Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 
 Author Thread: Well I just said NO to a offer of friends with benefits
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 17 (view)
 
Well I just said NO to a offer of friends with benefits
Posted: 4/10/2013 8:37:42 PM
Technically you can't be FWB without being friends first. Anybody wanting to hook up with you on the internet before befriending you is looking for a FB, not a FWB. The dude was not being upfront; he false advertised what he really wanted. I have no issue with FWB or FB, but the FWB to me is a quite bewildering proposition to begin with even with Friends First. Today there is lots of info to sift thru, and even if you decide to do some sort of No Strings Attached deal, it can blow up in your face. It's always ok to explore new relationships, but to expect solid relationship definitions before meeting IMO is foolhardy.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 81 (view)
 
Wanting Out, but feel stuck.....HELP!!
Posted: 3/12/2013 9:59:18 PM
Not judging the OP here.

She's in this WAY too deep. She needs to put her relationship with the 3rd party on hold. Then come to some sort of resolution with her marriage. Stay in it or end it, or attempt to turn it into an open marriage (not that I'm promoting open marriages). Then explain the resolution to the 3rd party. Seems like too much drama to me, and we don't even know all the details, probably even more drama than explained in Msg1.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 65 (view)
 
Boyfriend Online this week
Posted: 3/12/2013 9:50:06 PM
The OP never explained if she had "the talk" with her boyfriend. Frankly I wouldn't assume I'm exclusive with a woman that I'm dating if I don't confirm and verify with her verbally if that is so. I also wouldn't assume that my partner would automatically delete her profile after having "the talk". I'd expect her to at least modify her profile to state she isn't looking to meet new romantic interests. That is what I would pledge to her. If she deletes it, great, if not that's cool too as long as she modifies it. I'd have a discussion to this effect--our mutual expectations would be explicit if there were any doubts or questions.

If you have had "the talk", it isn't right to have an active dating profile.

Having an ultimatum confrontation out of the blue is erratic and a knee-jerk reaction.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 40 (view)
 
This is from Eharmony
Posted: 2/26/2013 8:59:36 PM
I have never brought up the topic of sex in any initial texts. To me that's putting the cart in front of the horse. Now I'll mention that I'm passionate and enjoy sharing my passions with my partner. Now if she brings up the sex topic, I'll provide honest answers without being terribly graphic.

Any sort of hard-and-fast dating rule is ludicrous IMO. I could go on a few dates with a woman I find attractive before getting physically amorous, as long as she isn't being a tease. Or the first date could lead me to want to exercise my libido on the second date (never been a ONSer). When the time is appropriate, then discuss it. If you are discussing sex in the first few correspondences, IMO that shows you to be one-dimensional, not very interesting, sort of unbalanced.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 54 (view)
 
Change your Personality???
Posted: 2/26/2013 8:00:05 PM
I'm basically an introvert and yes, it will be more difficult for an introvert to meet people. But I don't equate introversion with shyness. I'm definitely not shy. I wouldn't recommend "changing" your personality. In the long run that won't work, because the other person will probably think of you as being some sort of phony. An introvert just needs to work on modifying their personality in such a way that they will expose themselves to more opportunities to meet singles. Always be yourself. Personally, I'm more attracted to an introverted woman--sorry but extroverts rub me the wrong way. If an introverted woman wasn't acting like herself, and she is attracted to introverted guys--we wouldn't hook up. So just be yourself--but get out there.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 56 (view)
 
Cheating...forgive?
Posted: 2/19/2013 8:07:03 PM
I'd forgive the guy, but no way in hell do I suggest that the OP reexamine any sort of immediate future relationship with him. Also, I think the OP should definitely explore her options with local guys. I can't see how this angry drunk cheater has got some sort of rare quality that is better than all the singles in her surburban neighborhood. If that's the case, her standards are too restrictive. Yes, we all have standards and preferences, but often one can be pleasantly surprised if they exercise an open mind on occasion with their restrictions.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 45 (view)
 
Break ups
Posted: 9/18/2012 8:53:58 PM
Can't say I have had any very similar experiences.
My advice is:
1. Respect her breakup decision and her space.
2. Work on you anger issues for YOURSELF and not your X.
Only then can you get any sort of relationship closure while you are investing in yourself. Only then can you realistically pursue developing a successful relation with any woman.
Frankly I wouldn't tolerate verbal abuse from my partner no matter how "nice" she was before she turned on me.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 27 (view)
 
Should I take back my boyfriend (he wants to keep in contact with his friend he had sex)
Posted: 9/8/2012 11:09:44 AM

Honestly, I see his reason though. That's a big thing I don't let a woman get away with. My friends are my choice, and NOBODY is going to tell me who I can and can't be friends with. He lied because the condition of his friend getting to visit was that nothing ever happened before between them.

You all jump to this conclusion that he's cheating on her, but MAYBE, and this is a crazy idea, I know, but MAYBE he lied so that he can actually see a friend that he wasn't planning on having sex with.

When you make rules on who people can be friends with, the only outcome is lies from that person.

I'm not suggesting that the OP blacklist this dude's friends. It seems she and this dude voluntarily entered into a committed relationship, then the dude broke the commitment in a backpedalling way. This dude clearly doesn't understand what a monogamous relationship is. You don't maintain sexual FWBs in a monogamous relationship.

It doesn't seem that the OP should expect her relationship to work. His past behavior would seem to indicate a "have your cake and eat it too" attitude.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 57 (view)
 
Is it OK to keep going on POF and window shopping while you have a girlfriend
Posted: 9/6/2012 9:16:23 PM
Does the OP imply a "boyfriend" implies they had "the talk"? Just because you sex someone or date them a few times does not imply commitment. You get commitment when you have "the talk". Otherwise you BOTH are free to date other people.

You got to discuss commitment with your partner or otherwise you don't really know where you stand in the relationship. I can't tell from the OP's posts whether or not they said "let's not date anyone else and see where this goes".
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 38 (view)
 
Can she be cheating?
Posted: 9/6/2012 9:06:29 PM
Does it really matter whether or not she is "cheating"? Spell out acceptable behavior parameters with your live-in. If she doesn't measure up, boot her out regardless of whether or not she is putting out for another dude. Communication is key--but you HAVE to assume 50% of that communication responsibility yourself. This ain't rocket science.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 17 (view)
 
Should I take back my boyfriend (he wants to keep in contact with his friend he had sex)
Posted: 9/6/2012 8:59:16 PM
Bottom line is this guy isn't being straightforward with the OP. Personally I would forgive this once with my partner. 2nd time I'd probably dump her but keep her as an extremely low priority. 3rd strike and she's out. Why bother with a chump like this? So many other fish in the sea.

The dude isn't being honest. If you want commitment, this ain't the dude for you. Keep your integrity and don't give this chump any time of day.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 22 (view)
 
She is still on POF, but dating me! What do I do?
Posted: 8/30/2012 9:36:44 PM
I wouldn't assume a monogamous relationship until you have "the talk" with her. Until then, both you two are free to date whoever you want, whether you meet via PoF or In Real Life.

After three weeks I wouldn't assume that my three-week partner wishes to be monogamous with me. I also wouldn't assume we are monogamous if we have engaged in sexual acts unless we had "the talk" first. Frankly, with every sex partner I've had, we were on the same "monogamy" page before we started to get it on, so I've never been in this sort of conundrum that the OP is in.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 79 (view)
 
Is there anything with wanting to see someone everyday?
Posted: 8/17/2012 11:18:48 PM
There's nothing wrong with wanting to see someone every day if all aspects, emotional intellectual spirtual physical, are concurrently developed. Personally I wouldn't feel like wanting to see someone "everyday" until all four aspects of a relationship are developed, not just one or two. Lots of people have relationship expections that they don't effectively communicate with their partner, then when they are not fulfilled you get a "oh woe is me" moaning.

If you work on your relationship, everything falls naturally into place. If you don't, you don't really have a relationship leg to stand on.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 133 (view)
 
How to cure my bad boy addiction?
Posted: 8/17/2012 11:06:13 PM
No offense, but I wouldn't waste time on a person who dated me a few fimes then started to blow me off. They aren't serious in dating you, or anyone else for that metter. There are LOTS of people on the internet doing casual hookups. This doesn't happen In Real Life, when you meet someone in person first. The chemistry is sorta obvious, and if you don't pick up on the Real Life signals well then that's your fault for not paying attention. This ain't rocket science.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 44 (view)
 
Is there really a right one, or just compatible?
Posted: 8/17/2012 10:57:47 PM
There are so many people men and women cherry picking on the internet who In Real Life are really very marginal people, lucky to hook up with Pot Luck. I wouldn't lose any sleep over this.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 43 (view)
 
Friends of the opposite sex?
Posted: 2/23/2012 8:02:29 PM
A few people have said what I'm going to say now. If the dude's relationship with a chick is that "platonic", why wouldn't he invite the OP along if he had any sort of respect for her??

Or better yet, how about investing time into developing the romantic relationship instead of investing more time in a supposedly "platonic" relationship.

Some people are going to post that "sure I've got lots of platonic relationships--haters are insecure and should lighten up". Ultimately these "platonic" relationships will cause issues if BOTH parties aren't in other really solid romantic relationships. And even that requires LOTS of patience from their romantic partners.

Frankly I don't want to begin to get involved with a female who is going to tell me she's going to choose to hang out with a bunch of other guys all the time instead of showing me she's serious about spending that sort of free time with me. That's just a strong indicator she's not serious about being available for romance.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 142 (view)
 
What's up with this?
Posted: 10/1/2011 11:27:55 PM

One question I do have to ask you, though, is this. Suppose you met and married your dream man tomorrow. Then two years down the road, he divorces you.
Great point. Wait for unmarried man to find you, hook up, engage, marry, then get divorced. What do you do after that? Just hook up with dudes as an eternal sinner? Oy vey. Commit hari-kari??
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 67 (view)
 
Do I need to do it differently?
Posted: 9/28/2011 9:32:11 PM
I think the OP should have been a bit more tactful with his turn-down. Saying "I'll be moving on" comes off presumptuous to me. If I were in this sort of scenario, after spending 2 hours together with conversation, I'd say something like "Say "date's name", thanks for the conversation and fun evening, but I'd prefer not to see you again; sorry to maybe have misled you, nothing personal but good luck on your next meet-up."

Normally I'd know within a minute if I feel the initial attraction necessary in order to want to have a 2nd date. Now let's say after 90 minutes my date reveals some sort of dealbreaker to me--picture what your dealbreakers are--let's say "well I just love to go down to the seaport when the sailors are coming home, if ya know what I mean wink-wink". Then she goes on blabbing for 20 more minutes without giving me a chance to wind the date down politely. Then the date ends. You might not believe it, but I've gone on dates like this--and I'm sure I've put my foot in my mouth and kaibashed myself like this plenty of times.

Better to know than to act initially interested and then display 180-degree indifferential-behavior. Interesting to see most men agree with the OP but many women disagree. This is because women tend to have the "1st date but no interest" advantage because quite often they are not financially responsible for the meetup. The indifferential shrug-off naturally more affects the one who is doing most of the initiating with these meetups.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 17 (view)
 
Bad first encounter....really no first encounter
Posted: 9/28/2011 8:21:35 PM
You're gonna meet lots of flakes and disingenuous folks on free internet dating sites. Best attitude to have is to be pleasantly surprised when a mutually satisfactory meeting actually occurs. Keep fishing!
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 37 (view)
 
Casual Dating, Friends with Benifits or FB?
Posted: 9/28/2011 8:04:58 PM
What the OP described in Msg1 sounded more like casual dating moreso than a Bed Buddy or a Friend With Benefits. You can just call up a Bed Buddy for booty calls. The FWB implies a sort of friendship that you had before hooking up and would like to maintain afterward. The OP was going on actual planned dates with a dude and they seemed to discuss that there was no exclusivity.

The label isn't important; what's important is communicating your expectations and acceptable behavioral parameters. As long as that's being done, everybody's happy!
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 116 (view)
 
I never should have asked her......but I did.
Posted: 9/28/2011 7:51:47 PM
Hate to say but I did a little research on this. I sorta wondered about this a bit because one g/f of mine told me I was too big. Not bragging here but that was confounding because I'm merely average and thought most women wanted huge schwantzes.

A woman's vagina is 3 to 4 inches long, on the average, BEFORE being excited. One link I read said it was even smaller. During excitement and subsequent intercourse, the vagina enlongates, due to a physical reaction of her uterus moving upwards in her abdomen.

It sounds like the OPs woman orgasms at times during penetration when she was being stimulated at or close to her cervix. I'm glad to read later on after Msg1 where the OP stated that his partner achieved an intercourse orgasm when she rode him like a bucking bronco. Now the OP ought to be paying attention to their anatomical connection when she climaxed on top of him, and try to imitate those positions and movements when he's on top of her.

It's always important to communicate well, even with a tough question like the OP posed. Frankly, I'd want to know the same thing if I were with a woman--I damn well want to know if she's climaxing and what's the quality and quantity of her climaxing.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 60 (view)
 
Does this happen to others?
Posted: 9/28/2011 7:26:07 PM
There are lots of disingenuous people floating around on internet dating sites. You know the sort of person, always smiling no matter what they are thinking. I generally know within 5 minutes of a date whether or not I'll want to go another date. The guys doing this to the OP probably wasn't interested for whatever reason immediately after meeting, hung around to see if he could get laid, and when he saw that wasn't happening he does a POoF. Women will do this to guys not for the sex but for the ego-stroking "chivalric" largesse.

Dust yourself off and get back on that PoF horse.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 28 (view)
 
Did I do something wrong?
Posted: 9/28/2011 7:17:26 PM
You're gonna meet so many flakes and/or disingenuous people on here. Treat this as water off a duck's back and water under the bridge (can't think of any other water-related adages). So many over-rated people on here thinking they can cherrypick a match, or just out here for serial dating. Don't worry about it.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 126 (view)
 
Ok! Now he's slept with someone but is asking for forgiveness...?
Posted: 9/28/2011 6:02:08 PM
OP, not sure why you air your relationship dirty laundry on public forums like this and summarily dismiss opinions of people who either personally experienced scenarios like yours or know people who have.

Your dude, no matter how swell you think he is, is now not emotionally available for a monogamous relationship. That being said, I don't know this guy at all, don't know what sort of life experiences make him simultaneously a "swell" guy and a cheating philanderer.

Can he change? Can he be a non-cheating monogamous partner to the OP? Maybe. The thing is, you can meet the right person for you in the right place, but if the timing isn't right, it ain't gonna work. Gotta be in the right place at the right time in order to meet Mr. Right. Obviously no one is perfect, but they can be perfect for you. If you seek monogamy and your partner cannot reciprocate, obviously that partner is not perfect for you.

Best thing the OP is going to have with this dude is a FWB. Long term ain't gonna work.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 25 (view)
 
I need advice badly!!! BTW this is a long post fyi.
Posted: 9/28/2011 5:33:55 PM
I'd forget about the 2nd guy, he's a massive tool.

Tell the 1st guy you'd consider VERY low key dating with him AFTER he breaks up with his g/f. It's low key because you need to correctly ascertain if he is truly emotionally divorced from the other woman, otherwise you're just a rebound chick for him. Even then, you have a problematic scenario with him because he's proven to you to be an uncommunicative wishy-washy philanderer.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 108 (view)
 
Shouldn't there be a 3 month rule before sex?
Posted: 9/27/2011 9:33:22 PM
A FWB fails when both partners are not on the same page. So basically, one partner (seems to be more female than males here) feels more emotional commitment but doesn't communicate those feelings. If they were really FWBs, after that communication the benefits would then end and the friendship continues, or the FWB evolves into something else.

Basically bad communication is the root of most relationship problems. The FWB isn't inherently doomed to cause issues if the participants would just keep communicating about whatever emotions they are feeling and thusly stay on the same FWB page. Wanting a "real" relationship isn't what dooms the FWB for the female, it's the evolutional wanting of that with the FWB partner without discussing that evolution. I'm sure some dudes fall into that same sort of trap, just maybe not as high a percentage.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 75 (view)
 
When do I tell a man that I'm bisexual?
Posted: 9/27/2011 7:25:49 PM
This is similar to another thread where a dude wanted to do a total 180 after 10 years of being a homosexual. Except that there is 4 years since the exclusive homosexual behavior.

Frankly, if I were the OP, I'd just list on her profile that she's a bisexual now seeking heterosexual relationships only via friendship first. That sort of spells things out clearly without being deceptive.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 50 (view)
 
Should I leave the fact that I'm half-gay off my profile?
Posted: 9/27/2011 7:18:57 PM
Can't see how a man who has exclusively dated men for the last 10 years can not consider himself to be close to 100% gay. It's certainly not half-gay, that's for sure. You never know, but frankly I can't see how any woman is going to want date a man who has been exclusively been with men for the last decade. You never know.

I say make your last ten year sexual history quite clear on your profile if you truly and ingenuously plan to make a 180 on that history today. It's not fair to whoever contacts you and discovers that after the fact. I'd say the same thing to a tranny. No way in hell I want to date a tranny, and he/she had better make clear on their profile. When you deceive, there are no winners.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 50 (view)
 
Small Balls:/
Posted: 9/27/2011 7:07:32 PM
Frankly I don't have a good "feel" (pun intended) regarding what is a below average size for a dude's nuts since I ain't doing much nut grabbing (other than my own). Statistically you need to have a sample size of at least 20 to really know.

Now on the serious side: Lots of people say if a dude is on the roids, his nuts will shrink. So if the dude is muscular and has pea-sized nuts, I'd just assume he's on roids. Otherwise, it could be a serious problem regarding the dude's testosterone level. It's something the small-nut non-roid dude should be checking out medically.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 104 (view)
 
Shouldn't there be a 3 month rule before sex?
Posted: 9/27/2011 6:59:16 PM
It makes no sense to put a time limit on holding back exploring sexual physical intimacy for any sort of specified time period. Imagine the backlash if thread subject here is "Shouldn't there be a 3 month rule before fully exploring emotional, spiritual, and intellectual intimacy????"

It makes no sense to me if my new dating partner expected to share herself emotionally, spiritually, and intellectually meanwhile it was ok to not check out the physical side. If I were dating a woman like this, I'd be either dumping her when her expectations were clearly displayed to be out of kilter, or I'd be keeping her around as an unexclusive 2nd option while I look for a better 1st option.

Oh by the way, please don't put me in the "pump and dump" bucket. I'm all for two people exploring ANY or ALL relationship intimacy issues as they see fit. Personally I like to develop all sides of intimacy concurrently; but I certainly don't begrudge anyone who likes to experience 1st date hookups/1-nighters, nor do I begrudge individuals who either lack the inner confidence and security to experience physical intimacy at an appropriate and/or spontaneous time.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 57 (view)
 
While giving head..
Posted: 9/26/2011 8:01:21 PM
I'm surprised to read women here stating that they just wanted to "have at it" without the dude doing anything for her. I'd think the best thing to do is for the couple to discuss what best turns them on when it comes to BJs. Maybe some women do not want her dude to be eye-balling her--personally I enjoy watching my lady "have at it"--makes the experience a helluva lot more erotic. One of my partners insisted on "having at it" from the side and wanted me to watch and finger her simultaneously. She claimed she was blowing multiple Os in a matter of a minute--so who was I to argue her request?
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 129 (view)
 
Another irrational dating preference
Posted: 9/17/2011 8:13:33 AM
Dating preferences are one thing--illogical rationalizations are something completely different. Especially where religion is concerned. There are 100s of different religions--which one is more correct? You've got some Muslims believing a woman is permanently defiled and damaged goods if she is not a virgin before marriage. Yet the man can go out and defile as many virgins at will without repercussions.

You see lots of posts in these forums where people espouse all sorts of irrational opinions and partnership preferences. This won't be the last one.
Men who won't date single mothers.
Women who won't date guys who don't tower over them.
Women who won't date bald guys.
Men who won't date women who weigh too much.
Men who think it's great for them to boink any woman but the woman is a slut if she thinks the same way.
Women demanding chivalric largesse as an relationship entitlement.
Once a cheater always a cheater.
Etcetera
Etcetera
Etcetera
. . .
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 57 (view)
 
Guys who open the door and walk through, holding it for me as an afterthought
Posted: 9/15/2011 5:31:33 PM
This is a ridiculous question. Normally doors open out because that enables evacuation during fires. So if I'm inside a restaurant with my date and we're leaving, the door is going to open away from the entrance. I'll try to be in front of her as we're leaving to walk through the door first and then hold it open. I'm DEFINITELY NOT walking through the door and holding it open as an afterthought. You have to walk through the door first in order to hold it open for anybody if the door opens out. I guess you could nudge the door open with your arm, but that's awkward.

Now if you're entering the restaurant, the door opens out--so if I'm walking through the open door first, that's rude. I NEVER do this if I'm entering an establishment, whether it's with a date or a guy friend. Not to do this, to me, indicates a sort of self-absorption. I'd try to get in front of my date as to open the door for her. If there's a 2nd door, she'll be through the 1st door 1st so I'll try to quickly catch up to open the 2nd door for her--sometimes if she's "with-it" she'll open the 2nd door for me--great. If I'm entering a place with a dude, I just assume whoever gets to the door first will open it, and then whoever gets to the 2nd door opens it. This ain't rocket science folks.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 46 (view)
 
exclusivity and commitment
Posted: 9/15/2011 5:21:29 PM
You have exclusivity after you had "the talk". You typically have commitment after exclusivity has been mutually satisfactorily established for an extended period, or if one person proposes marriage and the other accepts. Normally exclusivity preceeds commitment, but it doesn't necessarily lead to commitment.

In the OP's scenario, she's had an exclusive relationship for an extended period of time and seemingly wants the relationship to advance further, but her partner is not willing to go there. Why be exclusive and not committed? Some people have independent mindsets and don't want to be encumbered by cohabitation or risk personal financial loss due to lawyer's interference in a potential dissolution of a marriage. It's great to be exclusively sexually active with a STD-clean partner.

I suggest to the OP to directly confront her partner with the "why be exclusive with no commitment" question. If she receives a dissatisfactory response, end the relationship or let it morph into a FWB while looking for a more suitably-acceptable commitment-like partner.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 107 (view)
 
What's up a divorced person not understanding PoF's pedantic demographic declarations?
Posted: 9/15/2011 5:06:33 PM
Personally I don't think Divorced is Single. But that's my opinion and I don't begrudge a divorced person declaring themselves single. And I do think it's slightly deceptive to list your status as single if you've been married, even if was years ago.

The OP has a preference to date never married men. Fine--I've got preferences too--we all do. If you have a preference for "Single Never Married", fine that's your business that you ought to spell out in your profile. Like a guy not looking for "Single Mothers", "A Few Pound Overweight", "Divorced", "Fiercly Independent", "Madonna-Whorish", whatever. Like a woman seeking "Traditional Chivalric", "No Baldies", "No Shorties", "Tall Dark and Handsome", whatever.

PoF doesn't really have correct demographic explanations. I have no qualms about a 15+ year divorced person declaring themselves as "Single". Like a overweight person not finding the correct demographic category accurately describing their physical condition.

Personally I wouldn't make a knee-jerk reaction to a PoF demographic declaration. To do so is to rationalize your limited life experiences into some sort of clear-cut relationship decision process, which no normal person would do, no matter what your religious viewpoint is. If you really feel like Christian marriage is the "be-all end-all" decision-making process in your potential partner picker, join a Christian website with better credentials than PoF, or a website that has better demographic fields from which you can cherrypick to your heart's content.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 74 (view)
 
Men and their intentions...
Posted: 9/15/2011 4:51:28 PM
I want to apologize to fellow PoFfersfor my Msg 58 rant. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th paragraphs are supposed to be for a different forum post about a woman who didn't mind dating men who had children out of wedlock but she steers clear of divorced men like they are the plague. Guess that happens when you type your responses late night into Word pad and then paste them into multiple forum tabs.

Carry on . . .
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 55 (view)
 
Afraid to commit or just a player ?
Posted: 9/14/2011 10:08:52 PM
Sounds like the OP sexed this woman and expected commitment without having had "The Talk". Bad idea IMO. Frankly, I wouldn't expect "The Talk" commitment without having "The Talk" beforehand, no matter how good the sex is or what I anticipate the sex to be like beforehand.

Frankly, a physically and otherwise compelling-attractive person with an active PoF profile has no reason to delete their profile or otherwise declare on their profile that they are not available to other potential suitors after several dates and uncommitted physical intimacy. I've been in internet-dating scenarios where I've wanted to get "physically intimate" without discussing the issue, and I've NEVER explore the physical intimacy without having a 99%+ idea about her level of commitment.

You can't judge someone who is on PoF 2-3 times a day without you being on 2-3 times a day yourself. Therefore, someone who lives in a glass house should NOT be throwing stones at someone, ESPECIALLY if they cannot communicate effectively outside of PoF what they expect out of their partner's commitment inside of PoF.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 39 (view)
 
I don't get it...
Posted: 9/14/2011 10:00:07 PM
The best way to end an undesirable relationship is to act indifferent. It makes no sense to "block" someone who you meet via PoF, then unblock them and expect them to act indifferent to you. I suggest not to summarily block someone who doesn't ASS-U-ME what you are thinking after you sex them and then wonder why they cannot read your mind regarding your romantic interests in them. Better thing to do is not to get intimately involved in someone if you haven't figured out what your interest is in them or what their interest is in you. Personally I wouldn't be physically involved with someone if I didn't have a good sense of where her head was at regarding her commitment with our relationship--obviously I'd be having "The Talk" with her if I had any sort of doubt regarding where her head was at--& I'd be expecting her to question me if she any sort of doubts. That is what responsible consenting adults do, IMO.

So no, I've never experienced this, sounds like one of those senseless "Facebook-like declaration" questions. The dude is irrational in expecting a rational response after he made an immature knee-jerk non-personal breakup (I've NEVER made a non-in-person breakup, and yes I'm a pre-Facebook adult, but what the hell I believe in FTF breakups). How do you get it to stop? Treat the idiot with indifference. Or get legally restricting restraining orders if they prove to you they have no common sense.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 65 (view)
 
Should she return the engagement ring to her husband?
Posted: 9/14/2011 9:58:56 PM
I believe in the "Judge Judy" explanation regarding engagement proposals. Meaning that an engagement ring is a "conditional gift" in most 50 states, including other most other rationally-thinking modern locales in the civilized western world. After the wedding, IMO the engagement ring is clearly in the possession of whoever received it, man or woman. So no matter how short the marriage, the engagement rings are not any part of a combined marital asset.

If I were the woman in a short marriage, I wouldn't want the engagement ring as any sort of keep-sake--I'd cash it in as a way to pay for the legal expense of dissolving the marriage. Especially if you ASS-UM-E that after the bridesmaid accepts the conditional gift, her family is supposed to front the expense of the marriage reception. Now if that doesn't occur, she has no leg to stand on, and she ought to consider the engagement ring as some sort of mutual wedded asset.

Next question.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 97 (view)
 
What's up a divorced person not understanding PoF's pedantic demographic declarations?
Posted: 9/14/2011 9:53:29 PM
I'm not religious. Don't understand the "Adultery vs. multiple marriage" issue. To me that's a moot point. Adultery vs. illegitimate fatherhood seems like a wash to a rationally thinking human who isn't looking to rationalize a religious issue to a murky conclusion which could be debated ad infinitum to the infinite versions of religions of sects that exists, none of which IMO is any compelling to believe 100% without a doubt.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 50 (view)
 
Men and their intentions...
Posted: 9/14/2011 9:47:39 PM
You don't let a man touch your thigh without a response. If you allow that, you're permitting the relationship to advance to the next level. Because it's sort of obvious where the relationship is going if you don't. Who doesn't like their neverregions massaged? The OP should of defined the platonic nature of the relationship after that. Otherwise, you've opened up a can of worms. I don't care if the woman is 15+ years younger. The natural primal urges are thre if you are heterosexual. I don't care about the age difference--that's irrelevant to mutually consenting adults.

If you have a preference for "Single Never Married", that's your business that you ought to spell out in your profile. Like a guy not looking for "Single Mothers", "A Few Pound Overweight", "Divorced", "Fiercly Independent", "Madonna-Whorish", whatever. Like a woman seeking "Traditional Chivalric", "No Baldies", "No Shorties", "Tall Dark and Handsome", whatever.

PoF doesn't really have correct demographic explanations. I have no qualms about a 15+ year divorced person declaring themselves as "Single". Like a overweight person not finding the correct demographic category describing their physical condition.

Personally I wouldn't make a knee-jerk reaction to a PoF demographic declaration. To do so is to rationalize your limited life experiences into some sort of clear-cut relationship decision process, which no normal person would do, no matter what your religious viewpoint is. If you really feel like Christian marriage is the "be-all end-all" decision-making process in your potential partner picker, join a Christian website with better credential than PoF.

The age difference IMO is a moot point. Lots of people get involved in happy mutually satisfactory relationships. If you failed in forming a relationship like this, that's your problem, not the OP's.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 29 (view)
 
insecure
Posted: 9/11/2011 1:33:50 PM
True, if you have nothing to hide, why hide it? The flip side is the insecure one has trust issues. Frankly, if it were me, I'd just ask why did she have a trust issue with me; I'm not her last relationship mistake, and it looks like she's now my relationship mistake for having to ask for unnecessary access to my privacy. And it's a red flag as far as I'm concerned, for more often than not the person that really needs to be watched is the person asking for carte blanche access to one's privacy.

People addressing the OP having a profile on a dating site are making an irrelevant moot point. This site, albeit a site whose primary function is for single people to meet to date, is not a purely dating website. What next, make him defriend all the women on his Facebook?? The forums are interesting enough to have a non-dating profile set up. Counting the OP's forum posts is irrelevant--you have no idea what sort of level of commitment or history he has got in his current relationship, regardless of how long he has been cohabiting. But it's sort of normal for folks on here to lambast an OP who asks relationship questions like this on a dating website--it's par for the course for people who seem to be continually floating in and out of relationships.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 65 (view)
 
Showing Interest
Posted: 9/8/2011 8:34:59 PM

I've never walked away "wondering" if they are into me or not. I know. And I don't get why others don't.
I sort of agree on the "never wondering" part. But after going on a few apparently good first dates, with lots of seemingly good "connections", so to speak, and then have the lady do a total 180 and either do a disappearing act or become colder than a block of ice to me, THAT'S got me "wondering" if I need to be "wondering" more if they are really into me when they are acting like that. It's a no-brainer if you make a come-on and the other person acts indifferent to it.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 17 (view)
 
Dating- how often?
Posted: 9/1/2011 7:50:57 PM
If you want to date "players", play the disingenuous unavailability game. Otherwise, be yourself and let the chips fall where they may. Personally, I'm not going to have interest in dating an "unavailable" woman. I'll look for an available woman. Three times a week is not too much if you live in the vicinity of your partner.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 43 (view)
 
Showing Interest
Posted: 9/1/2011 7:33:39 PM
Forget about two dates, in two minutes I'll know if I want to see the woman again. The OP's problem is she didn't express herself adequately on the second date. I don't care if she didn't want to get smoochie-woochie with these guys--although that's a great way to show interest--the guys could not get a read on her interest. Or maybe they are the type to want to get real intimate on the 1st or 2nd date or they'll move on. If they are like that, they obviously aren't the right sort of guy for the OP, so if I were her, wouldn't worry about those guys.

Her scenario is resolved if she just expresses herself more on the 2nd date. She could go for a good night hug. If that is a catalyst for the guy to make an advance, politely decline and then state you are not against doing that but that you want to wait a little more and that you want to go out again soon. Although I must admit, I've never had a meaningful relationship with a woman that I didn't passionately kiss by the 2nd date--not saying that it's not impossible, but . . .
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 40 (view)
 
is it cheating
Posted: 8/27/2011 7:28:07 PM

And yes...I was online as well. Right here reading these forums with a hidden profile.
Oh, so it's ok to cheat on your partner if you met on a dating website as long as you have a phony extra profile? Pot? Meet Kettle. It's black.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 17 (view)
 
Not looking for a committment confusion
Posted: 8/27/2011 6:18:15 AM
Call me an old fart, but I don't put much credence into Face book. I couldn't intelligently comment on the proper Face book protocol when dating. Especially after only one date--do people really invest that much time in revising and revisiting their Face book page? I dunno. I recommend to the OP to just have fun with this girl if given the opportunity, and pay attention to the vibe she exhibits during the date. That's a WAY better indicator of her intent with you--not some BS personal status she currently has on her Face book page.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 31 (view)
 
is it cheating
Posted: 8/27/2011 6:13:41 AM
If you are in a "committed" relationship and continue to surf the internet for new dating opportunities, of course you are cheating. I don't see that a couple can't commit after only month of dating--seems reasonable if everything is firing on all cylinders and both people are on the same page. That's not the issue--just don't have "the talk" with someone if you can't walk the walk.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 28 (view)
 
Going to fast??
Posted: 8/15/2011 7:24:59 PM
Wow one month on here after 30 years out of the scene, and three women right out of the gate. Good for the OP.

I sort of agree with folks who say six hours on a first date ending with hot smooches MAYBE is a bit too much. I've had dates like this, really great first dates, and then wondered why the lady is taken back by the activity when it certainly appeared she seemed to be a willing exuberant participant during the date.

I'm going to guess that the OP picked three women on here to meet that have LOTS of options. Options they want to explore, and they can't do that if they feel like the dude is moving in on her too fast. So they do a 180 and put distance between you. The OP is sort of lucky that two of these three women are still maintaining casual contact. That sort of indicates that they indeed do have other options they are checking out and they just want the OP to chill a bit.

I do think if two really compatible people meet, a six-hour first date with smoochy woochie is a great way to start off the relationship. Even if you meet the right person, the timing has to be right--if the timing is off things just never get started right.
 bikeman1467
Joined: 9/22/2009
Msg: 56 (view)
 
staying in touch with exes...
Posted: 8/15/2011 6:45:17 PM
The thing here is if you are in a monogamous relationship, you obviously ought to be investing your time with your partner moreso than with any of your Xs. Now the relationship ought not to be stagnant, you can't spend every waking moment with your partner, so you do have to show trust as it relates your partner's friends whether they have previously dated them or not.

Frankly I'd be wondering where my partner's head is at if she were not only semi-frequently contacting her Xs, but afterwards concealing that sort of information from me. Of course there will be people stating that you're insecure if you don't trust their dealings with their Xs. I say I'm not insecure but pragmatic, because I feel you gotta invest in your relationship if you want it to work, and you ain't doing that if you are contacting and spending time with your Xs, maybe not even telling your partner that you are doing so. Recipe for relationship disaster.
 
Show ALL Forums