loony Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 A poster in another thread claimed that "serial non-committed bed-hopping" was ok, while sleeping with many women at the same time (no threesome, but for example chick #1 Thursday night, chick #2 Friday night, chick #1 Saturday night, etc.) was not ok. Could someone explain me the difference here? If you're able to separate sex and love and have no emotional involvement, why limit yourself to one partner? I have to add, I'm not hopping around or doing anything similar, I just don't understand the logic here.
Merin Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Seems like the same thing to me? While I won't say having multiple partners is wrong, if thats what does it for you and you're all good to go and okay with that.. I will say that having multiple partners by either lying about the fact thats what you're doing OR saying nothing to a partner thats what you're doing is wrong. I will also say that no one should assume that because they are intimate with someone that it means that other person isn't intimate with someone else.. IF it hasn't been talked about and agreed to, never assume. I'm personally not all about casual sex.. and I wouldn't be down for the person I'm intimate with being intimate with anyone except me. 1
Author loony Posted July 21, 2005 Author Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by A Fly onThe Wall It's the over lapping that is wrong .. Why? Suddenly all the playboys are turning into loving caring partners? Is it more honest to be with one woman, use her for a couple of weeks and then discard her than doing a couple of women at the same time?
Cecelius Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by loony Could someone explain me the difference here? It's a matter of circumstance. You do not have to be committed/emotionally involved to sleep with someone, but that is not the same thing as lining them up around the block. Meet girl X on Wednesday and things go well, but they go better with girl Y on Thursday? That's different from penciling in both girls on Monday with intent to score. Don't necessarily have that philosphy but it is a difference. Originally posted by loony If you're able to separate sex and love and have no emotional involvement, why limit yourself to one partner? I wouldn't, but I have no plans to be the second guy (a Thursday guy after the Wednesday guy has done his business). That's just nasty and skanky. 1
JS17 Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Cecelius - that's a double standard!! it's ok for you to do it but not her?!?! personally i'm not into casual sex but it seems like an unfair double standard.
Author loony Posted July 21, 2005 Author Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by Cecelius It's a matter of circumstance. You do not have to be committed/emotionally involved to sleep with someone, but that is not the same thing as lining them up around the block. Meet girl X on Wednesday and things go well, but they go better with girl Y on Thursday? Why not, if you haven't made up your mind yet? Honestly, if you're able to have casual sex without emotional involvement, then I don't understand why you're making such a fuss about sleeping with one person or several. I wouldn't, but I have no plans to be the second guy (a Thursday guy after the Wednesday guy has done his business). That's just nasty and skanky. So, you're more concerned that the girls are also sleeping around? If they only slept with you, would you feel better?
Merin Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by loony Is it more honest to be with one woman, use her for a couple of weeks and then discard her than doing a couple of women at the same time? It's more honest to be straight up regarding what you're looking for.. BUT that doesn't always happen OR one person may really know what's up but be in denial about someones intentions.. a good example is a FWB situation. It always seems that ONE person in that deal wants more than FWB and think they will get a relationship if they hang in there long enough while the other person is all good to go and set with the arrangement.. this isn't always the case but IMO it is the case more than 80% of the time. With that said the person who is saying they are all okay with the FWB status isn't really being honest about what it is they're okay with or seeking... 1
blind_otter Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by loony Why not, if you haven't made up your mind yet? Honestly, if you're able to have casual sex without emotional involvement, then I don't understand why you're making such a fuss about sleeping with one person or several. Why does it matter what anyone else does in their own bedroom? And honestly, sexuality is ike politics and religion. It's a personal thing. It can't be legislated, although there are those ludicrous laws against anal sex and blow jobs in some states. I also don't see anyone making a fuss about this but...er...the person who started this new thread just because they can't understand someone else's different values and personal sexual habits. Which would be. You.
Author loony Posted July 21, 2005 Author Posted July 21, 2005 Ok, let's clarify, in the two hypothetical cases everybody involved knows that there is no commitment involved. I'm just asking, why do people feel it's better to be with one person instead of many others at the same time if they don't feel that much for their partner anyway?
Cecelius Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by loony Why not, if you haven't made up your mind yet? Honestly, if you're able to have casual sex without emotional involvement, then I don't understand why you're making such a fuss about sleeping with one person or several. I wasn't making a fuss, I was pointing out a technical difference. To me its merely an issue of skeevieness. Got no problem with others who want to bang everyone. Originally posted by loony So, you're more concerned that the girls are also sleeping around? If they only slept with you, would you feel better? I'm not concerned with what those girls are doing. Just wouldn't do a girl who did someone else the other day. I just skip over that girl and wouldn't feel one way or the other about it.
Author loony Posted July 21, 2005 Author Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by blind_otter Why does it matter what anyone else does in their own bedroom? And honestly, sexuality is ike politics and religion. It's a personal thing. It can't be legislated, although there are those ludicrous laws against anal sex and blow jobs in some states. I also don't see anyone making a fuss about this but...er...the person who started this new thread just because they can't understand someone else's different values and personal sexual habits. Which would be. You. So, what? I'm interested in people's opinion.
blind_otter Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by loony Ok, let's clarify, in the two hypothetical cases everybody involved knows that there is no commitment involved. I'm just asking, why do people feel it's better to be with one person instead of many others at the same time if they don't feel that much for their partner anyway? For me, because I have experienced sexual violence (rape), my coping strategy has been to separate sexuality from emotional intimacy. So for me, I can have sex without being emotionally intimate with someone as well as being able to be emotionally intimate without sex. They are two separate things in my mind, because I have experienced sex without the context of emotional attachment in a violent context. It's not necessarily that I "don't feel that much for my partner" - it's that the sex we have changes depending on the context of the experience. If I am emotionally drained, it's more of a physical gratification thing. If we are having a romantic evening, the sex becomes more infused with emotional intimacy. It's the context of the sexual act, rather than the sexual act itself, that is sacred and special. IMO.
alphamale Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by Merin I'm personally not all about casual sex.. most women aren't...esp when they get past 30 Originally posted by A Fly onThe Wall It's the over lapping that is wrong .. agreed Originally posted by loony Suddenly all the playboys I prefer Penthouse myself Originally posted by Cecelius It's a matter of circumstance. I'm a victim of coicumstance. nyuk nyuk Originally posted by loony I'm just asking, why do people feel it's better to be with one person instead of many others at the same time if they don't feel that much for their partner anyway? one reason is when you get older you just don't have the energy to bang two people at the same time, and now with all the funky-ass diseases and all.
Merin Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by alphamale most women aren't...esp when they get past 30 I'm not past 30 and never was about casual sex. It just doesn't appeal to me. 1
Author loony Posted July 21, 2005 Author Posted July 21, 2005 Originally posted by alphamale one reason is when you get older you just don't have the energy to bang two people at the same time, and now with all the funky-ass diseases and all. So, yourreasons are age and health-concerns? Well, before it sounded like "doing several people at the same time is just not right".
MWC_LifeBeginsAt40 Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 I do guy #1 on Monday and then do guy #2 on Wednesday. Then guy #1 decides he would like to take things to the next level.....well then I feel like I've cheated on him already. I can easily never go back to guy #2, but I probably shouldn't have slept with him in the first place. But since I already did, I might as well blow them both off and move on to guy #3 right?
Recommended Posts