Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

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  > Dating Experiences  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 peppermint petunias
Joined: 9/2/2009
Msg: 64
First meet, am I being unrealistic?Page 4 of 4    (1, 2, 3, 4)
First of all Max. Madara, and carol ann and a few others are spot on..


Just had a 'first meet' with someone i've been corresponding with & bang, seems to be a match. I have had a few first meets & have come to realize that the chance of both parties having so much in common, as well as a mutual attraction is rare. So as the night came to an end, we discussed getting together on Sat night. He hesitated, so I suggested he get back to me the next day about it.


It "seemed" to be a match to you, not so much with him or he would have asked you out again right then."he hesitated" So I assume YOU brought it up first or sounded SO available he may as well check his options..
Just tell a guy you meet and really like that you enjoyed meeting him and had a great time and hopes he will "call again".PERIOD.


When we arrived home, we chatted on the phone a bit & he told me that the reason he hesitated, was because he was chatting with another gal & had planned to meet with her on Sat


You pushed. Did you call him?
OP..People talk to more than one person at a time in most cases online and some even IRL...
Don't shove yourself down their throat or put them on the spot to meet again so soon..Let the man take the initiative , just let him know you are open to it.


I can't help but feel that if he follows through with the meet, then I become one of two things...
1) I'm the gal that gets tossed to the curb because he likes her better or,
2) I'm the consolation prize because the other meet didn't go as well as he hoped.
So that's it. Am I being a 'drama queen'?


"If he follows through with the meet".Again sounds like you cornered him and pushed to me.

He can't toss someone to the curb that was never on it.

SO WHAT??I mean really..what have you invested in him?

You should not have pushed, and he should not have told you he had another date..
He could have just said.He had plans for whatever night you were asking about if he intended on giving you a second date .

So me thinks you are not THE ONE for him..Therefore he mentioned the other woman.


Forget about it. If he calls, he calls..if not..oh well.

Me thinks he already met her..They "shebanged " or impressed him more and got the upper hand.

Doesn't really matter though does it??
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 65
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/18/2011 12:02:14 PM

After one of you "bails out" there are no prospects around to take the person's place because once you've informed the others you've started seeing someone exclusively, they have already moved on.

In practice, that isn't a problem, unless it takes you six months to decide whether to go from casual dating to exclusive dating.

I've never heard of a car dealership that allows that.

It was your idea to use the car analogy. I'm sorry if the correct analogy doesn't actually exist in the car world, but since that seems to be a problem for you, just skip the analogies.

That's an erroneous assumption to make.

It's the only assumption that's logical, given that I have no agreement to be exclusive and in lieu of that, you have no obligation to not sleep with anyone else you're dating.

Many women don't sleep with a man until they are in an exclusive relationship with him.

I'm sorry, but I'm not clairvoyant. Is there a way less paranormal way to identify these many women?

I didn't sleep with anyone while I was multi-dating, including the man I am now exclusive with.

And? If either of you did sleep around while you still ``multi-dating,'' you weren't promising to date each other exclusively and I assume you didn't agree to anything that might be construed as exclusivity, like telling your options what options they had with their options.

If one is that suspicious about what other people might be doing, then maybe that person shouldn't be dating at all.

Right. That's why I imposed the constraints I imposed. That eliminated the deal breakers that would bother me.

There are no guarantees in life.

Also correct, but you'll never get anything you don't ask for, either.

It is your business and you have every right to ask someone you have been dating regularly if they are involved with anyone else.

It is? I thought multi dating meant something like dating several people at the same time and not being nosy about who does what with whom unless you're the who or whom. I guess I'd say, ``Why, I'm dating a few other women. You haven't said anything about dating exclusively.'' That doesn't seem like a very useful answer, but asking about the details would sort of be antithetical to the concept of multi-dating.

I agree that some people do want it both ways, but I wouldn't say that a lot of them do.

If by that, you mean the women posting to this thread, I'd say WIP is the only shoe-in for someone who doesn't expect to get it both ways. But, I knew that long before this thread was ever posted. Everyone who thinks that, ``But, I don't sleep with anyone outside of an exclusive relationship,'' seems to be missing the point. It doesn't matter. You haven't agreed to exclusivity and neither have the guys you're dating.

Personally, I don't care who a man sleeps with until he makes the decision to be exclusive with me---because I'm not going to be sleeping with him.

I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean to say you won't ever be in a relationship with a man who sleeps around or that you don't care if he does as long as he stops when you have a chat about not dating anyone else? The latter, I understand. The former is just bizarre.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 67
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/18/2011 6:28:52 PM

I'm sure you and a couple of others on here understand that and accept it as part of the deal, but I also think quite a few others think that because they want to keep their options open and because they remain celibate while doing so, means that they expect those they date to do the same, by default. I'm not sure what you mean by ``as long as it doesn't affect anyone else.'' If I'm single and I have no obligation to tell my dates what I'm doing with any other dates, then what I'm doing is irrelevant to anyone but me and the person with whom I'm doing it. If I'm dating 5 women, sleeping with 3 of them and none of the 5 women think it's their business to ask me about anyone else I'm dating (probably because they think it's none of my business to ask them about anyone they may be dating), what I'm doing doesn't affect them by virtue of their wishes.

What I mean is, will it someday affect them personally, as in, are you practicing safe sex? Will one of your exes someday cause her grief? That type thing where it becomes a physical hassle for a future SO. If you are careful, safe, drama free about your stuff and it won't cause a very real threat to a future SO, then it's totally your business and not something a girl you're not that serious with needs to know.

On the other hand, if I had to do it over again, most of the women (you not being one of them) who prefer to keep their options open would also have no valid complaint about me deciding in advance that a relationship was out with anyone who would date me while keeping her options open, but not actually mentioning that fact until they brought up the subject of a relationship. If they aren't obligated to tell me anything and don't want to know anything, I can't see why not telling them they aren't candidates for a relationship, until they bring it up, is unethical.

Unless/until a relationship is a possibility all that goes on before it IS personal business for each person unless they choose to share it, so if one is not considering the other for a relationship regardless of the reason - then I agree everything is pretty much on a need to know basis for both involved.
 Halcyon_Skies
Joined: 2/1/2009
Msg: 68
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/18/2011 6:34:47 PM
In practice, that isn't a problem, unless it takes you six months to decide whether to go from casual dating to exclusive dating.


In practice, losing other prospects wasn't a problem for me simply because I didn't tell them to get lost in my haste to enter into exclusivity with one person after only a few dates---where the likelihood of the person bailing out would have been much higher. It took me over four months before I became exclusive with my current partner. By that time there was no doubt in my mind that he was planning to stick around. Sex? Yes, I could easily wait six months or even longer.


It was your idea to use the car analogy. I'm sorry if the correct analogy doesn't actually exist in the car world, but since that seems to be a problem for you, just skip the analogies.


No, you deliberately chose to miss the point I was attempting to make with my car analogy---which was that I don't invest in anything big---whether it's a car or a long-term exclusive relationship, without seeing how it stacks up against the competition.


I'm sorry, but I'm not clairvoyant. Is there a way less paranormal way to identify these many women?


Yes, you simply ask the woman directly if she's involved with any others and if any other man considers her to be his girlfriend. If you've already gotten far enough with the woman to get past date one, then you've no doubt already pre-screened her to be a reasonably straightforward person.


And? If either of you did sleep around while you still ``multi-dating,'' you weren't promising to date each other exclusively and I assume you didn't agree to anything that might be construed as exclusivity, like telling your options what options they had with their options.


I let the men that I was multi-dating know that I was casually seeing others, and that I didn't believe in sex outside of an exclusive relationship---however, since I wasn't bothered by what they were doing, I didn't need to ask them. All voluntarily told me what their dating situation and goals were.


I thought multi dating meant something like dating several people at the same time and not being nosy about who does what with whom unless you're the who or whom.


Where did you ever get that rule? If I had more than a couple of dates with the same man, the question was invariably raised by him. I've never thought a guy was nosy for politely asking me if I was involved with anyone else, nor have I ever been accused of being nosy for asking him in return.


If by that, you mean the women posting to this thread, I'd say WIP is the only shoe-in for someone who doesn't expect to get it both ways. But, I knew that long before this thread was ever posted. Everyone who thinks that, ``But, I don't sleep with anyone outside of an exclusive relationship,'' seems to be missing the point. It doesn't matter. You haven't agreed to exclusivity and neither have the guys you're dating.


While I disagree with the stance of the OP, I'm not speaking for other women in this thread. Personally, I've never cared if the men I was multi-dating were sleeping with other women because I wasn't sleeping with them---therefore, with me your point is moot.


I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean to say you won't ever be in a relationship with a man who sleeps around or that you don't care if he does as long as he stops when you have a chat about not dating anyone else? The latter, I understand. The former is just bizarre.


I will continue to date a man that sleeps with other women for as long as he keeps asking me out, however, I won't sleep with him unless we become exclusive. Thankfully, the men that I encountered that weren't looking for an exclusive relationship and were only interested in sleeping around always self-eliminated---usually sooner rather than later.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 69
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/19/2011 3:40:08 AM

While I agree with you WomanInProgress , that every person has the right to make those choices, for me it would come down to incompatibility on the grounds of not sharing common values/morals. While they have the right to chose to sleep with someone to whom they are not committed, I have the right to not chose a partner whose values are that different than mine.

Well, that would obviously fall under every person having the right to make their own choices, assuming that's information someone wants to give you to make a decision based on. And vice versa...with your information, which is your choice to share or not yourself.

I do agree with the poster above that said it makes no sense to continually date someone you're not really that into for months. Why would you want to, really? However some people like to get to know someone they ARE into naturally and take their time before getting really serious, or may in the first month of dating meet, talk to and date more than one person before making a choice.

A person may also be sleeping with someone they know and trust but are not ever planning to date; in that case meeting someone new and dating can happen with someone you do have interest in, and in that case your interest would naturally turn in the direction of that person.

I don't think someone who chooses to have sex safely between serious relationships is a sign of anything they might do within a relationship. For those who don't have sex between relationships, it's agreed that dating those who are of the same mindset is probably best personality wise...but I don't agree that it's doomed otherwise.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 70
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/19/2011 8:53:48 AM
In practice, losing other prospects wasn't a problem for me simply because I didn't tell them to get lost in my haste to enter into exclusivity with one person after only a few dates---where the likelihood of the person bailing out would have been much higher.

I wasn't looking for a long term relationship or a wife (you can see that from what I wrote in my profile). I was happy being single. I've never in my life had to deal with dating women who wanted to multi-date and I've never had to have a discussion about exclusivity. So, I had zero incentive to do that online. If it takes a woman months to figure out whether or not she likes me enough to date me exclusively, she's not for me. I find self-confidence and decisiveness an attractive trait and my personality is such that there's not much middle ground. If I hit it off on a first date, I never have really needed to ask for a second date. If I don't hit it off, going on several more dates has always been a waste of time. Getting into a relationship just because I outlasted everyone else is not very appealing.

No, you deliberately chose to miss the point I was attempting to make with my car analogy.

Don't resort to analogies which don't fit to make a point. Analogies are analogies. They serve no purpose other than to provide a parallel situation which is more familiar. You deliberately chose an analogy which is nothing like the issue at hand and what you're complaining about is what I added to make the analogy fit. It's not my fault if you try to make points by using analogies which ONLY fit the point you want to make. That isn't even a good reason to use an analogy as it obscures rather than clarifies all of the points being made.

whether it's a car or a long-term exclusive relationship, without seeing how it stacks up against the competition.

Some people know what they want and don't have much difficulty figuring out whether something is or isn't what they want when they see it. Give me a $ figure and I could tell you what car I'd buy inside of 24 hours and why I'd buy it. It would almost certainly not be your choice nor what many would choose, but I'm quite sure I'd be satisfied.

Where did you ever get that rule? If I had more than a couple of dates with the same man, the question was invariably raised by him. I've never thought a guy was nosy for politely asking me if I was involved with anyone else, nor have I ever been accused of being nosy for asking him in return.

I deduced it from reading the forums. Lots of people do think asking that is being nosy. As a matter of principle, as soon as you start making decisions based on who someone is dating, how many or anything else about dates with other people, you're starting to require some sort of committment to continue dating, except that you're pretending you aren't because you did't actually say it. I consider that game playing. You're just fishing for information.

All voluntarily told me what their dating situation and goals were.

I guess my answer would have been, ``I'm dating other people and whatever happens, happens,'' if I were a multi-dater. It's the truth, no matter how you slice it.

Personally, I've never cared if the men I was multi-dating were sleeping with other women because I wasn't sleeping with them---therefore, with me your point is moot.

No, it isn't. It's the main reason you multi-date and I don't. It's also something anyone who prefers keeping his/her options open ought to be aware of and accept. I have no problem with having sex between relationships or even casual sex, but for me ``between relationships'' means up until the time I meet someone where sex is concerned. Dating exclusively isn't a committment to marriage. It's an agreement to date exclusively because of how I feel about sex, dating and relationships. I thought it was only fair to point that out up front and risk turning off a few women. However, threads like these make me wonder if I went overboard, since I could have easily made that decision without saying anything without affecting anything anyone is entitled to expect.

I will continue to date a man that sleeps with other women for as long as he keeps asking me out, however, I won't sleep with him unless we become exclusive.

Well, I will sleep with a woman I date, but I won't get into a relationship with her if she's sleeping with anyone else. Since the longest span of time between first date and sex in my life has been 2 weeks (and she was an 18 year old college freshman who had never had sex), and apart from that, about 2 dates, I expect sex to happen soon enough to not differentiate between dating and sex. At this point in my life, I'm not going to be meeting any virgins and if sex was of no interest, I'd just go have dinner with my best friend.
 Halcyon_Skies
Joined: 2/1/2009
Msg: 71
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/19/2011 12:12:48 PM
Don't resort to analogies which don't fit to make a point. Analogies are analogies. They serve no purpose other than to provide a parallel situation which is more familiar. You deliberately chose an analogy which is nothing like the issue at hand and what you're complaining about is what I added to make the analogy fit. It's not my fault if you try to make points by using analogies which ONLY fit the point you want to make. That isn't even a good reason to use an analogy as it obscures rather than clarifies all of the points being made.


Not every analogy applies to everyone, but when it fits the majority of people, I'll use it. Most people who buy cars consider them to be a long-term investment rather than something they can return in a week's time. By the same token, most people who enter into an exclusive relationship go into it with the intent of it being a long-term relationship that could lead to marriage. You agree to date exclusively only because of your feelings about sex, dating and relationships rather than viewing it as a long-term commitment.


Some people know what they want and don't have much difficulty figuring out whether something is or isn't what they want when they see it.


Or rather, some people jump at the first thing that comes along that has the potential to fulfill their needs simply because they have a mentality of scarcity rather than abundance. Those are the people who are most apt to be afflicted with "the grass is always greener" syndrome, and view everything as disposable, including relationships.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 72
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/19/2011 1:19:11 PM
Or rather, some people jump at the first thing that comes along that has the potential to fulfill their needs simply because they have a mentality of scarcity rather than abundance.

Some people do. I certainly didn't wait until age 47 to get married because I jumped at the first thing that came along, though.

Those are the people who are most apt to be afflicted with "the grass is always greener" syndrome, and view everything as disposable, including relationships.

That has to be one of the most logically inconsistent statements I've seen. Could you explain how anyone who would ``jump at the first thing to come along'' could possibly have a ``grass is greener mentality?'' A ``grass is greener'' mentality is the epitome of indecisiveness and you're trying to apply that to a comment I made, which describes the exact opposite of indecisiveness:

Some people know what they want and don't have much difficulty figuring out whether something is or isn't what they want when they see it.

Also, what about that suggests anything about not being satisfied with what I have or that relationships are disposable?
 Halcyon_Skies
Joined: 2/1/2009
Msg: 73
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/19/2011 2:26:23 PM
That has to be one of the most logically inconsistent statements I've seen. Could you explain how anyone who would ``jump at the first thing to come along'' could possibly have a ``grass is greener mentality?'' A ``grass is greener'' mentality is the epitome of indecisiveness and you're trying to apply that to a comment I made, which describes the exact opposite of indecisiveness:

Some people know what they want and don't have much difficulty figuring out whether something is or isn't what they want when they see it.


The logic behind the statement is that someone who jumps at the first thing that comes along is acting impulsively and is more likely to make a wrong decision. As people get older, their dating pools grow smaller. Consequently, some people get lonely or anxious and are more apt to become exclusive with the first promising prospect that comes along---rather than keeping their options open. When they get involved too quickly, they are more likely to pick the wrong person, and as soon as they spot greener pastures, they bail out.


Also, what about that suggests anything about not being satisfied with what I have or that relationships are disposable?


I don't see anywhere in my post where I suggested that you were not satisfied with what you have. The "relationships are disposable" comment was made in reference to your statement: "Dating exclusively isn't a committment to marriage. It's an agreement to date exclusively because of how I feel about sex, dating and relationships." which suggests that you view exclusive relationships as temporary rather than long-term.
 WomanInProgress
Joined: 10/16/2005
Msg: 74
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/19/2011 7:13:35 PM
^^^I hear ya, and I totally hear those who factor their egos into their choices, but for me (outside of protecting myself from danger perhaps) I try to leave my ego out of most of my decision making. I find that any emotional decisions I make - well, just aren't typically wise ones, so I do my best to avoid that.

And unless we're all still dating the first person we ever got involved with today, or the person we're dating has never dated anyone before us - we're all second choice to someone, no matter how much we'd like to think otherwise.

YMMV.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 75
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/19/2011 9:29:36 PM
The logic behind the statement is that someone who jumps at the first thing that comes along is acting impulsively and is more likely to make a wrong decision. As people get older, their dating pools grow smaller. Consequently, some people get lonely or anxious and are more apt to become exclusive with the first promising prospect that comes along---rather than keeping their options open. When they get involved too quickly, they are more likely to pick the wrong person, and as soon as they spot greener pastures, they bail out.

That's really a stretch, especially given the number of threads in which people complain about everyone being too picky and people (especially guys) who are unwilling to make a committment. I'm also not talking about people who are impulsive. (Impulsive and descisive are not synonymous.)


The "relationships are disposable" comment was made in reference to your statement: "Dating exclusively isn't a committment to marriage. It's an agreement to date exclusively because of how I feel about sex, dating and relationships." which suggests that you view exclusive relationships as temporary rather than long-term.

You are prevaricating. Dating exclusively is not an exclusive relationship except by abuse of the word ``relationship'' to fit some tortured logic. Where in my statement does ``dating exclusively'' transform into ``exclusive relationship?'' Have you been married and divorced? If so, apply that logic to your divorce.


I find that any emotional decisions I make - well, just aren't typically wise ones, so I do my best to avoid that.

Actually, despite the fact that you and I take opposite views on a whole lot about dating, I always understand your reasoning, as it applies to you, perfectly. You always understand the all of the pros and cons. We differ in what we consider pros and cons, but that's about it.

 Halcyon_Skies
Joined: 2/1/2009
Msg: 76
First meet, am I being unrealistic?
Posted: 1/20/2011 8:04:06 AM
That's really a stretch, especially given the number of threads in which people complain about everyone being too picky and people (especially guys) who are unwilling to make a committment. I'm also not talking about people who are impulsive. (Impulsive and descisive are not synonymous.


It's curious that most of the people in the threads complaining about folks being too picky just happen to be men. In regards to making a commitment---if your regular MO before you got lucky and met your fiancee, was to convince a woman to remove herself from the dating pool by promising her exclusivity, and then bailing out a week later, as you gave in your example when refuting my car-buying analogy, then that is the epitome of someone unwilling to make a commitment. And yes, impulsive and decisive can be synonymous when the decision made is an impulsive one.


You are prevaricating. Dating exclusively is not an exclusive relationship except by abuse of the word ``relationship'' to fit some tortured logic. Where in my statement does ``dating exclusively'' transform into ``exclusive relationship?'' Have you been married and divorced? If so, apply that logic to your divorce.


Oh c'mon Abelian, THAT is what I'd call a stretch. You're just quibbling over semantics. Dating someone exclusively is by definition, an "exclusive relationship". If you're dating and sleeping with each other, you are "relating" to each other, as well as "excluding" others, thus you're in an exclusive relationship.


I find that any emotional decisions I make - well, just aren't typically wise ones, so I do my best to avoid that.


I also happen to agree with WIP with this statement, and one of the ways I avoid making an unwise emotional decision is to not have sex with a man until we are in an exclusive, committed relationship. A chemical change often takes place when women have sex, and they get emotionally bonded to the man.
Show ALL Forums  > Dating Experiences  >