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  > If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 151
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30Page 7 of 9    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

Oral sex, while I don't see it as "wrong,"

Freeze-frame. You putting it this way reveals your POV about it, and how you seem to classify it as a naturally unnecessary thing that people have the right to do. It's not on the outside. It's not some people will, some people will never-ever. It's not random like that. Those who Refuse to Ever do it are the outsiders, is my point. It's not not "wrong" -- it's good & fruitful to do. You don't have to -- and your tastes won't like some things that are good & fruitful (like certain foods). But I just wanted to make it clear that it's not some outsider thing -- but that it is a good thang, generally speaking.

But you guys can't tell me that not wanting to kiss/touch your partner is on the same level as not wanting to do oral.

IMO, to a majority of the people, Refusing to Ever have oral sex Is on the same level as an "unhealthy" level of insufficient kissing/touching. Hey, everyone's going to have a truck-stop quickie with their partner where there's no romance/kissing/cuddling. And no oral had either. And pound for pound, the mere Concept of kissing/touching on Any level in and of itself you can say is more basic and important, yes. But point is, doing an Insufficient amount is going to have the same level of Negative impact in it's own way on average, as Refusing to Ever have oral sex.

Said types are limiting themselves, not the other way around compared to the common person who is only going to be compatible with someone who is willing/open to engage in that at least once in a while.
 LJane_6
Joined: 6/10/2015
Msg: 152
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/9/2016 7:20:33 PM

Those who Refuse to Ever do it are the outsiders, is my point. It's not not "wrong" -- it's good & fruitful to do.


This sounds kind of like peer pressure to me. Lol. "Everyone is doing it, It's not bad, it's good. Try it, you'll like it." I can almost hear other guys hi-fiving you at this point. I can see people not wanting me to judge it as wrong or weird (which I didn't) - but to insist that it is good and necessary to do is the other extreme. To each their own.


IMO, to a majority of the people, Refusing to Ever have oral sex Is on the same level as an "unhealthy" level of insufficient kissing/touching.


I completely disagree with this, but you are clearly trying to justify your position (by saying "a majority of people" think the same way), and I'm not going to fight it anymore.
 quinneskimo
Joined: 2/12/2016
Msg: 153
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/9/2016 7:37:29 PM
NG just likes to see words on a page and argue. Maybe if you replaced anal sex with oral sex NG might change his mind on what some see as "a given" and what others see as "if I don't like it I won't do it". I agree with LJane on this. A certain amount of intimacy and sexual play is expected in a relationship. We all know we can live without oral see. In some relationships, because of mobility or physical issues, a couple can only have oral sex and if this is so, I doubt they would divorce because he or she can't do the conventional sex act, like missionary, for example.

NG wants to add that oral sex is right up there with holding hands, kissing, touching each other, penis in vagina sex. Well, it's not to some people. And no one should be pressured to do that. So NG, in your argument, replace anal sex with oral sex or replace her wanting to put carrots up your butt...if it makes her happy you should do this even though you don't like it??

Do want pleases each without either partner feeling pressured or forced - that is what the majority do.

And I still think asking someone how many partners they have had is just wrong. Inwould would never ask nor would I tell nor would I be with someone who thought he needed had a right to know.
 NJgirl116
Joined: 7/3/2015
Msg: 154
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/9/2016 10:34:26 PM
Oral sex is like yoga pants - some people are shocked that there are others who do not do it. Why would you not want to wear them? You have a nice ass, show it! What do you mean you don't want to show your ass? LIKE WHY?
I wear an athletic skirt or shorts over yoga pants; there are other girls at the gym who wear those cute loose shorts with a tight pair underneath - no yoga pants.
Oral is not part of everyone's repertoire... but I'm guessing as a couple is more comfortable with each other, they may explore even if they did not initially. But lots of people don't do it, depending on the culture of origin, etc.
Oral sex is a very intimate and loving thing to do, actually. But, I've heard a woman claim a man loses respect for you immediately if you perform it, and I've heard a man say that when a girl performs it, it makes him feel that she is cheapening herself...
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 155
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/9/2016 11:33:15 PM

This sounds kind of like peer pressure to me. Lol. "Everyone is doing it, It's not bad, it's good. Try it, you'll like it."

No, I'm not trying to convince you to revel in it. I'm pointing out what it is and where it stands, is all. It is good & fruitful & natural, and that most people ideally desire it... and it's not just some optional side dish that some people might like.

completely disagree with this, but you are clearly trying to justify your position

One can say a vast majority of people don't see it quite that much but Many do is my point. I'm just trying to shed light on things, is all. When ya talk to someone who's been in an LTR for a while, and they say the other Refuses to go down on them ever -- it's a big deal to Many. Just saying. And to clarify, I'm not equating Refusing to Ever do that = Refusing to Ever touch or kiss. No, not saying that extreme. I'm saying that it'll have a negative effect about as often as folks having a Lack of it (not empty or refused -- that'd be worse).

NG just likes to see words on a page and argue.

I'm honestly not. Lady Jane's first expression was that it's disrespectful to the person who refuses to ever have oral sex, for it to be a big issue. LJ, to be fair, I think may come from a more wholesome environment, combined with lack of physical sexual experiences, can be assumed to be something not so natural/common/wanted to people in general as the norm.

Maybe if you replaced anal sex with oral sex NG might change his mind on what some see as "a given" and what others see as "if I don't like it I won't do it".

I actually was about to make that analogy before. :) That her POV seems to be putting oral sex on the level of anal sex or something, to the masses. Which it's not.

NG wants to add that oral sex is right up there with holding hands, kissing, touching each other, penis in vagina sex.

Not quite. Sounds like you are just wanting to argue for the sake of arguing. Easy. :) Read above, it may clarify it some if you actually do wish to know my POV and the subject doesn't drum up emotion and angst, etc. I'm certainly not trying to do that.

Do want pleases each without either partner feeling pressured or forced - that is what the majority do.

Nobody at all has even remotely implied pressure or force. At all. That'd be bad.
 LJane_6
Joined: 6/10/2015
Msg: 156
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/10/2016 2:25:44 AM

Oral is not part of everyone's repertoire... but I'm guessing as a couple is more comfortable with each other, they may explore even if they did not initially. But lots of people don't do it, depending on the culture of origin, etc.


Agree.


Oral sex is a very intimate and loving thing to do, actually.


In the right context, and with the right motives (giving rather than taking or demanding), I could see that.


But, I've heard a woman claim a man loses respect for you immediately if you perform it, and I've heard a man say that when a girl performs it, it makes him feel that she is cheapening herself...


Interesting to hear. I have wondered if performing it too early (say, before having "regular" intercourse, or at/near the beginning of a relationship) could cause a man to lose respect. Or, if the woman is doing it just to get a man's attention or appease him, that could be likened to cheapening or disrespecting herself. So could any sex act I suppose, or doing any kind of favor to gain someone's attention/affection. But, I'd be curious to know how many guys would agree with the above statements, even if they wouldn't admit it. Kind of like how guys say they wouldn't lose respect for a woman who has sex on the first date, yet you see it happen all the time.
 chinook1111
Joined: 4/1/2016
Msg: 157
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/12/2016 7:42:21 AM
I can understand where LJane is coming from,not unreasonable.Some intimacy is expected.....

If a woman went down on me quite early I would wonder....
 *buzz*
Joined: 6/1/2006
Msg: 158
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/14/2016 2:34:38 PM

And what does it matter??????

Actions speak louder than any words, let alone "numbers"
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 159
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/14/2016 3:40:53 PM

In the right context, and with the right motives (giving rather than taking or demanding), I could see that.

If someone has visions of oral sex being at all tied to bad motives -- they're in la-la land. It's no more tied to bad motives than to sex itself. It's not at all degrading, on a lower level, etc., nor by default assumed to be anything on that level.

I have wondered if performing it too early (say, before having "regular" intercourse, or at/near the beginning of a relationship) could cause a man to lose respect.

No, not at all. People tend to have oral sex before actual sex -- hence the "bases" concept -- 3rd base vs home plate. If a gal holds off on "going all the way", but will fool around some on date #x, if anything, there'd be more respect than going all the way 'too soon'. If a gal gives a guy a BJ or a guy goes down on a gal on a 1st date, certain types may find the other respecting them or the situation between them Less... but if they went all-the-way (sex), then that feeling would amplify.

One can also lose respect for someone who refuses to engage in sexual relations that's seen as at least close to 'par'. One of my friends dated a gal for a few months. She really liked that he's not the type at all to want sex so soon. A couple months into things, they've been fooling around, and she'd sleep over on the weekends, but he'd stop at 3rd. Well, the gal in the condo upstairs could be heard getting Railed every Fri & Sat night, and that was quite sexually frustrating for his new GF when 3 months in, he was still refusing to have sex with her. She walked. She was ticked at him. I told him Yep, she has every right.

Or, if the woman is doing it just to get a man's attention or appease him, that could be likened to cheapening or disrespecting herself.

It could -- just as the case with sex. If wanted to get anal about it (no pun intended), in such a scenario, one would likely be "cheapening" themselves more by going all the way (sex).

With that said, I don't think it's cheapening oneself to engage in sexual situations to aid in garnering the other person's interest, any more than the sexual act of kissing. But I think it Is cheapening oneself when they do that in terms of playing some you-owe-me games... or the classic game of "you buy me dinners, and then I'll have sex with you". I also think it's cheapening oneself to believe that he (or she) needs to go out with them more, solely because they had some sexual relations.
 LJane_6
Joined: 6/10/2015
Msg: 160
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/14/2016 9:14:57 PM

If someone has visions of oral sex being at all tied to bad motives -- they're in la-la land. It's no more tied to bad motives than to sex itself. It's not at all degrading, on a lower level, etc., nor by default assumed to be anything on that level.


Intercourse, just like oral sex, COULD be done with bad motives. They both can be an act of mutually giving and receiving, or they could be done with one person trying to control or demand things from the other. You seem to assume in all my examples that I would ONLY attribute those things to oral and nothing else. I’m focusing on it because that’s what this conversation is about, but that doesn’t mean the same couldn’t apply to other things.


If a gal gives a guy a BJ or a guy goes down on a gal on a 1st date, certain types may find the other respecting them or the situation between them Less... but if they went all-the-way (sex), then that feeling would amplify.

It could -- just as the case with sex. If wanted to get anal about it (no pun intended), in such a scenario, one would likely be "cheapening" themselves more by going all the way (sex).


Why would having intercourse be seen as cheapening oneself more than having oral? That opinion is just as biased as thinking the opposite.


One can also lose respect for someone who refuses to engage in sexual relations that's seen as at least close to 'par'. One of my friends dated a gal for a few months… that was quite sexually frustrating for his new GF when 3 months in, he was still refusing to have sex with her. She walked. She was ticked at him. I told him Yep, she has every right.


I don’t know if I would call that a loss of respect. I’d say that was more a case of mismatched expectations. She wanted to have sex earlier than he did, and as a result she was sexually frustrated. She didn’t want to wait that long, so she broke it off. She was “ticked,” as you put it. That’s not the same as a guy who thinks less of his girlfriend after they sleep together. Men aren’t ticked at a woman because she slept with him. But some men (and I do think this is very hypocritical), see the woman as having a lower value, and/or mislead her into a relationship, and then once they get what they want from her, move on to the next conquest. That is disrespecting.


With that said, I don't think it's cheapening oneself to engage in sexual situations to aid in garnering the other person's interest, any more than the sexual act of kissing. But I think it Is cheapening oneself when they do that in terms of playing some you-owe-me games...


I think it depends on the situation. For example, if a 2 people are dating, and the man is treating her like a FWB, while knowing she wants more (aka using her), and she is using sex to appease him and gain his favor. Or if the man is just treating her badly/disrespectfully while she does sexual favors to keep his attention. That would be cheapening herself. That’s not the same as 2 people who mutually agree to FWB or who both want a relationship, and are doing things to increase eachother’s attention. I guess I didn’t explain that very clearly. And yes, I agree that using sex as a bribe to get free stuff is also cheapening oneself.


I also think it's cheapening oneself to believe that he (or she) needs to go out with them more, solely because they had some sexual relations.


This, I don’t see as cheapening oneself. Again, it’s a case of mismatched expectations. I think this is kind of the opposite of the other scenario – one person uses sex to appease the person they want to date, the other continues dating a person just to get sex. (If that’s what you meant – from your wording I wasn’t sure). Perhaps they should have a conversation before getting intimate, to make sure they are on the same page about what’s expected afterwards.
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 161
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/15/2016 6:58:37 AM
"Why would having intercourse be seen as cheapening oneself more than having oral?"

>>>since Bill Clinton, people have assumed oral is less intimate, and less likely to catch an STD or get pregnant. plus its more work and more effort for both people to get nekkid.
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 162
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/15/2016 1:58:45 PM

Intercourse, just like oral sex, COULD be done with bad motives. They both can be an act of mutually giving and receiving, or they could be done with one person trying to control or demand things from the other.

Yes, exactly. Oral sex isn't tied to anything more "bad" than sex itself.

You seem to assume in all my examples that I would ONLY attribute those things to oral and nothing else.

Not quite. It's that, at least from the get-go, you were attributing oral sex as something bad/negative By Default... which would make it more understandable why someone wouldn't want to engage. My thing is -- no, it's not by default associated with anything bad, at all.

Why would having intercourse be seen as cheapening oneself more than having oral? That opinion is just as biased as thinking the opposite.

*IF* one engaging in something sexual in a given situation would be cheapening themselves -- "going all the way" would amplify the cheapeningness, and not going very far at all would lessen it. I don't think that's a biased concept. :)

I don’t know if I would call that a loss of respect. I’d say that was more a case of mismatched expectations.

No, she was Pissed at him. And she had every right to. It wasn't a "sex too soon" thing for him. It was that he was unsure if she was LTR-worthy. 3 months in still mulling over that? He's a nice guy at heart, but I called him out on it. I told him he had More than enough time to sh!t or get off the pot, as far as that's concerned. :) I agreed with him that he shouldn't have sex with her when they already were dating and didn't have sex yet -- until he felt like he wanted to stay with her indefinitely. It's that he strung it (her) along for too long.

But some men (and I do think this is very hypocritical), see the woman as having a lower value, and/or mislead her into a relationship, and then once they get what they want from her, move on to the next conquest. That is disrespecting.

I don't think that happens. Not misleading a girl into a Relationship -- no. It's more like misleading her into an extra date or two, porking her, then leaving. Guys will unknowingly do this sometimes, and sometimes knowingly do it. And, sometimes, girls will play sexually hard-to-get games which will Help Cause this -- and in the end, she got what she deserved, if and when that's the case.

For example, if a 2 people are dating, and the man is treating her like a FWB, while knowing she wants more (aka using her), and she is using sex to appease him and gain his favor.

IF you mean that he's not That into her, in terms of "treating her like a FWB", I don't think he's using her. I've been in dating situations where the gal wasn't That into me. Was she using me for sex? We weren't FWB. Sex was just something we'd engage in, as well as going out. She didn't want to sacrifice most weekend nights, where I would guess she would if she were more into me. Was she using me just because *I* liked her more? No, that'd be too easy for me to say. She was a better catch than I. :)

That’s not the same as 2 people who mutually agree to FWB or who both want a relationship, and are doing things to increase eachother’s attention.

If two people agree to a FWB situation (which, by the way, 1-on-1 FWB for a while = dating; just not committed or romance or Relationship pursuing) -- they don't have to be increasing each other's attention (to be fair, don't know Exactly what you mean by that). I think a lot of times in dating situations, one person is going to like the other person more which tends to make the other person keep a certain distance if they're not going to break it off. Not ensuring some distance when you know the other person likes you more than you like them would be really rude, IMO. But doing so to some will aid in a possible illusion that they're being used, if they're also having sex.

Not to say one can't be using another person - lol. I'm just saying we're too quick to call it that when we're understandably emotionally frustrated. We're going to be biased, and we're going to tend to have backing by our peers that we were used, screwed over, etc. even when it's not so much the case.

This, I don’t see as cheapening oneself. Again, it’s a case of mismatched expectations.

I do. I've said this to a female friend of mine a time or two. Just because you and he had some sexual relations -- doesn't mean he should be taking you out. If you know he's not that into you, but want to be taken out a couple more times because you two swiftly fooled around -- that's cheapening yourself.

one person uses sex to appease the person they want to date, the other continues dating a person just to get sex.

I think when the other person isn't That into them, yes, the sex will keep them around and give them a chance. But when it falls thru and didn't work -- they'll call foul on the other person. Which is wrong to do in that case. Someone may not use sex, but say, have connections to get into VIP areas at select bars, or have a lot of cool friends to bring them into a good social pipeline, etc. That will keep them around where they'd otherwise walk. When one uses those things to have the other person give them more a chance, to appease their interest, it's all good when it works out. When it doesn't -- the person who likes the other more cries victim... which I raise an eyebrow to and shake my head.
 LJane_6
Joined: 6/10/2015
Msg: 163
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/16/2016 1:05:53 AM

It's that, at least from the get-go, you were attributing oral sex as something bad/negative By Default... which would make it more understandable why someone wouldn't want to engage.


Again, I never once said it was bad or negative. All I ever really said from the beginning is that some people don’t like or want to do it and that’s ok, they shouldn’t be pressured into it.


*IF* one engaging in something sexual in a given situation would be cheapening themselves -- "going all the way" would amplify the cheapeningness, and not going very far at all would lessen it. I don't think that's a biased concept. :)


How is oral sex “not going very far at all”? Some would consider it going just as far as intercourse. It’s still sex. It would be cheapening oneself more to do the thing they were less comfortable with, IMO.


It wasn't a "sex too soon" thing for him. It was that he was unsure if she was LTR-worthy. 3 months in still mulling over that?...It's that he strung it (her) along for too long.


Ok, this totally changes the scenario. In your first description, it wasn’t clear that he strung her along, or that that was the main issue. I agree that he shouldn’t have had sex when she clearly wanted a relationship and he was unsure (as that would be leading her on). And that 3 months should be enough time to know if you want to be exclusive with someone. So, the real issue is not that he waited too long for sex. It’s that he dated her too long before making up his mind about a LTR.


I don't think that happens. Not misleading a girl into a Relationship -- no.


Are you kidding me?? Lots of times, one person (in this case, we’re talking about the guy), is looking for a sex/hookup type thing, while the girl clearly wants more. And sometimes, a guy will say just about anything to get her in the sack – including making her think he’s more serious about her/a relationship than he actually is. Then when he gets what he wants from her (sex), he bails, after knowing all along he was going to. It happens a lot, actually.


It's more like misleading her into an extra date or two, [having sex with] her, then leaving.


It’s not misleading if both people know that the dates/sex are a trial run or that it’s going to be a short affair. It IS misleading when the guy makes the girl think he’s in it for more than he actually is.


And, sometimes, girls will play sexually hard-to-get games which will Help Cause this -- and in the end, she got what she deserved, if and when that's the case.


What do you mean by “sexually hard to get games”?


IF you mean that he's not That into her, in terms of "treating her like a FWB", I don't think he's using her. I've been in dating situations where the gal wasn't That into me. Was she using me for sex? We weren't FWB. Sex was just something we'd engage in, as well as going out.


In your case, you knew the girl wasn’t that into you, and agreed to have sex anyway. So, if she was using you for sex (which I can’t say for sure) you were ok with that. Lol. If a guy is not that into a girl, but pretends he is to get sex, that would be using her. Sometimes, guys will string a girl along and treat her like a FWB, only wanting sex from her and nothing else, while the girl wants something more. I think in those cases, he is using her. An example would be the guy who only texts her at midnight to come over for some "netflix and chill," and never takes her on a proper date. But I also think the girl can refuse to go along with it and not let herself be used, if she wants more from him.


If two people agree to a FWB situation (which, by the way, 1-on-1 FWB for a while = dating; just not committed or romance or Relationship pursuing) -- they don't have to be increasing each other's attention (to be fair, don't know Exactly what you mean by that).


Earlier, I said it was cheapening oneself to use sex to get someone’s attention. You said it was not. So all I meant was that if both people are in agreement with the situation, it’s ok for them to both make moves on eachother to increase attention. Now I’m getting confused about what I was even trying to say. Lol
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 164
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/16/2016 10:58:28 AM

All I ever really said from the beginning is that some people don’t like or want to do it and that’s ok, they shouldn’t be pressured into it.

The topic bounces around semi-relevant threads - lol. But the main thing you basically conveyed (which raised an eyebrow) was that the guy would be an a-hole if he wanted to walk away from the gal he's dating because she Refused to Ever have oral sex, and seeing oral sex as some odd/different fetish that a lot of people can get into... and that it's bad/negative for it to be something regarded as a staple to one's diet of sexual intimacy.

How is oral sex “not going very far at all”?

I never said it's not going very far at all. Don't put that in quotes as if I said that! :) It's not "going all the way". When people say "we went all the way", that means having sex.

Some would consider it going just as far as intercourse. It’s still sex.

Oral sex isn't vaginal intercourse (=sex). It's not "going all the way" (in reference to the above). If I said "I had sex with Sally," that doesn't mean I merely had sexual relations -- it means I had vaginal intercourse. Yes, to some people it can still be A Lot. I never implied anything beyond kissing isn't. Heck, in one thread, a gal said for a quickie she wouldn't want to kiss the guy, but would have sex. So to a few people, kissing is a Bigger Deal. I know one gal I dated -- she didn't want to take her top off until we got to know each other better, but she wanted to have sex. So yes, some people can be scared/weirded by some things. It doesn't mean taking one's top off IS as big as going-all-the-way (sex).

It would be cheapening oneself more to do the thing they were less comfortable with, IMO.

I disagree. Comfort level & cheapening oneself are different concepts. They WOULD be cheapening themselves doing something they didn't want to do to merely get a rise out of the other person -- but that's not what this piece is about. It's about how 'far' one goes.

People mistakenly feel they are cheapening themselves when they're not. I knew a gal who didn't want to call her ex/boyfriend -- she felt she would be cheapening herself to do so. I told her he has your purse and your coat, and he was a total d!ck! She may think that's cheapening herself to demand to get it back -- but no, she wouldn't. She was uncomfortable calling him (understandable; uncomfortable situation altogether). Not the same as cheapening oneself.

I can think of many things I'm not so keen on/comfortable with "in the bedroom". It doesn't mean I'm going "further" in reference to sexual relations, as that's a different concept. So IF sexual relations of any type would be Actually cheapening oneself in a given situation -- going "further" would amplify that Actual cheapening. If they stopped at kissing, even if kissing was uncomfortable for the guy "too soon", but bending her over doggy style to hearts content was what he wanted -- if Any sexual relations between them at the time would be "cheap" -- sorry Bob, the latter would be greater than kissing. :)

In your first description, it wasn’t clear that he strung her along, or that that was the main issue.

He wasn't trying to. He was content just-dating but not having sex. He strung her along by not being interested enough in her To have sex, it being 2-3 months in.

And that 3 months should be enough time to know if you want to be exclusive with someone.

He Was exclusive with her, though. That wasn't the issue. He wasn't stringing her along by being a jerk or wanting to date others. He wanted to be exclusive. He just wasn't into her enough to "go all the way". Which is fine early on -- but sheesh, you're past the 2 month mark seeing each other a lot and not sure if you're into her enough to be seeing her for several more months (knock on wood), thus have sex? Sh!t or get off the pot, man. He wasn't. He stood there for too long, hence, stringing her along.

Are you kidding me?? Lots of times, one person (in this case, we’re talking about the guy), is looking for a sex/hookup type thing, while the girl clearly wants more.

No, I'm not kidding you. ANYTHING can happen, sure. But what I'm saying is: There's a Difference between a Relationship and two people merely having gone out on some dates. If all someone wants is a sex hookup, they're not going to go become BF/GF to do so. That's kind of an oxymoron. To go out on DATES? Yes. My point -- big difference between a BF/GF *relationship* and having gone out on a handful of dates to get some poon. Many guys won't last too many dates to get some action if they're just looking for a hookup.

It’s not misleading if both people know that the dates/sex are a trial run or that it’s going to be a short affair. It IS misleading when the guy makes the girl think he’s in it for more than he actually is.

Again, they're not in a Relationship (BF/GF). But yes, if the guy Actually does mislead her on -- that's bad of course. BUT -- no, just because they have sex on the 2nd or 3rd date, doesn't mean he was misleading her because he didn't want to become an item. The burden is on the person who wants the Requirement-to-be-an-item to come into play to say/do something. Otherwise, if you're having sex or heavy sexual relations then -- sorry, it doesn't mean he or she was leading ya on because they ended up not wanting to run off in the sunset together with ya. Should have brought it up if that was a requirement. It's Not a default requirement.

What do you mean by “sexually hard to get games”?

Reference to another thread. To expressively let the guy know "he has to earn it". To tell a guy that if he takes her out on this-date or that-date and does this or that, he can (gasp) have sex with her. That's playing games.

In your case, you knew the girl wasn’t that into you, and agreed to have sex anyway. So, if she was using you for sex (which I can’t say for sure) you were ok with that.

Yes! After several dates we did. In retrospect, whether we had sex or not, she wasn't going to be that into me. Into me enough to date me some, but that happens. Point is, I was okay with it because I agreed to have sex. So switch the genders around. Would I have been using Her because she wanted me more? No.

Sometimes, guys will string a girl along and treat her like a FWB, only wanting sex from her and nothing else, while the girl wants something more. I think in those cases, he is using her.

Why, if my situation I wasn't treated any different? Because I'm a guy? :) There was a lack of interest, yet, continuing to go out. You realize that Many guys will take a gal out to Olive Garden to get in her pants, right? If anything, someone being Real and expressing their Actual level of interest is Better than misleading them and taking them out to a nice restaurant to bang them.

I would have been More pissed at the gal I was seeing if she expressed interest on the level of a guy Taking a gal out to nice restaurants... and come to find out it was a facade in "being nice" and she wasn't that into me. I was able to read her interest not-yet?-fully-captured, so at least I know what was up. Switch roles in that scenario? You'd be thinking I was using her for sex. :)
 LJane_6
Joined: 6/10/2015
Msg: 165
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/16/2016 1:53:37 PM

and seeing oral sex as some odd/different fetish that a lot of people can get into


This^^ I never said. As we've already discussed.


I never said it's not going very far at all. Don't put that in quotes as if I said that!


To quote from your earlier post, “*IF* one engaging in something sexual in a given situation would be cheapening themselves -- "going all the way" would amplify the cheapeningness, and not going very far at all would lessen it. I don't think that's a biased concept. :)” I was assuming you meant oral sex when you said “not going very far at all,” but perhaps I misunderstood. ?


Should have brought it up if that was a requirement. It's Not a default requirement.


Yes, she should bring it up if that's her expectation. But the guy should also not be misleading about his intentions (which you agreed with).


To expressively let the guy know "he has to earn it". To tell a guy that if he takes her out on this-date or that-date and does this or that, he can (gasp) have sex with her. That's playing games.


She shouldn’t see material things like buying dinners, presents etc. as a tradeoff for sex. I agree that sex should not be used as a bribe of any kind. But to expect the guy to go on dates and get to know her for a while before they do it is completely reasonable. Some people don’t want to jump in the sack with just anybody. The guy does have to “earn it” in the sense of proving to be trustworthy and being on the same page (in it for more than just sex), if that’s what she’s looking for.


Why, if my situation I wasn't treated any different? Because I'm a guy? :)


No – because you knew what was up and went along with it anyway. You weren’t upset about the fact that she just wanted sex and not a relationship, so you were basically agreeing to be FWB.


If anything, someone being Real and expressing their Actual level of interest is Better than misleading them and taking them out to a nice restaurant to bang them.


I agree – more people should be up-front about their intentions. Just because a girl doesn’t SAY she wants more than sex from a guy, it can often be assumed/read from her actions. It’s just that some guys choose to ignore it.
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 166
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/16/2016 2:21:53 PM

This^^ I never said. As we've already discussed.

Yes, I should be entirely fair -- you don't think it is an actual fetish. But treating the same way as if it were on some commonly-found one was my point. That the person who would walk due to it not being part of the receipe would be insulting to the other person and they'd be the bad guy, where sex itself would be more understandable.

I was assuming you meant oral sex when you said “not going very far at all,” but perhaps I misunderstood. ?

Yes. Sex being the highest, or 1st base being the lowest -- different degrees of "cheapness" if getting anywhere on base in and of itself in a particular situation would be cheapening themselves.

Yes, she should bring it up if that's her expectation. But the guy should also not be misleading about his intentions (which you agreed with).

He shouldn't, no. Vicki, another poster a little while back -- she and I had a debate about that concept. Basically, she (and some people out there) believe that the guy has to make a declaration that he Isn't Aiming to be with her for a relationship, if they're going to swing into the bedroom early. Otherwise, he'd be leading her on. I disagreed. So a lot of "what is leading someone on" is thing to break down. I think the ball's in the person's court who wants more than one-thing-leading-to-another, when one thing in fact does lead to another.

Some will take the act of allowing that to happen & having a good time = misleading. To them, there's no such thing as misreading. Because to them, if THEY were going to have a roll in the hey early, and were seemingly having a great time -- Heck Yes I'm wanting to at least get the ball rolling towards riding off in the sunset! So they're assuming that's the case, when it's not. And as a guy, I can say I've been in that position before on the flip-side. When it's "too early" on -- you can't run on assumption about what they want / will want much down the line (whether substantial sexual relations are involved or not).

But to expect the guy to go on dates and get to know her for a while before they do it is completely reasonable.

Sure. To say "Hey, I don't have sex with anyone who I'm not Truly dating," is 100% just fine. That's the norm.

The guy does have to “earn it” in the sense of proving to be trustworthy and being on the same page

The guy doesn't have to "earn" squat anymore than the gal does. That's where the problem lies. It's not a one-way sideshow where guy-proves-himself-to-girl. That's where baby games come in. There's no direct or indirect "earning" any more than a G-rated kiss. Guys who are catches will walk (unless the gal's way out of his league; then he'll have no problem jumping thru games).

No – because you knew what was up and went along with it anyway.

No -- I didn't know she just wanted sex! I just knew that her interest level wasn't full-circle (yet?)... which happens sometimes when people date and not hitting it off, but continuing things. It's just that sex wasn't discluded from the equation when things were carrying on. And point being, I don't think she Just wanted sex. That's the point. As I said, we went out on dates. These weren't booty calls. Just because you get pretty far or go all the way with someone in the bedroom, while still dating and assessing your interest in them, doesn't mean you're using them for sex.

Again, there was no agreement to FWB. It was the process of dating with sex (kinda?) early. I wanted her more, and I did figure rolling in the sex direction would bring her interest up (or down if I performed poor? lol). It didn't. Did she use me for sex? No. Flip the genders around. Would I be using her for sex? She wouldn't have "agreed" to anything -- there was no "agreement" on the table. Just two people rolling with things.
 LJane_6
Joined: 6/10/2015
Msg: 167
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/16/2016 2:52:51 PM

Guys who are catches will walk (unless the gal's way out of his league; then he'll have no problem jumping thru games).


I have to wonder how great of a guy he is then, in terms of what he values, if he is fine going along with the games if the girl is out of his league (by which I assume you mean "hot.") But for a regular girl, if she plays games, she's not worth his time and a b*tch. Total double standard. I guess if I was out of the guy's league (hotter), he would have still chased me then, instead of walking away, even after I tried to fix it.
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 168
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 5/16/2016 3:21:38 PM

I have to wonder how great of a guy he is then, in terms of what he values, if he is fine going along with the games if the girl is out of his league

Well, a gal's going to put up a lot more with a George Clooney than with a Pee Wee Herman (and vice versa in genders). Love it or hate it, people will tend to more put up with a mild-level of games that are unfortunately commonly found, at least for a little while when someone's out of their league (and/or they Really Really like them). But yeah, if someone's going to go out on a wild goose chase and degrade themselves to grasp the chance with someone out of their league? Yeah, says a lot about them (in the negative).

(by which I assume you mean "hot.")

Not necessarily, but for an average or an above average Joe? Yeah, that's commonly the case. If he's a hot guy and she's a hot girl objectively speaking, she wouldn't be out of his league. He could still be all about her, though, with enough drive to chase her and make himself look silly. :)

But for a regular girl, if she plays games, she's not worth his time and a b*tch. Total double standard.

Yeah, I agree. I think some people out there think it's OK for a gal to be like that because she's a lady and a man has to prove himself To her... while thinking its rude for the guy to be like that. Playing games on a small scale can be tolerable for a small period of time, if it's clear that both people can see thru it (like harmless 'teasing'). Of course, that can be playing with fire, and IMO, not recommended. When people grow up, they get turned off by seeing hints of it after past experiences of it obviously Not being harmless.
 MohawkMayhemRebel
Joined: 12/30/2016
Msg: 169
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 1/6/2017 4:02:37 AM
It comes from too many guys wishing they were in the mix xD
 100MilesFromMemphis
Joined: 6/1/2016
Msg: 170
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 1/7/2017 3:37:20 PM
More than one is too many!
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 171
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 1/7/2017 4:26:52 PM

More than one is too many!

What?? :) More than 1 is too many? So not being a virgin with one you sleep with means you've slept with too many people? :) Geez, are we in high school? :)

A "number" being too high is a function of how many years you've been single as an adult... and if one wants to get really accurate on judgment, how socially active & attractive one is.

EX: Bob's 32, got married early during college to Sally. Divorced at 30. He's been single as an adult for 2 years. He's slept with 12 women: 1 high-school GF, 1 college-gf-turned-wife, and 10 women in the 2 years he's been single.

EX: Sally's 42, never married. She's been single as an adult for 10 years. She's slept with 24 men: 3 live-in boyfriends, 7 other boyfriends since high school, and 14 short-term relationships in the 10 years she's been single.

Who's "naughtier"? Bob, even though he's slept with Half of what Sally has. It's a function of time:

10 people in 24 months = Almost 1 new person every other month; not relationship-angled
14 people in 120 months = 1 new person almost every 9 months; certainly can be relationship-angled

If you think about it -- just take a friend of yours who just got out of a relationship at the end of the year. Say during this year they date someone thru the entire Spring, and yes, slept with them.... but in the end, things didn't work out. And say during the entire Fall they were dating someone, and yes, ended up sleeping with them, but in the end, things didn't work out. Are they a sleaze? I certainly don't think so.

 PurpleToffee
Joined: 11/25/2016
Msg: 172
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 1/12/2017 11:44:25 AM
I'm no mathematician, but barring DIY and non-human contact, in the end it breaks even doesn't it?
 cruel_cucumber
Joined: 10/27/2016
Msg: 173
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 1/26/2017 9:46:32 PM
In my experience, most women will be dishonest about their sexuality at first. They may say 5 or 6 people at first... but if you end up being in a committed relationship, later on down the road when you visit the topic again you will find that the number inflates more and more. Usually it ends up being 20 or more people. If this is something that really matters to you, you need to know the truth about deception. There's a good website on it that can be found with a quick Google search.

Why do they do it? In a nutshell, people try to avoid bad consequences and sometimes resort to deception to do so. Early on when you don't know somebody, it is possible that being straight up honest about something like that would be a deal breaker. That's why I think it's inappropriate to ask somebody explicit questions like that when you hardly even know them. Show them that you are somebody they can trust and be open with, and they will be truthful with you...
 LincsAndy
Joined: 1/14/2017
Msg: 174
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 1/27/2017 11:54:38 AM
I don't expect a woman to interrogate me about my past, so I'm not going to ask about hers. The subject may or may not come up, but... Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged. When did anyone ever call an experienced man a slut? I loathe double standards.
 LetitiaLeGrande
Joined: 3/22/2015
Msg: 175
view profile
History
If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30
Posted: 1/28/2017 7:21:21 PM
If a man says he has had 30 lovers, you can bet it is probably 10. No one really tells the truth about this sort of thing to another lover. and honestly I would never ask. A man is more expected to sow his seed so to speak and it is different to being a "loose" woman for many reasons.....
Show ALL Forums  > Sex and Dating  > If a woman admits to 10 lovers, she's probably had 30