SumGuy Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 24 minutes ago, thaygiaogiang said: You are talking as if "a relationship based on sex" is a bad and evil thing. Even if that's the case. Do you know what's worse than "a relationship based on sex"? Answer: A relationship NOT based on sex. Sorry. But that's life. Sorry your're wrong, or at least wrong in that it may be your life but it is not "life" as in the reality for everyone A relationship based on sex will vanish with time as at some point we all physically fade, so too will the basis then. Usually we see how this works through our parents if they are happily married for a long time. Think you are confusing a relationship with no sex as a relationship not based on sex. Long term relationships are based on something in addition to the sex, so once the sex fades there is something strong still there. Also most of the time you are with someone in a relationship (that is about more than just sex) you are not having sex, it's in those moments the non-sex stuff is important and provides the fun. This coming from a guy who apparently spends a lot more waking hours having sex during the week than is practical for most :). 3
thefooloftheyear Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 1 hour ago, SummerDreams said: l? What if she looks deep into his eyes? What if she caresses his cheek? What if she tells him she enjoys their conversation? What if she talks to him in a sweet way? I'm not trying to be funny here, but this pretty much describes my interactions with my dog.... I dont really care if its 2020 or 2000 BC...A woman's sexuality is one of her most valuable assets when in the mate selection process and to discount that is to do so at one's own peril...That doesn't mean that she has to be a laydown for every swinging dick she meets, but most women don't ignore the fact that this aspect is vitally important and use it to their advantage...It triggers a response in men that sets them off and makes them want to pursue.. Of course there are myriad of other ways that M/F relationships blossom outside of this aspect, but being uptight and too rigid in the areas of sexual/romantic interaction isnt going to go over well with most ....especially in the early stages...The most successful long term relationships I know of all have one thing in common...The obvious appearance that both parties desire each other in a romantic/sexual way... TFY 2
chillii Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, thaygiaogiang said: You are talking as if "a relationship based on sex" is a bad and evil thing. Even if that's the case. Do you know what's worse than "a relationship based on sex"? Answer: A relationship NOT based on sex. Sorry. But that's life. l actually think it could not be less life. Back in younger playing around days anything like that died badly after a month or two. lf that's all it's based on , your screwed , in all the wrong ways . WTH else are you even gonna do together let alone marry or anything long term , real , if that's all it's based on. The other team isn't saying nothing physical people are having fits round here in a panic, talk about mountain out of ant hill , they're only saying take the time, get to know each other a bit . l wouldn't have it any other way myself these days , those days back when just left you both with the worst emptiest nothing feeling , sometime they almost made you sick after a few weeks of it. lf there's anything real between you in connection, emotionally, real feelings, and your attracted to each other , that few wks won't matter at all matter of fact it makes the build up even more exiting, and with real feeling, real emotions, 10 times better than any other crap . But eh , not that any minds round here will be changing but just sayin. Edited March 9, 2020 by chillii 1
Gaeta Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 1 minute ago, chillii said: a few wks won't matter at all matter of fact it makes the build up even more exiting, and with real feeling, real emotions, 10 times better than any other crap . So, be honest, how many dates over how many weeks would you be willing to date a woman without kissing her, or holding her hand, or doing any type of touch as OP mentionned she doesn't want ANY type of touch at all.
chillii Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 (edited) Well , my ex w and l waited 3wks , gf now was 3mths because she was interstate. Not not kissing or holding hands or whatever though , just not all the way . Ex w and l finally went away for a long wkend at nearly 4wks , we wanted it to be special, 24yrs ago and it was yet to this day one of the most beautiful times and wkends of my life. gf and l oh man , we had the most beautiful 6wks , when she finally got here. worth every second of the wait. ps, with op , l mean if everything was there for us and growing by the day as it does when it's real , l mean as long as she didn't actually have a problem, l'd wait a month or two if she preferred . The build up would be beautiful Edited March 9, 2020 by chillii
Gaeta Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 Chillii: I am sorry for insisting. If you had dated a local gf, with which you had 2-3 dates a week, how long would you be willing to date her without any kissing or hand holding?
5x5 Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 ^^^ @Gaeta, one date. Or at an extreme stretch two dates, if I could never ever get any woman to have sex with me. Seriously though, I see little point in a man romantically pursuing any woman at all, when they evidently appear to be not attracted to them (via no kissing and touching). 2
5x5 Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 I will also add that my third longest relationship started with a date that had no touching until a kiss at her front door during the end of the night. Where she said to me "I'm not like that", so I said "that's okay, yet we should have another kiss before I go" (which we did). It wasn't until the end of our second date that we kissed more and then had sex.
manfrombelow2 Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 52 minutes ago, 5x5 said: I will also add that my third longest relationship started with a date that had no touching until a kiss at her front door during the end of the night. Where she said to me "I'm not like that", so I said "that's okay, yet we should have another kiss before I go" (which we did). It wasn't until the end of our second date that we kissed more and then had sex. Actually, if you do everything right, then the sex should come naturally at the second or the third - at the latest - date. If you, for whatever reasons, fail to have sex with her on the third date, you will be friendzoned.
Silver_star Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 (edited) Date 3?? I think that is alot of pressure. This is not always the case. What if those 3 dates are only over the course of a couple weeks? She may not feel "natural" or comfortable about it at date 3 and that is okay if that is her boundary. I think the attraction signals should be there by the 2nd/3rd date. Is she paying attention to you, interested in what you are saying, flirting with you.. noting if there has been any physical touching/kissing or hugs. I think that there should be some sort of physical touch or interaction (maybe hand holding, hugs at the end of the date) and talk about physical things (compliments to outfit, or hair). I want to know that my date finds me attractive and likes me more than a friend, and a guy wants to know that too. So I think that if it doesn't happened early, your are not immediately friend zoned but that you should know about her interest level by her signals. After a month or maybe 5 dates and if it is not progressing physically (more kissing, touching) I think it fair to have that conversation with her about intimacy and sex. Maybe she does have some hangups you should know about. My opinion is that women should only have sex with a man that they are dating when they feel comfortable and have a strong desire to, but should communicate with the man to let him know her level of comfort. Women feel different ways about getting physical. However if she hasn't communicated to you about sex after 5-6 dates I think it would be time to have a conversation about her feelings about it, to be fair to your needs as well. If you are not down to stick around after the 3rd date given all the information and cues you have taken from her about her attraction to you then it was likely all about having sex with her to begin with. 38 minutes ago, thaygiaogiang said: Actually, if you do everything right, then the sex should come naturally at the second or the third - at the latest - date. If you, for whatever reasons, fail to have sex with her on the third date, you will be friendzoned. Edited March 9, 2020 by Silver_star 2 1
SumGuy Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 2 hours ago, thefooloftheyear said: I'm not trying to be funny here, but this pretty much describes my interactions with my dog.... Wait, your dog talks to you? 2
princessaurora Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Silver_star said: Date 3?? I think that is alot of pressure. This is not always the case. What if those 3 dates are only over the course of a couple weeks? She may not feel "natural" or comfortable about it at date 3 and that is okay if that is her boundary. I think the attraction signals should be there by the 2nd/3rd date. Is she paying attention to you, interested in what you are saying, flirting with you.. noting if there has been any physical touching/kissing or hugs. I think that there should be some sort of physical touch or interaction (maybe hand holding, hugs at the end of the date) and talk about physical things (compliments to outfit, or hair). I want to know that my date finds me attractive and likes me more than a friend, and a guy wants to know that too. So I think that if it doesn't happened early, your are not immediately friend zoned but that you should know about her interest level by her signals. After a month or maybe 5 dates and if it is not progressing physically (more kissing, touching) I think it fair to have that conversation with her about intimacy and sex. Maybe she does have some hangups you should know about. My opinion is that women should just have sex with a man that they are dating whenever they feel comfortable and have a strong desire to, but should communicate with the man to let him know her level of comfort. Women feel different ways about getting physical. However if she hasn't communicated to you about sex after 5-6 dates I think it would be time to have a conversation about her feelings about it, to be fair to your needs as well. If you are not down to stick around after the 3rd date given all the information and cues you have taken from her about her attraction to you then it was likely all about having sex with her to begin with. Exactly. As long as things are progressing towards eventual sex, you're not going to get friendzoned, so putting a 3 date max is a little extreme. As long as you are building towards that, there is no reason to stop seeing the girl unless as Silver said, that's all you're really after. But if you like her and she's kissing you, touching you, telling you how attractive you are , why end it prematurely? There is nothing wrong with the OP wanting some build up before intercourse, but she has to at least show him a little pda iin the first few dates so he doesnt start wandering if he's wasting his time on a girl who will never get intimate with him. Edited March 9, 2020 by princessaurora add 1
thefooloftheyear Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 6 minutes ago, SumGuy said: Wait, your dog talks to you? In her own way of communicating, absolutely!! If you aren't a dog person you wont understand, but those who are will know exactly what I mean... Anyway.... This "3 date rule" is pretty crazy, imo....Everyone is different and no one should feel pressured in any way...Of course if things aren't steadily progressing in that direction, then its likely to be an issue for most people, but there shouldn't be some set rule or any pressure to adhere to such,.. TFY 5
Ellener Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 1 hour ago, thaygiaogiang said: If you, for whatever reasons, fail to have sex with her on the third date, you will be friendzoned. I don't think I believe in 'rules' when it comes to matters of the heart, there are 101 reasons why people will not be having sex by the third date no matter what level of attraction etc 2
SumGuy Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, thefooloftheyear said: In her own way of communicating, absolutely!! If you aren't a dog person you wont understand, but those who are will know exactly what I mean... Anyway.... This "3 date rule" is pretty crazy, imo....Everyone is different and no one should feel pressured in any way...Of course if things aren't steadily progressing in that direction, then its likely to be an issue for most people, but there shouldn't be some set rule or any pressure to adhere to such,.. TFY I'm a dog person so I understand, love my dog but his conversation is limited many times to "I love you" or "I love what is ever on your hand I'm licking off" His verbal responses are very Zen otherwise when I ask him about the economy or theoretical physics. He is very good at non-verbal communication and comforting when I'm sick or sad. I agree that the by the 3rd date or other rules are BS. Each situation is different, indeed it is about progress and communication and different folks like a different pace. I try to impose on myself not before the 3rd date no matter how hot and heavy it gets.
Andy_K Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 7 hours ago, SummerDreams said: Yes of course. But it's this type of women who regret the next day because they realize they came off as easy and this really nice guy who had a potential may never take them seriously after they slept with him 3 hours or so after they met them. Every action (even spontaneous actions) has consequences. If the 'really nice guy' won't take a woman seriously because they had sex together a few hours after they first met, he's not actually a 'really nice guy'.
Blind-Sided Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Andy_K said: If the 'really nice guy' won't take a woman seriously because they had sex together a few hours after they first met, he's not actually a 'really nice guy'. I disagree. I am the "Really Nice guy", and a few times in my life, I had sex with someone the first day we met. Now... the reason I don't take that person seriously after is because I know she is easy, and may fall into someone else's bed easily while I'm dating her. I learned this from one of my early relationships. I could have had this girl the first time I was alone with her... but I stopped, because I didn't know if I wanted a relationship. Well the next day we had sex... and she wound up cheating on me later. From that point on... I wasn't opposed to the one night stand, or FWB... but none of those girls got a real relationship with me. Now... to directly hit your point about "Not really being the nice guy"... I tell my female friends all the time. I'm their friend, and I will never break a boundary of that friendship... but... I'm not their gay friend !!! What I mean by that is... if they come on to me, and want something I can provide... it's probably going to happen. (as long as I'm not in a relationship) Edited March 9, 2020 by Blind-Sided
Gr8fuln2020 Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 9 hours ago, SummerDreams said: Lets be real; how many SINGLE men who are a) total knock-out and hot AND b) seem to have everything a lady wants, are there in the dating scene? I bet that these men are just taken or married. What you are describing is so rare that we don't even have to waste any time adding it to the statistics. What you want to say though is that women want to seem they are deep and they want the emotional connections but in fact they are just superficial like men who will jump on this type of guy after 5 minutes they meet him and have wild sex with him. It's a good effort to belittle serious women and create an "aha" argument, but as I said, this story will happen once out of one million times or something so no, it won't be a good enough example to make women look superficial. I was being hyperbolic when I gave the example of that hot guy. This 'hot guy' is anyone the person finds exceptionally attractive. So very much common and relevant.
SummerDreams Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 19 minutes ago, Gr8fuln2020 said: I was being hyperbolic when I gave the example of that hot guy. This 'hot guy' is anyone the person finds exceptionally attractive. So very much common and relevant. I don't know many women who will go out again and again with guys they don't consider attractive, whatever this means for each person. Or if some do, we are not talking about them now. So your example was just trying to prove that women will have sex superficially if the guy is hot (to them) but this doesn't happen either so to be honest, I have lost the point of what you said. 1
thefooloftheyear Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 1 hour ago, SummerDreams said: I don't know many women who will go out again and again with guys they don't consider attractive, whatever this means for each person. Or if some do, we are not talking about them now. So your example was just trying to prove that women will have sex superficially if the guy is hot (to them) but this doesn't happen either so to be honest, I have lost the point of what you said. Have you never heard the term "orbiter"?? "He'd end up blowing all his wages for the week....all for a cuddle and a peck on the cheek".... TFY 1
Miss Spider Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 11 hours ago, SummerDreams said: Ok if this is the case, then this man is not suitable for this woman, why are we even talking about it? Also, a man who will be allowed sexual touches and moves, may continue to go on dates just for them, even though the woman is not the most attractive woman for him. I mean, what you are saying is not an argument for women allowing sexual moves from guys early on. The same way a guy will just go to a date with a woman he is not that interested in and who is not allowed to make a sexual move on out of boredom or despiration, the same way he will go on dates with a woman he is not that interested in and who is allowed to make sexual moves on out of boredom or despiration. The second example gives him even more reason to go to that date. The problem here is not sexual moves or not, the problem is, he is not interested in her. So why doesn't she see it and she keeps going out with him? I don't want to brag but I like to think I'm a good judge of characters, I would realize really soon that this man on a date is not interested enough and he's there cause he has nothing better to do so I would reject him. I wouldn't want to waste time on mediocre situations. yea I agree with you that it’s not a good argument for to move things faster sexually. Just say it happens, so it’s not a good argument against it either. It’s more about the values of the people.
simpycurious Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 I still say that there is no need to rush or put parameters on things especially when the connection is very strong. It will happen when the timing is right. You might have one party that is somewhat old fashioned and wants to wait on intimacy until they feel there is something substantial between them. 3
Miss Spider Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 55 minutes ago, enigma32 said: . For me personally, I have no problems getting to know and waiting for the right girl, but in my experience it is usually not the right girl making a guy wait for anything, it's usually the promiscuous girl that suddenly regrets her promiscuity and wants to turn over a new leaf...starting now....no, now....ok, maybe now. I am not gonna be the only sap that bothered to get to know a girl when she hooked up with every other dude before dates. Lol yea tired of attractive jerks and wants a nice guy. Or waiting with him while she gets her back blown out by Chad or Jamal on the first date. She wants to go slow with him because he’s a nice guy she wants to settle down with. Also It’s that to resist him sexually because she’s barely attracted to him. But he’s “secure” and she really likes him so she’s going to take things slower and would never do the freaky stuff she does with Jamal with him. That’s for guys who want to be fwb with her only lol 2
Woggle Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 9 hours ago, SummerDreams said: Ok then, if people want to base their relationship on sex, sure, I have nothing more to say. If good men nowadays are called settle guys, then maybe I'm born in a wrong era cause I feel very disappointed with this. Good men are not settle guys. Settle guys are the men who marry women who aren't attracted to them. Chances are she isn't interested in sex and when they do it she pretty much laws there emotionless. There is no passion on her part and he is pretty much a walking ATM to her. One day she might get bored and cheat and divorce him because she wants passion in her life. Men should be loyal, loving and passionate but only with women who are loyal, loving and passionate with them. Men who have this kind of relationship are not settle guys. 4
chillii Posted March 9, 2020 Posted March 9, 2020 1 hour ago, simpycurious said: I still say that there is no need to rush or put parameters on things especially when the connection is very strong. It will happen when the timing is right. You might have one party that is somewhat old fashioned and wants to wait on intimacy until they feel there is something substantial between them. Yeah , pretty well sums it up . lf everything's there it won't be a problem . 1
Recommended Posts