mysteryscape Posted December 21, 2014 Posted December 21, 2014 The world is a completely different place than it was 30 years ago, and will be even more different 30 years from now. Deal with it. It must be nice to think that the world as we know it began less than 30 years ago. While we're at it, abortion was legalized in 1973, for better or worse. Believe me, there were plenty of abortions back then, not performed in back alleys. In fact, abortion seems to be becoming gradually less available today.
Author Dreamworld Posted December 22, 2014 Author Posted December 22, 2014 this happened to me after waiting over two months to sleep with someone. by then we were going on regular dates and in touch by phone daily. he was talking about having visions of marrying me. the first time we slept together was the last time i saw him... even though i blocked him and have moved on, i feel a lot less confident about dating. i think that people who do this will do this even if you have waited a fairly long while and have made all kinds of professions of liking each other. this happened to me after waiting over two months to sleep with someone. by then we were going on regular dates and in touch by phone daily. he was talking about having visions of marrying me. the first time we slept together was the last time i saw him... even though i blocked him and have moved on, i feel a lot less confident about dating. i think that people who do this will do this even if you have waited a fairly long while and have made all kinds of professions of liking each other. I think so too. I am just going to chalk it up to I either met a smooth player who got his kicks from me, got bored and moved on, or for some reason or other he lost interest. I dont care to know why. It doesn't matter. But my ego still kinda hurts. I havent dated many guys ( i was even married once ) and have had a couple successful fwb things, but the fade away is actually the first time for me. Guess I still have a lot to learn. Do these dudes ever come back? Not because I want to try again, but I can have the chance to turn him down this time around ( i know i know, petty, but I am being honest hehe) Thanks all!
Author Dreamworld Posted December 22, 2014 Author Posted December 22, 2014 Oh and yikes I am not going to get into the Victorian era and modern era argument. But as a 30 something woman today, I like sex just as much as men do. Sometimes I think I even want it more than some guys! And I dont have to be in a committed relationship to want sex. But I still need a little ( not a lot mind you!) of an emotional connection/interaction with the guy before that happens so I can't do one night stands and kissing/sex on the first date. And for pregnancy std's and such (yikes!) i am on BC and I request the guy wear a condom. If these dont apply sex I ain't having. I will leave it at this since I dont want to get off topic. Thanks again all for your input! 3
mysteryscape Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 But as a 30 something woman today, I like sex just as much as men do. Sometimes I think I even want it more than some guys! And I dont have to be in a committed relationship to want sex. But I still need a little ( not a lot mind you!) of an emotional connection/interaction with the guy before that happens so I can't do one night stands and kissing/sex on the first date. I would just say that you got into the problem you mentioned in your post. Most guys are happy to do one-night stands at least until they get sick of them. I agree that all this has little to do with whether I am "Victorian" (as claimed by a couple of the posters) or not. How about kissing on the first date without anything else? Now that I think happens a lot, even with women who wouldn't dream of having sex until much later. 1
furby19 Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 I don't think he "hit and quit". It sounds like he lost interest. It happens. Just lick your wounds and keep it moving. 1
Author Dreamworld Posted December 22, 2014 Author Posted December 22, 2014 I still can't seem to do the first date kiss. Maybe by the second? I guess it is a good thing it happened sooner than later or else the blow would have been harder. Sigh, rejection, however small, sucks. We have so many mutual friends though (slapping hand to forehead) so I am going to run into him sooner or later. Hopefully by that time I will have gotten over it enough to be cordial and not all awkward.
losangelena Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 From what I can tell -- google around on this, you will find it -- 6 months or longer improves the odds of a guy staying e.g. a marriage resulting. Sure, but try getting a modern man to stick around for six months without sex. Unless they're religious in some way, it's just not going to happen. 2
mysteryscape Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 Sure, but try getting a modern man to stick around for six months without sex. Unless they're religious in some way, it's just not going to happen. I don't know if you're right or not, could be. It probably depends on what circles one moves in. As I pointed out somewhere, there was a research paper some time back that claimed that the typical woman i.e. 50% of women ready after 6 months, the typical man after a week. Probably they compromise somewhere in between. 2-3 months maybe? Or is that already outdated. With the easy availabiity of sex, men can just find it somewhere else if the woman balks. If she won't put out, somebody else will be happy to, is the lesson guys learn early on. So, women will keep on making it easily available, and guys will keep on dumping them without much thought. As I also said, some woman writer whose name I can't remember call ed it "unliateral disarmament." This back in the days of the Cold War.
Rydo Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 I would never stick around and waste 6 months of my life without sex. Also I would never have a second date without a kiss on the first date. You might get a guy to stick around and date you without sex for 6 months if he is old/religious but that's pretty much it. 1
losangelena Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 I don't know if you're right or not, could be. It probably depends on what circles one moves in. As I pointed out somewhere, there was a research paper some time back that claimed that the typical woman i.e. 50% of women ready after 6 months, the typical man after a week. Probably they compromise somewhere in between. I just don't know many men who are willing to wait that long, or women either, for that matter. Again, unless "waiting" is for religious or some other specified purpose, I think both genders desire sexual closeness and compatibility. There's a way to go about securing a commitment from a man that doesn't mean putting out right away, but by and large, women do probably have to have sex before they're fully comfortable. That will ALWAYS be a risk, no matter how secure one feels in the relationship. I don't buy this idea that people waited so much longer to sleep with each other back in the "olden days." I do think that marriage was the more socially acceptable path at that time though, and pretty much the only way a woman could make it in the world. As my 70-something year old mother told me once, "be careful, 'cause a man will tell you he loves you just to sleep with you," so this is a practice dating back to at least the 1960s! In the OP's original thread, she mentioned that this guy was in near constant text communication early on; another poster said the guy she waited two months to sleep with said he had visions of marriage. At what point does a woman know a man's true intent? Who knows? When even the words "I love you" do not constitute genuine intent. In my opinion, that's where women get tripped up (then and now), by sleeping with a guy and having any expectations that something will come of it. I slept with my now-boyfriend on date three. I knew there was a reasonable chance that I wouldn't hear from him again, and was surprised when I did. But at the time, I had no illusions that what we were doing "meant something" to him. It wasn't until later that I came to learn what a deliberate person he is and that it's not his nature to pull a one-and-done on a woman. Either way, there's no way to know until after the fact. 1
mysteryscape Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 I don't buy this idea that people waited so much longer to sleep with each other back in the "olden days." I do think that marriage was the more socially acceptable path at that time though, and pretty much the only way a woman could make it in the world. As my 70-something year old mother told me once, "be careful, 'cause a man will tell you he loves you just to sleep with you," so this is a practice dating back to at least the 1960s! In the OP's original thread, she mentioned that this guy was in near constant text communication early on; another poster said the guy she waited two months to sleep with said he had visions of marriage. At what point does a woman know a man's true intent? Who knows? When even the words "I love you" do not constitute genuine intent. In my opinion, that's where women get tripped up (then and now), by sleeping with a guy and having any expectations that something will come of it. I agree with most of this. Age of first intercourse has been pretty constant over many decades. Difference is, in the "old days" women got a marriage out of it. And then marriage was much more of a commitment than it is now. The 1960's are part of the same era as now, that was when the sexual revolution really took off. I can tell you for sure, two months isn't long enough to test whether a guy is serious. Six months does seem like a pretty good indicator, is my sense. I'm glad things worked out for you with your current boyfriend. I wonder if you and he will stay together? Personally, I know of some experienced men who never tell someone they want to sleep with that they're going to stay (or something along similar lines) unless they mean it. These guys have learned that it just feels too lousy when the woman (whom they may truly care for whether the guy wants a commitment or not) realizes they've been had.
BluEyeL Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 I think 6 months is too long. Three months or so it's safer. In any case the length of time doesn't matter. It's safe for a woman to have sex when the man says he is ready to be in a relationship with her/be her boyfriend. That's when. If it's 3 months OK, if it's 6 OK. I waited 1 year with my ex-husband, he almost left me, but came back.
mortensorchid Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 That happened to me earlier this year, the hit and quit, which is what seems to have happened to you. It's not a big deal, it happens. It wasn't meant to be. On my part at least I got an answer out of him when I ran into him a few months ago, he said he was kind of freaked out after his divorce which was a few months before we met. True? I don't know. But in your case, move on.
Rydo Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 I agree with most of this. Age of first intercourse has been pretty constant over many decades. Difference is, in the "old days" women got a marriage out of it. And then marriage was much more of a commitment than it is now. The 1960's are part of the same era as now, that was when the sexual revolution really took off. I can tell you for sure, two months isn't long enough to test whether a guy is serious. Six months does seem like a pretty good indicator, is my sense. I'm glad things worked out for you with your current boyfriend. I wonder if you and he will stay together? Marriage was more of a commitment because women needed marriage and also divorce was frowned upon. It seems that any era you consider inconvenient is the same era as now. This just isn't the case. The 60' 70's and 80's were nothing like now. Anyone on these boards that takes the advice of 6 months will find themselves sitting around with a lot of cats in years to come, unless they wish to find a religious person or an old man. 1
mysteryscape Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 Marriage was more of a commitment because women needed marriage and also divorce was frowned upon. Precisely. Also, men needed marriage to get sex, unless they wanted to go to prostitutes and the like. It seems that any era you consider inconvenient is the same era as now. This just isn't the case. The 60' 70's and 80's were nothing like now. No, they were very much like now. If you think the sexual revolution was just invented, you are very wrong. I'd agree that the internet has made a difference, but the big change took place in the 60's especially the late 60's. There are even signs of a modest pullback in the current millennium. Anyone on these boards that takes the advice of 6 months will find themselves sitting around with a lot of cats in years to come (I don't think I actually advised 6 mos.; I just reported the results of social science surveys) Could be, unless they work at it and probably do things differently than now. But, how well are people on these boards doing now? Not so great, to judge by all the angst. If someone is happy with how their live is going, I'd be the last to tell them to change
Rydo Posted December 22, 2014 Posted December 22, 2014 Precisely. Also, men needed marriage to get sex, unless they wanted to go to prostitutes and the like. It seems that any era you consider inconvenient is the same era as now. This just isn't the case. No, they were very much like now. If you think the sexual revolution was just invented, you are very wrong. I'd agree that the internet has made a difference, but the big change took place in the 60's especially the late 60's. There are even signs of a modest pullback in the current millennium. (I don't think I actually advised 6 mos.; I just reported the results of social science surveys) Could be, unless they work at it and probably do things differently than now. But, how well are people on these boards doing now? Not so great, to judge by all the angst. If someone is happy with how their live is going, I'd be the last to tell them to change Reported results are useless without links, so I'm gonna take these results with a Dead Sea sized pinch of salt until said links are provided. I never said the sexual revolution is a recent thing, no idea why you would think I said that at all.
Recommended Posts