How to keep a guy interested without putting out

[BetheButterfly]

 

The next time I have sex, I want it to be with someone who's invested and I deserve that.

 

Agreed

[Revolver]

They don't need to have many requirements, as they will be able to provide for a family solely with their own salaries and a woman willing to stay home and take care of their kids.

 

We women who are relatively successful can't do that. A lot of times salaries are lower for the same position men have, so we can't pay for a family with our salaries only, and if we don't date a guy who can minimally provide, how are we going to take a little time off to have kids? Hmmm...

 

We're doomed.

 

Who said they're staying home with the kids? These women work too, they just don't make as much as their husbands, and their husbands are ok with that which was my point.

 

As for your second point, a man would have to make as much as you did to provide for the family? We're not talking about bumbs here lol, just guys who aren't doctors/lawyers etc

[edgygirl]

I am happy too... I am sure there are a lot of women going through the same thing but we don't get to talk about it much.

 

I hear you girl. At your age is also when casual sex started to get annoying and empty to me. But it took me a long time to realize that. I think I only realized it like... last week hahaha! I lied to myself as I was also quite emotionally unavailable although I wouldn't admit that back then.

 

You TOTALLY deserve it. Make them see it too, I think that's the key.

 

I'm glad you started this thread, edgy.

[edgygirl]

I know women generally work today. My point is, in my city, you can't have a baby if you don't make at least 100K plus, collectively or one of the partners. To be more realistic, if you don't want to eat ramen everyday, in my city you should be making at least 150K to be able to have one baby.

 

I am not sure how our parents had 4+ babies and held it together lol.

 

Who said they're staying home with the kids? These women work too, they just don't make as much as their husbands, and their husbands are ok with that which was my point.

 

As for your second point, a man would have to make as much as you did to provide for the family? We're not talking about bumbs here lol, just guys who aren't doctors/lawyers etc

 

That being said, i.e. if I make around 80K and my guy makes around 80K (non doctors or lawyers) who is going to be home with the kid in the beginning? That's why it's easier for guys... most ones I date make 100K + and would be able to have the woman not work here and there while having babies and caring for them, while he does. I don't want to be with a partner who wants to stay home. Call me picky.

Edited December 12, 2012 by edgygirl

[Lonely Ronin]

I am not sure how our parents had 4+ babies and held it together lol.

 

1. they lived in the burbs,

2. Knew how to fix and make stuff (I'm shocked how many guys can't change the oil in their car)

3. they didn't eat out 1/10 as much as our generation does

4. they had smaller homes & less stuff

5. they didn't take 4 or 5 vacations a year.

 

the list goes on and on

[phineas]

It's coming from... our lives? Most guys I've seen try within a date or two.

 

And no, I don't think I am picking the bad ones. I only go out with regular interesting guys who don't seem like players.

 

Every woman I know who complains about boyfriends that jump ship for another woman after a few months only had nice things to say about them when they met them.

 

The simple fact is there are red flags that tell you these men are just looking for sex & don't actually like you & you are missing them completely.

 

People are creatures of habit. Men who go for sex early then bail when it doesn't happen do so because it's faster & easier for them to just go after a bunch of other women to get laid.

 

Like I said, you are picking the wrong guys & you are missing the signs.

 

another thing, in our age group i've met plenty of women that I meet in a bar wanting to go home with me that night.

 

So since you said you are doing OLD, couple that with an increasing number of women in our age group that are DTF & well that's why it could seem every guy is like this.

Edited December 12, 2012 by phineas

[Ruby Slippers]

I am happy too... I am sure there are a lot of women going through the same thing but we don't get to talk about it much.

Yep, I was gonna start a thread about the virtues of waiting a bit - but didn't want to sound like Conservative Constance So I'm also glad you did.

 

I've never waited as a manipulative move. I did it because I felt it was healthier for me and would get things off on the right foot for me and the man - and yield better sex.

 

Sure, the few times I truly wanted sex only, I was totally up front about that and went for it. But it didn't take me long to figure out that sex only is rarely that simple, and it's really not what I want, or very good.

 

This thread prompted me to make a list of all the people I've had sex with (12 people), and figure out how many were one-nighters (2), how many were ongoing casual/FWB situations (2), and how many were relationships (8). I also got really nerdy and ranked the sex in each situation.

 

For the curious, here's how my experiences rate for quality of sexual pleasure on average, on a 1-10 scale:

 

Relationships: 8

FWB: 7

One-nighters: 1!

 

I figured out a long time ago that one-nighters aren't for me - but it's good to remind myself why.

[Els]

That being said, i.e. if I make around 80K and my guy makes around 80K (non doctors or lawyers) who is going to be home with the kid in the beginning? That's why it's easier for guys... most ones I date make 100K + and would be able to have the woman not work here and there while having babies and caring for them, while he does. I don't want to be with a partner who wants to stay home. Call me picky.

 

Oookay... so you want a man who makes about 100k/year, who is very good-looking and 'cream of the crop', who is also fine with waiting a while to have sex. That's quite a different story from just wanting a guy who waits a while to have sex. That isn't to say that what you're looking for is impossible, just that with each restriction that you put on them, it narrows your pool. And those guys are likely to be the ones most desired by other women as well, especially if you are in your late 30s where less people are still single. AND your primary method of trying to meet these guys is OLD?

 

My suggestion would be to just forget all that for a while. Just TALK to men in real life (if you don't have social circles with single men in them, make some!) and get to know them for them. Don't think about whether he's cream of the crop or whether or not he makes enough for you to be able to stay at home with the kids while living a nice lifestyle and all that. Aim to make, instead, a mental and emotional connection with those men. Then they will be FAR more likely to be willing to wait if they feel the same with you.

[edgygirl]

Hmm just to make it clear. I don't WANT men to "wait".

All I want is to develop a healthy relationship, whatever it takes. I noticed that my inability to jump in bed fast on the first dates with someone I am extremely attracted to is not a contributing factor in developing a healthy relationship.

 

In my city most men make 100K a year. Yes I know, it's hard to have the kind of men I date being patient and not wanting it fast. My pool is not that big indeed. And yes there are a lot of women after them, but they are mostly blond barbies and I'm more cultured and different which keeps their attention and interest for a long time before the first date. My problem is I haven't had control when dating. I need to develop a healthier approach to dating.

 

Well not sure where you live but in my city everyone I know 90% of people probably use OLD. As I said I do develop a mental connection before meeting. But I think I send sexual vibes when meeting which makes them always try to jump on me. Ugh!

 

I will try to think of ways to meet people IRL though. I will go to religious fun events (they are not really religious, in my culture they just want us non religious people to get together and eventually want to get married within)

 

Oookay... so you want a man who makes about 100k/year, who is very good-looking and 'cream of the crop', who is also fine with waiting a while to have sex. That's quite a different story from just wanting a guy who waits a while to have sex. That isn't to say that what you're looking for is impossible, just that with each restriction that you put on them, it narrows your pool. And those guys are likely to be the ones most desired by other women as well, especially if you are in your late 30s where less people are still single. AND your primary method of trying to meet these guys is OLD?

 

My suggestion would be to just forget all that for a while. Just TALK to men in real life (if you don't have social circles with single men in them, make some!) and get to know them for them. Don't think about whether he's cream of the crop or whether or not he makes enough for you to be able to stay at home with the kids while living a nice lifestyle and all that. Aim to make, instead, a mental and emotional connection with those men. Then they will be FAR more likely to be willing to wait if they feel the same with you.

[movingon12]

I don't know how I was so blind up to today that I didn't realize that all/most guys will TRY. It doesn't mean we have to do it or feel the pressure to do it or it's the highway.

 

Specially because they will try with almost every woman they go on a date. It's not that we're that special or irresistible. What was I thinking???

 

Thanks LS for making me see it. And I used to consider myself pretty intuitive and smart. Ha.

 

Personally, I have no problem with the fact that most guys (especially older) guys will try very early on. It doesn't mean I have to agree to it.

 

Just because a guy tries on the first date doesn't mean he thinks you're incredibly special or that he is hearing wedding bells.

 

But equally, it doesn't mean he sees you as nothing but a ONS and you'll never hear from him again.

 

It just means he wants to have sex with you. No more. No less.

 

If you want to have sex with him, do it. If you don't, don't. It's not a big dilemma.

 

From what I've read on here - none of the guys would end a relationship just because you had sex early on. And most would carry on dating you if you didn't have sex early on (providing they were sure you were genuinely interested in them).

 

Do what feels right at the time - but it's wrong to think that having sex with him or NOT having sex with him is going to decide your relationship. It won't.

 

If things didn't work out - it wasn't because you did/didn't have sex too early.

[Taramere]

In my city most men make 100K a year...it's hard to have the kind of men I date being patient and not wanting it fast. My pool is not that big indeed. And yes there are a lot of women after them, but they are mostly blond barbies and I'm more cultured and different which keeps their attention and interest for a long time before the first date.

 

I'm confused about this, because this last part suggests that contrary to the title of the thread you don't in fact have a problem with men remaining interested in you when you don't have sex early on.

 

High earners are not automatically the classiest of guys. Some might indeed be very classy gentlemen, but quite a few others will be high earners for little reason other than that they're cut throat in businesses that require it. A few of the most cultured men I've encountered have been quite low earners - money and material items not necessarily being as important to them as it is to other men. A cultured person can get a huge amount of pleasure from very inexpensive activities...whereas somebody whose pleasure comes from booze, drugs, going to lapdancing clubs, living in a penthouse and taking exotic holidays is going to need a lot more cash to fund that kind of lifestyle.

 

If you're currently focused on what men earn and what they do for a living, it might be time to rethink this. A man's job/salary isn't a reliable indicator of his character, intelligence and ability to appreciate the arts. If you want to meet a man who falls into that category, then perhaps it's time to ditch the online dating and get more involved in your local arts scene.

[xxoo]

If you want to meet a man who falls into that category, then perhaps it's time to ditch the online dating and get more involved in your local arts scene.

 

Find a man looking for a muse....and be adored forever

 

Poor and adored

[Taramere]

Find a man looking for a muse....and be adored forever

 

Poor and adored

 

Not the starving artist in the attic! I don't think they tend to make very good, loyal boyfriends in the long run.

 

I'm thinking more of men who enjoy books, art galleries, the theatre and classical music...and who aren't gay or over 90 years old. They've got to be out there!

[Els]

Not the starving artist in the attic! I don't think they tend to make very good, loyal boyfriends in the long run.

 

I'm thinking more of men who enjoy books, art galleries, the theatre and classical music...and who aren't gay or over 90 years old. They've got to be out there!

 

They are, I'm with one! Okay, he's not terribly much into theatre, but still.

 

Classical music outings aren't cheap though, with tickets to the orchestra costing double that of the average movie. We do splurge and go on occasion. But, I digress. I think the OP has specifically mentioned that she wants a man with a high income not because of a passion for the arts/culture, but because she wants someone who can fund a nice lifestyle while she stays at home with the kids. If she has no trouble finding those men and keeping them interested in her, that's all well and good, but then I don't see a reason for the topic of this thread.

[edgygirl]

Oh what I meant was that the guys I get really interested on online seem fascinated by me and how different I am than most women they meet.

 

But after meeting... then maybe I'm too unconventional for most "normal" men, as I am not a typical good girl who most men seem to be looking for.

 

I certainly don't go for that kind of guy you are talking about. i.e. I don't date people in Finance (in my city they only care about cars, women, drugs, spending money, condos). No way, I am into men with culture and that's the main thing I look for in their profiles.

 

Honestly I just think I am too intense, emotional, not calm. I go all the way too fast, in all senses: emotional, sexual, passion etc. It scares most people who are not like me away. I think I need someone more balanced than me who can control himself. And who is stable in his career and is looking to start a family sometime soon. I thought I found it with this last guy. Oh well.

 

Who knows what my problem is. Me and my friends keep saying it's a shame there's no post relationship database you can access where people say what's the problem with you so at least you can improve yourself lol.

 

I'm confused about this, because this last part suggests that contrary to the title of the thread you don't in fact have a problem with men remaining interested in you when you don't have sex early on.

[Taramere]

Oh what I meant was that the guys I get really interested on online seem fascinated by me and how different I am than most women they meet.

 

But after meeting... then maybe I'm too unconventional for most "normal" men, as I am not a typical good girl who most men seem to be looking for.

 

Are any of us? Ask a man what they want, and in most cases you'll get some variation of "conventionally attractive, cooks things the way my mother does, gives good blow jobs and will generally do her best to conform to my expectations."

 

Picture a man striding up the path all doe-eyed, Brycreemed hair plastered down against his skull, a bunch of roses in one hand and a box of chocolates in the other, then switch his gender to female. That's what they want....only with a hot slutty friend walking behind her, primed for a threesome.

[musemaj11]

All I hear is money, money, money.

 

This woman is no better than the men she is complaining about.

 

Women always use having children as an excuse to gun for wealthy men. But the fact is that kids dont need wealthy parents. What they need is loving parents.

Edited December 13, 2012 by musemaj11

[xxoo]

Women always use having children as an excuse to gun for wealthy men. But the fact is that kids dont need wealthy parents. What they need is loving parents.

 

This is true. I stayed home while my babies were young, and we didn't earn anywhere near 100k.

 

I know city couples who simply moved to the burbs after having kids. If you want the big city lifestyle, expect to keep working. If you want a husband and kids, make that the priority--not city lifestyle.

[edgygirl]

Hey I agree with you. Love matters much more.

The difference between a gold digger and me is: I would NEVER ever be with a man only because he has money. Honestly prefer to be single or die. At least in my case the ONLY reason I would like someone somewhat stable is kids INDEED. Believe it or not. In my city it's crazy expensive to have kids. There's no way that both can work if you don't have 2K a month for day care. That's exactly what it costs, I know from friends who have kids. Yes, it costs like a second rent to have a kid here.

 

So no I could care less about the lifestyle associated with having a guy with money. Seriously. I mean it.

 

All I hear is money, money, money.

 

This woman is no better than the men she is complaining about.

 

Women always use having children as an excuse to gun for wealthy men. But the fact is that kids dont need wealthy parents. What they need is loving parents.

[edgygirl]

Well it totally depends on the city. You can hardly pay rent here if you wearn less than 70K.

 

I would be totally up for moving to the suburbs, sign me in today! I couldn't care less about the city lifestyle. So shallow anyway. I am just here because that's where there's work in my profession.

 

This is true. I stayed home while my babies were young, and we didn't earn anywhere near 100k.

 

I know city couples who simply moved to the burbs after having kids. If you want the big city lifestyle, expect to keep working. If you want a husband and kids, make that the priority--not city lifestyle.

[Drseussgrrl]

Hey I agree with you. Love matters much more.

The difference between a gold digger and me is: I would NEVER ever be with a man only because he has money. Honestly prefer to be single or die. At least in my case the ONLY reason I would like someone somewhat stable is kids INDEED. Believe it or not. In my city it's crazy expensive to have kids. There's no way that both can work if you don't have 2K a month for day care. That's exactly what it costs, I know from friends who have kids. Yes, it costs like a second rent to have a kid here.

 

So no I could care less about the lifestyle associated with having a guy with money. Seriously. I mean it.

 

Yeah - it's like that where I live, too. I know hardly any families with one earner in the household.

[edgygirl]

Yay therapy time.

 

Yes I am too available to the few people who catch my interest. Guilty.

 

You are right, I think my intensity IS scaring the right men away. Usually it is the more Beta guys who get crazy about me as they love that vibe. Not that I am into Alpha men, but I don't want someone who is weak either.

 

Hmm does it mean I have to do a "Complete Makeover" with my personality? lol.

 

This is your problem (in bold).

 

You need to be demure. It seems you are too available and there is no mystery with you.

 

If you were 20 I would say "sex too soon" is not a good idea. But, that does not apply to your age group.

 

I think your admitted intensity is scaring men away. The only ones that are not scared away are the men looking for sex and nothing else.

[edgygirl]

Come on girl do tell! How was the date yesterday???

 

Yeah - it's like that where I live, too. I know hardly any families with one earner in the household.

[Tara247]

5 dates is a long time... you wont keep a guy interested without physical intimacy for 5 dates...

 

I agree not to be the fish that just jumps in the boat, but if you need a crane to reel that fish in, its not worth it and we will let you go.

 

Men are about sex, bottom line... if you dont put out... we will walk... Quid pro quo...

 

You might find some sucker that will do what you want and wait 5 dates, but you eventually wont be attracted to him long term

 

Now stop dating losers that push the intense threshhold

 

Excuse me??! This is sickening. OP, along with not having intercourse on the first three dates, please don't "blow him" either. And be mindful how you dress and present yourself. Please don't walk into the restaurant dressed like a tramp, or he might be anticipating dessert even before he finishes dinner...:bunny:

[edgygirl]

It was sickening indeed.

 

This is what I wore on my last date: Gemma wrap dress - Polyvore

 

I think I looked low-key, yet cute and not unsexy either. There was this woman prob in her 50s who was dressed like a slut with her husband in a table nearby and my guy looked with rolling eyes. I mean, there's nothing wrong to want to feel sexy for her husband but on a date men do notice when you're dressed like a tramp lol.

 

Excuse me??! This is sickening. OP, along with not having intercourse on the first three dates, please don't "blow him" either. And be mindful how you dress and present yourself. Please don't walk into the restaurant dressed like a tramp, or he might be anticipating dessert even before he finishes dinner...:bunny: