Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 Author Thread: Squirting
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 838 (view)
Posted: 12/11/2018 2:27:53 AM

Skene's glands are very tiny, which you posted. Any fluid coming from them would be negligible, hardly noticeable.
They are also not under pressure, and fluid would leak slowly, not squirt as if under pressure.

You are correct. Oddly enough, even as the poster above pointed out, it's what they suggested. For so long, they never Really dug deep into it. But yes, it's pretty much urea. That's what gives it the volume -- otherwise, you wouldn't see much of anything "shoot".

They had women who claimed to squirt -- and brought them in. But before demonstrating, had them empty their bladders. They couldn't squirt (out of ammo).

That said, of women who squirt, even though it's not an orgasm itself -- from my experience, it was part of the "release".
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 21 (view)
only accepts messages from upgraded users
Posted: 11/18/2018 12:11:14 PM

upgraded has a few perks that I miss having but not really sure why you would block someone that didn't have it. is that to insure you only get serial daters? or maybe the guy who couldn't get a date in years?

It's to get people of "higher value" -- those taking it more seriously that they'll pay the site. It's a way to use a free site, but only correspond with those who are on the level of a paying site. One has to admit that on a pay site (Match), the prospects pound-for-pound are better for those who do pay to use it. On a free site & paying, those are likely better ones, too. Problem is, you're throwing some babies out with that bathwater, because many aren't going to pay on POF because you don't have to and it isn't worth it, as far as functionality goes -- so there's a lot who Would pay if it was a pay site, who wisely aren't.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 135 (view)
How men mathematically sleep with more people than women
Posted: 11/18/2018 11:49:58 AM

No, he mathematically explained how it is possible. You're just literally ignoring the mathematical explanation.

No, you don't understand what you're saying. He admits he doesn't Know because polling people is INCORRECT. I understand what mode means -- it's the most Common #. Do YOU understand that? Again, it's not his specialty -- you're just picking someone's Opinion as Fact, where he even doesn't Know, but he theorizes. You can't feed off incorrect data as fact. Those polls have men sleeping with 2x as many women as women to men -- which He and I know is False Data, but you don't!

Just because the most Common # for men in hand-holding is higher than women's does Not mean men held more female hands than females held mens'.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 133 (view)
How men mathematically sleep with more people than women
Posted: 11/18/2018 11:37:52 AM

How many times do I have to say the exact same thing.
The MODE of mens average partners is higher than women's.

No, it's not. The author of that article, which is Not his specialty btw, theorizes it's higher. He admits he doesn't know for sure. He admits the average is the same!

So when you say 'men mathematically sleep with more women than women sleep with men': You can't say that when the Average is The SAME!

Let's talk male-female hand-holding to clear emotional bias. Have men held more female hands than females have held mens' hands? No, not if there's roughly the same # of men as there are women. If a guy holds a gal's hand, she's holding his. You can make the argument that men initiate sex, hand-holding, dances, etc. more than women do to men, sure.

Instead, you should say: Men mathematically sleep with the Same amount of women as women do men BUT I *believe* the most Common result for men is higher than women's most Common result.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 179 (view)
How many partners is too much?
Posted: 11/15/2018 12:14:59 PM

Norwegie, I get what you are saying but you seem to be forgetting why so many women have kids before they are ready for them: the ever-ticking biological clock.

OMG, Wake Up July. You're saying that as if that should happen. No, it shouldn't -- and it doesn't for many. First, the "biological clock" ticking tends to be in the 30s, not 20-21 when starting a life of their own. Second, a guy also has a "biological c0ck" -- is that a reason to put the cart before the horse (c0ck)? No!

You don't adjust society and give the green-light to make babies when you're in no position to. Same as Johnny getting into debt because he wants to move out of mom's basement and have his own nice pad. You don't think there's a psychological effect there either? Holy hell.

Your position is basically "but when women have kids, they can't do [this-and-that]." Yeah! Don't get knocked up. Saying there's a psychological desire to isn't an excuse by any means -- otherwise tons of other things would be an excuse for the rest of society to conform to.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 193 (view)
Do you care what a person does for work?
Posted: 11/15/2018 11:52:23 AM

If we're talking Canadian versus US dollars, the gap widens. It takes about $1.32 Canadian to equal $1 US or $1 Canadian equals $.76 US.

Yeah, but we're not talking about a someone living in America, crossing the border for work, tho.

The so called "affordable healthcare act" made healthcare even more unaffordable.

For some. For some, they're allowed it which they could never get, or it went down (on the poorer side). But yeah, overall it definitely has its serious complaints outside of that. In a nutshell -- allowing everyone to have healthcare and to also put a price limit on people who are going to get healthcare all the time, passes the buck onto everyone else. But merely going to back to what it used to be with a few tweaks won't resolve everything, and isn't a realistic option. They need a total revamp.

In Montreal daycare is super cheap cause its subsidized.

I always found that to be a good idea. Like school (an 8-3 "daycare") -- having one from babies->Kindergarten, which would obviously be smaller than schools... and having a sort of certification by the state to allow private citizens run their own (not just trailer-park-Sally doing allowed to do it), where if you're below middle-class the fee would be minimal, and if you're middle-class+ the fee not high. This would allow single-moms (and dads) breathing room to still go to college and more work leeway, and pay itself back into the economy due to less on welfare assistance and better jobs obtained, school, etc.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 297 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/15/2018 11:23:34 AM

That's not what I mean. Broken people choose to give their attention, etc. to folks who are going to aide in their own self-destruction...i.e. the WRONG types

But he wasn't the wrong type, I think that's the point. His Situation was the wrong type to be caught up in a relationship, but so Is Hers. We do need to put things in perspective: Some people aren't in position to go relationship-chasing. That's more self-destructive to chase Relationships when, cum to find out by the other person, they're not set for one -- then said person gets more frazzled and hurt, because they Don't Realize they're not set for it. She wasn't following that very self-destructive path. However, this guy was "too good" to her feelings given a FWB would last too long.

They're choosing nonviable partners, which will erode at one's self-esteem.

Problem is -- most are going to be non-viable given HER situation (it's always Them, not Me, right? lol). It's a very slim/narrow market, and you're going to experience a lot of drop-offs in the standard dating-market given her situation. At least she put things in perspective. I think after-the-fact, we can say "Yeah, you shouldn't get caught up in FWBs, as those aren't as bad, but they can end up lasting and are no picnic." ANY situation she could get herself caught up in could be interpreted as "destructive" and destined to "not work out", given her situation. At least FWB was a better move.

If she sets the boundaries to FB, then she won't be hurt (ha!) when he leaves -- because he will leave because she isn't 'good enough'.

She did with the FWB (big difference on FB vs FWB). She kept the FWB over the phone, and didn't want to "go out" with him. Erroneously she thinks FWBs don't -- they certainly do, at least with fellow friends. But keeping things at bay and not going out on the town at all together kept things on the DL somewhat. However, always talking on the phone, and when spending time together him being really nice and ideal -- for too long a time, is going to get to one's emotions.

All in all, someone in July's current temporary living/work situation shouldn't be chasing Relationships. That'll get you more hurt. But since she's emotionally sensitive, going the wise move of FWB isn't such a hot idea if said relationship between them lasts considerably long. Now a strict FB (you don't chat on the phone all the time; they're an entry in a black book you each call upon once in a while) -- that may be an outlet. But I give July kudos for at least being reasonable and going the more realistic FWB route.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 115 (view)
How men mathematically sleep with more people than women
Posted: 11/14/2018 3:05:33 PM

Men often EXAGGERATE how many partners they have slept with..upward.

Ya know, I think that's not something one should assume for all guys in all situations. Depends who's asking, his age, and his history. College boy, or guy who had his fair share of slippery tail over the years, is married, and gets surveyed over the phone (even with nobody around)? Don't see the latter really exaggerating higher. I could easily see it going lower. But yeah, overall, I would see a bit of a higher # -- and among guys who knowingly have a Yuge high #, they might escalate it to try and win high score.

Women often underestimate the number of partners they have slept with to look GOOD and pure.

That I more clearly see. "The ones I don't remember but could drum them up in my mind? Nah, not going to try and count those. I'm going to think of the ones that come to mind right now if it sounds like a good #. As long as it isn't too high."

I would only believe studies about such a topic when they are being observed doing the horizontal mamba!

Well, there's actually Objective Proof the surveys are Off. They're All with men higher than women, usually much higher. When analzying collections of them, they tend to come out 2-to-1 -- men averaging 2x more than women, which we know is mathematically impossible in an environment with roughly the Same # of men & women. We're not even talking some surveys coming off with women a little higher than men, but just more surveys with men higher than women. Instead, it's totally skewed which is laughable to take as accurate data.

But it's our social environment we are in that Allows that not to be questioned. Quite sad.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 113 (view)
How men mathematically sleep with more people than women
Posted: 11/14/2018 12:02:42 PM

Those numbers do not relate to the reality of the West Coast of the USA., at least not in my experience. Something is false in the reporting data.

They can't relate to any part of anywhere as far as hetero-sex is concerned -- unless there's less men than women. It all averages out to be the same, and you have to go by average when you're generalizing how many many a whole gender sleeps with of the opp-gender.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 290 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/14/2018 11:49:40 AM

^ he doesn't need to be carbon copy of her ex to be not right for her.

They're not at all the "same types of people", not by a long-shot is my point. Not being right for you doesn't At All make them "the same type of people". Her ex wanted commitment, he was an a-hole thru and thru (of course him reading she not really being into him as she admits from the get go is going to help spurn the wrong-side-of-the-bed in everyone at least). This FWB guy agreed to no commitment with her and was a good guy to her -- and he Shouldn't commit to a gal with his baby-mamma-drama going on and possibly having to move (and is moving).

When people go for the "same types of people" -- it's at least Roughly the same type of person. Not "not right for me". Additionally, she was purposely Not going for commitment understandably, as she's not ready to date toward Relationship Alley with most guys. If one is going for FWB, that guy was a fine pick. Her ex would have not been. Problem is, FWB lasting for a while has it's emotional consequences to her if he Is a nice guy.

if therapy is an option, she should go for THAT instead of trying to meet new men.

Yeah, I think that should be an option -- for her dealing with her situation that she's frustrated with, living with mom, having to juggle the kids, custody issues while getting back on her feet -- all while not being in position to not expect to find a BF... and also dealing with the emotions of dealing with guys when in this type of situation... having affection/attention but then wanting more. Emotionally damned she does, damned if she doesn't interact in the 'dating' scene at this point, and how to deal with it.

What I'm doing right now is an intended time-filler, something to fill a specific void in my life. I connected with someone with as many problems in their life as me, thinking we were both not in a place to be in relationships, thinking he'd be perfect for fwb but of course I got really attached because I'm a person that does want to emotionally connect to someone yet he has some genuine qualities that attract me. Before I met him I hadn't expected to be so taken by him.

Yeah, damned if you do, damned if you don't. Fine for a little while, but after a while, when you have an underlying hunger for more -- especially with a real POS Ex as your main experience with guys -- it'll draw ya in, and you get those complications.

my summary would be that I feel lonely in a certain way that I can't solve on my own. I felt really lonely in my longterm relationship for years. There was zero love and romance and at heart I am a very romantic imaginative person but mixed with cynicism due to my childhood with my parents.

Well that LTR -- as you said, you weren't into him from the get-go. So even if he was generally an OK personality guy, you wouldn't have love & romance anyway. And more realistically, even an OK guy is going to be an a-hole to some degree to the other person, if that other person rolls to date->LTR when not liking them.

Your situation isn't one to find love & romance. Especially out of "big city/population" life, it'd be the exception one shouldn't hold their breath for, not the expectation. So when you get a Taste of a non-POS guy after being with one for so long (no love or romance would be had anyway even if he wasn't a real POS) -- yeah, it's frustrating. So would seeing a single female friend who was in a similar boat, semi-recently getting on her feet, finding a cool guy and getting love & romance. Dammit! I want that, like, yesterday! :)

The guy I have been seeing treats me with respect, shows caring for my feelings, listens to me, puts effort into my pleasure during sex and is a really good dad to his daughters. He is everything my ex wasn't. Unfortunately though, I realize that he doesn't have romantic feelings for me so this thing from him to me is very one-sided plus there's no future in it.

Don't take it as a knock on yourself as person. He shouldn't have romantic feelings given his crazy baby-drama & moving, when you Understandably opted to go the FWB route. Going the FWB route was the best approach if you were to see each other at all, given both your situations.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 184 (view)
Do you care what a person does for work?
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:37:42 AM

No high school diploma and felons....
The starting wage is $14.50 an hour....which is double the minimum wage here...and getting all the overtime they want.

If anyone can get a job starting at $29k/yr + all the OT they want -- sounds like a lot of people don't last that long in the job, otherwise it'd be filled up? Or is it one of those "sweet spot" temporary time periods where it's growing faster than people willing to move in, even with people sticking to the job quite well?

As for $14.50 being peanuts... if you live in a small town in Indiana with rent being cheap, and you end up getting start off making $32k/yr with the occasional OT, and the gal he lives with is making $22k/yr (~11/hr) -- that's $54k a year combined. Far more "peanut" situations.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 174 (view)
How many partners is too much?
Posted: 11/14/2018 1:23:09 AM

I agree that women should get a job that supports themself. However, once kids are born many women have to either quit or change jobs due to difficulties arranging childcare plus it is better for kids to see at least one of their parents more.

Oh for heavens sake -- we're talking about what you prepare for. Don't put the cart before the horse, for crying out loud. :) Just as you aim to suit yourself up for a job that pays independently, you also don't suit yourself up to have kids if/when that gets in the way. You mine as well be saying "Once I get a condo I like, it becomes difficult to travel to my job because it's not near there, and I have to pay more for it." Don't do that until you have your ducks in a row where getting That condo fits. You aim to make babies when/where it'll work out. Until then, ya don't.

So a man is expected to have an income high enough to support the family

There is no "the" yet. He should not have a family until he + she have a combined income, and will have a combined income to support one. Until then, ya don't have kids. Comparative Example: He shouldn't move out of his parent's basement until he has a high enough income to reasonably afford his own place + every day expenses. This is Life 101.

Also, women tend to go into job fields that pay less in general. For example, I am well aware that an engineering degree would be much more beneficial for procuring a better-paying job but I had zero interest in it.

Yeah, you don't go into a job that can't support yourself. Many women go into job fields where they can. You shouldn't think about having kids until you're Solidified in a proper financial situation for the long haul. One should not be set to go by "Jerry Springer Rules" -- where you figure things out after popping out kids with Leroy or Skeeter who have a tough time keeping down a job.

But I agree many gals will go for careers that are lesser paying than men on average. That's a different subject. Point is, if you're not financially grounded for the long haul to have kids, don't have kids. If you're not financially grounded to move out of your parents', don't move out of your parents'. If you're not financially grounded to move to that nice condo community + getting that pretty sweet car -- don't do it.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 170 (view)
How many partners is too much?
Posted: 11/13/2018 2:17:42 PM

My mother's feminist dogma was "always earn enough money to support self and offspring alone"

That doesn't sound like dogma, but good advice. Go for a career where you can support yourself, and offspring alone if need be. That's actually less than telling a guy to earn enough money to support himself, offspring, And another lady all by himself. A gal should be raised to support herself just as much as a guy. They shouldn't be raised to find a guy to support you and kids you want to make. One-sided dependence may end up happening of course IRL, but shouldn't be a goal.

If a man refuses to answer or seems to be lying about the numbers then he may be hiding other things, too. (Just a thought)

I disagree. Men And women lie about their #s. Because of erroneous judgement calls based on a mere "#".

How can someone love you if they don't even know who you are?

The real faux-pa would be assuming one's #s have any foothold of their life, which is sort of high-schoolish. Instead, it'd just be whether they fall into a couple categories -- are they a virgin, haven't slept with anyone in Ages, or have an on-going high # that'd make a frat-boy proud. Judging on an actual # is so socially flawed, the person who wants to know some # has the real problems (once we get older, it's many times a range not an exact #). Instead, beyond one falling in those 3 categories, is just about their relationship & dating life in general. That will actually say something about one's Life. The other is just a socially-conditioned distraction.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 282 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/13/2018 1:09:28 PM

it could be the lady is young, wants the thrill of getting laid, but doesn't want other women to label her a "ho" and so she gives the usual malarky about seeking a relationship.

That's not her situation. Her concern is attachment -- getting a taste of what a relationship's like, and when the FWB lasts some time, she feels aching for a Relationship and gets frustrated that she realistically can't (but dreams of "can I tho?") with said person... nor with others so easily when she lives with her mom & has her own baby-mamma-drama that'll push away almost all decent dating prospects.

If you already have little to no self-esteem, you will continually choose the same types of people over and over, who’ll aide you in your self-destruction.

Yeah, but this FWB she's had wasn't at all like her ex. And she has been in a unique boat with her ex many years ago not liking him from the get-go, but her hunger to "have someone" locked her in and continued with it. Some people are unfortunately conditioned that way growing up that "being with someone" in and of itself is a positive. Slap low self esteem on it, and bad relationships -- even knowingly -- occur. This FWB situation wasn't that at all. But she gets a taste of something she really likes and it's hard for her to hit the market again looking for another FWB as she doesn't want just-a-taste (and knows beyond FWB isn't so realistic; not enough to emotionally expect at all).
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 17 (view)
turns out she didn't love me
Posted: 11/12/2018 8:50:15 PM

I went out with him for two months first so it was beyond just a first date thing. And we did have the exclusivity talk and agreed about it so technically he was my first boyfriend. He didn't dump me till a week after.

Okay, the way it was phrased sounded like you barely went out with, had a great evening, he asked to be "official", you said yes, then it ended before ever going out again could be had. If you guys did go out for 2.5 months -- not talking, but actually Going Out for 2.5 months -- then yeah, even though it wasn't officially official during that period, I do think it's fair to refer to them as an ex in a general context. Although some would probably say it'd be best to refer to them as "someone I went out with" instead, as to some, "ex" implies serious relationship.

Damning myself??? maybe... but it's a clear transparency so that the other party knows a lot of what's going on...

I agree it's best to say that if you are in fact moving across country. IMO, that should put it in a more casual-dating zone, if that's the case. One can say "Oh, I don't Casual date!", but...

Long distance can be awkward... but as a 'half' retired, it can work out for you...

... that's pretty casual, as far as time spent between each other's concerned. Having a pen-pal relationship is casual for most. Maybe a role-playing sort of thing for some, while the other thinks real of it. Fine for attention, just fine for low sex drive or anti-relationship moded folks, but LD (serious) relationships by an extreme margin don't work for folks. But I can see them more functional and realistic on the casual-dating level (or more like close LD friends, with benefits when both single and get a chance to see/pork each other).
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 267 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/12/2018 8:31:10 PM

Something that bugs me a lot is sometimes he drinks after work with other guys (he's in a North Dakota oil camp) and he says things to me that makes it seem like he really likes me but then I'll talk to him the next day and he says he can't remember anything he said. I won't tell him what he said but it gives me some probably false hope.

It'd be false hope to run off in the sunset holding hands and becoming a glorious couple, yes. But you vied for the FWB, he agreed that it was a good call & for the best, and given both your situations due to you doing that, you shouldn't be having hopes of that around any corner anyway. But side note: That's actually a positive him saying he really likes ya when he's drunk.

He said he'll talk to me later but he never texted me. And the next day he didn't text me until late, about 1130pm and it was a picture of him smiling but I didn't see it till the morning.

You're FWB, not GF/BF. You'll see a variance of things, as expected. He can be busy on a Friday and not have Obligation to talk, while being a little busy during the day on Saturday but his mind on his REAL drama in life, as again, you're not an item nor should expect to get attention all the time.

And he found out his ex's boyfriend who she now lives with got left by his wife because he was doing drugs in front of their kids. So he's been trying to get custody of his kids

Which is a reason why his FWB (you) during the peak of this drama, should not be expecting prompt attention.

I sent him a text basically giving him an out but he still wants to be friends and he is moving his next set of 3 weeks off if he can find an apartment where he's moving. I likely will not get to see him again which makes me pretty sad but I've known its a possibility for a while so I was prepared for it.

Yeah, he's having to move. You're a FWB -- or even casually dating -- where one goes thru a mess like that, they shouldn't expect you to be the shoulder to lean on (or that they're wanting any specific shoulder to lean on). Instead, you're looking at it as "It's so hard on me", in the same sense as if you're a Couple.

But don't worry -- there are guys out there who aren't totally wrapped up in baby-mamma-drama having to move and work in another state for work, etc. You'll get back up on a horse and ride it silly -- just not into the sunset. ;)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 138 (view)
Marriage, do you believe in it, why/not?
Posted: 11/12/2018 1:43:58 PM

If you love someone you should be willing to put everything on the line.

So as soon as you fall in love, you should put everything you have on the line? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Especially with people saying they fall in love the moment they met them (which isn't ever correct; it's an insta-crush). You can fall in love with someone, grow apart, and fall out of love. Over long periods of time and not that long period of time. And it's a two-way street -- it only takes one to make it falter.

It's not merely that half of marriages don't work -- it's also that of those that still go on, many are unhappy + many that are somewhat content haven't been in an ideal situation (notably getting married early in life). Advanced society's wising up which is why there's now more single people than married people. Being married in and of itself holds Zero value, and should hold zero value. But too many people are conditioned to believe being married by itself (w/ insert-person-here) has value and still do, thanks to the conditioning of peer-pressure.

Marriage, IMO, for an independent person should be an option, not a life goal. Something based on IFs, and the right things lining up. Kind of like, say, moving to California. Doesn't mean living in Cali in and of itself is a bad thing at all. But doesn't mean one should make it a life goal to move out there when they grow up just because peer-pressure acts that way.

But there are many people, the way they're constructed, who need to be in a serious LTR (that leads to marriage). Where that in and of itself gives them comfort in life and fills a void, as they are emotionally dependent. For them, being in a merely functional Relationship brings Them greater peace & satisfaction in this game of life VS not being in an LTR but having what would be a More fruitful life to others. Where an independent person who has no void to fill when not in an LTR isn't going to find peace & satisfaction in life just Being in a serious relationship. Settling in / moving-in / ring-shopping is going to require More, as that by itself [w/ insert person here] brings no value, and can bring Negative value to them if it's not a Great Great match (comparatively speaking). And getting a solid match becomes comparatively harder when just-being-with-someone doesn't do anything for them. As to them, the focal point is instead on that Someone, not filling some void Being with someone.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 110 (view)
What does Wants to date but nothing serious mean?
Posted: 11/12/2018 12:30:07 PM

Who gets serious with a stranger on the first or second date, or a few subsequent dates?

True -- which is why it obviously doesn't refer to the first dates, but instead, the ideal type of situation that comes to one's mind.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 256 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/11/2018 8:54:05 PM

^^^ I don't think that is the case in most fwbs, because if they talk frequently with each other ( as in this case ) and text on the phone so often as well > that is a " friendship " in my book.

I agree by default as I said before hers sounds more like a FWB than F-Buddies if they talk consistently on the phone and text each other, despite not being able to "get out" much. That's not to say there isn't a red-flag -- either something July perpetuates with him, or him leaning that way -- not going Out together at all. July's perception is that FB = FWB, as she said FWB don't go out at all. Uhhhh, yeah, friends do. Not going out together at all (even among groups of friends) is more leaning on the F-Buddy side of things. Or at least wanting it to lean Toward that to prevent the friendship getting to close.

I think the majority of men know that insecure women are the easiest, especially the shy ones.

Ehhh, I'm not so sure on that. :) Insecurity has many different flavors. Most of them is going to draw in drama -- and many clearly insecure gals will have hoops to jump thru. They are not the easiest. A gal insecure in some ways, but not projected nor bringing drama can be not hard, sure. But the easiest gals are the ones who are Attracted to you, and don't have any emotional drama complications about hooking up on the fly and like to do it when they really dig a guy.

When you are insecure you feel less inclined to say no when a guy tries to sleep with you.

It can be, or can't. Insecure gals can be insecure about showing their (naked) bodies "too soon" which could even be not too soon. Secure women many times are not going by the beat of society's drum, and are emotionally secure about having sex "soon" with a guy they like, and won't feel emotionally hurt about any swiftness on it.

Prior to us meeting he kept saying he thought we'd go beyond fwb and kept talking about relationship possibilities (I was the one that had brought in the fwb proposal) but then a few days after we first met he said he was glad I wanted to do fwb because he wasn't ready for a relationship.

That's pretty much code for "Yeah, I like this FWB thing, because if you weren't, I wouldn't be interested in you enough to go down standard dating-toward-potential-relationship alley." Lack of attraction. Which, with relationship mind, may not be all about looks -- but one's situation where potentially going down standard-dating alley, sizing each other's situations up makes one realize it wouldn't be ideal... and it'd take a Wow in looks to make someone go for it anyway.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 418 (view)
On dating a cheapskate.
Posted: 11/11/2018 8:36:56 PM

You're so funny. Have you ever actually SEEEN a 'Ken Doll'?
Not much there that a woman would want~

Yeah, he doesn't have much of a package. Turns women off! But, nothing that a little super glue and chopping off one of the fingers from another doll won't fix.

We could argue “nature vs nurture” all day, but in the end, men pursue women for purposes of sex, not the other way around.

I agree. But my point is -- men pursuing women far more and as "the expected standard" everyone recognizes, has nothing to do with level of sex drive. That's comparing apples & oranges. You can say men are constructed (with genetic wind at their back) to put their foot forward to take risks, being more emotionally 'hardened' to failures, etc. That's what that's about.

When I compare certain big-city spots where women will strike up conversation with men somewhat commonly VS other places in small suburbanish towns where a gal ain't going to do that -- no, I don't make the false assumption that one area has a greater sex drive than the other area (something in the water?).
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 71 (view)
How Long Should You Date Someone Before Moving In Together?
Posted: 11/11/2018 8:19:34 PM

I did not take it that way at all.

It doesn't Necessarily mean she's materialistic on finances/jewelry -- but at least something similar to that: Taking a materialistic approach to being married.

I think she meant (I may be wrong) that she wanted a very serious commitment before cohabiting.

You don't have to have a ring on the finger for it to be a very serious commitment, of course. And cohabitating in an established relationship does make it a Very serious commitment, or More serious relationship if it already was.

I think the criticism is that one's chasing the concept. A reasonable person is going to want to move in with someone Before getting engaged (booking a marriage ceremony). When one has the mindset that they want the person to prove themselves by getting them a ring to marry them before they'd consider moving in -- underneath it all, they're chasing being married, where that concept itself gives them completion and satisfaction [insert-person-here]. Yikes.

I think that if you want to live with someone after only knowing them a couple months, that is a good sign the relationship is good but it doesn't mean you should do it.

I agree. The key is only KNOWING them a couple months, not just Dating them a couple months, too. Also, if you kick it off and want to live with them -- it's a good sign things are good, although it can also be a sign of someone willing to scare the other person away if that desire is taken too seriously so quickly.

Find out all each other's bad habits first before committing to cohabitation.

I agree. Which is why one wouldn't ever want to go ring-shopping until at least a year of serious dating's been had. You want to progress from meshing free-time lives to starting to mesh lives in general... to where their place is practically your place, vice versa and getting situated like that. Many times people can think it's like that, when it's really not so much -- they're just used to them sleeping over and a few of their things are there. I think one key is when being able to "Air BNB" one's house from time to time, and it ain't no thing -- that's where you're Practically living together. A good marker to hit before you two go house/apt/condo shopping together.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 166 (view)
How many partners is too much?
Posted: 11/11/2018 5:04:28 PM

I think it doesn't really matter how many partners a man has, as long as he doesn't have too few because then that automatically makes you think something is wrong with him.

Things don't go by a #, really. I mean, what's your version of "too few"? Sure, if he's 30 and only slept with 2 women -- it doesn't mean something's wrong with him. He married his high school sweetheart and got a divorce 2 years ago. He's only had 1 other girl friend, but fooled around with a handful of others but never went all-the-way.

That's why I would roll my eyes back in the day once in a while, when I'd date older women fresh off a divorce who were older 30s. A couple of them sat on "a number" and said girls who slept with over 10 men were sluts -- and I was reminding them they were out of commission, marrying a guy in their early 20s after going to a community college, having kids, and are new on the market. A gal could have 30 guys and be a little younger than they are, but are less likely to hop into bed with a guy they're mingling with and find decently cute. All depends how many years as an adult you've been single... along with how much social exposure one has when they are single.

I was raised in school to think that there were less gender differences but the older I get the more I see that there are.

The opposite effect, as I see it. I think stereotypes and such are silly -- it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy based on the social construct and how you raise them, so people will jump the gun to think it's so "natural". There are differences, yes -- but IMO, there's more differences Within guys, and Within gals than between them.

I laugh now to think about all the Women's Studies courses I took back in in university that preached that women could do anything men can do dogma.

I agree those Women's Studies courses can certainly be over-the-top, yes.

Sure, maybe if I hadn't had children but that never would have been a path I wanted.

Some women don't so much, in and of itself.

At 15, I wanted to adopt 14 kids when I grew up.

Do you still want to adopt 14 kids? Still think the same stuff now as you were at 15? I wouldn't base how "women are" based on how you were @15. :)

Society is still very much gender-lined and I think its an illusion that we think it isn't.

In many ways it is -- and you'll see a lot of it when you live out in the country. But that's a minority of society, so one shouldn't think living out in the country represents how Western society rolls.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 39 (view)
Thought I was almost over her
Posted: 11/11/2018 4:52:51 PM

When a person learns to accept that they are perfect just the way they are, other people think so too.

I dunno about that. Certainly wasn't the way it was with my old friend, the klepto. He thought he was perfect just the way he was, but we didn't agree. ;)

What happens when you meat someone who you feel is a soulmate but they don't feel the same?

When you just meet them and you feel they're a soulmate, you're getting ahead of yourself of course. Proof that you're always way off base thinking that so quick, when they don't feel that way. But what ends up happening? Varies. Some (emotionally disturbed people) get pissed at the other person who Isn't so ga-ga about them after they had a nice meeting. Those who are like that -- or even just feeling really hurt & frustrated -- I believe suffer too much from thinking the world revolves around themselves. Even if said meeting turned into a meating.

in most couples, there is one party who loves the other more which gives them less power in a relationship but sometimes equilibrium can be achieved my time and shared experiences.

There's a Yuge difference between meeting someone & being knee-deep in a Relationship. It's comparing apples & trucks.

When in an established Relationship, I don't necessarily agree it's most, but I do agree it's quite common that one person is into the person more than the other. If it's noticeable from the outside looking in, and it lasts a while, they need to resolve that ASAP (if possible), or break up. Sometimes we're more into our BF/GF than we were because we sense they aren't as into us anymore. That naturally makes us like someone more in a certain way -- when they don't like us enough that we feel "they should".
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 411 (view)
Wanking off costs less than dating
Posted: 11/10/2018 12:05:45 PM

There is a reason that prostitution is the oldest profession. And that is because men have a higher sex drive than women, they are the ones driven by their hormones to pursue the opposite sex.

I disagree, in a way. I don't think it's due to hormone construct at all -- I think it's due to the way society's constructed. Maybe females' emotional construct helps put them in that direction... to be provided for, to provide for kids, to look out for danger with the opp-sex, etc. The more open/modern/progressive a society is, the more open a gal is to getting in the sheets. Becomes less a "bad thing" to hook up... or to sleep around, etc. I think it's pretty much how we're shaped by society that women won't get a male escort/prostitute.

Men don't need high testosterone at all to get an escort/prostitute once that "social barrier" in their minds is eliminated. Many older men do so, who have lower T than younger guys -- and have lower hormones than a 30 year old gal. Social consequences the way society's shaped is what will keep (most) men from prostitutes, and keep (virtually all) women from it. Women have also not been able to afford said things (working for themselves independently is a Very new thing) -- and societies have set it where men have more freedom & women don't. Blah blah blah, I could go on. :)

Bottom line: I agree with many findings out there that women have just as much a sex drive as men. And when I suddenly had gals attracted to me when they never did, back when I was hitting 20 years old -- holy hell, a totally different world than the "Mars Venus" BS. :)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 323 (view)
A man and his car...
Posted: 11/9/2018 5:01:12 PM

Hell, in my part of the world, everybody drives trucks. Or SUVs.

Which is a pure image thing when one doesn't need a truck (or SUV). Big difference between getting a roomy car when you don't really need that so much VS getting some big truck. A guy who's not going to be hauling anything where a truck would come into play on any semi-regular basis -- it's basically just "high school games". Why in the hell would I go out of my way to pay way more for something that carries a hell of a lot more weight with poor gas mileage with a big bulky outside container, thus paying much more in gasoline too? Insecurities? "Get 'er done, Skeeter!"

I say the same thing on some level about SUVs to single folks with no kids nor ever really have to pile a bunch of people in their car. I'm not saying get a pinto -- but really? :)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 165 (view)
How do you define Athletic?
Posted: 11/9/2018 1:24:04 PM

I am an ATHLETE -..........(many of them do not have athletic body)
Or I have an athletic BODY........
two different it?:)

Yes, I in fact pointed that out if you read all my posts. :) You can be an athlete, but not have an athletIC body.

My post there that you quoted was also pointing out something else: There is no One universal "athletic" body construct, was my point. You can be a thick tough muscular softball catcher of a gal, which is an Athletic Body -- but not attractive. Not like a typical delicious gymnast gal's body. Got it? :)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 108 (view)
How men mathematically sleep with more people than women
Posted: 11/9/2018 1:19:41 PM

That he had done a million different things over the course of his life that he never would have done if it weren’t for women. My first reaction to that was total agreement. I know my life would have been drastically different if women didn’t exist.

Well, you wouldn't exist if women didn't exist. :) And if all women disappeared, even if you were in a country for a while where every one of them was unattractive, it'd still shift things in what you do. Society would change, even outside sexual attraction. Women just as much in life, if not more, due to male existence. Goes both ways.

There's a million things I wouldn't have done if it weren't for people around me not existing, and inserting others or no people, regardless of gender.

But I assume what you're getting at is due to sexual Attraction. Hormones in combination with the existence of the opp-sex. Sure. It doesn't mean you're Catering to them. There would be no MGTOW and it's carried attitude and actions if it weren't for women, either. My life would be different if I suddenly became asexual, whether in a relationship or single. Your hormones are going to affect what you do, even outside women.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 151 (view)
How many partners is too much?
Posted: 11/9/2018 12:55:41 PM

I think all you just said is a bunch of BS. Indicative of commitment issue? How about the person knows they arent ready for a relationship because they are finishing school and still need to travel a bit and so on.

I think what she was probably implying was older, past college years. But yeah, people can assume that on someone who's 25 or younger, if they banged a lot of girls & they never got locked in to a long sustaining LTR. That said, when younger, one's more emotionally naive and will latch in to a pretty gal they start dating much more than in their 30s+.

I think relationship experience is what cultivates someone Not to jump into anything serious with someone who wouldn't be a great match (but attractive), by also not feeling some big-emotional-crush as easily. You've come down to earth, which I think requires at least Dating a few people for a sustainable time.

A lot of sexual partners and little to no LTRs? Could be indicative of commitment issues .... A lot of sexual partners and HAS been in LTRs? Probably a cheater. In short, higher numbers mean more of a liability.

Although I don't entirely agree with that thought process, it is a natural way people think in our society, accuracy be damned. It's how we're shaped. Much like most of us are raised to believe that men on average slept with more women than women have slept with men (even though this is clearly inaccurate when male & female population is basically equal).

I believe what you say has some truth to it -- under the assumption said person is living a cookie-cutter life like your average Joe & Jane, but still not a sure bet. If one isn't emotionally dependent on "having someone" and truly 100% happy when single, and are for quite a long time -- but is socially outgoing and isn't sexually conservative -- those #s are going to add up over the years.

And it's not just age -- but their looks, social connections, and persona. When that combo is on the high end -- you can expect one to have LTR experience but also high #s. Those #s can rack up pretty quick for anyone when single, given the right conditions.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 31 (view)
Science Says Finding Your Soul Mate Is Basically Impossible
Posted: 11/9/2018 12:27:06 PM

Arranged marriages have a lower rate of divorce than marriages in the West anyway.

One shouldn't want to compare X-type of marriage to Y-type of marriage in totally different countries to measure X vs Y. That said though, arranged marriages happening here in the US are on the lower-end of divorce rates. Here in the US (and I'm sure elsewhere), from what I hear, is pretty much like arranged 1st dates -- and if you two click after a few dates... instead of getting naked & porking, you go ring shopping.

I can see arranged marriages (or arranged date setups to get married to someone ASAP, if you click) having a low divorced rate. If both parties truly buy into the concept -- the cultural shaping of those individuals is going to be on the low-end for divorces even when in an unideal relationship.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 98 (view)
Friends With Exes: What are your thoughts?
Posted: 11/9/2018 12:19:19 PM

I wish him...and her the very best, but that's all I can do

Do you Really WISH them both the very best together (happy wave), on the inside? :)

but when either myself or they start dating someone new, we don't have as much contact as we did when we were both completely single. We distance our contact out of respect for the new relationships either myself or he is trying to cultivate.

I think that's the natural flow of things. But when one of them starts Dating someone -- it naturally becomes more like a friend who lives in another city across state.

I equate the still close friends with an ex when Dating someone to another scenario: When you know of someone (usually female) who has an opp-sex friend where anyone in the room can sense they Like them, but they're the only ones who don't. "Oh, come on, we're just friends! Just because a [guy] is a friend, doesn't mean he wants to sleep with me!" No, it doesn't. But many times, it's pretty clear that opp-sex friend of theirs had Liking as a motivating factor to become friends, even if they'd feel uncomfortable making a move in the present time.

One's free to be in any situation with someone else, even if there's writing on the wall that everyone sorta sees and they deny. But when Dating someone -- you ditch those, including your ex's as people you hang out with closely.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 135 (view)
How many partners is too much?
Posted: 11/8/2018 4:22:58 PM

How many partners is too much?

"Partner"? That means BF/GF/FWB, or maybe a consistently on-going F-Buddy. Misleading PC terms always make my eyes roll - lol. Just because a guy stuffs some gal's turkey, doesn't mean they're "partners". No wonder you'll once in a while find someone freaking out who porked on a 1st/2nd/3rd date, when the other person's interests fade. They must have thought they were "partners" - lol.

My wife was a bit shocked at my number when we were dating, but it seemed to turn her on.

I have never experienced that. It's only been in the Negative when the # was higher than "normal" for guys of my age. If it's higher than their really-low guess, I could see that being a turn-on. More of a reversal of seeing them a certain turn-off way. But if the gal assumes you've certainly been around the block quite a few times, and you throw out a higher # than they'd assume (thus HIGH) -- good luck getting a positive vibe! I'd call it a win if it were a neutral reaction. :)

From my experience -- and granted, this is notably past college years where people can in fact have pretty low #s -- whenever the topic has come up, which has not been often, the assumed # of getting into the high range has been quite Low.

And a preferred sexual partner helps keep a woman feel secure in various ways.

I don't think guys feel so secure when they're tied down with a Non-preferred significant-other, either. :)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 105 (view)
How men mathematically sleep with more people than women
Posted: 11/7/2018 5:42:17 PM

men who are MGTOW still have sex with women, they dont have relationships with them. And if it was only men who are desperate for sex, then it wouldnt be so easy to get random sex from women.

That's not what MGTOW has evolved to, as I've checked out a lot of it. It's turned more into a "I don't need women" -- and walking away from them unnecessarily -- wanting them to do what you want, reasonableness be damned (you can always find a gal to bow to ya). Kind of like "I'm taking my ball and going home" in hastily fashion, and rather Not sleeping with any women than having to conform to women in any way. Too overboard.

In reality the arrangement would be more like mgtow with benefits than a actual mgtow lmao

I don't agree with this either.

All MGTOW, by itself means (not by any current movement popularly utilizing the name) is that you're not going to put up with sh!t, chasing women around who play the game of "impress a lady, because they deserve it and that's the way things are if you want anything".

IMO, in concept, it's just an attribute a guy should have -- go your own way, instead of going a woman's way that's off-track. Problem is, it can be taken too far -- where it's okay to be a d!ck and self-absorbed, if your way is to be a d!ck, women be damned. Kind of like particular flavors of feminism go too far and it's reactionary. "Men do too much out there," which I agree with, but, it follows essentially with, "so f'ck 'em. Make THEM chase you. Many won't, but it's a lot better to have no woman than only getting any who won't conform to You."
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 243 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/7/2018 3:37:49 PM

But is it asking too much to say you should not have sex with people you don't like?

Now that's being too picky! ;) To be fair, she IS having sex with someone she likes -- a lot. Damned if you do, damned if you don't - lol. However, what FWB / Casual-Dating-Only should be restricted by is liking them, but given circumstances & attraction-level, Not ga-ga about them. In this situation, I think her mixed messages in her various posts point out she Can feel too strongly for him, come back down to earth, feel fine... then possibly feel strong for him again, etc.

The fact that there is a time limit on this thing is what keeps me with it.

Not necessarily, from the details you pointed out. He may not have to move. Or it may be quite a While until he would Have to move. But it should at least put things in perspective -- that good possibility he will End Up moving away + you both too busy to hang out much, you circumstantially aren't an ideal match anyway... and for the sake of your feelings, don't see each other Too much during a stretch of time if mutually available, and don't talk on the phone & text too much (keep an emotional distance). If he's an Actual Friend, as you say, you can open up about it, and get his thoughts. It's not weird. It should end up being natural.

People do this all the time with someone they've known, hooked up with, and started talking to and hung out with a few times... where they really like them But that other person is in a defunct (breaking up?) relationship with a BF/GF, and know that becoming an item is off-limits ... so they let that other person know "Hey, I really like you more than I should, given the circumstances. You're really great, but I understand your situation, so I don't want to get hurt if I invest too much feelings, ya know? What are your thoughts?" Not weird. It's weird, weak, and childish to avoid bringing it up. REAL men do. REAL women do. Want to Actually be the "Get 'er done" type? Don't be a wuss. :)

I have learned that these types of "relationships" including F-Buddies, FWB, etc., really are half-baked.

There's a Big Difference between being just F-Buddies, and someone who's an Actual Friend, with benefits. In fact, a sustained FWB that's an actual FWB -- actually is stronger than (initially) casually Dating someone where "FWB" doesn't apply. FWB just means the boy-girl relationship part of it isn't going to go past what casually dating would be (has a known barrier to it). Where something best labeled as casually Dating is a temporary "transition" period, to either not see each other anymore, or becoming an item. FWB is stronger than that in terms of the bond (friendship) between the two if it forms -- but has less potential to become an item.

F-Buddies are someone in your black book that you'll hit up when you want sex. Communication is for the purpose of setting things up to boink. FWB means you're real friends -- even though people want to falsely give F-Buddies a better sounding name like FWB, which gives the wrong impression.

This doesn't mean FWB can't lead to drama. Anything beyond platonic can, when 1 person likes the other a lot more.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 32 (view)
I just lost my soulmate.
Posted: 11/5/2018 10:25:14 PM

I was referring to LTR when a couple is already established. But when it comes to paying bills (ie. rent, power, heat, water, etc.) splitting the bill is optimal. I guess I'm just really against kept.husbands/boyfriends.

I disagree...
You weren't referring to splitting the bills among live-in couples being an optimal situation (assuming both are roughly equal on income, I agree). You were referring to men needing to "bring something to the relationship" to "make him feel Needed" for his benefit, like changing her oil & paying (her or greater share of) bills. It was pretty clear it was Not about "men need to do their part". :) That part I very much disagree with, because men are not even in any indirect way crying out that they want to contribute more on that level in a relationship (the crying out would be in the opposite direction). :)

Yes, even among the demographic of men who "work with their hands".

Women are more emotionally needy so saying they need a man emotionally is fine. But many men operate on a more concrete level.

I think society / child-rearing helps create a bulk of it, but there are thankfully plenty of women who are not so emotionally needy. I don't think it's fine for anyone (yes, there are men) to be emotionally needy.

A lot of men have said they really don't care how much a woman makes or how strong they are physically, it doesn't come into their considerations for a relationship.

A lot of men do care on some level that the woman's self-supportive. It's a positive (thus caring) much much more than men who literally don't care if she's not making hardly anything or a lot. There are some who are intimidated if the gal makes and seems that she will always be making more than he -- more than willing to admit, too. And there's also some who would Really like that as a breath of fresh air. I think it's just think there's no real thoughts/expectations beyond a gal being self-supportive (which they do care about, generally speaking).

Many men prefer what they deem "feminine" qualities.

But what are You defining them as? :) Sure, of course pretty much all men like women who are feminine rather than masculine - lol. But if one's defining "feminine" as emotionally needy or isn't very self-supportive -- no, that's not a positive, they don't want that. I don't think one should define "feminine" as that. One can take a particular trait as "feminine" or "masculine" over-board, and the opp-sex isn't going to be a fan of many of them.

Men, would you prefer a woman makes less money than you?

I think "how much less" is the key where obvious preferences come in. For myself, I make good money, so if she made the same or more which would be a lot -- great. I wouldn't feel being in an inferior position as I can support myself many times over. I think some guys will more potentially heed when a girl knowingly has a higher position the work force, or makes a lot more than he -- which in the end, is a weakness. But there's no "universal" social rule, as you point out. And I think that's the point when it comes to things. That's why "Mars / Venus" books are silly. Men vary among men too much, and women vary among women too much to have a basic stereotypical coloring book like that. :)

Do you like feeling needed in regards to fixing things?

Needed? No, I wouldn't say I "Like" that, as how things are. I like being able to help someone (notably a gal) when she Does need it. I Like being able to fix things when needed, within a reason. That said, over time, if something is easy to fix that constantly needs fixing/adjusting, I more Like a gal who can learn to also do that herself. Not much thought in "playing house" tho.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 202 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/5/2018 8:41:35 AM

Nothing wrong with a FWB....everything wrong when you are lying to yourself and setting yourself up for yet another heartbreak and failure.

I don't think it's in any position for Heartbreak. And a FWB situation -- or shall I say FWB-lite at best in her case -- are not supposed to last terribly long anyway. No expectations on that, so I don't see how fear of "failure" applies. Heck, she even said once that she wished there was some "temporary" coupling-up. She's emotionally vulnerable, and will get caught up in unnecessarily emotionally stressful situations -- and she is letting it get to her too much, but at least at this point, it's not a whirlwind of crazy drama -- as she just wanted FWB off the bat with him.

Yeah i dont think you know that youre not in a FWB situation. You're just F buddies. FWB actually do go out for movies and dinners together and hang out. I've had quite a few successful ones over the years

I questioned the FWB label, too. But if they do text & talk on the phone enough, it'd fit more into the FWB zone than FBs. You don't have to be close friends -- especially when you're both juggling baby-mamma-drama and don't have so much time.

Of course, if you're 1-on-1 FWB and go out to dinner & a movie a lot, etc -- given enough time, FWB wouldn't be the most ideal term. Instead it'd be dating. A girl I'm dating, nothing serious would be more applicable. But that's what 1-on-1 FWB pretty much is -- you keep your dating options open while seeing them, with no intentions of going steady and wanting to keep it that way. That's why they usually don't last very long. If they do and the two parties regularly go out together 1-on-1 for dinner & a movie, then needs to drop the FWB line.

And in her case, if all she's doing is texting/talking on the phone about when he/she can cum over for fun, with no aim to ever even go out to grab a drink or something -- then she'd need to drop the FWB label and call it what it is... a Fvck Buddy.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 195 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/4/2018 9:10:51 PM

As I understand it, she initiated the FWB situation... BECAUSE she doesn’t believe herself worthy of a real relationship.

I really don't think that's it. She has esteem issues, yes -- but her main motive was she doesn't have a whole lot of time, and she doesn't want the drama. People of emotional sensitivities are going to feel more drama from something. Going the casual-route can heed some drama VS the standard dating route.

Are you absolutely certain that this was just an FWB? The men only want sex stuff is just a myth. He could have had feelings for you and just gave up after a while because you would never come around.

True -- or somewhere in-between which is quite often. As she says, he's really cool & nice to her. He's not there to just stuff her turkey most likely, but at the same time, she shouldn't assume he has any desires to amp it up to true Dating, besides that may be an option in the back of his mind that he's not chasing. He put Relationship in his profile. Although that may not mean he's Really looking for a relationship, as it's a better marketing option for guys to do, it at least indicates that he's pro-actively searching for chicks online.

I try really heard to hide my feelings and I'm very careful not to say anything to reveal them. So on one hand, I wonder if he really has no clue and on the other hand, I wonder if he can actually read me. But I know a lot of guys suck at reading women so I'm leaning toward the theory that he doesn't.

If you try really hard to hide your feelings and are careful about it (even if not a pro at it), and You proactively wanted to be FWB, while many guys aren't necessarily masters at reading girls -- yeah, you can be confident he isn't reading your emotions that well. Probably figures you do Like him, possibly a bit more than your average FWB, but he probably can't read your concerns, emotional drama about it.

It all comes down to the perception I have that I believe no guy I really like will ever share the same feelings.

It's your low self-esteem talking. But realize you have little (and bad) dating experience. You had that one LTR with that scuzzy guy you didn't like from the get-go, and another guy you had a date with who you like to call "dating" which it wasn't... and this FWB who you're casually seeing on-the-down-low (along with dates and date-hookups had).

If a guy is willing to come over and pork ya repeatedly, and he's really nice as you say -- if you don't read him as out of your league, then there's no reason to believe, given the right situational circumstances, that he couldn't/wouldn't develop strong feelings for ya.

I always ended up trying to go out with guys I wasn't interested in because they showed interest.

I can understand willing to go out on A date and just being active in mingling/interacting with guys you're not that attracted to for a short-term period to get "the ropes" down, and slowly work your way up... but you shouldn't be goING out with any guy you're not that attracted to, casual or not (unless he's really nice/sweet and has a big pickle and would make for a Convenient FWB).

Its just that I am in a ?friendship? with a guy who has all of the qualities I'm looking for in a guy, who I am attracted to, is great at sex (the only guy I ever orgasmed with) and who is in the same stage of life as me so we bonded over that.

With your expectations being pretty limited with him, there's No harm bringing it up with him. You emphasize you two are just friends, but more on the physical side with it... and you just let him know what's up. The Cool thing about a FWB -- is there's no Expectations of it getting more serious. You're friends, right? After rolling over and chilling out after a porking, you can bring up that you think he's a great guy -- and no, you're not wanting to scare him that you're expecting or chasing him down Relationship alley -- but that he Would be a great guy to truly Date, if our situations lined up well enough.

And as a side note again, NO -- there's no ban on going out to a cafe/restaurant/bar with a FRIEND, just because there's benefits involved. You can easily suggest grabbing a drink some time before/after a salami-hiding romp.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 42 (view)
Time wasters
Posted: 11/4/2018 8:52:50 PM

I've been speaking to a girl that joined recently, lots of the same interests. 5-10 messages a day for two weeks and then when I ask if she would like to meetup sometime in the future. No she doesn't do meeting in person.

That's your fault for lasting more than 2 days of messaging that fruitfully. Not to say she's not a guilty party past the 1st two days -- but separately, you have to take the responsibility to yourself it went 2 weeks, not 2 days of wasted-time.

Some gals will preach the value of the pen-pal ("time-waster") game -- but don't let that fool you into holding off too long to suggest meeting up. The responsibility is on the person who wants to do the pen-pal charade despite living in the same city, to let it be known, but they always won't say so before much time's wasted.

Nothing is real until after you meet.

And nothing's worth being that important, until after you meat. ;)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 511 (view)
Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/4/2018 11:01:40 AM

But as Irish said, people still arguing over who pays the coffee date! Lol those were good days of forums.

There would be little to no argument if it was about and only about buying someone a $2-3 coffee at a cafe on a mini-date. If it were Only about that, yeah, that'd be silly. But that's not at all what the "who pays" argument is about. It's when it can hit an average American Joe's budget -- and many gals out there taking the cultural "thing" for granted, with some making bad arguments on how it is objectively justified for all women on dates -- that an argument understandably comes about.

What I find intriguing about the "who pays" discussion is that brings out the "I say I'm cool with X", but once "X" happens IRL, it's hard to believe they'd all be so cool with it as they say. Happens with various topics, but "who pays" I believe really brings it out.

- Gal says she's 100% fine with paying for roughly half the stuff after the 1st date, and says it has no effect on her date choices.
- IRL, as opposed to "on paper", it has a negative effect when a new guy opts to go in that direction, as opposed to her other dating choices who always step forward to pick up the tabs.

- Someone says it's the person who asks the other out, who pays.
- IRL, that don't really fly. Especially after a 1st date, there's no official asking to take the other one out much of the time. It's commonly brought up in the same manner a friend would to another -- from chatting. When a gal brings it up within convo ("Well, we should go to that new bar this weekend!") -- as opposed to the guy -- it in no way points to the gal paying for his sh!t. :) In actuality, for the gal, it's only if she Asks to Take Him Out, that she would be expected to pick up the tabs. Otherwise, the dude's expected to be paying for all her stuff, by default. :)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 23 (view)
Cancelled/rescheduled date. Feeling vulnerable & irritated, thoughts?
Posted: 11/3/2018 1:15:46 PM

You were nude, fooled around, but did not have sex? exactly does that work?! (You don't have to answer)

It's common, usually during date 1-3, to stop at 2nd or 3rd base. :) Especially when one party has little sexual experience, it can be quite common. I was always a fan of it when the girl seemingly liked me more than I liked her.

Assuming her story is roughly accurate...

So he does look a little sick/pale & he tells me he was not going to blow me off, but was waiting another hour in the hopes he would feel better. Sounds plausible.

When one goes out of their way to explicitly say they are not going to blow you off, and are going to follow-up with you soon... they're telling the truth that they do want to see you (at some point), even if Best Option #1 in the mix is the reason for making a last minute decision with ya.

However, he mentions that he doesn't feel ready to be in a relationship and would prefer something more casual right now (remember he is a virgin also and was very nervous in bed first time). He asks how I feel about what he's said and I tell him what I'm hearing is 'I like you a little, but I'm really not that interested overall.' He said 'that's really not it. I like you a lot. This is about me.'

This is where things don't really add up. He's a virgin who already got naked with you, was nervous -- ok. But he opts for something more casual, yet also making a last minute decision whether he can go out on the date or not after Not reaching out to you for 2 days.

"I like you some, but I'm not That into you" is what he was saying. Anyone who feels this way but is and wants to be nice to the other, is going to Defend themselves when you say that's what you're getting from them. 99% of the time. It's pretty much a given for all people nice and otherwise. Remember that.

When you were out, he acts "couply" during the night, which drinks will help do and a guy in his position about how he feels about you will do. I don't think he's as sexually innocent as he says, but he probably does get nervous about sex and has some issues there -- and is wanting to blame it on being a virgin or something, which I don't buy. In the end, you Should want to keep him as an Option B or C at the most... and in the meantime, hunt for better dudes.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 18 (view)
Unfriended, then re-friended woman who rejected me. What did this tell her?
Posted: 11/3/2018 12:12:30 PM

What did this tell her? Does she have me figured out now?

Yes, at least in a basic way -- but maybe not that you're reveling about her day in, day out.

Did I make my feelings obvious in an a moment of painful douchebaggery?

Absolutely. Emphasis on being a douche. :) This is something a year or two later you're going to be like "WTF". :)

It IS as bad as it looks. Ya gotta suck it up and "take the sack". You basically told her you're not so much into being friends, but do want to stay connected on FB -- which isn't a good idea for you, either. You're confused. You made a situation worse.

You should have just dropped her (she wouldn't notice for a good while, if you two don't chat on there). Staying connected is going to extend you pining over her. She's enjoying other erect penis, and delightfully so. And none of them are yours, which she Has Rejected. It's best you move past that. In about 10 days, I would say defriend her, and don't say a word. You shouldn't want to be friends with her if she Only and will Only want something platonic with you. Move on. :)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 100 (view)
My Cats are C*ck-Blocking Me
Posted: 11/3/2018 12:04:27 PM

I noticed that "cat woman" must have unfriended me on Facebook. Probably for the best. 10 of the other women I met through OLD including Hoarders #1 and #2 are still on my "Friends" list.

Well, if they're hoarders and won't throw away a ratty old book that's been sitting around for decades -- they're certainly not going to throw a friend off Facebook if they're unthreatening. :)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 174 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/3/2018 11:36:54 AM

Although this FWB situation brings her both joy & sadness, she doesn't sound like she wants to be completely single & celibate either. Some people can operate just fine with no attention, intimacy, affection, companionship, etc. from the opposite sex but she (& a great deal of many others) is not wired that way.

She's always said how she doesn't want anything serious right now, as that'd bring stress to her having to juggle/manage that. FWB brings that no-stress no-heart-chasing angle. Until/unless you really like them. But I can also easily see her not going the FWB route but still stressed that a guy she's dating doesn't want to get so serious when she does. I think as long as they get on the same page, since he's a nice dude, they'll be fine. But she wants to keep it in guessing-game territory, which is only going to bring stress when she likes the guy more than FWB-level.

Let's be honest - FWB and other half-baked relationships are a mistake.

If you're someone who's too much into the other, I agree. But a FWB is essentially just casual dating (with line drawn that's as far as it'll go, at least for a good while) -- or a social-group friend who you sneak away with from time to time. As long as you're not So much into them, nor have an emotional weakness about fooling around with Anyone outside a Relationship or honeymoon period -- it can be a positive, not a negative.

In one post she was "seeing" him but in another post talked about wanting to be able to go out in public. I have never had a FWB who hid me away. This guy is sleeping with other women and actively looking for a relationship (with someone who is not her).

To be fair, she told him about guy(s) who stuffed her turkey, and as she said -- she Went for the FWB... not something she was put in position to "settle" for. That said, him mentioning sex stories (and she the same) isn't doing anything any good. Given enough time you assume they've gotten past 1st base with someone else at some point -- why bring it up if it's not a sexually-exclusive FWB situation. It can only do negative, even if you're not that into the other. In fact, it can make someone who's not that into you, more into you (natural competition feeling).

But yeah, not going out at all -- that raises some questions whether it's closer to a Fvck-Buddy and not a FWB.

She is attached and he clearly is not in any way. I don't see how this could possibly be a positive thing for a person who clearly needs professional help.

It could be worse for her though, oddly enough, if it were more of a mainstream FWB when she really digs the guy. If they were going out and such, and he wasn't bringing up his sexual conquests -- I think she'd be more frazzled. And in a way, him potentially moving to another Province I think actually helps her situation -- as even a romantic situation won't work if he does have to move to chase his offspring.

I wasn't actually aware that FWB actually hang out in the outside world. To me that would be like dating which we aren't doing.

OMG, lol. FRIENDS hang out in the outside world. FWB does not equal Fvck Buddies. Big difference. But as you say, you're both tied up a lot with your kids (hence you wanting FWB), and you talk on the phone & text -- so I can understand not being able to go out much. But if you have time to lay around eating Cheetos in bed with the Tonight Show on after getting your pumpkin carved, you can at least grab a drink at the local watering hole beforehand. Friends hang out in public. :)

1-on-1 FWB is actually just casual NSA dating (with it at least implicitly known that it's not going to be serious dating).
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 169 (view)
Warning women about a dangerous guy on pof
Posted: 11/2/2018 2:30:16 PM

Listen, I have nothing against hot sex and lots of it, it's a normal part of a relationship.

Or not-so-hot sex. Cold pizza is still pizza. ;)

But, gee guys, is it only me who thinks you should try to get to know a person for at least a few dates before you get serious? Common, man.

There's nothing implying that he pushed her for sex. Nor is that, unfortunately, a required ingredient for the accusation of "he used me for sex". I agree, don't try and push to get some real action on the 1st date. But IMO, most of the time, that's not really happening when the guy AND the girl pork on the 1st date. Like having an 8th-grade-makeout-jam-session in the restaurant/bar parking lot capping off a typical great 1st date after a few too many drinks -- going back to one's place where 3rd base or home plate is reached is the same. Both parties are rolling with it and Equally Responsible, and usually Equally wanting it just as much.

I say wait as long as you can. Some even wait for marriage. At least wait the average, 3-5 dates.

I don't say wait as long as you can. That would mean denying the gal until, what, moving in together? :)

Waiting until marriage objectively speaking isn't a good idea at all -- unless both people are strongly conditioned that that's the way, which is a whole other ball of wax in the very small % of society once over 21.

The average is 3-5 dates, but funny thing is -- if you're past 5 (full) dates and you're still on 1st base at most -- unless you're from Mormon country or still in high school, you can bet a decent amt of $ that it's not going to go anywhere.

Many times that isn't "waiting", it just unfolds around that time, due to circumstances and jelling. But even then, if you have sex on date #3 or #4, and have sex on the following date or two, and things fizzle out -- if the girl Likes the guy, but the guy's interested wanted -- the whole "he used her for sex" still comes up. If she perpetuated the fizzling out though, that doesn't become an issue.

I agree not to push for sex right off the bat, or at any point (not worth your time). Or if you feel on date #1 you really hit it off but both had too much to drink and you really like the gal, and see that she'd be willing to roll home with ya if you threw that offer on the table -- heed doing that, to avoid 1st-date-sex-regret on her (or your) part.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 42 (view)
Too many transgender...
Posted: 11/2/2018 1:58:45 PM

I dont understand all this BS the left are going on about. If you wont date a man who identifies as a woman than you are transphobic and a bigot.

That's not what goes on, though. It's far-left people who are all about this issue who will take someone who goes "ewww, yuk!" when imagining dating a tran, that they're hating on trans. One's "transphobic" not because they wouldn't at all Date them (as well as not dating Anyone with a penis) -- but projecting disdain toward them. I think some people can hastily call someone a phobe about if it they razz about trannies with a joke or whatnot, when said person really doesn't hate on them at all at the end of the day, but is just razzing.

I've come across a few on locals on the app when click the thumbs and always straight away the profile states they are transgender and go on to say they aren't trying to trick anybody. Mostly in the headline this is said or first few words of profile..

Yeah, you can pretty much bet that most trans-folk are either going to Say it in their profile -- which a vast majority do -- or it's Obvious they are. Even of the small % that may slip thru the cracks, almost all of those are going to let ya know off the bat, too.

Guys in the online dating field don't have to worry about getting involved with a "gal" online to find out they're, whooops, a "tranny". There's no social complaint about stepping on that "land mine" by accident. It's hardly even a blip on a radar screen ever. It doesn't even remotely compare to:

o Someone doing the "MySpace" photo routine on an angle to make themselves look thinner, which you only find out until you meet them

o They had fake pictures up when they were 40-50lbs lighter, and 5-7 years younger.

o They're married or have a serious BF/GF

People who complain about transgender guys on POF as males (like this thread kicking off) -- just don't want to See them in the listings at all, as the concept grosses them out -- which yes, does bleed into transphobia.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 12 (view)
Your Best and Worst Halloween Costumes for Singles?!
Posted: 11/2/2018 1:41:40 PM

She hinted it's a song title. When I viewed the image again, I finally noticed a bunch of white drippy looking spots on her face and neck and on her outfit. Told her I'd heard that joke before.

That's the first thing I would have thought in my mind before seeing fake cum on her. Well, looks like you nabbed quite a catch there. She's no POF virgin, that's for sure. You can be sure to rack up a notch on the old belt with Eileen there! :)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 34 (view)
How many good second dates have you gone on in the past 5 years?
Posted: 11/2/2018 1:06:19 PM

It wasn't like that at all.. never had a ménage à trois.

I never implied that. I was implying they were cool both porking the same gal -- like comparing notes happily (ie high-fiving).

The one that was possessive was possessive of my time and attention. He thought I should be exclusive to him but he wasn't exclusive to me.

Which I can understand keeping your options open if he keeps his open. Funny thing is, those usually don't last terribly long, especially if one of the parties wants to spend a lot of time together.

The first one (ten years) was always my friend first and occasionally more until he stopped respecting my boundaries and complained about the way I communicate.

I wouldn't say that'd have anything to do with crossing the platonic line, but just being a friend you hang out with -- platonic or not.

I never eat pork.. ever. It can give you worms.

That's why some people wear condoms, even though they're just aimed for sailors and bus drivers. ;)
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 160 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/2/2018 12:35:09 PM

Thanks for the advice and I think you are right but I'm not that brave. I'm just going to wait for the inevitable ending of things.

Not a good game-plan. It's the same thing as trying to justify procrastination. Those who get into the rut of procrastination are driven by emotion (fear, worry, stress, etc).

Besides, I have to ask myself, what's the point of my feelings? What do I want to happen? I'm the one who said from the start I wasn't looking for anything serious.

First, we all have feelings about everything. Our friends, our pets, certain article of clothing that we spent too much money on, etc. You should ask yourself if you have too little or too much feelings about something you really shouldn't, sure. Regardless though, hearing about him hooking up with a girl is unnecessary if you're going to be FWB, and things are lined up To be that way. He is a FRIEND, so you talk with him about it to be on the same page is all. Much like a friend bringing up stories about stuff he does with his other friends -- where one of his female friends is chasing an ex of yours. Ya know what dude, let's not talk about that. Don't let fear of confrontation/uneasiness dictate what you do and don't do. You know you'll thank yourself later, if it makes sense.

So when this thing fizzles out it fizzles out. Not sure I can get back in the game after that.

Yeah, and if he's a cool guy -- you let him know that too. You just want to be on the same page, is all, so you're not hit by surprise by anything, so you don't want to wonder/worry about anything. Even if your feelings are really on the low-end with him, you'd still inquire. Especially if you two are already bringing up boinking others. This should be simpler in comparison. :)

The truth is I want to actually date someone, really date, go out in public and stuff. So while I like him a lot and care about him, I just have to let him go. Everybody on here is right and I want a relationship too much.

Well, FWB (by default) go out in public all the time. There's no restriction on that. But yeah, I understand Actually Dating -- meaning you're an Item. Things are Solidified. There's Romanticism, which is the key that FWB lacks, as that's a requirement for rolling in the direction of being in a Relationship (BF/GF).

But the thing is -- the dating-game includes FWB type situations, even if we don't call them that because it's so short-lived. If one's looking to just casually date, and they start seeing the other somewhat, but still keeping it on the casual level -- that's basically FWB. CALLING it FWB basically draws a line in the sand that you want to keep it in the casual zone, which won't last forever, but you'll be friends (and not BF/GF) once it's not casual.

Most dating sequences start out as casual with someone you really don't know... it could naturally flow in the direction to be casual and not evolve into something bigger (=FWB), or it could flow even too quick into becoming an Item. Or somewhere in-between during that just-dating phase. Point is, it has it's drama -- so you can't bank on it quenching your thirst for something you want more right now.

At least with a FWB, rules drawn out early like you did -- it's more predictable. It's easier and should be easier to bring up concerns ("So, you put Relationship on your profile. Just wondering if you're more looking for that. Also, you could be moving tho -- fill me in, I'm curious (and a friend).") VS going down standard-dating alley where if you really like the person but feel they aren't That into you but continue to hang out with you, it's too-fuzzy and gets stressful.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 156 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/1/2018 11:40:08 PM
Yeah July -- it sounds like you are really into him. Nothing wrong with feelings. Every actual FWB has feelings to at least Some degree. It's just whether it's over "that hump" (no pun intended) where you really Are "that into them" or not, on that level. Sounds like you are. Part of it could be due to him wanting to keep 'space' between you two, which makes the other want them more when they really like them as a person, as you laid out.

That said, you guys should have a talk about this stuff. Don't get weepy about him or anything, or make it some grandioso thing... but not 30 seconds either. Just talk about it: Talk about him bringing up when he hooks up with someone, and that unless it's something on-going with someone else, don't ask / don't tell. Say you really like him, but a FWB is an ideal circumstance for the time being, and you're not pushing him to 'want' you more, and you are cool with him being a caring guy about you and spending more-than-friends time together with his feelings just being and only to be just at that level. And also that you too shouldn't bring up when you may hook up with some guy either unless it's something more than that. It's because, yeah, there is some feelings and one doesn't want to, ya know, hear about it -- any more than hearing about one having a crush on someone at work.

And also bring up his profile changed that he's looking for a relationship. That combined with him possibly having to move to another Province, ask him how he sees things, as you've had concerns in the back of your mind that seeing each other may be coming to an end, sans a distant friendship.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 81 (view)
Would you have children with someone you wouldn't have a longterm relationship with?
Posted: 11/1/2018 11:17:24 PM

Women cannot teach a boy how to be a man. Period.

Certainly not optimally, no. But a significantly older brother, male relative, the mother's boyfriend(s), etc. certainly can and do, whether it's a single mom situation or not (sans the boyfriend part). Plus, just because a single mother is carrying the bulk of the day-to-day weight raising the kid, it doesn't mean there's no father to be a role model too.

I agree with those who believe it's optimal to have 2 parents. I think most of the data says that 2 parent children flourish compared with kids from single parent homes.

True... however, there's something to avoid though...

Even when you exclude income considerations.

I think one should. Obviously single mother homes (carrying a bulk or all the weight of raising) is going to be a household of less income than a 2 parent household.

The thing to avoid is this: We would expect a high %, especially historically speaking, of single-mom-main-custody+ homes to be not good ones. That's not to say ones With 2 parents can't be hell. In fact, it many of those may be better if there Weren't 2 parents in that household (hence, breakup or divorce). Poorer people from poor neighborhoods tend to take up a large % of single-parent households. Especially in areas like that, lacking something takes a bigger blow in an already non-optimal environment being raised. But again, it can be worse than having the two parents living together with the kid in many situations. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't in many situations, notably in poorer areas -- and it takes two of the adults working together for it to be Better together VS Worse together with the kid(s).

Like some things (like DUI statistics), we should expect there to be a push, misleading analyses, etc. when it comes to demonizing single parenting. It's correlated to poorer, more defunct environments so it's not that difficult to do. But doing so puts emphasis on 2 parents staying together and being functional -- which IS better to at least some degree, IF that happens, all other things being equal.

Many decades ago, you could say being single and never getting married = problems. You could probably cite statistics pointing this out, etc. All you need is correlation. But correlation does not equal causation. Most folks don't really see that, and if you have someone with good education & a years of work experience in a field pushing this, well, they're going to take it as correlation=causation. Hey, that educated person wrote it. Has to be true, can't be biased! ;)

I believe if the two parents get along fairly well, and one parent doesn't do Negative work on the child (while the other is a positive), a dual parent system is by default the best. May not mean Much if they spend enough time with the other parent and have close family members networked together on both sides. Many factors come into play, here.

So should someone have a child with someone they know that an LTR isn't in the making, but their biological clock is ticking? By default, no. But if they make a good amount of $$ and don't have to work too much, have a lot of closely knit family members of the opp-sex too that are in their nearly every day lives -- especially if the biological parent is going to be a part of their lives too and is a good citizen wanting a kid too -- sure. Many dual parent situations out there don't have as a good a situation as that, but one can't expect that either.
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 146 (view)
A man's actions are the key variable that determines whether a relationship survives or fails
Posted: 11/1/2018 5:26:28 PM

But it sounds like your friend was trying, if he was limiting his extra-curricular activities to out of town trips. It that is the case, then how exactly do you know about it? Is he doing something incredibly stupid like talk to you about other women?

Good point. "How'd your trip go, honey?" "Not bad, not bad. I shagged this delicious 22 year old after my meeting. Then I had my own Meating!" "Way to go, babe! High five!" I guess she could ask. But he'd have to go out of his way to tell her that he does it fruitfully. The only ways I'd see it is "Have you ever...," where he'd say yes, and leave it at that... or her talk about their situation (usually in beginning) where he'd say that he wouldn't want to nix his options because he travels a lot, so she assumes he's porking a gal once in a while when out on a road (head) trip... OR he admits he still once in a while hangs out with his ex/ex-FWB who lives in a town that he goes to for work.

But anything more than that, my guess is that he'd be doing it to keep space between them due to him feeling she has potentially too-strong feelings for him.

What it boils down to is “possessive”. Either you are, or you aren’t.

Two things where I disagree, and I'm not trying to be picky (I swear!). You can be (overly) jealous but not possessive. I think those are different terms. Possessive to me would be leaning on the clingy side at least. One can not want to hang out So much with the other, let them have their own life 100%, but word that they're potentially talking to someone, they could get hastily upset ("the jealous type").

The second thing I disagree with, is the black-n-white view of someone being the possessive (or jealous) type -- in or out, are or not. I think it's more a spectrum -- not just degrees of how possessive or jealous one may be, if they are that type.

Some people can be "the jealous type" when with a particular gal -- and rightfully so IF they wish to keep seeing her... but with other particular girls, when he starts dating them, he's not at all. I know I've found myself on the jealous end of things with some gals, but for unique reasons -- while I'm usually not the jealous type at all.
Show ALL Forums