|
|
|
|
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/22/2009 7:07:55 PM | | I had an experience wrestling in cole slaw once at the Cabbage Patch in New Smyrna Beach where I used to live during bike week one year... $1000 to the winner (my friend Lisa from Omaha won it one year). My best friend put slaw in places I still tease her about! We were young and foolish and it was actually fun... My brother still has some pictures he black mails us with... I never wrestled in mud and as funny as it may be to joke around I really never would. I'm not all that bad at 45. 30 was a different story and my BFF and I keep each other around only because we really do know way too much!!! Her husband is always hitting me up for stories but I know who my BFF is! We've been through way too much together. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 4:20:05 AM | Margo, you're a lot of fun! I wrote this just for you. LOL ! If you'd like, please feel free to add this to your dating profile ! :
I REALLY like cole slaw. For eating, slinging and wrestling. On a date, Hush Puppies are optional. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 6:30:55 AM | Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!! That's a hoot! The guys I date already know I'm a different character for sure. Thanks for all the fun and compliments on these threads...
I'll be at work 24/7 for the next week and I can't bring my lap top anymore. I guess I really do have too much fun... TTFN till Thurs. night... Have fun without me! | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 7:00:07 AM | Is this like one of those '60's things.....if you remember it, you didn't live it? Well, regardless...I DID live it, and I DO remember it; however, it would seem, I don't remember it like anyone else on POF seems to. Maybe it was my small Midwest Town upbringing, but....
My opinion is that any woman who's surprised, and angry that a man who's been wining and dining her for awhile might likely anticipate having sex with her, isn't living in the real world for this date and age. No, actually that IS how it was in the 60s (early) but, it seems pretty typical for "this date and age".
Yes, I've dated women with money, and those without... and it's always been understood that I don't date women to be friends with them, because I have female friends that are just that. And I don't wine and dine my female friends. Ummm, yup, sounds pretty universally understood through the ages and across most geographic areas that I know of.
Most women DO put a lot of effort into getting ready for a date... they use make up, wear bras to show maximum breast appeal, dye their hair, and look as appealing as they can for a man. WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S COMMONLY CALLED SEX APPEAL ??? LOL! I'm so glad that men DO still think this, but honestly, we mostly do this for ourselves; and would still spend the same amount of time preparing even if we were just going out with the girls for an evening.
In this day and age, most men anticipate having sexual relations with a woman that they have been wining and dining, within a month or 2. They anticipate it, and most women probably do as well. SEX is part of a healthy relationship. Sex is passion, expression,communication, trust, excitement, and so much more. It's not the 1950's any longer... and how a woman sexually responds to a man says a lot about their compatibility. I'd have to totally agree with this statement except the 1950s part. In the 1950s-1960s young women WERE raised with the understanding that to accept the "favors" of a male (dinners, gifts, etc) was to agree that sex was very likely to happen....soon. This is NOT something that women did back then, but is pretty much the "norm" in 2009.
I don't know why people have such a warped view of how things "were", and then again, I do find myself wondering if it was the "where's and how's" in how I was raised and maybe not as "universal" as I was taught. I do know that women like myself, who are accustomed to paying their own way and who prefer that way are, in 2009, often ridiculed as being "too independent"; when in reality, we're just kinda stuck with that voice in our heads which tells us...."nice girls do NOT accept "favors" from men UNLESS you have the intention of allowing the relationship to escalate to the next level".
So, to answer your question: Yes, the man who was whining about being jumped on was wrong in his beliefs and attitude; and it is HE who is stuck in the 1950s thinking.
I think that perhaps things are no longer so "subtle" these days, and that sex, or the expectations of it are much more direct. "A" no longer implies "B". Wining and dining are simply...flexing..."hey, look at me!"; and the woman still has the right to say...."I see you, but I'm not impressed." I think that women were more careful in the 50's and 60's. Their attitude was: "you can't buy me, so don't even try", in 2009 it's kinda reversed with the attitude; "go ahead and throw money around; I'll let you know when I'm impressed." | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 7:59:42 AM |
I think that perhaps things are no longer so "subtle" these days, and that sex, or the expectations of it are much more direct. "A" no longer implies "B". Wining and dining are simply...flexing..."hey, look at me!"; and the woman still has the right to say...."I see you, but I'm not impressed." I think that women were more careful in the 50's and 60's. Their attitude was: "you can't buy me, so don't even try", in 2009 it's kinda reversed with the attitude; "go ahead and throw money around; I'll let you know when I'm impressed."
Interesting....back then women were seen as the moral gatekeeper of sex, the whole burden and repercussions of sex were placed on women and men were pretty much free to behave the way they wanted and women took the "blame" for being loose or of poor moral charcter and should have "known better". Women dont have to bear that responsibity as much now, so a man is free to behave any way he wants and women no longer feel the responsibilty to protect themselves in the same way. So if a guy wants to drop loads of cash he is free to do it, but a woman now doesnt have the responsibilty of his bad decisions. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 8:34:30 AM | ^^^^ LOL! Yes, that's pretty much what I meant, only I didn't express it quite so eloquently! But, yes, it's true, back in the 50's and 60's (can only speak about the years that I personally know about, but of course these "values" were instilled by MY grandparents so I believe they would have been telling me things as they experienced them as a young man and woman.); women were pretty much responsible; or as you say, the "moral gatekeepers of sex". One of those "values" was to NOT accept the continued "attentions" or "favors" of men...UNLESS you fully intended it to lead farther. Back then, nobody "talked" about sex...that's what made the "wining and dining" such a "subtle" agreement...that sex was pretty likely, IF she accepted these dinners and drinks.
It's also true that women were "expected to KNOW better". They were expected to know that men don't "date" or pay for "friendship" I think that that much hasn't changed a lot, only that fewer women realize that.
Women dont have to bear that responsibity as much now, so a man is free to behave any way he wants and women no longer feel the responsibilty to protect themselves in the same way. So if a guy wants to drop loads of cash he is free to do it, but a woman now doesnt have the responsibilty of his bad decisions. Philosophically, that's quite true; but let's face it.....rape is not philosophical. I.E. we have to deal with "reality", not necessarily "idealism".
In any case, as the man said.....This IS 2009, and "modern women" who reject those responsibilities for men's poor decisions (being too free with their money) are certainly NOT going to feel that his willingness to wine and dine are anything other than showing off and they (the women) are under no obligation to be impressed or to respond with sex. If this man wants to continue to operate this way in 2009, then I'd say his best chances would be with NOT a 2009 woman, but one with a more 1950s mentality who was willing to trade sex for dinner.
I think he just has everything quite backwards; it's HIS thinking that is 1950's, and he's trying to apply it to 2009 women and it's not working. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 8:51:20 AM | | I get what you are saying an I agree with you. If you read a lot of the threads about dating and money,there seems to be this almost attitude that the woman are responsible for ensuring that the man doesnt make a poor decision with a "if you arent going to have sex with me, you should not have accepted that meal" attitude. I guess things havent changed that much, some men still want women to be the moral police and save them from themselves. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 10:06:49 AM |
If you read a lot of the threads about dating and money,there seems to be this almost attitude that the woman are responsible for ensuring that the man doesnt make a poor decision with a "if you arent going to have sex with me, you should not have accepted that meal" attitude. LOL! I guess I do tend to avoid those threads as perhaps my thinking is a little too "black and white". Obvious, since, I get what you're saying in
some men still want women to be the moral police and save them from themselves. but, isn't it the same thing? The same result I mean?
Albeit, not "intentional" that I'm saving him from himself, but when I pay my own way, it's just ME being responsible FOR ME. I'm not going to stop being responsible for my own behavior just because a side effect is ALSO that I "save him from himself". I guess I'd have to think on this more, but....I don't really give a hoot about "saving him"....he's a big boy, he's on his own; but I'm going to continue to be responsible for me....and ESPECIALLY if I like the man...it's even more important to establish those boundaries; that I can NOT be "bought".....with ANYTHING other than respect, affection, consideration, etc.
I do know that things have changed a lot in the last 40 years. LOL! kinda what makes it so difficult for a woman my age to "date"; but my thinking is along the lines, that NO MAN who respected me would even offer to wine and dine me for 2 months. Well...maybe not "disrespect" so much as ....Id think he was a "control freak" or something. I just can't visualize every going out with a man for 2 months and allowing him to always pay. There'd have to be something seriously wrong with ONE of us.
Actually, an older gentleman wrote me recently and very nicely asked if I would "refuse" to let him buy me dinner, and my answer was, "well, no, as long as it wasn't extravagant, and as long as if we had dinner a 2nd time that I would be allowed to buy".
I think that a lot of times people have "good intentions" but that money is also often used to insult and disrespect others. Whether or not it was "intentional"...I'd be really insulted if a man insisted on always paying....to the point that I wouldn't date him for 1 month...much less 2.
You've raised some good perspectives Grizzelda; LOL! not sure this old dog can learn any new tricks, but I do see the points you've raised. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 2:34:53 PM | I think we should pay for our own dinners wherever we want (with friends if we so choose), and invite them to show up and pay for their own dinners while charming and entertaining us. If they aren't cute or engaging enough, then at some point we just ask the waitress to move him to a table so we can continue to enjoy our meal after the brief distraction.
That should even out the playing field...that way men will get a pass based only on their looks, eating habits and social skills (and later on, penis size of course). | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 10/23/2009 2:48:03 PM |
A lot of women would be VERY UPSET, if a man had been wining and dining her for awhile, and the man did NOT anticipate sex. Most women would walk away unsatisfied from that situation.
I would welcome that situation. It would be something new and different.
I hate going to dinner with a man and as soon as he pays, in the car, he grabs me. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/7/2009 4:32:00 AM | A lot of women would be VERY UPSET, if a man had been wining and dining her for awhile, and the man did NOT anticipate sex. Most women would walk away unsatisfied from that situation.
" I would welcome that situation. It would be something new and different.
I hate going to dinner with a man and as soon as he pays, in the car, he grabs me. "
I don't believe that because a man pays for dinner, a woman should be up for grabs.
No matter if a man or a woman does it... isn't paying for dinner, and expecting sex called prostitution ?
The thread's focus is about anticipating sex in a healthy relationship/beginning relationship | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/7/2009 6:14:52 AM | " WHAT SHOULD A WOMAN DO IF THEIR ROLES WERE REVERSED IN THIS SITUATION ??"
To me, the most useful response would be to this very interesting question posed above ^ by the OP as most men are "easy" sexually.
If I were dating a man who was not interested in me sexually, I would date someone else who was interested in me sexually, while man # 1 would be relegated to the "friend" zone. Under the circumdstances, man #1 probably wouldn't mind that anyway.
I agree OP in the importance of sexual compatibility, and I have dumped guys when that did not exist just as many people probably have. I also agree that, unless it is stated somewhere in a profile, it is assumed most of us are looking specifically for sex on here, or a relationship with a sexual component. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/7/2009 12:00:59 PM | In a current thread, many women have been jumping all over a man who had wined and dined a woman for awhile, because was complaining that she didn't give him sex. Many of the women's replies told the man that if he expected sexual favors in return for dining and entertaining this woman, that he should get a Prostitute.
My opinion is that any woman who's surprised, and angry that a man who's been wining and dining her for awhile might likely anticipate having sex with her, isn't living in the real world for this date and age.
" I also agree that, unless it is stated somewhere in a profile, it is assumed most of us are looking specifically for sex on here, or a relationship with a sexual component."
You write the way that I think. And I'm sure that most men have similar views as well. It amazes me, how hundreds of replies later, there have been so many diverse opinions on this matter. Agree, disagree, or have a neutral opinion on the subject... it's still called , and heavily marketed as Sex Appeal. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/7/2009 9:05:05 PM | [" I also agree that, unless it is stated somewhere in a profile, it is assumed most of us are looking specifically for sex on here, or a relationship with a sexual component."
You write the way that I think. And I'm sure that most men have similar views as well. It amazes me, how hundreds of replies later, there have been so many diverse opinions on this matter. Agree, disagree, or have a neutral opinion on the subject... it's still called , and heavily marketed as Sex Appeal.]
Sex appeal is nothing more than being appealing to the opposite sex. Of course, one component of the highly sought after relationship is ex, bu not all relationships include sex. The desire of any one person to include that aspect in the relationship is up to them to express, and up to the other to decide, period. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/7/2009 9:44:03 PM | | it is wrong to allow a man to spend money on you for an extended time if you have no interested in having sex with him...and a woman knows this is wrong whether she admits it or not...this is to me sinful...because you are deceiving someone for your own selfish interests...to fake an innocence of what you are doing is transparent....we women should be better than that....fair is fair... | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/7/2009 10:32:26 PM | Startle [[[it is wrong to allow a man to spend money on you for an extended time if you have no interested in having sex with him...and a woman knows this is wrong whether she admits it or not...this is to me sinful]]]]]
Yes, it is wrong. It would be using him. I do not think most women are this hungry for a free meal, as has been described on these boards. You would think we were all starving to death.
To Kindman,...yes, I know within 3 seconds if I would want to have sex with a guy or not. But it takes time to know if he is trustworthy. Finding out a persons character takes longer than those 3 seconds of the physical measure up. | |
|
| |
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/13/2009 6:27:53 PM | | No they don't. I go out to eat with my guy friends all the flippin time and they don't let me pay or expect sex. They are Southern gentlemen that don't like eating alone. SIMPLE. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/14/2009 8:33:16 AM | I wish that there were more Gentlemen out there. AND more Ladies.
To look good for one's date, or one's self, which boosts your own self esteem is called Sex Appeal.
" No they don't. I go out to eat with my guy friends all the flippin time and they don't let me pay or expect sex. They are Southern gentlemen that don't like eating alone. SIMPLE.
I agree with you. And speaking of Southern Genttlemen and Southern Food,
I wonder...when you go out to eat with a platonic male friend... do you refrain from ordering the COLE SLAW ? : ) | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/14/2009 10:56:29 AM | If a guy is taking a girl out, wining and dining, or whatever- if he's spending time with her, I would assume its cause he likes her. If he likes her, he most likely wants to have sex with her. Doesnt mean he expects it, but he'd like to. If he doesnt like her, but just is going out with her because he wants to have sex with her, then he's not being fair to her.
If a girl is going out with a guy repeatedly- no matter who pays, I'd assume its because she likes him. If she likes him, she most likely will want to have sex with him at some point. If she knows she's not going to ever want to have sex with him, then she doesnt like him romantically, and she's not being fair to him to keep going out with him.
I don't see what it has to do with who pays.
JMO | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/14/2009 1:25:53 PM | | Ha ha ha!!! No I have the COLE SLAW with my barbecue and at KINGS none the less thank you! I do the Southern thing respectfully! | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/15/2009 11:25:13 AM | " WHAT SHOULD A WOMAN DO IF THEIR ROLES WERE REVERSED IN THIS SITUATION ??"
To me, the most useful response would be to this very interesting question posed above ^ by the OP as most men are "easy" sexually. "
I wonder what most men would feel if WE, as individual men had to color/curl our hair, wear wonder bras, wear fake nails, and anything else to look NATURAL, so that we could enhance our sex appeal.
Especially since some younger men can jump out of bed, run a razor over their face, or not, brush their teeth, and run their fingers once thru their hair, and appear sexier than should be allowable by law LOL | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/15/2009 12:05:36 PM | That's why it's called sex appeal~
I don't wear a wonder bra but at 45 an under wire helps.
I don't dye or curl my hair- I have some gray cause I raised two girls alone (now married).
I'm no longer a size 3 but my 12 is still hot to many.
Fake nails are annoying as poop.
I wear pink lipstick cause it is my true addiction (MMM).
Some blush is nice on most days in the winter/spring.
...and I like to mostly wear my secret weapon of body spray blends that make me smell like home made candy of some sort...
Now that's sexy.
Gotta have HOT SEX after football... BYE BYE... | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/15/2009 3:05:43 PM | OP.....If men/women expect sex after "x" many dates, they should put that in their profile....it would save both people time and money.
You say you don't date women to be friends with them, which means that any woman you date will never be considered your friend, which also means that you only date women so you can have eventually have sex with them. I think that is what is typically referred to as a prostitute. If you wine and dine a woman and expect sex in exchange for the dollars you spent wining and dining her...........that is also prostitution.
Prostitutes don't want to be friends either, a prostitute sounds like the best option for you. A prostitute is cheaper than paying for 3 or 4 dates with a woman you might not get sex from, simply because you haven't told her your expectations up front.
So you resort to tricking her into thinking your a nice guy with the hopes of manipulating her into having sex with you. Sheesh and men condemn "gold-digging" women, what about the "vagina-digging men." Maybe it's you who needs to get with the times, after all, it is the 21st century. | |
|
| That's WHY It's Called Sex Appeal
Posted: 11/15/2009 5:07:39 PM | " You say you don't date women to be friends with them, which means that any woman you date will never be considered your friend, which also means that you only date women so you can have eventually have sex with them. I think that is what is typically referred to as a prostitute. If you wine and dine a woman and expect sex in exchange for the dollars you spent wining and dining her...........that is also prostitution."
Your crafty diatribe put words and values in my mouth that are non existant. I hope that you would ask question of those that you love, instead of making sweeping analyses like this of someone that you do not know.
I have female friends. I won't take a woman out on a date like situation, if I am only interested in having her as a friend. That's called NOT leading soemone on.
So in your mind, because mathematically, a bumble bee should not be able to fly, but it does.. therefore, a bumble doesn't fly.
Dear Pretzel logic, Bumblebees DO fly, I don't engage in Prostitution, your conclusion has titanic sized holes in it, and you STILL don't know me.
Just because a man per sues a woman, and takes her out because of her sex appeal, doesn't mean that if he HOPES for something from the woman.. a hug, a kiss, a phone number, that he's engaging in PROSTITUTION.
Because if that were the case, then by definition, all men and women who DO HOPE for something when they go on a date, would be in jail, doing time for HOPING. I believe that's laughble, barbaric, and that the human race would be long extinct if we followed your logic on this subject. | |
|
|
| Page 15 of 16
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 |
|
Home
login 
