Divasu Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 That book, and The 48 Laws of Power are my two favorite books for what it's worth. Both by the same author Such a charmer. 1
miss_jaclynrae Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 Castle, in being romantic and not wanting exclusivity, this sends a lot of mixed signals. For naive or competitive women, the setup is a hunting, proving and prize attainment trigger. Are women only foils to your ego? I totally disagree with this. As a younger woman, I don't think anyone who ends up in a casual relationship was looking for something casual. I think we all hope it ends up being long term, but not everything is always meant to last. It isn't about not wanting exclusivity, its about not being ready for it with that person. That doesn't mean by being romantic before you know that is leading on. I don't think romance is trickery, I think romance SHOULD be a give in, and I am sad that it isn't. I think guys just looking for a one night stand should still be romantic. 1
Author MrCastle Posted August 3, 2013 Author Posted August 3, 2013 Maybe you are the EXCEPTION lol. But you must admit that you sound like you're experimenting or carrying out ome sort of project on these women lol.[/Quote] Well my quandry is, I absolutely love women. You don't have to go far to see that if you've read some of my threads (female appreciation thread anyone?) and a host of other ones. There are men I know who flat out don't respect women. They tell me openly they're only doing stuff for sex, or that they're using a girl because she really likes him and he can live out some of his more dirty sexual fantasies with her because he has her wrapped around his finger. That's not me. I'm just a 25 year old man who loves women but doesn't want to settle down anytime soon. I want my first LTR to be my last. So what am I to do, abstain from sex until I meet "the one?" What if I never meet her? All I can do, is my part to not be a douche that uses women for sex, that lies or leads them on in any way. A man who is a romantic casual dater. I don't think every casual dater is the same or has the same motivations. I'm not a user just because I don't want to settle down. By the way, I know of some guy who is a ROMANTIC....but it lasts for only three months. In fact, this is why he gets women so easily. He is very handsome and charming, and "romances" women. Alas! His attention span usually lasts for three months and off he goes. No thanks lol. However long it lasts, and romance certainly has no set life span, should be appreciated for what it is, in that moment. You can't say it wasn't romantic just because it only last three months. Being romantic is a moment in time and not an on going thing. However long it lasts should be enjoyed. 1
Author MrCastle Posted August 3, 2013 Author Posted August 3, 2013 Castle, in being romantic and not wanting exclusivity, this sends a lot of mixed signals. For naive or competitive women, the setup is a hunting, proving and prize attainment trigger.[/Quote] I just can't be that guy that bangs chicks and leaves them. I don't have it in me to be that cold. At the same time, I'm not going to date long term every woman I meet. People always have moments where they're up for the commitment and responsibilities of a LTR, and times where they just want to focus on themselves and have fun. There is a middle ground here that keeps getting overlooked by many, that even some women in here have acknowledged. You can be casual and be romantic. I understand it can be a confusing concept to grasp for some, but the women I deal with haven't really had problems with that set up. They know where I stand on LTRs. That said, they also don't want it to just be sex. It's more than sex. It's a relationship where both parties like each other as people first and foremost, but for one reason or another, the timing isn't right to settle down exclusively. Are women only foils to your ego? No.
Weezy1973 Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 I would say romance is about love and seduction is about sex. You can use romantic gestures as part of your seduction if need be. But, unless you are in love with the woman, it is not romance - it is merely seduction. And as far as I know, romantic love doesn't come into play with casual relationships. 1
miss_jaclynrae Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 I would say romance is about love and seduction is about sex. You can use romantic gestures as part of your seduction if need be. But, unless you are in love with the woman, it is not romance - it is merely seduction. And as far as I know, romantic love doesn't come into play with casual relationships. Why is it so black and white? So just because you don't want something long term with someone means you just want sex? I totally disagree with this. 1
Sunshine87 Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 I think that being on Loveshack has made Castle more sensitive. He definitely gets some stick for some of his liberal ways. Lol. Sometimes he has to defend himself I sort of feel like Loveshack has caused some subtle changes or made him more sensitive lol.
Weezy1973 Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 Why is it so black and white? So just because you don't want something long term with someone means you just want sex? I totally disagree with this. I actually said love. Romance is about being in love. If your casual guy wasn't in love with you and still made those romantic gestures, it wasn't romance, it was seduction, or from the sounds of it just part of his personality and probably how he was raised. Being romantic is about doing something special for someone you are in love with. 1
tbf Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 You can be casual and be romantic.The romance you offer isn't new. Think Casanova. Short fantasy, non-monogamous seductions. But there's no heart in it. There's only fantasy and sex. 1
Author MrCastle Posted August 3, 2013 Author Posted August 3, 2013 I think that being on Loveshack has made Castle more sensitive. He definitely gets some stick for some of his liberal ways. Lol. Sometimes he has to defend himself I sort of feel like Loveshack has caused some subtle changes or made him more sensitive lol. I like this site a lot. Whether I make topics where most agree with me or topics where most don't. It is refreshing to have an ongoing dialogue on things I feel very passionate about. I think this site has given me insight into the minds of others, more specifically, women, and has helped me understand them better. To say I have not gained anything from being here would be disingenuous. I would hope also, that others have, too, opened their minds and have gained new found insight into how people different from them operate.
miss_jaclynrae Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 I actually said love. Romance is about being in love. If your casual guy wasn't in love with you and still made those romantic gestures, it wasn't romance, it was seduction, or from the sounds of it just part of his personality and probably how he was raised. Being romantic is about doing something special for someone you are in love with. This doesn't even make sense. So if I have a boyfriend, and we aren't in love yet, but in a committed relationship, then when he does something "romantic" it is actually "seductive"? Talk about total misuse of the word. 1
Author MrCastle Posted August 3, 2013 Author Posted August 3, 2013 The romance you offer isn't new. Think Casanova. Short fantasy, non-monogamous seductions. But there's no heart in it. There's only fantasy and sex. So I ask you this -- if you were in a casual relationship, would you rather a guy who only texted/called you when he wanted sex? Or a guy who actually took interest in you as a human being and catered his approach around you as an individual as opposed to a one size fits all approach he used on every woman prior?
miss_jaclynrae Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 I suggest people actually look up the word romance and seduction. If you did, you would see that romance 100% does not only pertain to people in love. Many of you are mis-using the words romance and seduction.
Sunshine87 Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 I like this site a lot. Whether I make topics where most agree with me or topics where most don't. It is refreshing to have an ongoing dialogue on things I feel very passionate about. I think this site has given me insight into the minds of others, more specifically, women, and has helped me understand them better. To say I have not gained anything from being here would be disingenuous. I would hope also, that others have, too, opened their minds and have gained new found insight into how people different from them operate. If only more more joined loveshack....we'd definitely have better quality men lol. Yeh, LS is very ingishtful. I've learnt an incredible lot! 1
tbf Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 So I ask you this -- if you were in a casual relationship, would you rather a guy who only texted/called you when he wanted sex? Or a guy who actually took interest in you as a human being and catered his approach around you as an individual as opposed to a one size fits all approach he used on every woman prior?I don't have non-monogamous relationships.
miss_jaclynrae Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 I don't have non-monogamous relationships. Who says a dating someone casually means it isn't monogamous? 1
tbf Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 Who says a dating someone casually means it isn't monogamous? This is Castle's romance model.
Weezy1973 Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 This doesn't even make sense. So if I have a boyfriend, and we aren't in love yet, but in a committed relationship, then when he does something "romantic" it is actually "seductive"? Talk about total misuse of the word. Again - you are only referring to romantic gestures. This would be romantic - if your casual guy were to say to you: "JaclynRae - you are the most amazing woman I have met and our connection is so deep that I can't stand the thought of not being with you. I know our lives are complicated right now, but I will do anything that I need to do to be with you." - that would be romantic. Opening doors and paying for dinners is child's play.
Weezy1973 Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 And also here's the first definition that popped up when I Googled romance: Romance is the expressive and pleasurable feeling from an emotional attraction towards another person associated with love. 2
Author MrCastle Posted August 3, 2013 Author Posted August 3, 2013 This is Castle's romance model. You can be monogamous and be casual. Plenty of threads here back that up with people in a fwb situation but don't want to, or feel bad about, sleeping with others. My romance model changes depending on the woman. I don't have a one size fits all approach.
miss_jaclynrae Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 Again - you are only referring to romantic gestures. This would be romantic - if your casual guy were to say to you: "JaclynRae - you are the most amazing woman I have met and our connection is so deep that I can't stand the thought of not being with you. I know our lives are complicated right now, but I will do anything that I need to do to be with you." - that would be romantic. Opening doors and paying for dinners is child's play. You keep not making sense. For one, what do romantic gestures equal if not romance? The idea of what one person finds romantic can be vastly different from what another person considers romantic.
Author MrCastle Posted August 3, 2013 Author Posted August 3, 2013 I don't have non-monogamous relationships. That's your answer? Can't answer the actual question I posed? It's a hypothetical, so. Let's just assume you do have "non-monogamous relationships." What then?
tbf Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 My romance model changes depending on the woman. I don't have a one size fits all approach.I can see that.
Pyro Posted August 3, 2013 Posted August 3, 2013 OK I take back what I said previously. Yes people in casual/ONS/FWB situations can be romantic....but is it genuine romance? No If you are in those type of relationships you pretty much know that there is an expiration date on the relationship. A year from now you aren't going to care where that person is what they have done with their lives. All that matters to that person in the casual relationship is getting as much out of that time before the expiration date hits. In the end "romance" (acts portrayed as) are used to make that person happy because a happy person means a lot more sex. So in the end the "romance" used in a casual fling is conditional. Genuine romance is unconditional.
Recommended Posts