One issue with making a man wait for sex

[misssmartypants]

What? I'm supposed to fall in love with you on the first or 2nd date & we live happily ever after?

 

Arn't the woman bitching about all the looser guys she meets?

How many dates do you give them before you drop them?

 

I feel sorry for any guy that gets attached to you.

 

I don't sleep with the guys who I meet. Certainly not in two or three dates.

[phineas]

I don't sleep with the guys who I meet. Certainly not in two or three dates.

 

And I don't get emotionally attached to a woman or consider her special or make her a priority in such a shot time frame either.

 

When the woman decides she's ready to sleep with me i'll decide if I want to date her long term.

[blueskyday]

Men get hurt. I didn't know exactly how until I saw this thread, but I see now how that happens. They do get emotionally attached.

 

We women can hurt, too.

 

I love sex! I don't make men "wait." Instead, I want to feel comfortable both emotionally and physically with them. The physical attraction will be there right away. I show affection, and let the guy know I want him.

 

But, I've also learned to wait due to past hurts. I need to know a guy cares. I really don't want to have sex with a guy I don't care about. I like to have sex with guys who are my boyfriends. Who knows how long we will last, but I still like that kind of parameter. It creates a sense of safety and safety creates a vulnerability that lets a woman be sexually free.

 

I'm not for casual sex, generally, but...

 

I've had ONS with a guy friend who I was wildly attracted to and we hooked up when he came in from out of town.

 

I would have had a relationship with him, however, had he lived in town. I liked who he was.

 

It's easy for some of us women to get attached to the man we are having sex with. I know I do. Then I will make all kinds of excuses for his bad behavior, which I should have noticed earlier.

 

So, two people should have sex when they BOTH want to. It does take two to be willing and able. I sure wouldn't want a guy to have sex if he wasn't sure about wanting a relationship.

 

I think relationship materal guys are hot! Way hotter than players.

 

I get sick of many guys wanting to sleep with me and putting very little effort in otherwise. It's like they are wondering, "How cheap can I get this relationship for? Maybe she'll sleep with me BEFORE I commit to an exclusive relationship with her?"..."Heck, maybe I won't even have to have a relationship if I tell her I want to keep things casual?"

 

Had that happen many times. Seemed like promising guys, too, but I'm more than a lay. Thank you. And so is a guy.

[Titania22]

But, as seen on the forum, man is damned if he does & damned if he doesn't.

If he get's burned, well that's his fault because nobody made him date the woman for months & months.

If he walks, well then he just wants sex.

 

 

You keep saying this over and over again.

 

What does it matter if people think you just wanted sex? Whose good opinion are you wanting?

 

If you are doing what is true and right for you, what does it matter what anyone else thinks.

 

I feel your frustration with this whole waiting for sex thing, is because you are giving your power away to these women. You are thinking things like, if I dump her now she will think i was only after sex, so you stay in a situation which isn't empowering. You should stop complaining after how unfair it is (damned if you do damned if you don't) and just live your truth.

 

I would also ask how did you get to know your friends enough for you to decide they were special? Have you had sex with them? If you haven't had sex with them, how are you coping with them making you wait for sex? If you didn't have sex with them, surely isn't it possible that there is a female out there that could also be special even though you haven't had sex with her?

[serial muse]

what I read from the women is I either imagined these women leading me on or i'm just a sad individual.

 

The thought that a man can be hurt just as much as a woman is not something they seem to want to admit to either.

 

I don't think that's what people are saying at all. I don't doubt that someone led you on. And I'm quite sure that there are plenty of men who have been led on and manipulated, just as there are plenty of women who have been coerced and manipulated.

 

I think that's what people are trying to say to you - that this sort of thing isn't unique, but at the same time, you can't assume that because one person did this, or many people do this, that everyone is going to do this. I mean, of course you can assume anything you want, really, but that won't make it true. All that you can say for sure is that it happened to you and you got burned. That's all any of us can say. I don't doubt that it did happen to you. And I certainly don't doubt that men can be hurt just as much as women. That would be ridiculous. We're all human beings with feelings and hurts and desires and agonies and whatnot.

 

But that's not the same thing as saying that just because a woman chooses to wait to have sex she's toying with you, or sleeping with someone else. Sure, she might be. Then again, she might not. That's what Queen Zenobia was saying - it's always a risk. If your way of dealing with that anxiety is to immediately cut off a woman who says she wants to wait, just in case she's screwing with you, then that's your decision and you wouldn't be the first person, man or woman, to react that way defensively. It's the exact same thing as a woman saying that just because a man wants to have sex with her early on, he's a player and is going to use her. You clearly don't think that's true (and it isn't!!!), so why should the reverse be true?

 

But nobody here is required to "admit" that that's what always happens. Because it isn't. And it's just as fair for women here to note that they themselves haven't done that as it is for you to note that it happened to you. That's not negating your experience - but don't negate theirs, either. That is what would be one-sided BS.

Edited January 25, 2012 by serial muse

[zengirl]

Any sadder than a woman who see's "player" at every corner?

 

What I said was sad was your comments on how women are unspecial and interchangeable, not that you'd been hurt and worried about that. Your attitudes, in general, are sad to me and the way you speak about women in terms of what they can provide for you is sad to me. Would be said if it were a woman with the same ideas of quid pro quo.

 

That's unfortunate and coloring your view incorrectly, the same as women who assume men are players (which is not the same as waiting to get to know someone before having sex---that's just common sense to know the person you're becoming attached to before you become attached; the odds are that he's NOT a player, but the odds are also that he's NOT compatible with you since most people aren't compatible and it's rarer to find that great match!).

[phineas]

You keep saying this over and over again.

 

What does it matter if people think you just wanted sex? Whose good opinion are you wanting?

 

If you are doing what is true and right for you, what does it matter what anyone else thinks.

 

I honestly don't care what people think about me.

 

However what I have been saying legitimately gives men as much of a reason not to wait as it gives women to wait.

And no woman wants to actually discuss the possibly that men have legitimate reasons not to wait around.

 

If a guy don't want to wait he's accused of being a player. I personally don't care what some woman I don't plan on ever talking to again thinks about me.

 

But it's get's tossed around all over this forum and i'm getting tired of it.

It's an open forum isn't it?

 

I feel your frustration with this whole waiting for sex thing, is because you are giving your power away to these women. You are thinking things like, if I dump her now she will think i was only after sex, so you stay in a situation which isn't empowering. You should stop complaining after how unfair it is (damned if you do damned if you don't) and just live your truth.

 

Again with the armchair head shrinking.

 

It isn't about the sex. I can get sex if I want. It's about attention whores & reason's why men won't wait around for sex. (other than them being players)

 

You just don't want to get that.

Why do you keep defecting?

 

I would also ask how did you get to know your friends enough for you to decide they were special? Have you had sex with them? If you haven't had sex with them, how are you coping with them making you wait for sex? If you didn't have sex with them, surely isn't it possible that there is a female out there that could also be special even though you haven't had sex with her?

 

I'm not gay. Therefore I haven't had sex with my friends because they are all men.

[phineas]

I don't think that's what people are saying at all. I don't doubt that someone led you on. And I'm quite sure that there are plenty of men who have been led on and manipulated, just as there are plenty of women who have been coerced and manipulated.

 

Uhh yeah, little tiger I believe actually said I imagined these women were leading me on because I might of mistaken their friendliness for something else.

 

I think that's what people are trying to say to you - that this sort of thing isn't unique, but at the same time, you can't assume that because one person did this, or many people do this, that everyone is going to do this. I mean, of course you can assume anything you want, really, but that won't make it true. All that you can say for sure is that it happened to you and you got burned. That's all any of us can say. I don't doubt that it did happen to you. And I certainly don't doubt that men can be hurt just as much as women. That would be ridiculous. We're all human beings with feelings and hurts and desires and agonies and whatnot.

 

And yet, men still get labeled as players on this forum, it's regularly said he doesn't like the woman if he doesn't wait for sex & it's BS. There are legitimate reasons for a man not to wait around for months & women refuse to acknowledge that on this forum.

 

 

But that's not the same thing as saying that just because a woman chooses to wait to have sex she's toying with you, or sleeping with someone else. Sure, she might be. Then again, she might not. That's what Queen Zenobia was saying - it's always a risk. If your way of dealing with that anxiety is to immediately cut off a woman who says she wants to wait, just in case she's screwing with you, then that's your decision and you wouldn't be the first person, man or woman, to react that way defensively. It's the exact same thing as a woman saying that just because a man wants to have sex with her early on, he's a player and is going to use her. You clearly don't think that's true (and it isn't!!!), so why should the reverse be true?

 

I agree, i've said this already. My beef is the men admit readily that men use women for sex but women flat out refuse to admit women use men in other ways. I've been through quite a few threads on this forum & women just flat out refuse to just admit that. They blame shift on the guy, make lame excuses or even better toss out the "both sexes use people" then head off to another thread to comment on how men use women for sex.

It's laughable.

 

But nobody here is required to "admit" that that's what always happens. Because it isn't. And it's just as fair for women here to note that they themselves haven't done that as it is for you to note that it happened to you. That's not negating your experience - but don't negate theirs, either. That is what would be one-sided BS.

 

But they do negate it by claiming "i'm sad" or tell me "I imagined it" or some other crap.

 

Yet, tell a woman on this thread it's her own fault for getting used for sex & you have a score of angry women calling you a misogynist or some other BS.

 

Again it's pure entertainment.

[phineas]

What I said was sad was your comments on how women are unspecial and interchangeable, not that you'd been hurt and worried about that. Your attitudes, in general, are sad to me and the way you speak about women in terms of what they can provide for you is sad to me. Would be said if it were a woman with the same ideas of quid pro quo.

 

Because women don't value a man by how much money he has to spend on her?

 

How many women in this forum alone talk like their all that & a bag of chips?

You got one woman (sugermama) posting about whether to tell her man to do something for V-day or let him hang herself. She obviously thinks she is something "special". When you got a forum of women who think their "special", "special" seems to loose it's shine now doesn't it?

 

That's unfortunate and coloring your view incorrectly, the same as women who assume men are players (which is not the same as waiting to get to know someone before having sex---that's just common sense to know the person you're becoming attached to before you become attached; the odds are that he's NOT a player, but the odds are also that he's NOT compatible with you since most people aren't compatible and it's rarer to find that great match!).

 

Ya know what, I think I've said multiple times there is a difference between a woman who waits with EVERY guy & those who selectively decide when a man gets to have sex with them so i'm not referring to those women.

 

I'm simply not compatible with them. But these days their few & far between especially at my age & odds are a woman who won't is just looking to waste a guys time.

 

So I walk.

I don't get angry, I don't get pissed, I just go to the gym & look around for another woman.

[zengirl]

Because women don't value a man by how much money he has to spend on her?

 

Not women who aren't sad. Those women are sad too.

[Sugarkane]

Well i'm older than you & if I had every penny I spent on a woman who told me she wanted to "take it slow" when she was sleeping with someone else or just hopped into bed with someone else I'd have a lot more money than you.

 

But you just keep thinking women are the only one's victimized.

 

Well why date someone if they're sleeping with other people?

I only sleep with someone if we're exclusive. I don't keep dating someone if I'm sleeping with someone else. That doesn't make sense to me.

[carhill]

I won't speak for phineas (as he's doing a gangbuster job ) but my version of 'sex = exclusive' means I consider myself emotionally exclusive and committed once we are making love regularly and have expressed our commitment. I only have sexual relations with one woman at a time; no overlap, ever. Generally, I take at least six months to a year (of celibacy) between relationships. Lovemaking is not something I take lightly. Just wanted to get that out of the way. Carry on.

Edited January 26, 2012 by carhill
clarified 'time off'

[doushenka]

Uhh yeah, little tiger I believe actually said I imagined these women were leading me on because I might of mistaken their friendliness for something else.

 

There is one solution to this particular problem:

 

Until she outright expresses interest in you, she's being friendly. If you can't tell, ask, and take her word for it.

 

It's not gender-specific, either. I had to figure that out in order not to get hurt. I kept imagining more than was there with some men, reading endless meanings into tiny gestures, when if I'd just asked, I'd have had my answer. The lesson after that was moving on gracefully, which is even harder, but I did manage to learn it.

[phineas]

Well why date someone if they're sleeping with other people?

I only sleep with someone if we're exclusive. I don't keep dating someone if I'm sleeping with someone else. That doesn't make sense to me.

 

I don't understand the player mentality myself but I acknowledge it exists.

 

There are a lot of women out there A LOT. That know a guy (usually an ex that could give her an orgasm) that they are attracted to yet know he is not suitable relationship material. He basically only pays attention to her when she is naked in front of him.

 

So they look for someone as attractive as that guy who is suitable relationship material. They also don't want to add to their count only to find out the guy is crap in bed. (serious)

 

The older they get the harder it is to find that guy so they just "date" any halfway decent guy so they have someone to spend time with. They tell him they need to "take things slow" in some form or manner, have sex with the ex or FWB & continue looking for mr. perfect.

 

Once they find him they jump ship & lock him down with sex & just make up lame excuses like "i don't want a relationship" or "i just want to be friends" or just blow the guy off by *poofing*

 

Basically, the guy is just a prop for friends & family while they get their O's from the ex/FWB in secret.

 

I've had this happen to me twice, i've had my ex-wife come onto me because I could ring her bell better than her BF & just wanted good sex from me no strings attached every once in a while.

 

I've had women I used to date call me up for a booty call only to find out later she's dating someone but it "isn't serious" basically, he's spending money on her, buying her dinner & drinks & she's coming over to my place at 9 to "watch a movie". Once I find that out I stop talking to them because it just disgusts me.

 

Women are just as bad as men. LS women make up like 1% of the population, just because they don't do it & they don't know other women who do it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Women don't brag about this like men do.

 

On the flip side LS women do seem to know men who are players or at least know of them. so it only stands to reason men know of female players.

[phineas]

Uhh yeah, little tiger I believe actually said I imagined these women were leading me on because I might of mistaken their friendliness for something else.

 

There is one solution to this particular problem:

 

Until she outright expresses interest in you, she's being friendly. If you can't tell, ask, and take her word for it.

 

It's not gender-specific, either. I had to figure that out in order not to get hurt. I kept imagining more than was there with some men, reading endless meanings into tiny gestures, when if I'd just asked, I'd have had my answer. The lesson after that was moving on gracefully, which is even harder, but I did manage to learn it.

 

One more time, I was DATING those women I mentioned. DATING. Taking them out, going to dinner, holding hands, hugging & a peck on the lips towards the end. They said we were DATING.

 

Phone sex.

Sexual innuendo talk.

talking about shaving their woman parts.

Talking about sex & how a man can give them an orgasm.

 

Saying things like "You know, my house is big enough that If I remodeled it I could have 5 bedrooms" out of no-where. Why would she say that? well she had 2 kids & I had two kids. see where i'm going with this?

That one also kept trying to get me to fix things on her house.

She had an ex texting her for booty calls & she went on & on about how much of a looser he was & how she couldn't understand how a woman could disrespect herself by being some guys booty call & claimed she was ignoring him.

 

Then I saw a text on her phone to him. She said she would call him when she got out of work. It was sent on the same night she told me she was doing something with her kids & then going to bed early.

 

These arn't woman that were flirting with me, or I went on a few dates with & I got butt-hurt because they rejected me. I can care less about rejection like that.

 

I am talking about women who purposefully lead men on for attention while they either slept with an ex or looked for someone they really wanted a relationship with then jumped ship.

 

What part of this don't people understand. I was DATING these women.

Women do this kind of stuff all the time & then refuse to be held accountable for their actions.

 

I recently had a woman at work. AT WORK. that I dated for two months who blew me off & didn't return my calls or txts.

 

Then last month she txt'd me & asked me out to lunch.

I asked her what she wanted with me & she said to date.

Then later on she said she wanted to hang out & I told her she blew me off last yr so I wanted to know what was different.

 

She actually said "you could of called me"

And I told her I did call & she ignored me.

then she actually told me her phone broke & she didn't have anyone's numbers so she probably didn't know it was me calling & txting.

I left a voice mail. Again

 

Keep in mind, we work in the same building. She could email me, call me on my desk phone, walk down to my cube. (all things she did when we were "dating")

 

Also I swear I could hear her brain oozing out her ears when I asked "if you lost my number, how were you able to txt me & ask me to lunch":lmao:

 

I know other men who have experienced the same type of thing from women.

 

I can't make this crap up.

[zengirl]

I won't speak for phineas (as he's doing a gangbuster job ) but my version of 'sex = exclusive' means I consider myself emotionally exclusive and committed once we are making love regularly and have expressed our commitment. I only have sexual relations with one woman at a time; no overlap, ever. Generally, I take at least six months to a year (of celibacy) between relationships. Lovemaking is not something I take lightly. Just wanted to get that out of the way. Carry on.

 

Carhill, as I understand it you take relationships very seriously in general and don't multi-date. It also seems that you treat the people around you with the utmost respect at all times. I don't really see a correlation between your attitude, as you've described it here and elsewhere, and phineas's comments in this thread at all. I find nothing wrong with admitting that a relationship certainly reaches a new level with sexual intimacy. It's the idea that men (not all; certain men) are sitting around thinking, "**** or get off the pot already!" all impatient for sexual intimacy that is odd. It is generally a natural escalation.

 

I've had women I used to date call me up for a booty call only to find out later she's dating someone but it "isn't serious" basically, he's spending money on her, buying her dinner & drinks & she's coming over to my place at 9 to "watch a movie". Once I find that out I stop talking to them because it just disgusts me.

 

Women are just as bad as men. LS women make up like 1% of the population, just because they don't do it & they don't know other women who do it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Women don't brag about this like men do.

 

On the flip side LS women do seem to know men who are players or at least know of them. so it only stands to reason men know of female players.

 

I'm not denying that people of all genders indulge in bad behavior, and I don't think anyone has denied that in this thread at all. Many women have said it's not a good 'defense' for the other attitudes and comments you've made; that's a different thing than saying that NO women behave badly. Of course some women do. But the thing those women did wrong wasn't not sleeping with you --- it was not having enough respect for others and honesty in their dealings.

[serial muse]

Uhh yeah, little tiger I believe actually said I imagined these women were leading me on because I might of mistaken their friendliness for something else.

 

Ah, sorry, I missed that. I will respectfully disagree with Little Tiger on that point. As I said before, I don't for a minute doubt that there are women who make men wait, as part of a power struggle or to keep a man on the back burner or puff up their own egos. This is a human nature thing. Some people just crave that kind of validation.

 

And yet, men still get labeled as players on this forum, it's regularly said he doesn't like the woman if he doesn't wait for sex & it's BS. There are legitimate reasons for a man not to wait around for months & women refuse to acknowledge that on this forum.

 

Hm. I don't think "women refuse to acknowledge that." I think some women do. But plenty do acknowledge it.

 

I went back and read the first few pages of this thread again, including your OP, to find instances of women refusing to acknowledge that there are female players. What I found was that the first few female responders did not say that there aren't legitimate reasons for a man not to wait around; what they took issue with was the wording of "making a man wait" rather than "choosing to wait".

 

You might not like it, because it disagrees with your premise, but that is a perfectly valid argument, because it highlights a fundamental question embedded in the OP: whether choosing to wait is about the man or not. I think it's reasonable to point out that it isn't, always. And it is quite frustrating, to those to whom waiting for sex isn't about the other person at all, to read an OP that apparently minimizes something that to many people is a very personal choice, and casts it instead as something really ugly.

 

I understand that that wasn't exactly your intention - you were trying to make the point that someone (or more than one person) made you wait out of manipulation, and that now you won't wait for anyone as a result of it. That's also a perfectly reasonable viewpoint.

 

But what you said was that women make men wait. That's simply not always true, and pointing that out does not invalidate your personal experience. And there's absolutely no reason that a woman who doesn't do that shouldn't point out that it's a false generalization!

 

I agree, i've said this already. My beef is the men admit readily that men use women for sex but women flat out refuse to admit women use men in other ways.

 

See - this is what I'm talking about. Some do. Some don't. What do you expect? The same is true of men: some are reasonable, some aren't. Again, I hear your frustration, but you're just adding fuel to the fire here.

 

Yet, tell a woman on this thread it's her own fault for getting used for sex & you have a score of angry women calling you a misogynist or some other BS.

 

Again it's pure entertainment.

 

Well, I'll never understand why people want to take this approach in either direction. But while I hear your frustration, it sounds like you have MORE in common with these women who don't want to be told they're being used for sex, rather than less, wouldn't you say? You're both in the same boat - you got mixed up with someone who used you. I agree with you that there shouldn't be a double-standard. But please don't suggest that women don't frequently get reamed on LS - they do, in precisely the way you yourself just described. Do you think that those women - for example, the women in that single mothers thread - enjoy that or feel like it's any more fair than you do on this thread? Nobody's getting off easily on this site.

 

This is a problem on this forum in general. The more incendiary posts always get more attention, and the more reasoned ones tend to fall by the wayside. But, putting aside your frustration, if you go back and read through the thread, you'll find many women who are acknowledging your point - while denying that all women do this. And why shouldn't they? Their viewpoint is worth as much as yours or anyone else's.

 

And that brings me to a question. I assure you, I don't mean this is a snarky way, because I hear your frustration. But my question is, what are you really hoping women will acknowledge here: that men and women can be equally hurtful, or that women who aren't up for sex right away are toying with men?

 

Because I think you'll find that the second point will always be contentious, as it's untrue and unfair. The first point, on the other hand, is perfectly fair and valid. You may still get people disagreeing, but you won't get a flame war.

Edited January 26, 2012 by serial muse

[zengirl]

But my question is, what are you really hoping women will acknowledge here: that men and women can be equally hurtful, or that women who aren't up for sex right away are toying with men?

 

Because I think you'll find that the second point will always be contentious, as it's untrue and unfair. The first point, on the other hand, is perfectly fair and valid. You may still get people disagreeing, but you won't get a flame war.

 

Just wanted to say --- This is an excellent question, and at the heart of the long disagreement, really.

 

I'm not sure if LT meant that women never mistreat men (I don't recall the comment he's referencing either) or use their sexuality as leverage or power but I certainly didn't and have never said so. Some women do these things. Not all women, and not even MOST women, but I said in my very first post there is a specific subset of women you will see do that, again and again. That's been acknowledged many times in this thread. But the latter point simply is, as you say, untrue and unfair.

[LittleTiger]

Just wanted to say --- This is an excellent question, and at the heart of the long disagreement, really.

 

I'm not sure if LT meant that women never mistreat men (I don't recall the comment he's referencing either) or use their sexuality as leverage or power but I certainly didn't and have never said so. Some women do these things. Not all women, and not even MOST women, but I said in my very first post there is a specific subset of women you will see do that, again and again. That's been acknowledged many times in this thread. But the latter point simply is, as you say, untrue and unfair.

 

No, I certainly didn't say this and didn't intend to infer it. I have no doubt that women do mistreat men and use their sexuality to gain leverage and I readily acknowledge it - is that all Phineas is wanting us to say?

 

What I did say was that I had never come across the particular type of mistreatment Phineas was talking about, that I couldn't understand what the logic behind it was (which has since been answered by one or two other posters) and I suggested another possible reason for this behaviour.

 

I think I even acknowledged that, if this was his experience, he had a right to define that behaviour whatever way he chose and I was in no position to argue with him.

[fishtaco]

What I did say was that I had never come across the particular type of mistreatment Phineas was talking about, that I couldn't understand what the logic behind it was (which has since been answered by one or two other posters) and I suggested another possible reason for this behaviour.

 

You are a woman correct? Do you date women? If you don't, I'm not surprised you haven't come across this behavior in women. A bad behaving woman in the dating scene can still be a great platonic friend, especially to a gender they're not romantically interested in.

 

I've had similar experiences as Phineas. It is very real, and very common.

 

A lot of these discussions are because of this one issue -- we can't tell the difference. The behavior is the same, but a good woman will have a innocuous reason for doing it, where a bad woman will use it to her advantage. It's part of the ambiguity of dating. And for utilizing this ambiguity, and getting away with technicalities, both genders are equally guilty.

 

From the receiving perspective, being that this is a thread about withholding sex from men, it's a matter of self protection. Sure, some women really do think this is the right thing to do... for themselves. But there are also some that uses this to play games and dangle the carrot. Honorable people are few and far in between, men and women.

 

For me, if I know the woman well, and I make a judgement call that she IS a honorable person, then I'll be willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. But if I met her three weeks ago at a friend's party, and I've known her for three dates, sorry but I'm NOT going to give her the benefit of the doubt. How can I? I don't know her. So then I have to go by the lowest common denominator.

 

It's a very basic and practical dating strategy - don't trust someone until they've earned your trust.

 

I'm with Phineas.

 

I don't think it's wrong to make a man wait for sex, if that's your thing. As long as you have been having success, keep at it. But it's also not wrong for a man to not want to wait for sex. As long as we are successful, we should keep at it too.

 

It's just a question of compatibility.

 

I've met women that want to be friends first, and basically have to have already made up their minds that they want to be in a relationship with you before they will even say yes to a first date. It's not wrong, but I'm not like that. I go on dates with strangers and I discover their personality during dating. So women like that would want to keep me in the ambiguous maybe platonic friends maybe dating zone while they check me out, I don't do that. I've bailed on many of those in my past.

 

This withholding sex thing is the same. It's not wrong, but it'll work with some men and it won't work with some men. It doesn't improve a woman's chances, it doesn't do anything, except one very important thing -- it makes the woman happy, and she feels good about it.

 

So keep doing it. And well, if I were single still, I'd keep walking away from those women after my limit is reached. But there are plenty of guys that are way better than me that are willing to wait. Go ahead, filter me out. Plenty of fishes in the sea, for both genders.

[silvermercy]

It doesn't improve a woman's chances, it doesn't do anything, except one very important thing -- it makes the woman happy, and she feels good about it.

I can't agree here. It doesn't make you feel any better. I'm one of those women who HAS to wait before sex for security reasons, that I'm not being played. How does that give me power over a man? I'm not doing it to play him. If a real psychic ever told me the man was indeed relationship material for me, then I wouldn't wait. No reason.

 

As with the other female posters here, I was also surprised to hear there are female players, because nobody in my circle is like that either. Possibly because women like us (who wait for legitimate reasons) also filter out any female player friends (as we are not compatible in friendship). I've also discussed it recently with some friends and no man or woman knows any woman like that either. (Male players on the other hand, plenty). Which makes me curious where on earth do you go to find all those female players!? Bars, pubs, clubs, online??

Edited January 26, 2012 by silvermercy

[phineas]

 

And that brings me to a question. I assure you, I don't mean this is a snarky way, because I hear your frustration. But my question is, what are you really hoping women will acknowledge here:

 

That men who won't wait around for sex are not always players or only interested in sex.

 

That men have legitimate reasons for not waiting around & shouldn't be raked over the coals for it.

Edited January 26, 2012 by phineas

[zengirl]

A lot of these discussions are because of this one issue -- we can't tell the difference. The behavior is the same, but a good woman will have a innocuous reason for doing it, where a bad woman will use it to her advantage. It's part of the ambiguity of dating. And for utilizing this ambiguity, and getting away with technicalities, both genders are equally guilty.

 

An interesting point, but look at two scenarios:

 

(1) A couple has sex too soon

subsets: (a) the guy is a player and that's all he wanted, (b) the guy gets to know the girl and really doesn't dig her, so leaves---not necessarily the same as (a), or © the girl realizes she really doesn't dig the guy but now feels awkward and like she needs to pretend she does because they've already had sex. There are probably more subsets when the people do not know each other well.

 

(2) A couple waits for sex

subsets: (a) the woman never intended to have sex with the guy, (b) the woman just wants to get to know the guy to see if she wants to have sex with him, © the woman is afraid the guy is a player. There may be more, and really woman COULD be substituted for man; that's just not a common socialization. There can also be religious values or such involved.

 

If the couple has sex too soon, you cannot unring that bell.

 

I understand you cannot get time (or money, if you date that way) or energy spent back either, but both parties are spending equal time, if not equal intentions, and you can easily tell if someone is putting energy (or money) into the equation. But what's the worst that happens if you wait? I just don't get the harm. I do get that there are women who are emotional vampires, but it's not the waiting for sex that is doing harm. That woman probably isn't putting anything else substantial into the relationship EITHER, if she's truly an emotional vampire.

 

So, why make it about sex? If I read between the lines, all I can figure is: Because it's fine if she puts nothing else in so long as she puts out? That seems excessively gross to me, and it makes relationships all about sex. . . which is what the mentality I think many women have say turned them off about certain posters styles.

 

From the receiving perspective, being that this is a thread about withholding sex from men, it's a matter of self protection. Sure, some women really do think this is the right thing to do... for themselves. But there are also some that uses this to play games and dangle the carrot. Honorable people are few and far in between, men and women.

 

I think most people don't even SEE it as "withholding" sex though. I think they see it as waiting, getting to know someone, and moving at their own pace, and I think it's the premise that sex is set up as something women "withhold" that many female posters have objected to.

 

For me, if I know the woman well, and I make a judgement call that she IS a honorable person, then I'll be willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. But if I met her three weeks ago at a friend's party, and I've known her for three dates, sorry but I'm NOT going to give her the benefit of the doubt. How can I? I don't know her. So then I have to go by the lowest common denominator.

 

Really. I never assumed the men I dated were the lowest common denominator! I certainly wanted to get to know them before being intimate or over-investing in them---investment should happen over time---but I never thought people were creeps till they prove otherwise. That seems an unhealthy way to approach it.

 

I don't think it's wrong to make a man wait for sex, if that's your thing. As long as you have been having success, keep at it. But it's also not wrong for a man to not want to wait for sex. As long as we are successful, we should keep at it too.

 

It's just a question of compatibility.

 

This, I agree with, except the top phrasing. I don't think it's wrong to WAIT to have sex, if that's your thing. And I don't think it's wrong to move on if you don't have sex soon enough, if that's your thing. People need to do what's right for them, sure.

 

I've met women that want to be friends first, and basically have to have already made up their minds that they want to be in a relationship with you before they will even say yes to a first date. It's not wrong, but I'm not like that. I go on dates with strangers and I discover their personality during dating. So women like that would want to keep me in the ambiguous maybe platonic friends maybe dating zone while they check me out, I don't do that. I've bailed on many of those in my past.

 

This withholding sex thing is the same. It's not wrong, but it'll work with some men and it won't work with some men. It doesn't improve a woman's chances, it doesn't do anything, except one very important thing -- it makes the woman happy, and she feels good about it.

 

It does a lot, though. It helps a woman (and a man, if he's so inclined) avoid having sex with someone who is not a viable relationship partner, either because he (or she) is not interested in a real relationship OR because he (or she) is simply not relationship material. That's the point that's been re-stated in this thread many times and missed by many of the male posters. It has a purpose, a very clear purpose, and it works to prove that purpose, and when a guy leaves because he doesn't get sex quickly enough, it's actually WORKING right then!

 

As you say, it may be compatibility. It doesn't mean every man not willing to wait is a jerk. But it serves a very real purpose, and NOT just to protect against players. Most guys who date a girl a few times, sleep with her, and then lose interest are not players! Most are just guys that didn't know that girl, wanted to sleep with her, but never thought through whether they wanted a relationship with her, and then when confronted with that realize that they either don't want a relationship, or at least not with her. It's generally not premeditated. Most people aren't Barneys, to reference a TV sitcom; they're Teds. But Ted jilts ****-tons of girls too, even though he claims to be looking for love. That's because most people don't magically have a radar for how to find the right person for them!

[phineas]

No, I certainly didn't say this and didn't intend to infer it. I have no doubt that women do mistreat men and use their sexuality to gain leverage and I readily acknowledge it - is that all Phineas is wanting us to say?

 

What I did say was that I had never come across the particular type of mistreatment Phineas was talking about, that I couldn't understand what the logic behind it was (which has since been answered by one or two other posters) and I suggested another possible reason for this behaviour.

 

I think I even acknowledged that, if this was his experience, he had a right to define that behaviour whatever way he chose and I was in no position to argue with him.

 

There is this

 

http://www.loveshack.org/forums/showthread.php?p=3807923#post3807923

 

There are some guys who mistake friendly behaviour for being given the 'come on'. I had a male friend in my 20s who, on one occasion, sat in my room at Uni and watched me doing my hair and make up for a night out. He later told me I was giving him 'signals' by the way I was brushing my hair!!! Erm, no! Maybe I'm just naturally 'sexy' when I'm doing ordinary stuff - he obviously thought so - but I certainly had no intention of 'getting him horny' or 'getting him wanting me'. That was his interpretation! Fortunately we were good friends and nothing was 'spoiled' but it proved to me how easily men can assume sexual interest when there is none.

 

It wasn't friendly behavior. We were dating. they said so.

 

and there is another post in this thread, I can't think of the exact wording but someone said something along the lines of they don't doubt I thought these women led me on but sometimes a woman is just friendly or something close to that.

 

It may not of been you & i only attributed it to you because of the post I did reference & if it wasn't you I apologize.

 

I don't know who then & with how slow this site is + the 26 pages i'd rather just admit I imagined it was posted then search for it.

 

So again i apologize for claiming you said I was imagining sexual interest from those women.

[LittleTiger]

It may not of been you & i only attributed it to you because of the post I did reference & if it wasn't you I apologize.

 

I don't know who then & with how slow this site is + the 26 pages i'd rather just admit I imagined it was posted then search for it.

 

So again i apologize for claiming you said I was imagining sexual interest from those women.

 

Thanks for the apology - I appreciate it.