One issue with making a man wait for sex

[joystickd]

This is the exactly the reason women should wait.

 

Time will tell if a man is truly the deal or not. sure, early sex make him reveal himself early, but ususally a man cannot hide that well for months. Risking your heart and body for a fake just not worth it.

 

If a man only aims for sex, then waiting for sex will filter this kind of men quickly.

 

If a man wants to know you well and has a future with you, he will wait.

 

Not always true

[xxoo]

So if a woman tell's me she wants to wait, I tell her sex = exclusive

 

Sounds like a perfect response to me!

[JohnP82]

I've found that women that make me wait never did so with previous guys or subsequent ones. Girls that I slept with quickly I've found liked me much more. I guess it comes down to attraction. I think now in life I would find it hard to take seriously a women that makes me wait; especially because of my experience with my most recent ex. If she's making me wait she's likely not attracted enough to me for this to work.

 

 

I've also found that adding "with you" to the end of what most women say is most helpful. There is always the exception to the rules most women lay down.

[Lorelai]

Honestly, if two people aren't on the same page about when sex should happen, they probably shouldn't be in a relationship together.

 

But I'm also over 30 and expect any man I'm with to be able to think with the head above his shoulders more than the one below his waist.

 

------

 

I do think there is such a thing as people waiting too long, though. It's kind of like trying to tell a joke -- if you forget the punchline long enough, by the time you remember it it's stale. If two people wait too long and then the sex is disappointing rather than a nice happy case of fireworks.... well, it can happen.

[Wolf18]

IMO women only make men they're lukewarm about wait for sex, unless there's some religious reason for it. I've found that if a woman is authentically attracted to you, you'll be just as irresistable to her as she is to you. Some half-assed hesitation may emerge when you make your move "too early", but in the end she'll give in.

[Cypress25]

and for women who think denying men sex until they have a full laundry list of their other needs and requirements met is normal because it's THEIR idea, well, they're going to struggle to find compatible men, that's just the way it goes and that is their consequence.

 

That's funny, I've never struggled to find compatible men. I've had 3 committed, long-term relationships with wonderful guys, and none of them had a problem waiting for me. And they waited a lot longer than 6 months. Don't worry, they enjoyed the relationship in the meantime. Waiting didn't feel like a punishment to them because they appreciated everything else I had to offer. If you think women have nothing to offer besides sex, then you're not capable of being in a healthy relationship.

 

And you still think of it as denying men sex. You do realize that these women aren't having sex either? They're not waiting until they have a full laundry list of needs and requirements met. They're waiting until they meet the most basic requirement: trust. Until I can trust that the guy genuinely likes me and cares about me, and is in it for the long haul, I can't have sex with him. To me, it's not normal to have sex with someone you barely know who may or may not disappear the next morning.

 

well, i'm not one of those guys who lies to a woman to get sex then bails.

I guess that means I can stick my head in the sand & just dismiss their existence like you are.

 

Yes, actually, you can. It's not your responsibility to answer for those guys. They have nothing to do with you. I'm not going to blame you for their actions.

 

Because like it pokes holes in my arguments.

 

The existence of women who use men for attention doesn't poke holes in my arguments. Maybe they exist, but that's not my problem. It has nothing to do with me. I also think these women are few and far between. You claim that so many women are like this, but in reality, it's rare. You just use it as an excuse to bail on women if they don't put out fast enough.

 

It is not morally objectionable--nor is it necessarily an impediment to deepening the emotional connection between him and her--that he continue his sexual romps elsewhere until he has reached that level of intimacy with the woman in question.

 

And that's why I wait until after we've established a monogamous relationship before I have sex with a guy. I'm not interested in being with a guy who's having sex with other women right up until the moment he starts having sex with me. Because that means he doesn't really want to be with me, he just wants to be with any woman who will have sex with him. He just wants a vagina, any vagina, he doesn't care who it's attached to. Not the type of guy I want to be dating.

 

in the real world most women who do so are the type phineas mentioned. they dangle that carrot to try to maintain control, and get the attention/affection they want while shopping for greener pastures.

 

Most women who wait aren't like that. It's an excuse that men use to justify their impatience. Even if they know the girl is completely genuine and she really does want a relationship, they just don't want to wait. I don't know why you think most women are that desperate for attention/affection, but the truth is, women don't want attention or affection from men they don't like. It's the same as guys who say "She doesn't really like me, she's just using me for free meals." No, she's not. Women would rather buy their own meals than sit through dinner with guys they don't like. And a woman would rather stay home alone on a Saturday night than spend time with a guy she doesn't like.

 

I guess it comes down to attraction. I think now in life I would find it hard to take seriously a women that makes me wait; especially because of my experience with my most recent ex. If she's making me wait she's likely not attracted enough to me for this to work.

 

It has nothing to do with attraction. Women don't date men they aren't attracted to, so if she's dating you/kissing you/doing other intimate things with you, then she's attracted to you. I've been madly attracted to every boyfriend I've had, but I still waited because I wanted to get to know him and trust him before I had sex with him. I'm not gonna have sex with a guy just because I'm attracted to him.

 

This thread is funny because all the guys here are basically trying to convince women that waiting for sex doesn't work. They won't find compatible men, no man would ever wait that long, this whole "waiting" plan will backfire and it will never give women what they want, so women should just surrender and start rushing into sex too soon.

 

But I'm not convinced, because I've always been the type to wait for sex and I've never had trouble finding men who are willing to wait. I've never been used or taken advantage of, and I've had great relationships with great guys who were happy to wait until I was ready. So why would I stop doing it, when it's been working so well for me? Why would I listen to bitter, self-indulgent men who don't even like women, trying to convince women that they should offer up their body to any man who wants it? They give terrible advice to women.

[PratyekaYana]

And that's why I wait until after we've established a monogamous relationship before I have sex with a guy. I'm not interested in being with a guy who's having sex with other women right up until the moment he starts having sex with me. Because that means he doesn't really want to be with me, he just wants to be with any woman who will have sex with him. He just wantsrea a vagina, any vagina, he doesn't care who it's attached to. Not the type of guy I want to be dating.

 

Forgive me, Cypress, but I'm not sure that I understand your rationale. If our hypothetical chap is only interested in the sexual pleasures that a woman can provide him, then why, per my example, would he be willing to engage you at other plateaus (psychologically, emotionally, etc.) in the non-sexual stages of the relationship, particularly if he is already sexually satiated by other women? The scenario that I constructed was based around a man being genuinely interested in a woman who, for her own reasons, has decided to delay a sexual connection. Should he be limited to abstinence simply because she doesn't yet want to cross that boundary?

[PratyekaYana]

IMO women only make men they're lukewarm about wait for sex, unless there's some religious reason for it. I've found that if a woman is authentically attracted to you, you'll be just as irresistable to her as she is to you. Some half-assed hesitation may emerge when you make your move "too early", but in the end she'll give in.

 

There is something to be said for the correlation between a woman's tepid emotional response to a man and her willingness to offer him sexual intimacy, and a greater factor still seems to be her degree of attachment to the exchange model of sexuality. Women that don't particularly enjoy sex, for reasons ranging from low libido to a socialized perspective of sex as unclean, tend to see the act as something to be given rather than mutually enjoyed. They don't truly have sex so much as they dole it out to men that they've vetted as worthy according to other criteria.

[silvermercy]

There is something to be said for the correlation between a woman's tepid emotional response to a man and her willingness to offer him sexual intimacy, and a greater factor still seems to be her degree of attachment to the exchange model of sexuality. Women that don't particularly enjoy sex, for reasons ranging from low libido to a socialized perspective of sex as unclean, tend to see the act as something to be given rather than mutually enjoyed. They don't truly have sex so much as they dole it out to men that they've vetted as worthy according to other criteria.

This only applies to a very limited amount of women.

 

(Also, I will agree with everything Cypress said).

[misssmartypants]

Its funny.

 

Women who don't have sex soon enough (on the guy's time table) are accused of "withholding sex" and "using men" for . . . what? Emotional support or attention or possibly gifts and meals?

 

But women who have a knowable history or evidence or prior sexual activity are treated as non-datable? For example, I have three children, all the result of a marriage that went badly side ways. I choose to leave that situation and to take my children with me because to stay would have been destructive and dangerous.

 

As a woman with kids, I have a hard time even finding someone to date.

 

The fat is, sex is risky to both partners. There's the health factor, I certainly don't want to catch a nasty virus from some guy because I slept with him before I knew enough about him. I don't want to have my birth control fail and be faced with either an abortion (something I am opposed to) or carrying the child to term, and then pursuing child support from a man who wasn't even honorable enough to wait until I was ready to be intimate with him.

 

Fact is, guys who are arguing that women shouldn't wait until they should have sex with men, there is no way for you to come off as anything but disgusting.

 

Why should a woman open her body to you? Just because you want her to? Because you have biological urges? Her personhood is less important than yours? You've shown her a little attention and kindness and now she owes you an orgasm or two?

 

Really?

 

No one owes anyone anything. Sexual activity is a natural result of affection, attraction, and biological drive between two people. Sex with someone you don't know well is usually sad, generic, and icky. Sex with someone who you know very well, who knows you, who makes you feel safe and cared for, who you trust implicitly and care for to a degree hard to put into words . that is a wonderful thing.

[ThaWholigan]

This thread reminds me of a nun rolling down a hill. It goes black-and-white black-and white black-and-white......

 

Honestly, I have met lots of women who do the "waiting" thing while dating other guys, and I have also seen women wait after they got burned giving it up too early.

 

I'd rather not wait personally, but if I liked her enough, I probably would, provided she isn't using me as emotional leverage while she sexes other guys. It seems unlikely to some men here, but some women do value trust when it comes to things like sex. I meet an assortment of different people and individuals, and while I may encounter a particular type of man or woman more than most, generally I accept the notion that everybody's individual tastes will end up coming into play more often than "universal" ideals.

[JohnP82]

It has nothing to do with attraction. Women don't date men they aren't attracted to, so if she's dating you/kissing you/doing other intimate things with you, then she's attracted to you. I've been madly attracted to every boyfriend I've had, but I still waited because I wanted to get to know him and trust him before I had sex with him. I'm not gonna have sex with a guy just because I'm attracted to him.

 

I said attracted enough. I didn't mean to come across as saying waiting was bad. Sure some people wait, but all to often it feels like if the attraction is high enough then that will overcome the rule.

 

I've had the experience of waiting only to find out that she was hooking up with someone right before me yet I'm waiting. Or with my ex that she hopped straight into bed with another dude before my side of the bed had cooled, while she made me wait a month. I'm sorry I've been subject to the rule too much just to learn of the exception before or after.

Edited January 15, 2012 by JohnP82

[phineas]

I said attracted enough. I didn't mean to come across as saying waiting was bad. Sure some people wait, but all to often it feels like if the attraction is high enough then that will overcome the rule.

 

I've had the experience of waiting only to find out that she was hooking up with someone right before me yet I'm waiting. Or with my ex that she hopped straight into bed with another dude before my side of the bed had cooled, while she made me wait a month. I'm sorry I've been subject to the rule too much just to learn of the exception before or after.

 

Amen brother!

I'd rather spend 5 mins. rubbing one out then spend 5 hrs listening to a chick who doesn't want to get naked chirp about her problems.

 

as carhill said, if a woman feels comfortable enough to saddle me with that type of emotional payload she should feel comfortable enough to have sex with me.

 

Because lets be honest here, intimacy is intimacy. period.

[PlumPrincess]

but, zengirl and cypress, it isn't all about you. that's the catch. it takes two people to make a relationship happen, not one giving the other what they want.

 

besides, whether the sex is on the second/third date or second/third month, women can't 'catch' men with sex. men simply aren't wired that way. not that it stops them from trying...

 

plus phineas' description is entirely accurate with many women. women string along men by denying them sex, while getting the male attention THEY desire. it happens all the time.

 

so the natural response for a man, as i've posted in other such threads, is to simply not play along. if the woman denies sex after a reasonable period of time, the man needs to deny her the attention she wants. and at that point the relationship is over.

Most men seem to be able to jump right into bed with any woman who is not outrageously hideous. Just because men don't have a problem with having sex earlier doesn't mean that most women work like that as well. If a man was unwilling to provide the necessary emotional comfort and intimacy that many women require in order to take it to the sexual level, then I'd say, move on, find someone else, because yes, some women don't mind as well having sex earlier. To each his own.

 

It's kind of stupid, on the one hand, you have the woman who wants more time to get to know the other person better and to develop trust. On the other hand, you have the man who uses the time wondering why she is not sleeping with him and whether she is not stringing him along. It would be better if he spent the time to get to know her as well. If he's the kind who believes that her taking her time to get to know him means that she is stringing him along, he might consider checking how good his skills in assessing people's character really are.

[zengirl]

but, zengirl and cypress, it isn't all about you. that's the catch. it takes two people to make a relationship happen, not one giving the other what they want.

 

Huh? I understand a relationship is not all about me, but my sexuality is always mine, no matter who I'm with, and my right to respect my own sexuality, boundaries, and sense is always there.

 

To me, a relationship is not about sex. Sex is a part of that relationship, but there are many other components. My husband would say he feels the same way --- he certainly didn't marry me just because of sex. A relationship is about so much more than sex, and for many people getting to know someone and seeing those components and being sure that they are serious and really in it is crucial before sex. This is generally more crucial for women, but I know several men who wait for sex until they know the relationship is for real as well.

 

The idea that it's somehow selfish to wait till you really know the person and are comfortable having sex, understanding that it will be inside an exclusive relationship, is bull****.

 

besides, whether the sex is on the second/third date or second/third month, women can't 'catch' men with sex. men simply aren't wired that way. not that it stops them from trying...

 

I never said women COULD catch men with sex. What I said was that waiting was about seeing the kind of man he was, the kind of relationship you have, and if it's appropriate to have sex/if the relationship is serious enough for whatever boundaries you have for sex.

 

I don't think anyone waits to "catch" men with sex; just the opposite --- I think sometimes women wrongly think they need to have sex sooner than they know what they need to know/are ready in order to catch a man. IME, that's totally untrue. I've never had a problem with men rushing me before I was ready; I just had to make my boundaries clear.

 

plus phineas' description is entirely accurate with many women. women string along men by denying them sex, while getting the male attention THEY desire. it happens all the time.

 

Bummer, I guess. Phineas also said those women fall into bed with someone else on a whim, so I guess it depends upon the character of the woman in question. Most people I know who are relationship-oriented -- men or women -- understand that immediate sex is not a good idea (unless they're truly interested in a NSA fling and know that person isn't the one; I do know some relationship-oriented people who still have sex outside of relationships, but that's more men than women) because it blurs the lines early on.

 

I think it's idiotic to equate it to power. It's not about power, or patience, or whatever. It's about honestly knowing what you're getting into.

 

so the natural response for a man, as i've posted in other such threads, is to simply not play along. if the woman denies sex after a reasonable period of time, the man needs to deny her the attention she wants. and at that point the relationship is over.

 

Certainly, you can make whatever boundary you want. And "reasonable" periods will vary for everyone. I never had a set time period in mind -- though I never had sex before I was in an official relationship -- because it depended on how well I got to know the person, what I saw there, how much time we spent together in that time, etc. For my husband and I, it was over a month and probably 20+ dates. By the time we had sex, we were already exclusive and in love. For me, that works better. For him, it worked too.

 

I think it'd be absolutely INSANE to sleep with someone out of fear he'd not want to date you if he didn't. Though girls do it all the time. And, usually, they get dumped.

[colliejoanie]

As someone else posted.....we're damned if we do/damned if we don't. I have had sex too soon and realized what a mistake it was. I think if a girl has sex too soon, the guy's opinion of her changes from "I think this is someone I could date" to "She's a good lay, I might hit that a few more times while I continue to look for a girl I can date".

 

I'm also a sexual person and there's NO WAY I could withhold sex for the sake of withholding sex. I have it once a committed relationship has been established, and if the attraction is there.

 

I don't know any woman who makes her partner wait for sex for any reason other than she's not sure where the relationship is heading.....and that usually happens when a man won't commit.

[thatone]

As someone else posted.....we're damned if we do/damned if we don't. I have had sex too soon and realized what a mistake it was. I think if a girl has sex too soon, the guy's opinion of her changes from "I think this is someone I could date" to "She's a good lay, I might hit that a few more times while I continue to look for a girl I can date".

 

I'm also a sexual person and there's NO WAY I could withhold sex for the sake of withholding sex. I have it once a committed relationship has been established, and if the attraction is there.

 

I don't know any woman who makes her partner wait for sex for any reason other than she's not sure where the relationship is heading.....and that usually happens when a man won't commit.

 

yeah but men think the same thing, that's another thing i posted above. it's a catch 22, he won't commit so she won't commit. she won't have sex with him so he withdraws from her.

 

it goes both ways.

 

so the bottom line is normal, successful relationships will only develop when both parties are comfortable with all aspects, including sex.

 

and as such, from a man's standpoint, there is no shame at all in refusing commitment until such time as we're having sex. because i've done the approaching, i've done the chasing, i've done the planning dates, i've committed a lot of time and effort. so she'll have to take me at my word that i am in fact interested in her beyond a casual dating/sex arrangement. if she can't do that, and i'll always fully communicate it, then we're not going to get along because i'm not going to be compared and judged by HER past.

Edited January 15, 2012 by thatone

[carhill]

Just as I always pay for the first few dates, I always proactively extend care, empathy and intimacy first with any woman I find attractive enough to date. Reading posts in this thread caused a light bulb to go on regarding this dynamic, which feeds into the 'let me love you' theory I've been working on to better fine-tune my people-picker. LS is a great place to learn

 

The short version is, if a woman is intimate with me but chooses to not be sexual with me, then she's letting me love her, rather than loving me in a mutually synergistic and healthy way. I use the word 'love' to shorten all the words and actions of intimacy. The relationship is unbalanced and unhealthy. Clarity.

[thatone]

Just as I always pay for the first few dates, I always proactively extend care, empathy and intimacy first with any woman I find attractive enough to date. Reading posts in this thread caused a light bulb to go on regarding this dynamic, which feeds into the 'let me love you' theory I've been working on to better fine-tune my people-picker. LS is a great place to learn

 

The short version is, if a woman is intimate with me but chooses to not be sexual with me, then she's letting me love her, rather than loving me in a mutually synergistic and healthy way. I use the word 'love' to shorten all the words and actions of intimacy. The relationship is unbalanced and unhealthy. Clarity.

 

 

 

you broke it carhill, we're supposed to be fighting with each other, not figuring anything useful out. i hate it when that happens!

[Emilia]

When I was younger it took me a while to sleep with me I fancied but that was around the time when I was 20 and not confident.

 

Nowdays, after several long term and short term relationships under my belt, I don't see the point in waiting for sex. I want to get to know the man I'm dating and sexual intimacy is just as important to me as any other kind. In fact almost more so because I believe you can draw a lot of conclusions from what a man is like in bed (and I don't mean technique) at his most vulnerable.

 

As a mature adult, I honestly don't understand why adult women make men wait for sex. Surely it's in everyone's interest to find out whether you are compatible long term? I dumped men after finding sex unsatisfactory after a handful of dates, it happens the other way around too. What's the big deal? It's not some ridiculous 'them and us' deal. Yes some men only want sex and those are only good for that too. So what?

 

To be honest, from what I have seen so far, it's the boring, passive girls that are more likely to be pumped and dumped. In my experience men like to stick around when they feel they are getting what they want, it's usually too much hard work for them to keep looking. You do need the ability to judge character to a degree of course but women's fears over men disrespecting them is misplaced a lot of the time - in my experience. But then again I don't have trouble relating to men in a positive way I suppose.

[LittleTiger]

Some people are willing to share their bodies as a recreational activity, others consider this level of intimacy to be something that is reserved for an emotionally intimate, long term relationship or even marriage.

 

Most women on this thread have said that they prefer sex with someone they love and trust so that means they won't have sex early in a relationship - until the love and trust is present. That's a perfectly reasonable way to approach relationships.

 

It's equally reasonable to jump into bed with someone on the first date if that's how you like to do things, although it's a fairly risky strategy for a woman unless she enjoys no strings sex.

 

In either case, it's irrelevant what men think women should do, or what they accuse them of, or what their opinion of women 'witholding sex' is. Only game players use sex as a tool and most women are not playing games, they are looking for love.

 

If you date someone who has a timescale on physical intimacy that you find unacceptable then move on - you're looking for someone compatible, not trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

[Lovelybird]

Most women on this thread have said that they prefer sex with someone they love and trust so that means they won't have sex early in a relationship - until the love and trust is present. That's a perfectly reasonable way to approach relationships.

and it is hard to tell if a man truely loves you or lust you within 6 months, some even longer, may just wait for marriage

[thatone]

Some people are willing to share their bodies as a recreational activity, others consider this level of intimacy to be something that is reserved for an emotionally intimate, long term relationship or even marriage.

 

Most women on this thread have said that they prefer sex with someone they love and trust so that means they won't have sex early in a relationship - until the love and trust is present. That's a perfectly reasonable way to approach relationships.

 

It's equally reasonable to jump into bed with someone on the first date if that's how you like to do things, although it's a fairly risky strategy for a woman unless she enjoys no strings sex.

 

In either case, it's irrelevant what men think women should do, or what they accuse them of, or what their opinion of women 'witholding sex' is. Only game players use sex as a tool and most women are not playing games, they are looking for love.

 

If you date someone who has a timescale on physical intimacy that you find unacceptable then move on - you're looking for someone compatible, not trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

 

you don't know any more about "most women" than i know about "most men".

 

so, again, just because your opinion is yours doesn't make your opinion better than anyone else's. doesn't even make it the most common, actually.

 

i would actually say most people are more in line with emilia's opinion, from experience.

 

/broken record mode

[LittleTiger]

you don't know any more about "most women" than i know about "most men".

 

so, again, just because your opinion is yours doesn't make your opinion better than anyone else's. doesn't even make it the most common, actually.

 

i would actually say most people are more in line with emilia's opinion, from experience.

 

/broken record mode

 

What a strange response to my post - do you have a chip on your shoulder about something? I'm not sure how you could take offence at what I said.

 

I have no idea what 'most women' in the world think - I'm only one of them - I just said 'most women on this thread'. That is my interpretation of what has been written and I never said my opinion is better than anyone else's but I am, nevertheless, entitled to give my opinion.

 

With regard to game-playing, I could have said 'most people' are not playing games and 'most people' are looking for love - we all just do it in different ways.

 

Personally, I don't know any women who think in line with emilia - although I know plenty of men who think that way. It probably depends on the crowd you mix with. As I said, it makes no difference what anyone thinks, everyone will do what they feel is right and each relationship is different. How does it help anyone to point the finger and say 'your way is the wrong way'?

[thatone]

it depends on a lot of things. and yes, it depends on the people you associate with. i'm a city person, i meet other city people. people who moved here, usually alone, who are content to be in a new place, by themselves, and make a new life for themselves by themselves.

 

they don't have to worry about what their family thinks, or their friends from high school think, or what someone at the church they grew up in thinks, because those people aren't around.

 

they are making their own rules.

 

but that doesn't make them 'most women' either. just most where i am and where i go.

 

as for loveshack i assume most people come here to vent because of bad relationship situations so i'm not assuming that this forum is representative of 'most women' or 'most men' either.