InJest Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 OK, but then you and the OP have different goals. ...bolded is what he says he wants to avoid. Therefore, I think that means he should be up front himself with the Cali girl, in order to be consistent with his own ethical code. The best way to avoid causing this potential confusion hurt to another person is to take action and be direct. What you quoted was in reference to a completely different situation. I was responding to the scenario of nice guys getting mad about mixed signals, and my solution to it was the same thing that women should do. Ruby Slippers is a perfect example.
PlumPrincess Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 Again, that's the responsibility of those pussy, nice-guys, to ask up front. Whenever I meet a girl I'm interested in, I make my move within the first couple times we meet, and if she's not with it, I cut her out for good and keep it moving. Ok, then it's not hypocrisy on your part, but just the way you roll.
verhrzn Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 My real priority is to have a LTR. I was in a serious relationship that ended a year ago with a woman I was deeply in love with. We had agreed we were going to get married, we had informed both sets of parents, the wheels were being in motion for that and then she ended it abruptly with little explanation. I don't EVER want to hurt somebody the way she hurt me. It's not like Cali girl is some ugly spinster in waiting. She has good qualities physically, intellectually and emotionally. She is a good catch. But she's made it clear that her long-term future is not here in Texas, and mine is, unless all of my family and friends dropped dead and I had no more remaining ties. I'm 33, and I don't want to play the field and wait too much longer to get married and start a family. I wouldn't ideally want to spend 2-3 years dating this girl and then have to give her up because she wanted to move back home and I didn't want to move somewhere where she'd be the only person I know. And I've only known her for two weeks, so there's also the possibility that as we get to know each other, there will be compatibility issues that make all of that moot anyways. The point being, I'd be more willing to consider her for a LTR if she was from here or at least wanted to be here on a long-term basis. So I don't see how I'm a scumbag or a lying deceiver if I set the expectations at casual dating knowing our long-term goals and plans diverge. I wouldn't have so much of a wandering eye in this situation if I thought Cali Girl was going to be around for the next several years. OKC Girl is not just a hot body to me. She's smart, funny and we like a lot of the same things. She just moved here from Maryland and plans on being here for the long haul. Like the guy upthread said, I haven't even been on a date with her, and she might not want to date me after getting to know me better. So what's driving me starting this thread is not ever wanting to put somebody through the pain that I went through the past year. I'm not going to be the guy who starts an exclusive relationship and then secretly lines up a replacement once something "better" comes along. So end things with Cali girl. Or explain that you're not looking for a long term relationship with her. Boom, done.
verhrzn Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 "I'm not sure I'm ready" means he's not that into you. Period. That you chose to wait around for him to "figure out" if he liked you enough was your choice. It's unfortunate you got hurt, but he was honest -- you just didn't want to face the real truth. Hopefully, you learned from this and won't make the same mistake again. Not true. I have never once asked for exclusivity. Every guy I've had a serious relationship with asked for it. If I was seeing a guy I saw long-term potential with and he didn't make that move, I'd assume he wasn't that into me and move on. Simple as that. Except he wasn't honest. Honest would have been "I'm not into you." He was perfectly ready for the girl he ACTUALLY wanted. I'm not a mind reader... I took "I'm not ready" to mean exactly that, especially when he'd go on and on about how hurt he still was about a past girlfriend. I am really not sure what exactly I learned from this, except to not take a guy at his word. It's great for you that you are so fantastically awesome guys have immediately wanted to date you... I have never had that. If I moved on from every guy who gave me the "I'm not sure if I'm ready for a serious relationship," I wouldn't have had a single boyfriend. So it's just the cold reality for some of us, that we either wait or we die single.
InJest Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 Except he wasn't honest. Honest would have been "I'm not into you." He was perfectly ready for the girl he ACTUALLY wanted. I'm not a mind reader... I took "I'm not ready" to mean exactly that, especially when he'd go on and on about how hurt he still was about a past girlfriend. I am really not sure what exactly I learned from this, except to not take a guy at his word. Bottome line is that your wants/expectations weren't being met, so you should have taken responsibility for you own happiness and walked.
Ruby Slippers Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 In those situations, regardless of how far things had progressed sexually or not, until the "exclusive" talk was brought up, did you basically assume that both parties were free to see other people, regardless of how affectionate and into each other you were? I don't have sex before I have the STD and sexual exclusivity talk, confirm that we are both STD-free, and confirm that we agree to be sexually exclusive. In my book, it's each individual's responsibility to clarify all this. I would never assume that a guy was being sexually exclusive to me if we never talked about it. Before the relationship exclusivity talk, yes, I assume we are both free to consider other prospects and see other people -- though personally, I'm not interested in seeing more than one man at a time. But until he asks for exclusivity, I understand he is free to consider other prospects, and so am I.
verhrzn Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 Bottome line is that your wants/expectations weren't being met, so you should have taken responsibility for you own happiness and walked. My expectation was that he was honest with me. He was not. I was willing to wait around for "I like you but I need more time." I was NOT willing to hang around for "I'm not actually into dating you, I'm just using you as a sure thing."
Ruby Slippers Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 Except he wasn't honest. Honest would have been "I'm not into you." He was perfectly ready for the girl he ACTUALLY wanted. I'm not a mind reader... I took "I'm not ready" to mean exactly that, especially when he'd go on and on about how hurt he still was about a past girlfriend. Here's what you said, presumably about this guy, on August 15: I met a guy about a month and a half ago, and since then we've been hanging out at least once a week. Right off the bat, when I asked if he'd be interested in dating, he told me he could not handle a romantic relationship right now, but he wouldn't mind doing a Friends with Benefits thing. At the time, I thought I could handle it, and I thought why not, I enjoy making out. He was 100% honest. That you chose to proceed with him in hopes he might change his mind was your choice. I am really not sure what exactly I learned from this, except to not take a guy at his word. The problem is you didn't take him at his word! His word was: I want FWB only with you. If you didn't want the same, you should have said "see ya". It's great for you that you are so fantastically awesome guys have immediately wanted to date you... I have never had that. If I moved on from every guy who gave me the "I'm not sure if I'm ready for a serious relationship," I wouldn't have had a single boyfriend. So it's just the cold reality for some of us, that we either wait or we die single. Well, I doubt I'm any more awesome than you are. In looks, I'm average to cute, but smart and cool. And I'm pretty good with interpersonal dynamics and communication. I know how to have a blast with a man and make him feel confident and excited. Maybe your attitude and doubts about finding something real are distorting your behavior and turning guys off.
serial muse Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 What you quoted was in reference to a completely different situation. I was responding to the scenario of nice guys getting mad about mixed signals, and my solution to it was the same thing that women should do. Ruby Slippers is a perfect example. You are correct. I ought to have quoted this, which is more relevant to the question at hand: If either of these women wants more than what's being given or wants to exercise her right make an informed decision, then it is her obligation to ask all the questions and initiate the talks. GreenPolicy, you can do whatever you want with a clear conscience, as long as you aren't lying to anyone. I think you're right in your reply to me, that you should stop spending so much time with Cali 6, and start splitting your time with them. Try to build something with the new girl, and if it gets to a serious point, then break things off with Cali 6. To this, my point is the same as before. What you are suggesting does not meet the OP's stated goal. You are saying he is not obligated to volunteer information, only not to lie if asked. He says he got burned by being blindsided, and would not want to cause that hurt to someone else. Therefore, to be ethically consistent and to truly have a "clear conscience," he should volunteer information, so as not to blindside someone else and inadvertently pay the pain forward. I do not think your advice answers his need.
OnyxSnowfall Posted October 28, 2011 Posted October 28, 2011 You end things with the Cali girl and take your chances with the Dallas girl.
OnyxSnowfall Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 That would be pretty stupid on his part. Stop giving terrible advice please. Often times being "ethical" seems like the "stupid" thing to do. What's right has little to do with intelligence, except that it takes some intelligence to discern what is right *pats Realitee's head* Moral/ethical classes should be required for American youth...
ptp Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 Moral/ethical classes should be required for American youth... Hahaha, unfortunately unlike math or physics, there is no consensus on morals or ethics. Having said that, the rule "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" seems to work most of the time.
daphne Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 I agree with Nexus. I've been the Dallas girl once, and when I found out the guy was playing both ends to see if I would make the move to be with him before dumping her, I bailed. I saw him as completely lacking integrity, because he was clearly pursuing a reconciliation but stringing us both along for whatever worked out in his favor. I dont' think of it as unethical when you're just dating, but when sex gets involved it's a whole different animal.
OnyxSnowfall Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 Realitee --- tsk tsk. Beyond the obvious of what is "right" --- closer to appealing in your terms: He is afraid of losing his safe little "sexy time" with someone he knows he's not going to be with........... afraid of jeopardizing it for a sexier time, because he could get rejected and end up with neither --- aww... Keeping the Cali girl will only hurt his chances with Dallas girl (unless she's just as loose and doesn't have double-standards) --- I know I've been the "Dallas girl" to more than enough men and have always been turned off when I've learned of "Cali girls". Cali girl is going to inevitably end either way. Might as well end it now before getting too deep in with Dallas girl. God forbid he lose his little sexy time with a "6" anyway. You want the "hotter" one, you better make the appropriate sacrifices for her.
OnyxSnowfall Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 I'm so honored And yes, especially if it's verhzn, 'cause she's cute and smart But, the main difference being, verzhn didn't have someone else she was interested in having a LTR with. The OP is interested in a LTR and possibly with Dallas girl. If verhzn was asking what to do with her FWB while pining for someone else significantly more, I would have had a different response. There's quite a few other details that are different actually.
OnyxSnowfall Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 (edited) My terms? You said the exact opposite of what you're saying in this thread, in a recent other thread. The only difference is that you were defending a woman. I've linked to it now, so your hypocrisy is exposed for all to see. So? If he's not exclusive, then it's none of the women's business who he's having sex with at the moment. I said he should stop having sex with 6 if he gets to the point where he thinks it will "happen" with 10. You on the other hand seem to think if Green was a woman, he would be entitled to have unlimited sexual partners, simultaneously, without disclosing anything to any of them, because hey!--it's none of their business, right? You mean double standards like you have? I think you probably have been many many things to many many men. That's his decision and is not an "ethical" or "moral" decision either way. Because he's a man, and you're a hypocrite. Excuse me, an "exposed" hypocrite. Yea, so exposed I must hide away in my nakedness and in my shame. Sorry if you don't grasp the differences. (You also misinterpreted the last thing you bolded of mine --- I wasn't condoning those behaviors, I was stating that the FWB was not the reason ver couldn't find a relationship) Edited October 29, 2011 by OnyxSnowfall
OnyxSnowfall Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 I misquoted nothing. This is another of your posts from that same thread: Maybe it would help if you stop trashing people's threads just because they are men and you want to deliberately mislead and hurt them? I dunno, maybe I do harbor hatred specifically towards men. It's something I'll consider contemplating But, beyond that, the two situations are NOT THE SAME. Yes, OP has sexual needs --- but he also has a prospect that is interested in him beyond the person he's currently "settling" for. Lol.
OnyxSnowfall Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 If Green was a woman and 6 was the man you (and others who share your sort of take on things) would consider what they had an "FWB." Friends with benefits, not subject to disclosure. IOW the woman's secret little fun. "It's no one else's business." Green is NOT currently in a serious relationship with 10. He doesn't even know if that's possible yet. If and when things get rolling with 10, he can make his decision accordingly. But telling him he has any moral or ethical obligation to give up 6 IMMEDIATELY is pure double-standard on your part. It's amazing that you would get on an ethical/moral "high horse" given what you posted in the other thread, only some of which has been quoted here. Whether you do this kind of thing because you "hate" men or whether it's some severely misguided notion of what "feminism" is, doesn't really matter. And, I never said you "hated" men. YOU brought that up. Interesting, huh? I'm not going to hold your hand and walk you through the disparities. Also, "just because they are men and you want to deliberately mislead and hurt them?" translates into hate to me, shrug. I've never considered myself to be a feminist, by the way
Mme. Chaucer Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 What a boring hydra we have here. It's kind of sad. It could be so cool to have a resident mythical beast, but instead, it's just … lame.
Tayla Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 Onyx, I get your ability to differentiate and ability to make an observation. Not sure how hard it is to follow your logic, made sense to me ..and I am blonde!! Point in the matter for the OP is the grass is greener idealism, which I do not subscribe or endorse. My most taken "aback" statement read here was the person who said they dont assume the person they are dating is "exclusive"...scares me...reason: They are then "assuming" the person sleeps around with multi partners..and I personally find that insulting to have such demeanor or perspective.... I can assure anyone I date that I dont date them if I am in anyway intimate or sharing a bed with another person...Its not my style and not one to get in the habit of persuing..... To date is one thing...to be sharing a bed is an entirely different story...THe line was drawn when the sheets were pulled...SO OP...Make that bed...put on your pants and move on if you so chose, but stop sitting on the fence trying to see which side is greener FROM your world.
carhill Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 "I'm sexually monogamous when I'm in a committed exclusive relationship." (this presumes you are) Other than that condition, happenis. BTW, this does not reflect my view on the matter, rather merely addresses the thread title as one potential way of handling it ethically.
PlumPrincess Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 What's right has little to do with intelligence, except that it takes some intelligence to discern what is right *pats Realitee's head*
dasein Posted October 29, 2011 Posted October 29, 2011 I totally agree. A lot of women get attached when having sex with a guy, while the guy is fine. If he had any sense of responsibility and ethics, he would talk with the girl and then he probably would find out that she does have feelings for him. Maybe she is stupid to assume that they are in an exclusive relationship if they haven't agree on anything, but taking advantage of her stupidity isn't that great either. Women are not children and are perfectly capable of expressing expectations. Everything is not the man's job. 40 years ago, the presumption may have been that sex with a relative stranger would likely lead to a relationship, maybe even to the point of being a valid assumption. Those days are long gone, and there are lots of women who are seeking casual sex for its own sake, who might even find an assumption that they expected a relationship to result from all sex was sexist and insulting. The solution is simple, adults are responsible for making their own expectations known; adults are not responsible for reading a relative stranger's mind.
Recommended Posts