Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Sex and Dating  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 125
women as pure sexual objectsPage 4 of 7    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)

For the most part, this is something that I will never understand. Why would you WANT to bring up or have sex with a woman you're not particularly attracted to? Unless you're counting on her walking away - and in that case, why not just end a conversation or meeting early without the games and not go there in the first place?

Here's an analogy, and these two things are -not- the same, although loosely related... People who are open to casual flings when out on the dating market while "looking for" a relationship. It brings up a similar question -- why just a casual affair with someone and not a relationship, if you're looking for a relationship? Because they're not THAT into (attracted to) the person, that's why.... but still game for a casual encounter. Someone can be not relationship-worthy, but can be hang-out-worthy.... or "just for fun" worthy when-in-a-particular mood, ya know? Everyone's not LTR-or-bust when out in the dating circuit, even when looking for a relationship-worthy person.

When it's all said and done, a sexual affair can be an attractive endeavor, when the other person involved isn't particularly attractive by itself. Alcohol helps make that more of a considerable option - lol
 anonymouslyme
Joined: 12/23/2008
Msg: 126
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/27/2010 11:21:53 AM

i am not aqgainst sex but i am no cheap slut what are other veiws on this
I don't think you're a cheap slut either.

There's all kinds of people in this world, each with their own agenda. I don't know about the 80% thing, but some men are just looking to get women into bed as quickly as possible. Then again, some women are looking for the same thing. My opinion, a guy that asking you if you'll have sex with him on the first meeting has no respect for you, and he's just let the cat out of the bag as far as what HIS agenda is. If it doesn't match yours, well, at least you found out early, no?

Try not to get offended.. it's nothing personal. Just excuse yourself from the conversation, and keep looking for the one who's agenda matches yours. Best of luck!
 tayl0rd
Joined: 5/19/2008
Msg: 127
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/27/2010 11:25:54 AM
I think I'll cosign what C-R just said. Just because a guy (or gal) is out looking for a LTR doesn't mean he has to be abstinent in the meantime. I've come across a few women that I'd like to have sex with but they aren't my "ideal" mate when it comes to a deeper relationship, and they accused me of "not really looking for a relationship." Just because I don't want a relationship with them doesn't mean I'm not looking. I am looking for a LTR, just not with them. It's usually just something about her personality or general attitude that keeps me from not wanting to go "all in" to pursue a real relationship with her.

Personality differences don't mean you can't bump uglies from time to time. The "friends with benefits" phrase didn't become popular for no reason! ;) (Just wish it wasn't so hard to find one! LOL)
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 128
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/27/2010 12:03:19 PM

Here's an analogy, and these two things are -not- the same, although loosely related... People who are open to casual flings when out on the dating market while "looking for" a relationship. It brings up a similar question -- why just a casual affair with someone and not a relationship, if you're looking for a relationship? Because they're not THAT into (attracted to) the person, that's why.... but still game for a casual encounter. Someone can be not relationship-worthy, but can be hang-out-worthy.... or "just for fun" worthy when-in-a-particular mood, ya know? Everyone's not LTR-or-bust when out in the dating circuit, even when looking for a relationship-worthy person.

Actually I thought people had casual relationships with people they were attracted to, but didn't match up with in other ways conducive to a relationship. How much better is sex with someone you're not THAT attracted to than sex alone or no sex at all? In fact, casual sex tends to be the place where you want the hottest person you can find since there's nothing else about them is long term oriented.

If I was looking for a relationship, I'd be more apt to let hotness slide a bit for a man who had other great qualities I was looking for in the total package.

When it's all said and done, a sexual affair can be an attractive endeavor, when the other person involved isn't particularly attractive by itself. Alcohol helps make that more of a considerable option - lol

I guess that's just not for me, if I don't consider someone really attractive. I'd rather just crack a book and skip the whole thing.
 want to travel
Joined: 7/29/2006
Msg: 129
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/27/2010 12:41:05 PM
80% of men only want sex, you have to be joking..... what are you dating 16 year olds,
sounds like it
most men i know want a relationship, and yes sex is important, great sex is even better
if you look at american stats 56% of married women have sex with another man, only 35 % of american men cheat
we want love just as much as women
sex on the first date, it happened to me once, it lasted for 7 years, we ended up married
 tayl0rd
Joined: 5/19/2008
Msg: 130
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/27/2010 12:47:30 PM

want to travel said: ...if you look at american stats 56% of married women have sex with another man, only 35 % of american men cheat...


Where'd you get those stats??
 Big_fun_wave
Joined: 2/28/2009
Msg: 131
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/27/2010 1:40:35 PM
Why even care so much about what many other people may think? Unless their someone of prominence in your life. I believe your stretching the truth by saying that's most men consider a woman a slut if she puts out fast. I've heard women say that as well about other woman. So it's not just men. Besides anyone who could be this analytical and narrow minded would be an ass. And therefore they would likely not be relationship material as well.
 *Just Jim*
Joined: 7/6/2007
Msg: 132
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/27/2010 2:56:17 PM

OY!! That label went out far too long ago to even be used anymore in my opinion, but it seems so popular here ~ go figure!


They would do that here! lol
The fora is for many who are still & maybe forever into the whine mood. lol

imo, the title being a sexual object is stupid, cuz who ever is on the other receiving is not complaining! Women make their choices in what capacity what deems necessarily & satisfying to them. You may not be getting laid but that's your problem not theirs. lol



~OT~ If you aren't happy with the conversation, hang-up or walk out. If you don't like the context of an email ~ read/delete it

True! If it's not your cup of tea,move on. I went to a big birthday party a while back & liked this one girl. And just about all the men took & turns in putting their hands down her pants as they wished her a happy birthday. OK.... lol
So,needless to say, I guess I'm just out of touch with these clubs as it made me think of the hippies & having their communal sex thingy! lol
So as V- green-eyes said, chose what preferences that coincide with yours.

And as special too me as sex & intimacy is,only a s/o should be there & not the whole group thingy. jmo & too each there own.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 133
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/27/2010 7:48:30 PM

Actually I thought people had casual relationships with people they were attracted to, but didn't match up with in other ways conducive to a relationship.

Yes, that's one reason why -- personality/matchability problem. Another very common one is that they're EHHH, OK looking in their eyes, on a level they wouldn't have too much trouble finding on that scale, but yeah, they want someone more special in looks when it comes to an actual relationship... but hey, a little fling or one-night stand? Totally different set of thoughts. Main point is that it can be looks, not (just) personality/matchability, which makes someone just want to fool around with someone. I mean, for most sober guys, they can't be ugly to them or anything. But when it comes to the thought of just having sex -- again, that notion of sexual relations becomes attractive in and of itself if she's not ugly.

How much better is sex with someone you're not THAT attracted to than sex alone or no sex at all?

As a disclaimer, I'm not applying this to every guy, just a common thing. Okay, to answer: Depends -- how long has it been that they've had sex? Years? Tons of mileage on their skin flute since their last oil change? The more that is, the more the mere notion of sexual relations becomes more attractive than another day at the solo-flute parade.

In fact, casual sex tends to be the place where you want the hottest person you can find since there's nothing else about them is long term oriented.

Well, yeah, that'd be ideal. But guys and girls are a bit different. Guys won't have their ideal situations for flings at hand very readily as girls can. Hence, many guys who are thinking about casual sex are like water or electricity -- they go down the path of least resistance of those they find sexually desirable... if they can't get the ideal one, they'll (golf term) "lay up" for the average Jane if that is available.

A lot of guys who pick up a hottie, if they can rarely ever get a hottie at all, are actually probably going to want more than just a fling if they're single and she's single and she doesn't throw him back due to a crazy personality or something.

If I was looking for a relationship, I'd be more apt to let hotness slide a bit for a man who had other great qualities I was looking for in the total package.

I think that goes both ways, too, sure. Here's where I'm coming from about a decent amount of people:
- When judging relationship-worthy, yes, it's not about THE hottest, but there is a threshold of physical attraction they should have. To many, it's a generally a good looking gal in their eyes.

- When he says "Naw, she's not that good looking... she's not ugly or anything... her looks just aren't my style", ie it doesn't hit his taste threshold, he MAY be open to a casual fling.

- A casual fling many times has a LOWER threshold "bar" in terms of what he'll be willing to roll with. Many guys are willing to take what they can get.
 want to travel
Joined: 7/29/2006
Msg: 135
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/29/2010 7:20:47 AM
women make themselves sex objects, look at how much they spend, time and money to look sexy
men are the true fools and sex objects, they have given all the power to women, women who as a rule have 2 or 3 times as much sex as men,just look at this stat, 57% of married women in north america have sex outside of there marriage, men only 36%
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 136
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/29/2010 7:51:52 AM

Many guys are willing to take what they can get.

I see nothing but evidence of this everywhere - why they think they HAVE to take anything is beyond me. The path of least resistance doesn't always lead to good situations - but as long as they don't complain to others about what they choose and/or any consequences - their choices are their business.

Men can forego all options if none are ideal - if they choose to "work with what's in front of them" then they get what they ask for.
 venndiagram
Joined: 10/29/2009
Msg: 137
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/29/2010 3:59:55 PM

Another very common one is that they're EHHH, OK looking in their eyes, on a level they wouldn't have too much trouble finding on that scale, but yeah, they want someone more special in looks when it comes to an actual relationship...


This is the part I never can understand about people. To me, and any person I would be interested in, it's about who the person is. Of course there has to be attraction- but if they are attractive enough for me to have sex with, that's my threshold.

The only way I would discount someone as relationship material would be if I could not see myself having sex with them. That's a pretty wide range of men. Personality-wise? Way smaller pond.
 Apollodorus
Joined: 11/24/2009
Msg: 138
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/29/2010 4:19:13 PM

it's about who the person is


I strongly disagree with this, it may be about who the person if you are wanting a long term relationship but if you want sex there personality is not going to make me want to have sex with the them. I have to be physically attracted to the person I am with or sex is just not going to happen, literally I will not be able to perform.
 venndiagram
Joined: 10/29/2009
Msg: 139
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/29/2010 5:06:48 PM
Maybe I wasn't clear. It's about the person for me to be interested in him- I was responding to the notion that a guy would need a higher level of physical attractiveness for a ltr than just sex. I need a higher degree of being attracted to the personality for a ltr.

Obviously for either, one needs a reasonable amount of physical attraction.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 140
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/29/2010 5:27:21 PM

The only way I would discount someone as relationship material would be if I could not see myself having sex with them. That's a pretty wide range

Boy, you sound like me in reference to women after about 10 beers! Not that picky as far as sex is concerned, eh? ;)

All kidding aside, there's "they're worth a fling-bang", and then there's "I truly find them physically attractive. Not just an element of them that stands out attractive, but actually physically attractive overall". The latter is a bar set for most people when it comes to relationship-worthiness. The former is for most people (open to casual sex) for sex-worthiness.

With some people out there, they don't have to be physically attractive overall to be worth "hooking up" with -- and with many of those, they just have to have an attractive physical quality or two, while everything else not being too bad.

What pretty much sums it up:

Some people are lonely and always want "a partner", and will be with someone even if their looks aren't that great, as you described (just sex worthy)... as long as their personality is a good match.

Some people are horny and can't go too long without sex, and will sleep with someone even if their looks aren't that great, as you described (just sex worthy)... as long as they are game for a roll in the hay.
 venndiagram
Joined: 10/29/2009
Msg: 141
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/29/2010 8:23:10 PM


Some people are lonely and always want "a partner", and will be with someone even if their looks aren't that great, as you described (just sex worthy)... as long as their personality is a good match.

Some people are horny and can't go too long without sex, and will sleep with someone even if their looks aren't that great, as you described (just sex worthy)... as long as they are game for a roll in the hay.


Either I didnt make myself clear, or you are misreading me.

Not lonely and dont always want a partner. I will be with someone if I truly connect with them- this is at the personality level. BUT- even if that connection is there, if I could not see myself having sex with them ( and if the connection is there there is not high bar regarding looks, as I will most likely find them appealing to me because of the personality) then a relationship could not happen.

If I just wanted sex- then the physical attractiveness is going to be more important, with the qualification that they have to be someone I could see myself spending time with other than that (and that rules out a lot of guys).

So relationship= higher bar for personality
sex= higher bar for looks.

Just me.
 eastwood969
Joined: 12/21/2009
Msg: 142
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/1/2010 6:04:37 AM
I dont see how you can put a money value on it. You wouldnt be a cheap slut, just a person who from time to time enjoys sex. Getting to know someone with the idea that they are compatible just doesnt make a lot of sense to me. Women waste a lot of time trying to make things harder than they have to be.
 *closer
Joined: 3/12/2010
Msg: 143
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/1/2010 8:41:14 AM

Women waste a lot of time trying to make things harder than they have to be.


The harder the better!

Oh...wait you meant head trippin',game playin',pain in the a$$e$!'~ ;lol


You wouldnt be a cheap slut, just a person who from time to time enjoys sex.


Phew.....so glad to know that...'cuz I enjoy it more than 'from time to time'! lol

Is it time to go again? Counting down the minutes myself.

I would much rather be seen as a sexual object than not one at all!

CHILL out already with the 'OMG he only wants to F*ck me bit'!

Be happy he wants to at all! (she said after looking at the op's profile)
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 145
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/2/2010 6:54:54 AM


The only way I would discount someone as relationship material would be if I could not see myself having sex with them. That's a pretty wide range


Boy, you sound like me in reference to women after about 10 beers! Not that picky as far as sex is concerned, eh? ;)

I don't think those two statements are necessarily the same. I would agree with the first statement, although I might very well not see myself having sex with someone you would after 10 beers (or 5 beers or 1 beer or whatever). That all depends on how picky we each are to begin with. The difference is really in your second statement:

All kidding aside, there's "they're worth a fling-bang", and then there's "I truly find them physically attractive.

Not everyone thinks that way. If I don't find someone physically attractive enough for a relationship, I couldn't see myself having sex with her either. Physical attractiveness goes hand in hand with sexual attraction. On the other hand, I could have sex with a 10 and still not see myself being in a relationship with her. A relationship requires being able to get along for longer than a few hours or even days. I think that is more what venndiagram ment when she made a reference to the peronality pool being smaller.

In short, if you assume that two people start out with the same idea of what is physically attractive enough for a relationship, you might lower that expectation for sex, while I would call that necessary for sex but not sufficient for a relationship.
 venndiagram
Joined: 10/29/2009
Msg: 146
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/2/2010 9:49:13 AM

In short, if you assume that two people start out with the same idea of what is physically attractive enough for a relationship, you might lower that expectation for sex, while I would call that necessary for sex but not sufficient for a relationship.


I wouldn't lower the expectation for sex- if anything it's higher, as there isn't the benefit of deeper feelings for the person which raises his attractiveness to me. A really hot guy might attract me briefly enough to have sex with, where as an ordinary looking man wouldn't- unless his personality turned me on, in which case he would become the hottest guy in the world to me.

Then sadly, I could really really like someone, but something about them just turns me off. Interestingly Ive never met someone without seeing them first where that has happened, if I've viewed them AFTER making that connection. Something to be said for not having pics?
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 147
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/2/2010 10:59:41 AM

I don't think those two statements are necessarily the same.

No, I know they weren't the same. And I assumed she didn't mean exactly what she said, but couldn't help myself with that line. :)

I would agree with the first statement

The only way I would discount someone as relationship material would be if I could not see myself having sex with them

I wouldn't though. That's my ONLY criteria? I could see myself having sex with them (with no circumstances applied)? It would be more picky than that for a -relationship- and not a truck-stop quickie. With that said, I don't assume that is exactly what she meant, tho.

there's "they're worth a fling-bang", and then there's "I truly find them physically attractive.

Not everyone thinks that way.

True, not everyone thinks in those terms. Especially if someone's relationship-hunting. I was just trying to point out that there exists a difference among a lot of people, IF they are open to casual sex, that their looks standards are lower for a roll in the hay if it's that convenient vs settling in with someone.

On the other hand, I could have sex with a 10 and still not see myself being in a relationship with her.

Oh I agree, too.

A relationship requires being able to get along for longer than a few hours or even days

Exactly -- which is why I couldn't agree with that statement as she wrote it, because seeing myself having sex with someone isn't my only criteria. There are very pretty women out there who I could see myself having sex with, but a high liklihood that I wouldn't want a relationship with them.

Either I didnt make myself clear, or you are misreading me.

I wasn't pinpointing you with those two "some people" statements. I was going off on a side note to add to things, to keep things in perspective on how people can be...

If I just wanted sex- then the physical attractiveness is going to be more important

Yeah, some people can be like that, but others not. It depends on the situation with most I think too. What do you mean by "just wanting sex"? People's "bars" will vary depending on the situation -- and I'm not talking about yours, just what is common out there....

For instance, a gal comes up to a guy, flirts, she's not that great looking but she says "Can I give you a BJ?" His tastes in looks isn't going to be sky-high for that... even if in his mind the BJ is likely to turn into a truck-stop quickie. To have a FWB situation? In otherwords, a repeated situational affair with someone? Yeah, higher "bar" than someone coming up to another offering something.

Some people are highly into image, and won't, and in fact, some conditioned where that's bad so much as it's actually a turn off. Some look at sexual relations with a new person as a notch on their belt to "GIVE UP" and don't want to do that "too easily" (an odd human cultural thing, I know).

Anyway, my point is, many people, given the right circumstances aren't as affected by the cultural-image thing as others... so when it comes to just sex -- convenient sex itself becomes attractive which makes up for the attraction of the other person who may be not be a 'hottie'.

And many people out there (check the forums), don't set their bar higher for sex even if it's a FWB. People don't want to form a relationship with a FWB, not necessarily because they don't match quite-right personality-wise, but because they're not attracted enough to them for it. It's convenient sex.
 venndiagram
Joined: 10/29/2009
Msg: 148
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/2/2010 1:14:35 PM
OK I havent made myself clear- my last attempt:

If I can see myself having sex with someone, then they are also attractive enough for me to have a relationship with, IF the connection is there.

If the connection isn't there, then the physical attraction becomes way more important.

I'm sure I haven't explained that well. Let's just say that having a relationship with someone entails way more than the physical, and leave it at that, lol.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 149
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/2/2010 2:51:53 PM

If I can see myself having sex with someone, then they are also attractive enough for me to have a relationship with

I assumed that is what you probably meant in the first place, but like I said, the actual STATEMENT you originally said I couldn't go by and couldn't help myself to make a joke resembling a guy being drunk, that's all lol

No, I understand... on an ATTRACTION level, if you can see yourself having sex with them, then they pass the 'attraction' test as far as relationships go.

Here's a side question, relating to other things. If you could see yourself having sex with them, would they also be attractive enough for a 'role in the hay' or 'just sex' situation?
 venndiagram
Joined: 10/29/2009
Msg: 150
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/5/2010 4:23:09 PM
I guess if the personality wasnt doing it for me enough to see having a relationship, they'd have to bring something else to the table, lol. So, they'd have to be MORE attractive, because honestly, its someone's personality which creates the appeal mostly.

If the personality is a total turnoff, then I could never see having sex with someone.
 Confident-Realist
Joined: 2/8/2004
Msg: 151
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/5/2010 7:58:40 PM

I guess if the personality wasnt doing it for me enough to see having a relationship, they'd have to bring something else to the table, lol. So, they'd have to be MORE attractive, because honestly, its someone's personality which creates the appeal mostly.

It's funny you mention that, that is so true with so many people (including those who deny it). It's basic instinct... but also...

When you have someone hunky or hot engaging with you, their persona will be interpreted differently without you even being aware of it. Now, that's not to say one's bad persona can't override hot looks, don't get me wrong... it definitely can. But one's flaws can become quirks... what may be a bit annoying with someone not hot to you, can end up being 'cute' to someone who most definitely is.

In the end, it is a combination. Most people with a sex drive, especially at breeding age, can't form a relationship with someone who's not physically attractive to them. That concept can sound "superficial", which is why some people swear they don't "care about looks", when at best, they care less than the average Joe or find pretty much anyone attractive 'enough'.
Show ALL Forums  > Sex and Dating  >