Reading another topic here on TL got me thinking about attitudes towards sex. I've written out two situations bellow of typical circumstances when saying no to sex would be an option. I would love to hear if anyone would turn down sex in either one of them, and for what reasons.
Situation 1
Say you were looking for a relationship and could date a different girl every day of the week. After a few dates, you and the girl would get to know each other better and become intimate. Since you are dating several girls at once and aren't really committed to any one of them, you have a lot of sex with different girls. Would you at some point decide that you've had too many partners and start saying no to sex? Situation 2
Once a week for a year, a hot girl would come into your life and start flirting with you. You didn't sign up for this, but she's ready to go. There are no strings attached and a new one would take her place the next week. Would you turn it down and continue going about your day, or would you sleep with her?
These are both really odd situations. Why not have a relationship with a person? It's creepy to stick my dick into friends. It's not something I'm habituated to do.
I'd rather find a girl who supports me and my life goals and that I find attractive and morally compatible. I'm lucky enough to have found a girl like that and am dating her now. I've gone on many dates with other girls and had a few real shitty relationships and I can say without a doubt that a bad relationship for me = bad sex. I feel hollow and kind of disgusted with myself afterwards. Only a very egotistical selfish person goes around hi-fiving himself just coz he got with a good looking girl. Then again, there are quite a few egotistical selfish people out there who think "scoring" a hot lay is an accomplishment.
I dunno, mostly i just don´t feel like having sex. Maybe I´m not that sexual person. There´s so much more rewarding stuff you can do. Of course sometimes sex can be fun. I´m startled by the fact people think about sex so much, like it´s not even natural anymore.
I think this topic is different for everyone. Your two scenarios are from a single man's point of view, whereas some of us are in long term committed relationships.
I personally would never say no to sex (yes I had to underline that for emphasis). But its with the same girl every time, so it's a little different from the playboy lifestyles you're presenting.
No, seriously. TBH I am about as interested in sex as I am in chocolate fire guards. I have much more fulfilling and creative things to do with my time. Also where is the female scenario in this post? We do exist on TL!
On December 19 2009 07:07 HwangjaeTerran wrote: I dunno, mostly i just don´t feel like having sex. Maybe I´m not that sexual person. There´s so much more rewarding stuff you can do. Of course sometimes sex can be fun. I´m startled by the fact people think about sex so much, like it´s not even natural anymore.
In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
If I wasn't in the mood, had something else to do, or the person was physically unattractive. As much as sex is enjoyable, it isn't the number one priority activity. I don't really enjoy normal/quickie sex so it's something I prefer to prepare for anyway.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
when i was 17-19 i used to turn down lots of girls that were 15-17(or if they were 2 years younger than me). God wtf was i thinking.
If the person is ugly?
This would be my answer atm but even then I sometimes end up with some chick i met at some club with nearly no light and im drunk as fuck and have a one night stand with her. I try and leave the area before day light hits. Seeing the actual product might lower my esteem along with my standards on a wife.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Both situations in the OP sound pretty good to me. I dont know if that is what I would want for the rest of my life, but at this point in time it sounds like exactly what I am looking for.
Am I not seeing the part where it says she has a horrible disease or teeth in her vagina? because unless there's a really good reason (eg we are related) I don't know why I would EVER say no.
On December 19 2009 07:58 starfries wrote: Am I not seeing the part where it says she has a horrible disease or teeth in her vagina? because unless there's a really good reason (eg we are related) I don't know why I would EVER say no.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Oh Jesus Christ, are you buying a computer or are you looking for a partner? Your list is just plain scary. There are certain joys found in being open-minded and accepting of differences you know...
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Let it die man, let it die...
never! when things look bad. u gotta skate!
You must be from Romania.
i am not from romania dumb. can not you see my country next to my name?!
Well I dunno, I turn down sex quite often. Probably because I'm an old fart but last night this girl wanted me to come over and she said she was naked (she lives 5 minutes from me). So I was like "hmm I dunno" and she got upset, and then asked me again and i was like yeah ok fine. I did it more for her than for me though, maybe that makes me a manwhore
Sex is crazy overhyped though unless it's love imo
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
On December 19 2009 06:58 Emon_ wrote: Reading another topic here on TL got me thinking about attitudes towards sex. I've written out two situations bellow of typical circumstances when saying no to sex would be an option. I would love to hear if anyone would turn down sex in either one of them, and for what reasons.
Situation 1
Say you were looking for a relationship and could date a different girl every day of the week. After a few dates, you and the girl would get to know each other better and become intimate. Since you are dating several girls at once and aren't really committed to any one of them, you have a lot of sex with different girls. Would you at some point decide that you've had too many partners and start saying no to sex? Situation 2
Once a week for a year, a hot girl would come into your life and start flirting with you. You didn't sign up for this, but she's ready to go. There are no strings attached and a new one would take her place the next week. Would you turn it down and continue going about your day, or would you sleep with her?
Even in a world without diseases I don't think I'd find this very appealing. Sex without emotional attachment isn't satisfying. It's more like masturbation that you can brag about. So basically I'd say no anytime I had something better to do (like playing Super Mario World with a friend), and maybe even just out of principal.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Oh Jesus Christ, are you buying a computer or are you looking for a partner? Your list is just plain scary. There are certain joys found in being open-minded and accepting of differences you know...
Say you were looking for a relationship and could date a different girl every day of the week. After a few dates, you and the girl would get to know each other better and become intimate. Since you are dating several girls at once and aren't really committed to any one of them, you have a lot of sex with different girls. Would you at some point decide that you've had too many partners and start saying no to sex?
Yeah, I can't see myself ever doing that. You'd have to be a pretty big douche if you're going out with multiple people. Anyway, like chef says, there really isn't a point to having sex just for the sake of having sex.
Oh, and missing the OSL finals for sex is not an option. Except maybe if it's ZvZ.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Let it die man, let it die...
never! when things look bad. u gotta skate!
You must be from Romania.
It's a play on Moltkes infinite wisdom, man.
I was just making... essentially a compilation of memes, not a genuine "attack" on someone, haha.
1.) A different girl every day? This is so unspeakably shallow I don't even have words to describe it. How could you see yourself boning all of them unless you're one of the inflated-ego douchetards who lives only to screw women and rub in it other guys' faces? Dunno, maybe my morals are different than most of the people I know...
2.) I assume the "no strings attached" part of this means you would just screw her and forget about her immediately to move on to the next girl starting the next day. This sounds just like the first one only with more time between each instance.
While I would say no immediately out of principle to the first scenario, I would always turn her down in the second because it's obvious in this situation neither one of us would actually be trying to pursue each other; it's just sex. I would want more than flirting to build upon between us, as well. Infatuation is one thing, but you won't even begin to understand another person until you spend plenty of time with them. If all you care about is the physical pleasure of the act and don't desire the emotional side of sex then you may as well just go beat off, things won't be any different for you except your bragging rights.
On December 19 2009 07:58 starfries wrote: Am I not seeing the part where it says she has a horrible disease or teeth in her vagina? because unless there's a really good reason (eg we are related) I don't know why I would EVER say no.
VAGINA DENTATA IT'S REAAAAAAL! (Sorry ask Pholon about my amusement over the movie Teeth.)
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
This is just frightening, SHIP IT HOLLA for both situations imo, I'm pretty liberal about that stuff. If I found myself in an actual relationship i would quit the others tho.
ahh fuck my donkey opponent hit runner runner flush vs trips with a high fuuuuuuu and then he hit and ran! fuuu
use your common sense; i'd turn people down if: 1)they are fugly (inside and out) 2)they are a man; i don't bend that way lololol 3)they are a russian woman into bdsm 4)i'd get in deep shit for having sex with them
plain and simple, whats up with those complicated and completely abnormal 'situations'???
I think most single guys would sleep with the hot girl for a few weeks in a row, then lose interest. Then eventually start doing it again out of boredom, but not even really want to. Like everything else in the world thats fun. I know thats most likely what would happen to me
Or tbh, Flash vs just about anyone is enough for me o.0
What if it's sex with Flash, or watching a game he just finished playing that is being broadcasted on an hour delay so it's on now. Also, you've heard it's a great game and you know he won't want to talk about it and just get to business.
On December 19 2009 07:26 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: i have passed on sex to watch Sea[Shield] play
i bet you were disappointed at the end of the game
no, because it was sea vs jaedong on andromeda
dude that game was _awesome_
omg i know that game was sooo sick...sea can be such a boss sometimes. (I'm trying real hard to turn the discussion in a TL thread from sex to sea vs. Jaedong lol)
If I ever come to the realization that there is no future with one of these girls, I would break it off with her, but still be up for no strings sex regardless.
On December 19 2009 06:58 Emon_ wrote: Reading another topic here on TL got me thinking about attitudes towards sex. I've written out two situations bellow of typical circumstances when saying no to sex would be an option. I would love to hear if anyone would turn down sex in either one of them, and for what reasons.
Situation 1
Say you were looking for a relationship and could date a different girl every day of the week. After a few dates, you and the girl would get to know each other better and become intimate. Since you are dating several girls at once and aren't really committed to any one of them, you have a lot of sex with different girls. Would you at some point decide that you've had too many partners and start saying no to sex? Situation 2
Once a week for a year, a hot girl would come into your life and start flirting with you. You didn't sign up for this, but she's ready to go. There are no strings attached and a new one would take her place the next week. Would you turn it down and continue going about your day, or would you sleep with her?
no, why the fuck would I turn it down? Unless im gaming or something theres really nothing that could possibly turn me off the idea of sex with random hot women lol!
On December 19 2009 07:13 NeverGG wrote: If it was with Kwanro.
No, seriously. TBH I am about as interested in sex as I am in chocolate fire guards. I have much more fulfilling and creative things to do with my time. Also where is the female scenario in this post? We do exist on TL!
LOLKWANROLLED.
i'm sure you and lilsusie are the only ones, NeverGG.
On December 19 2009 07:00 haster27 wrote: I would say no for both, since I am Korean and have very conservative traditional view about sex.
Despite, I am too nerd to care about such trivial matters
Edit: StorkHwaiting below me qft.
I'm with you there - I'm not Korean but I say no sex until you're married.
I remember hearing somebody say "keep your pecker in your pants and you'll stay out of trouble" and finding it hilarious, but now I think it's actually true as well. So much trash happens because people act like sex machines these days...I would expect people to treat sex as something that can be shared between two people who are actually planning on living and loving together for a lifetime. That would seem to make sense, but tons of people would rather do it the animal way - with anyone, any place, any time, just 'cause it feels good, right? I think that just sucks all the worth out of sex and turns it into something cheap and shallow. Personally I'd rather avoid all the baggage that goes with that lifestyle.
this doesnt necessarily have to do with sex.... but one time i was playing sc and my gf came over and i ignored her. then she keep on annoying me and i ignore her. Then she got piss and ask "Choose one , me or SC?" Then I said "SC" so she would leave me alone. she left pissed.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
I have been turning down sex for the passsed couple of weeks because she is 4 years younger than me, and im 19. but I am thinking about it... long and hard. (hahaha)
On December 19 2009 11:31 Meth wrote: I have been turning down sex for the passsed couple of weeks because she is 4 years younger than me, and im 19. but I am thinking about it... long and hard. (hahaha)
On December 19 2009 11:31 Meth wrote: I have been turning down sex for the passsed couple of weeks because she is 4 years younger than me, and im 19. but I am thinking about it... long and hard. (hahaha)
She's 15? Stop thinking about it and cut all ties.
On December 19 2009 11:31 Meth wrote: I have been turning down sex for the passsed couple of weeks because she is 4 years younger than me, and im 19. but I am thinking about it... long and hard. (hahaha)
She's 15? Stop thinking about it and cut all ties.
why? hes only got to, potentially, wait a few months..
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
How come everyone in this thread missed the Moltke reference.
Edit: Ok I suck I missed some posts that actually didn't.
To add some content to this now completely useless post, I did turn down sex once. The girl really liked me, she was sending me love letters all the time (real, paper ones), it was really sick lol, and yeah we were quite young :p, but I really didn't like her all that much except for her looks. When she jumped on me one day I managed to keep enough blood running in my brain instead of it going all to my dick to foresee the big hassle to come had I accepted so I didn't. I certainly could've had sex and tell her afterwards to get the fuck out and never bother me again but I won't do that ever to someone who likes me.
On December 19 2009 07:00 pubbanana wrote: I don't know, man. I would only turn it down if they had AIDS. I'll deal with STDs.
What about herpes? May have been asked already.
Personally, I love having sex. I would not say no in either situation. But there are times I would put it off. Like in the middle of the Super Bowl. That's more important than sex to me, because it only happens once a year. Maybe I would have sex at half time, but not during the game.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Holy shit, I haven't seen that in forever. Definitely was not expecting to see it. Awesome.
Also, based on the first page of answers (and I don't mean this to be insulting, I'm just stating it), I think there are a lot of people that haven't had sex before on that page. The reason I say that is that my answers were nearly identical before I had sex.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Let it die man, let it die...
never! when things look bad. u gotta skate!
You must be from Romania.
i am not from romania dumb. can not you see my country next to my name?!
Aren't you from America? And black (i.e. not Korean)?
On December 19 2009 07:00 haster27 wrote: I would say no for both, since I am Korean and have very conservative traditional view about sex.
Despite, I am too nerd to care about such trivial matters
Edit: StorkHwaiting below me qft.
I'm with you there - I'm not Korean but I say no sex until you're married.
I remember hearing somebody say "keep your pecker in your pants and you'll stay out of trouble" and finding it hilarious, but now I think it's actually true as well. So much trash happens because people act like sex machines these days...I would expect people to treat sex as something that can be shared between two people who are actually planning on living and loving together for a lifetime. That would seem to make sense, but tons of people would rather do it the animal way - with anyone, any place, any time, just 'cause it feels good, right? I think that just sucks all the worth out of sex and turns it into something cheap and shallow. Personally I'd rather avoid all the baggage that goes with that lifestyle.
Oh, don't worry, they're out there - they're just rare. Some people prefer quality to quantity - I say a faithful wife is better than a thousand whores any day.
Oh, don't worry, they're out there - they're just rare. Some people prefer quality to quantity - I say a faithful wife is better than a thousand whores any day.
Ahhh yes, but until that faithful wife...
As Kennigit says, all the women before your final one are practice.
I passed it before a few times because I knew I was going to break up (with "her") and I felt bad about it, said I was too tired and made other excuses not to have it a few times near the end of the relationship.
Oh, don't worry, they're out there - they're just rare. Some people prefer quality to quantity - I say a faithful wife is better than a thousand whores any day.
Ahhh yes, but until that faithful wife...
As Kennigit says, all the women before your final one are practice.
If you get used to "practicing" with women, don't bother finding "the final one." You're just practicing to get divorced. There's a reason the U.S. divorce rate is over 50% right now - it's 'cause too many guys like "practicing." Somehow it doesn't seem like doing that pays off, but maybe some dudes like getting divorced and going through all that hassle.
Heh - I find it funny that you call women "practice." I wonder what a girl would say if you told her "Don't worry, honey, you're just practice for the next one." I take it you either don't know girls very well, or you're just being sarcastic and I'm overreacting.
Oh, don't worry, they're out there - they're just rare. Some people prefer quality to quantity - I say a faithful wife is better than a thousand whores any day.
Ahhh yes, but until that faithful wife...
As Kennigit says, all the women before your final one are practice.
If you get used to "practicing" with women, don't bother finding "the final one." You're just practicing to get divorced. There's a reason the U.S. divorce rate is over 50% right now - it's 'cause too many guys like "practicing." Somehow it doesn't seem like doing that pays off, but maybe some dudes like getting divorced and going through all that hassle.
Heh - I find it funny that you call women "practice." I wonder what a girl would say if you told her "Don't worry, honey, you're just practice for the next one." I take it you either don't know girls very well, or you're just being sarcastic and I'm overreacting.
Oh, don't worry, they're out there - they're just rare. Some people prefer quality to quantity - I say a faithful wife is better than a thousand whores any day.
Ahhh yes, but until that faithful wife...
As Kennigit says, all the women before your final one are practice.
If you get used to "practicing" with women, don't bother finding "the final one." You're just practicing to get divorced. There's a reason the U.S. divorce rate is over 50% right now - it's 'cause too many guys like "practicing." Somehow it doesn't seem like doing that pays off, but maybe some dudes like getting divorced and going through all that hassle.
Heh - I find it funny that you call women "practice." I wonder what a girl would say if you told her "Don't worry, honey, you're just practice for the next one." I take it you either don't know girls very well, or you're just being sarcastic and I'm overreacting.
what if i said that women tend to think in the same way? at least from ages 18-25 - only when they realize their bio clocks are ticking badly, then they will start looking for "the one". Good luck then.
On December 19 2009 07:58 starfries wrote: Am I not seeing the part where it says she has a horrible disease or teeth in her vagina? because unless there's a really good reason (eg we are related) I don't know why I would EVER say no.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
YOU are my idol.
He's so obviously asian I dont even kno where to begin
In the beginning, when you don't know anything about sex, you go for the hot ones. After a couple, though, you realize that the funkiest girls are the best... and they arent necessarily the best looking, but they probably are the best in bed and the ones who care for you the deepest. And that's really what it's all about, not how much ego you can get from your buddies when you show them a picture of some hot girl's face after you came on it
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
YOU are my idol.
He's so obviously asian I dont even kno where to begin
In the beginning, when you don't know anything about sex, you go for the hot ones. After a couple, though, you realize that the funkiest girls are the best... and they arent necessarily the best looking, but they probably are the best in bed and the ones who care for you the deepest. And that's really what it's all about, not how much ego you can get from your buddies when you show them a picture of some hot girl's face after you came on it
Who cares about looks when your getting laid??? all you need to know is if she's good in bed or not???
man i got trolled pretty hard from that...haha moltke
The only reason i believed it was cause a Korean said it, which doesn't make that much sense when I think about it.
Also Skypig: you are extremely naive, the reason divorce rates are high is because divorces are possible, scandals and multiple partners/ "cheating" have existed since relationships have existed. Despite what you may think the "traditional" family structure isn't actually traditional, and it actually less prevalent in the world than multiple partner relationships, as well as less successful. The main reason people say that many more people are cheating/ having marital problems is because there is 10000x more media exposure of this behavior.
Example: Italy in 17/18th century, it was common, expected even, for every husband and wife to have a mistress or lover. There was very little negative social context towards this, partly because marriages have originated from political arrangements between families, not undying love.
Oh, don't worry, they're out there - they're just rare. Some people prefer quality to quantity - I say a faithful wife is better than a thousand whores any day.
Ahhh yes, but until that faithful wife...
As Kennigit says, all the women before your final one are practice.
If you get used to "practicing" with women, don't bother finding "the final one." You're just practicing to get divorced. There's a reason the U.S. divorce rate is over 50% right now - it's 'cause too many guys like "practicing." Somehow it doesn't seem like doing that pays off, but maybe some dudes like getting divorced and going through all that hassle.
Heh - I find it funny that you call women "practice." I wonder what a girl would say if you told her "Don't worry, honey, you're just practice for the next one." I take it you either don't know girls very well, or you're just being sarcastic and I'm overreacting.
what if i said that women tend to think in the same way? at least from ages 18-25 - only when they realize their bio clocks are ticking badly, then they will start looking for "the one". Good luck then.
So if you have both men and women thinking that the other partner in the relationship is "just practice" for the next time around (which happens all the time, sadly), what does that leave you with? Aren't you just being used by your so-called "partner"? If you can live with yourself knowing that you're nothing but convenient physical pleasure for the other person, then I guess it's your right. If the man knows he's being used by the woman (which is pathetic, but whatever) and vice versa, then that's pretty sad - but I guess that's how things are.
I admit I don't understand why people would prefer this "practicing" to having just a single faithful partner - from my own experience I can say that couples consisting of a single "stable" pair are way happier than those who are "just practicing."
Honestly, if all people want is physical pleasure, I don't see why they have to stick to each other for it - there's plenty of animals, objects, and even same-sex stuff for that. Come to think of it, I guess that explains homosexuality, bestiality, and all the stuff in between. Just people looking for pleasure. I tend to think of relationships as being based on more than just that, but I guess you would all disagree.
Oh, don't worry, they're out there - they're just rare. Some people prefer quality to quantity - I say a faithful wife is better than a thousand whores any day.
Ahhh yes, but until that faithful wife...
As Kennigit says, all the women before your final one are practice.
If you get used to "practicing" with women, don't bother finding "the final one." You're just practicing to get divorced. There's a reason the U.S. divorce rate is over 50% right now - it's 'cause too many guys like "practicing." Somehow it doesn't seem like doing that pays off, but maybe some dudes like getting divorced and going through all that hassle.
Heh - I find it funny that you call women "practice." I wonder what a girl would say if you told her "Don't worry, honey, you're just practice for the next one." I take it you either don't know girls very well, or you're just being sarcastic and I'm overreacting.
what if i said that women tend to think in the same way? at least from ages 18-25 - only when they realize their bio clocks are ticking badly, then they will start looking for "the one". Good luck then.
So if you have both men and women thinking that the other partner in the relationship is "just practice" for the next time around (which happens all the time, sadly), what does that leave you with? Aren't you just being used by your so-called "partner"? If you can live with yourself knowing that you're nothing but convenient physical pleasure for the other person, then I guess it's your right. If the man knows he's being used by the woman (which is pathetic, but whatever) and vice versa, then that's pretty sad - but I guess that's how things are.
I admit I don't understand why people would prefer this "practicing" to having just a single faithful partner - from my own experience I can say that couples consisting of a single "stable" pair are way happier than those who are "just practicing."
Honestly, if all people want is physical pleasure, I don't see why they have to stick to each other for it - there's plenty of animals, objects, and even same-sex stuff for that. Come to think of it, I guess that explains homosexuality, bestiality, and all the stuff in between. Just people looking for pleasure. I tend to think of relationships as being based on more than just that, but I guess you would all disagree.
You're misunderstanding this. One-night stand girls are practice. You usually don't enter a relationship unless you think there is a possibility for something long term. Not all sex happens in relationships, and you're confusing that issue. Sex =/= relationship.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
YOU are my idol.
He's so obviously asian I dont even kno where to begin
In the beginning, when you don't know anything about sex, you go for the hot ones. After a couple, though, you realize that the funkiest girls are the best... and they arent necessarily the best looking, but they probably are the best in bed and the ones who care for you the deepest. And that's really what it's all about, not how much ego you can get from your buddies when you show them a picture of some hot girl's face after you came on it
They have to be good at sex. They know no one would stay with their ugly-asses if they weren't! haha (I'm kidding.)
some people prefer full ring and some prefer heads up skypig
you gotta sk..
btw you dont seem to have any understanding of relationships, you completely fucked up the point that was made, you date women not just for "practice" in a physical way, but also for practice at handling relationships. you assume that a short term relationship, or a "liberal" one, is based off of physical desire only.
On December 19 2009 15:50 ShaperofDreams wrote: some people prefer full ring and some prefer heads up skypig
you gotta sk..
btw you dont seem to have any understanding of relationships, you completely fucked up the point that was made, you date women not just for "practice" in a physical way, but also for practice at handling relationships. you assume that a short term relationship, or a "liberal" one, is based off of physical desire only.
also read my previous post.
I disagree on the dating thing. I won't date a girl unless I think there is potential for a very long term relationship. Otherwise, being with one person is pointless.
On December 19 2009 15:50 ShaperofDreams wrote: some people prefer full ring and some prefer heads up skypig
you gotta sk..
btw you dont seem to have any understanding of relationships, you completely fucked up the point that was made, you date women not just for "practice" in a physical way, but also for practice at handling relationships. you assume that a short term relationship, or a "liberal" one, is based off of physical desire only.
also read my previous post.
I disagree on the dating thing. I won't date a girl unless I think there is potential for a very long term relationship. Otherwise, being with one person is pointless.
+1.same thing with me.i need to know that the relationship is going somewhere or there is no point in sticking arround.
On December 19 2009 15:39 ShaperofDreams wrote: man i got trolled pretty hard from that...haha moltke
The only reason i believed it was cause a Korean said it, which doesn't make that much sense when I think about it.
Also Skypig: you are extremely naive, the reason divorce rates are high is because divorces are possible, scandals and multiple partners/ "cheating" have existed since relationships have existed. Despite what you may think the "traditional" family structure isn't actually traditional, and it actually less prevalent in the world than multiple partner relationships, as well as less successful. The main reason people say that many more people are cheating/ having marital problems is because there is 10000x more media exposure of this behavior.
Example: Italy in 17/18th century, it was common, expected even, for every husband and wife to have a mistress or lover. There was very little negative social context towards this, partly because marriages have originated from political arrangements between families, not undying love.
So what if scandals and cheating have existed since relationships existed? Does that somehow justify the rising divorce rate? The very fact that it's GOING UP shows that it has more to do with the values of the people involved rather than with its historical existence. The divorce rate used to be much, much lower - if what you're saying is true, then it would have been at a constantly high rate, which is not the case.
You're correct when you cite media issues as being an influence - however the REASON that the media shows such behavior is because that's what people want. They don't show this stuff for no reason. Like you said, it's been going on since way long ago; it's just that now, people are becoming more accepting of it and therefore they need more and more. The media spreads the trash around, people accept it, it affects their VALUES, and then they follow what they've seen. I bet most of the people posting right now are acting more under the influence of the media than their own better judgment, values, and conscience. I'm still right when I say that "practicing" on women leads to divorce - and that's because "practicing" means that you're not looking for a stable relationship, you're just looking for pleasure and "trying out" all the girls you can. That doesn't lend itself well to marriage, as is evidenced by the laughable divorce rate we have.
In short, all I'm trying to do is point out how stupid it is to have a "I'm using you, you're using me" interaction with someone in the light of having a stable relationship. But, if all you're looking for is pleasure, than marriage isn't important anyway, right?
On December 19 2009 15:50 ShaperofDreams wrote: some people prefer full ring and some prefer heads up skypig
you gotta sk..
btw you dont seem to have any understanding of relationships, you completely fucked up the point that was made, you date women not just for "practice" in a physical way, but also for practice at handling relationships. you assume that a short term relationship, or a "liberal" one, is based off of physical desire only.
also read my previous post.
Dude, it was you who mentioned that Kennigit said that "all the woman before the final one are practice", and that's what I was attacking, since by that you mean that ALL relationships before the final one are "practice." The problem I have with the practice thing is that it gives you the wrong mentality for relationships - if you're thinking "this is practice", then you're not going to want to settle with one person and make it permanent. At some point, you have to stop thinking that or you won't stay with one person. When you're "practicing" relationships, all you're really practicing is how to get with someone for a while, break up, and keep looking for "the one" or "the better person." You have to stop thinking that practicing trash if you want to settle down with one person; otherwise you'll always be "practicing" (which leads to cheating, multiple partners, etc.). In other words, it's impossible to actually BE a stable pair with someone if you're "practicing."
And as for your comment on short term relationships, I'm not sure why you'd bother having a short-term relationship anyway - if you know it's not going to last, you're basically admitting that you're using the other person temporarily. If you cared about anything more than physical pleasure (i.e. their feelings, emotions, etc.) I'm not sure why you'd be entering into such a relationship considering that no one likes being considered a "short-term" commitment. If you do care about more than physical desire, than you're going against your better judgment in a short-term interaction because you KNOW that you'll be hurting the other person by leaving them eventually.
I feel like this is happening to me right now, and I haven't picked in real life yet. I mean, I won't do it, but it's hard to resist just fooling around. What's more insane is that these girls have never done anything with any guys.
On December 19 2009 15:53 ShaperofDreams wrote: What do you define as a very long term relationship?
Potential for marriage. I also realize that is impossible to find out immediately, but if I don't click with a girl immediately (like we have very different political or religious views) I won't stick around. I will, however, continue to have sex with her until she realizes that what we have is not going anywhere. Am I a horrible person? Maybe, but what's a man to do?
On December 19 2009 15:50 ShaperofDreams wrote: some people prefer full ring and some prefer heads up skypig
you gotta sk..
btw you dont seem to have any understanding of relationships, you completely fucked up the point that was made, you date women not just for "practice" in a physical way, but also for practice at handling relationships. you assume that a short term relationship, or a "liberal" one, is based off of physical desire only.
also read my previous post.
Dude, it was you who mentioned that Kennigit said that "all the woman before the final one are practice", and that's what I was attacking, since by that you mean that ALL relationships before the final one are "practice." The problem I have with the practice thing is that it gives you the wrong mentality for relationships - if you're thinking "this is practice", then you're not going to want to settle with one person and make it permanent. At some point, you have to stop thinking that or you won't stay with one person. When you're "practicing" relationships, all you're really practicing is how to get with someone for a while, break up, and keep looking for "the one" or "the better person." You have to stop thinking that practicing trash if you want to settle down with one person; otherwise you'll always be "practicing" (which leads to cheating, multiple partners, etc.). In other words, it's impossible to actually BE a stable pair with someone if you're "practicing."
And as for your comment on short term relationships, I'm not sure why you'd bother having a short-term relationship anyway - if you know it's not going to last, you're basically admitting that you're using the other person temporarily. If you cared about anything more than physical pleasure (i.e. their feelings, emotions, etc.) I'm not sure why you'd be entering into such a relationship considering that no one likes being considered a "short-term" commitment. If you do care about more than physical desire, than you're going against your better judgment in a short-term interaction because you KNOW that you'll be hurting the other person by leaving them eventually.
Short term relationships is a nicer way of saying one-night stand or fuck buddy.
You're still completely misunderstanding the idea of practice girls. Practice girls = one night stands and fuck buddies. No one goes into a relationship thinking "This is practice for another girl later on." It may be something that you say after the relationship doesn't work out (and good luck having the first one you ever enter work out. And you'll need a shitton of self-control and self-deprivation to avoid having sex with her) to make yourself feel better, but the mentality isn't to use a girl as a practice girl. If you decide to start seriously dating someone (at least in my mind), it's because you think that there is potential for something more than being physical.
You're speaking from a point of view that greatly lacks experience, which you've admitted. I don't mean to be an asshole, but you really don't know what you're talking about. I used to think very similarly, then I had a gf for a while and I learned a few things. It didn't work out in the end, but I also didn't go into that thinking "this girl will be good practice for another girl that's worth something later on." I thought "man, this girl is amazing, I really want to be with her. I better make this clear and start dating her so I don't lose her (obviously not verbatim)."
I disagree with NeverGG in so far as I feel sex is an important part of relationships. Relationships are an important part of my life, ergo sex is important.
That being said, completely casual sex such as the situations you've proposed (if they were more general neutral) ceased to interest me a fair while ago.
On December 19 2009 07:13 NeverGG wrote: If it was with Kwanro.
No, seriously. TBH I am about as interested in sex as I am in chocolate fire guards. I have much more fulfilling and creative things to do with my time. Also where is the female scenario in this post? We do exist on TL!
sex is very fulfilling for a girl lolol
imo sex em both as long as no hiv or ugly as shit with loose skin and flab hanging all over everything
Skypig your saying i shouldn't date short term because it will end up hurting someone. Also you are saying that every short term relationship is just "using someone". You have some serious misconceptions, not everyone wants to get married with every person they date, many people like to make a connection, have an extreme amount of fun and joy and love in their lives for a time, it does not guarantee marriage. The search for a your woman should be fun, it doesn't mean you have to dislike all others before her. Even if you realllly hit it off with a great woman you cant guarantee marriage, who knows what can happen? Maybe your just not ready t settle down just like that at the time, maybe there's one flaw you simply can't abide to live with for the rest of your life. You shouldn't take the "practice" quote so literally, it implies that you shouldn't feel guilty about having fun and finding people, as it ultimately culminates as your maturity as a person, your discovery of "the one" and a happy life.
I don't mean to objectify women but, saying you should be celibate, or even super inexperienced/"pure" before getting with your perfect woman is like saying you shouldn't drive until you can afford a 200K Porshe.
The only time I pass on sex is when I know the girl is too clingy and will want to have my babies if we screw once. But most of the time I still do it ne ways..... lol
I'm a man whore and damn proud of it, even more so after I found out about mocospace, what a fucking baller site! The chicks on that site like seek you out and make all the first moves, it's like a alternate universe.
I went to it, and some bullshit pop-up thing tried to get me to install one of those antivirus progrmas that aren't really antivirus programs but are impossibly hard to remove from the computer, and completely fuck the whole thing up. It also has this ridiculously annoying H1N1 advertisement. Also, all but maybe five of the girls in my state were ugly (I looked through all 17 pages because I have nothing better to do). One of them was apparently an Asian dominatrix.... which I found really strange, yet somewhat arousing.
On December 19 2009 16:44 Alethios wrote: These are pretty odd "typical circumstances".
I disagree with NeverGG in so far as I feel sex is an important part of relationships. Relationships are an important part of my life, ergo sex is important.
That being said, completely casual sex such as the situations you've proposed (if they were more general neutral) ceased to interest me a fair while ago.
I'm sure it is for some people - I wasn't talking about them however. I was talking solely about myself so there's not really anything to disagree with ^^;
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Oh Jesus Christ, are you buying a computer or are you looking for a partner? Your list is just plain scary. There are certain joys found in being open-minded and accepting of differences you know...
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
On December 19 2009 16:44 Alethios wrote: These are pretty odd "typical circumstances".
I disagree with NeverGG in so far as I feel sex is an important part of relationships. Relationships are an important part of my life, ergo sex is important.
That being said, completely casual sex such as the situations you've proposed (if they were more general neutral) ceased to interest me a fair while ago.
I'm sure it is for some people - I wasn't talking about them however. I was talking solely about myself so there's not really anything to disagree with ^^;
Indeed! My apologies. Perhaps my point could be better made by saying:
NeverGG feels that, speaking for herself, there are more fulfilling and creative things that she could be doing. For the most part, I feel the same way.
At the same time, I feel that having sex is an important part of the upkeep of all romantic relationships. When I am in a relationship with somebody I care about however, sex becomes much more important to me. It becomes much more fulfilling and somehow just feels far better. Then there is the addition of the 'glow' for a number of hours afterwards, which I never get unless I care deeply for my partner and is always a pleasure.
There are only two reasons why I would turn down a perfectly good opportunity to have sex with a girl. 1) I'm not physically attracted to her 2) I'm in a serious relationship with another girl
Hahahaha. Love how my post started whole discussion about nature of relationships. In fact, I am too much of the pessimist to believe that I will ever find a girl that will be compatible with me. Marriage-lessness for the win!
Of course, it will be awesome if I met such wonderful girl though
Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
the only time i have ever turned down sex is if i have a severe stomach or headache which has happened maybe 3 times. otherwise, i've never ever turned it down, and even left starcraft mid game for it, a couple of times.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
Ha, not when it only lasts for 30 seconds. No amount of masturbation can prepare you for it either.
On December 19 2009 07:12 number1gog wrote: I think this topic is different for everyone. Your two scenarios are from a single man's point of view, whereas some of us are in long term committed relationships.
I personally would never say no to sex (yes I had to underline that for emphasis). But its with the same girl every time, so it's a little different from the playboy lifestyles you're presenting.
This guy sums up my exact thoughts. When your in a committed relationship, your view on sex might be a little diffirent. From a married guys standpoint, no I wouldnt turn down sex with a hot chick. + Show Spoiler +
Short term relationships is a nicer way of saying one-night stand or fuck buddy.
You're still completely misunderstanding the idea of practice girls. Practice girls = one night stands and fuck buddies. No one goes into a relationship thinking "This is practice for another girl later on." It may be something that you say after the relationship doesn't work out (and good luck having the first one you ever enter work out. And you'll need a shitton of self-control and self-deprivation to avoid having sex with her) to make yourself feel better, but the mentality isn't to use a girl as a practice girl. If you decide to start seriously dating someone (at least in my mind), it's because you think that there is potential for something more than being physical.
You're speaking from a point of view that greatly lacks experience, which you've admitted. I don't mean to be an asshole, but you really don't know what you're talking about. I used to think very similarly, then I had a gf for a while and I learned a few things. It didn't work out in the end, but I also didn't go into that thinking "this girl will be good practice for another girl that's worth something later on." I thought "man, this girl is amazing, I really want to be with her. I better make this clear and start dating her so I don't lose her (obviously not verbatim)."
Relax, man - I jumped all over the "practice girl" stuff because I have a weak spot for trashing stupid arguments, and that was definitely one. The way you worded your first statement implied that you thought of all the women you'll ever meet as "practice" before the real thing; if that's not what you meant, then you could have saved a lot of trouble and just said so right from the start. Again, I'm going off of what YOU said. You said yourself that no one goes into a relationship thinking it's practice - why then did you bring up that Kennigit quote before? Whatever, dude. Try not to switch your viewpoint so abruptly.
Also, I'm not sure why you say my point of view "lacks experience" - I definitely lack experience with one night stands and running through different girlfriends, but that's because I've made a conscious choice to avoid that garbage. I don't want that experience and I don't plan on getting it, ever. The fact that "you learned a few things" doesn't make you more qualified to argue this at all - if anything, it means that you'll be more biased towards treating relationships with women as non-permanent because that's what happened to you (no offense intended, you said it yourself). Because that's what your "experience" has shown you, that's the way you'll think. I know people that never had a different partner other than the one that they're married to currently, and they would tell you that you're crazy for thinking that going through girlfriends "gives you experience." If anything, it gives you more stress, guilt, and monkey-wrenches in your life than you need, not to mention it ensures that you'll approach the next relationship ready to repeat the same thing over. If you find that type of experience advantageous, fine. As far as I'm concerned, I know it's possible to find the right partner the first time around and to remain happy with that choice the rest of your life - for me, that's way better than playing around with one night stands (using people, duh, which I have a problem with as well) and "practicing" with different girlfriends. I think a lot of the people here also have no interest in developing stable relationships; they just want the thrill of the chase and constantly-changing physical pleasures from different girls. If that's the case with you as well, then you shouldn't bother arguing about relationships, period, because that's not your interest anyway.
On December 19 2009 06:58 Emon_ wrote: Reading another topic here on TL got me thinking about attitudes towards sex. I've written out two situations bellow of typical circumstances when saying no to sex would be an option. I would love to hear if anyone would turn down sex in either one of them, and for what reasons.
Situation 1
Say you were looking for a relationship and could date a different girl every day of the week. After a few dates, you and the girl would get to know each other better and become intimate. Since you are dating several girls at once and aren't really committed to any one of them, you have a lot of sex with different girls. Would you at some point decide that you've had too many partners and start saying no to sex?
Okay, so, would you have a job? Or be in school?
If so, how the fuck would you find the time and energy to date several girls at once? I happen to enjoy hanging with friends, or even doing shit like playing SC.....
If not, it's not a "typical situation".....
Situation 2
Once a week for a year, a hot girl would come into your life and start flirting with you. You didn't sign up for this, but she's ready to go. There are no strings attached and a new one would take her place the next week. Would you turn it down and continue going about your day, or would you sleep with her?
There are a lot of factors that would go into this one. I have turned down one-night stands before, even if they were hot. Why? Because I wasn't attracted to them. There was something I didn't like about them, and it was enough to make me refuse..... It's impossible to explain properly.....
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
Thanks for all the replies! It's really nice to hear all of the different perspectives. From the conservative to the liberal. I've only read through page 3 so far and I would like to reply to a couple of the posts there.
On December 19 2009 07:00 haster27 wrote: I would say no for both, since I am Korean and have very conservative traditional view about sex.
Despite, I am too nerd to care about such trivial matters
Edit: StorkHwaiting below me qft.
Congratulations to you on being a person with integrity. Hope you find a woman that is as honorable as you!
On December 19 2009 07:04 StorkHwaiting wrote: These are both really odd situations. Why not have a relationship with a person? It's creepy to stick my dick into friends. It's not something I'm habituated to do.
I'd rather find a girl who supports me and my life goals and that I find attractive and morally compatible. I'm lucky enough to have found a girl like that and am dating her now. I've gone on many dates with other girls and had a few real shitty relationships and I can say without a doubt that a bad relationship for me = bad sex. I feel hollow and kind of disgusted with myself afterwards. Only a very egotistical selfish person goes around hi-fiving himself just coz he got with a good looking girl. Then again, there are quite a few egotistical selfish people out there who think "scoring" a hot lay is an accomplishment.
I understand that you feel being committed to one woman is a more fulfilling situation. And in turn it lets you focus on other parts of life. Though this doesn’t come easily for a lot of people. And in all likelihood you’ll have to date some different women first.
On December 19 2009 07:13 NeverGG wrote: If it was with Kwanro.
No, seriously. TBH I am about as interested in sex as I am in chocolate fire guards. I have much more fulfilling and creative things to do with my time. Also where is the female scenario in this post? We do exist on TL!
On December 19 2009 07:15 Zoler wrote: If the person is ugly?
They are attractive and specifically tailored to your needs. Just wondering if you would refuse based on principle/ethic/morale and what the reasoning behind it would be
On December 19 2009 07:58 starfries wrote: Am I not seeing the part where it says she has a horrible disease or teeth in her vagina? because unless there's a really good reason (eg we are related) I don't know why I would EVER say no.
hahaha ^^ ok man. . . I hear where you are coming from ^^
On December 19 2009 08:08 Foucault wrote: Sex is crazy overhyped though unless it's love imo
Depends pretty much on how you need it at a particular moment, hence the amount of priority it has over other needs. It could be very boring if done when you don't want to, so why wouldn't you say no if you don't really feel like doing it?
Basically, ignoring the first post, whenever i wouldn't feel like it.
This whole "sex is the best thing you can ever do" doesn't really ring true to me. Even though it's fun and feels good. It's not my one and only goal in life.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
hahahah thats so sweet and incredibly naive.
In my opinion buying a car with no test drive is not good, specially because sex is not something to abstain in the name of sanctimonious morality, or delayed gratification or whatever.
You just said that its something good, that you are waiting to do, well my friend here is the real deal, theres no reason to delay it, if you both like it each, enjoy spending time toghether, want to get MARRIED, sex is just one more thing you could be enjoying toghether today!
If an engaged couple said they both have tried weed before once, and liked it, but want to wait to smoke toghether for when they are married would it make any sense ?
Enjoy sex today, you never know what tomorrow reserves.
Short term relationships is a nicer way of saying one-night stand or fuck buddy.
You're still completely misunderstanding the idea of practice girls. Practice girls = one night stands and fuck buddies. No one goes into a relationship thinking "This is practice for another girl later on." It may be something that you say after the relationship doesn't work out (and good luck having the first one you ever enter work out. And you'll need a shitton of self-control and self-deprivation to avoid having sex with her) to make yourself feel better, but the mentality isn't to use a girl as a practice girl. If you decide to start seriously dating someone (at least in my mind), it's because you think that there is potential for something more than being physical.
You're speaking from a point of view that greatly lacks experience, which you've admitted. I don't mean to be an asshole, but you really don't know what you're talking about. I used to think very similarly, then I had a gf for a while and I learned a few things. It didn't work out in the end, but I also didn't go into that thinking "this girl will be good practice for another girl that's worth something later on." I thought "man, this girl is amazing, I really want to be with her. I better make this clear and start dating her so I don't lose her (obviously not verbatim)."
Relax, man - I jumped all over the "practice girl" stuff because I have a weak spot for trashing stupid arguments, and that was definitely one. The way you worded your first statement implied that you thought of all the women you'll ever meet as "practice" before the real thing; if that's not what you meant, then you could have saved a lot of trouble and just said so right from the start. Again, I'm going off of what YOU said. You said yourself that no one goes into a relationship thinking it's practice - why then did you bring up that Kennigit quote before? Whatever, dude. Try not to switch your viewpoint so abruptly.
Also, I'm not sure why you say my point of view "lacks experience" - I definitely lack experience with one night stands and running through different girlfriends, but that's because I've made a conscious choice to avoid that garbage. I don't want that experience and I don't plan on getting it, ever. The fact that "you learned a few things" doesn't make you more qualified to argue this at all - if anything, it means that you'll be more biased towards treating relationships with women as non-permanent because that's what happened to you (no offense intended, you said it yourself). Because that's what your "experience" has shown you, that's the way you'll think. I know people that never had a different partner other than the one that they're married to currently, and they would tell you that you're crazy for thinking that going through girlfriends "gives you experience." If anything, it gives you more stress, guilt, and monkey-wrenches in your life than you need, not to mention it ensures that you'll approach the next relationship ready to repeat the same thing over. If you find that type of experience advantageous, fine. As far as I'm concerned, I know it's possible to find the right partner the first time around and to remain happy with that choice the rest of your life - for me, that's way better than playing around with one night stands (using people, duh, which I have a problem with as well) and "practicing" with different girlfriends. I think a lot of the people here also have no interest in developing stable relationships; they just want the thrill of the chase and constantly-changing physical pleasures from different girls. If that's the case with you as well, then you shouldn't bother arguing about relationships, period, because that's not your interest anyway.
Now you're misquoting people. I never quoted Kennegit.
To your second paragraph, you're still misunderstanding me. I don't know how I can make it more clear either. You lack experience with women, that is (as you've admitted) fact. Being that arranged marriages don't really exist in the Western World anymore, it's really hard to find one person and end up with them for your whole life. What's the likeliness that the FIRST person you date (not even necessarily have sex with) is the person you will marry? The odds are extremely against you. The girl I dated, I had every intention of being with her for a very long time (and in my mind, marriage was a very plausible idea with her), but it didn't work out. There were differences that we had that were, apparently, irreconcilable. But the idea of "using her for practice for a better girl later on" never entered my mind. You're blurring the line between serious and non-serious relationships (and by non-serious relationships I mean casual sex, one night stands, and fuck buddies). Sex IS important in relationships at some point, because it's a way of keeping each other physically satisfied.
You're absolutely right that going through relationships adds stress, guilt, etc. But it's really hard to avoid that. The people you know that are with the first person they ever dated are the exception, not the rule. Most people aren't that lucky. Again, people don't decide to seriously see one another (i.e. date exclusively) thinking "this will be good practice." Saying "it was good practice for the right one" is a way of holding your ego together. Instead of coming to terms that you fucked up, or there was something they couldn't deal with in your personality, or vice versa, you say "I'll be better for the next girl." And hopefully you will, because it's almost impossible to find a "soul mate" on the first try.
To recap: girlfriends are not seen as "practice" when starting the relationship. It's impossible to get to know someone on a level intimate enough to marry them without having been with them for some time (there are things you just don't tell friends). Because it's impossible to get to know someone on that level immediately (i.e. you have to spend a lot of time with them), you date them, get to know them better as a person, and along the way decide if you can put up with their shit for the rest of your life (i.e. you want to marry them). Most of the time it's not going to work out, but you didn't begin the relationship with the mindset that it won't work out. Your mentality changes when you're in a relationship, so much so that previous thinking (like what I'm typing right now) goes out the window. When you fall in love with someone (or pairbond if you want to call it something different), you think it's special and unique, and unbreakable. The likeliness is that it's not, though, and that it will end. But, when you're in the relationship, you always say "damn the statistics! We're different." So, our thinking outside of relationships does not apply to our thinking inside of them, because of the change that occurs when in a relationship. That's why not having any experience with this issue matters. I reference myself a lot because all I can go on is personal experience, but breaking up with my ex didn't seem possible for a long time, until about a month before we actually broke up.
This probably still won't make sense to you, but it really is something you have to experience to understand. Emotions are illogical, so debating this in a logical manner doesn't work.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
hahahah thats so sweet and incredibly naive.
In my opinion buying a car with no test drive is not good, specially because sex is not something to abstain in the name of sanctimonious morality, or delayed gratification or whatever.
You just said that its something good, that you are waiting to do, well my friend here is the real deal, theres no reason to delay it, if you both like it each, enjoy spending time toghether, want to get MARRIED, sex is just one more thing you could be enjoying toghether today!
If an engaged couple said they both have tried weed before once, and liked it, but want to wait to smoke toghether for when they are married would it make any sense ?
Enjoy sex today, you never know what tomorrow reserves.
Except it's more like a couple that's never tried weed and is waiting until the right time to try it together.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
Ha, not when it only lasts for 30 seconds. No amount of masturbation can prepare you for it either.
I... I don't think this is what happens the first time.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
Ha, not when it only lasts for 30 seconds. No amount of masturbation can prepare you for it either.
I... I don't think this is what happens the first time.
30 seconds is hyperbole. But sex isn't all that amazing for the girl the first time a guy has sex, because he's most likely bad at it (and so is a girl having sex for the first time).
On December 20 2009 17:34 D10 wrote: Yep and theres the fact that if you had been having sex all this time, you would be sure that your honey moon will rock in terms of sex.
I would say no in both situations, I have better things to do with my time than meaningless sex.... It would be great if you could use more gender neutral language in these situations, there are women on this site too =p
I definitely don't want to get married ever. Settle down yes...later. I think marriage is an out dated practice and I don't need to sign a contract to "force" me to be faithful and take care of any children I make, I use integrity for that.
Edit for youtube imbed: (yes I know youtube thread, but this is related to the subject) and yes it's a comedian so don't nit-pick and start arguments about the points he makes, I do not endorse his every word and sacrifice a goat to him every year because i posted this.
I would have sex with the any of the girls who are flirting with me if they were decent-good looking; only if there were no strings attached as you said earlier.. definitely until I find a girl that I truly like and want to settle with (this would be based on if I see myself with them in the long run, fun and easy to get along with, ...pretty much someone you can bring home to meet your family), once I find this girl I wouldn't rush into things quickly and just go with the flow.
I always turn down sex if the girl is not good-looking enough or if shes too drunk. It's no hair-thin line for me as I've turned down sex several times, sometimes you know it's just not worth it. There have been occations when I HAD to have sex with the girl in order to get away from the situation and I tell you... that moment still haunts me.
On December 19 2009 07:14 StarN wrote: In order to answer these questions you might have to elaborate a bit more on the girls personalities
-Their religion, and respective piety -Their family and family history -Their socio-economic class -Their artistic and literary talents -Their sensitivity, romanticism and sentimentalism -Their patriotism, provincialism, and rootedness in their native culture -Their cooking, cleaning and other domestic abilities -Their mental and emotional stability -Their historical attitude and preferences regarding bourgeois family life -Their racial origins (if not already clear) -Their feminine virtues (virginity, modesty, etc)
Depending on what she answers for these I might say yes.
30 seconds is hyperbole. But sex isn't all that amazing for the girl the first time a guy has sex, because he's most likely bad at it (and so is a girl having sex for the first time).
The most important sex organ is the brain.
What, are you going to talk about how much better "thrusting technique" gets with practise?
Not to mention every time you are with a new girl you will have new things to learn.
On my first time, my girlfriend wept with joy. Months of erection problems will do that, I guess. But you could get a similar effect by holding off until marriage.
Basically your sentiment that the first time must suck for the girl is completely wrong. In fact, in relationships, sex often gets worse over time because a couple can get too comfortable with each other.
Im a little bitch that gets emotionally involved too but i dont turn down sex , my penis is stronger, however, my lazyness is stronger than my penis like this good looking girl asks me in the middle of the night to pay her a visit, ive declined many times cuz i need to take a shower, get dressed, drive to her house etc... yawns.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
Ha, not when it only lasts for 30 seconds. No amount of masturbation can prepare you for it either.
I... I don't think this is what happens the first time.
30 seconds is hyperbole. But sex isn't all that amazing for the girl the first time a guy has sex, because he's most likely bad at it (and so is a girl having sex for the first time).
The idea that people are "bad" at sex if they haven't had it before is such a bunch of shit. The first time I had sex it lasted 30+ minutes and was amazing. I don't know if it's the media or what that keeps perpetuating this stupid idea that the first time you do it you'll be bad at it. It's pretty hard to be bad at sex, honestly.
Also, anyone who says they wouldn't turn down sex ever has never been in a long term relationship. I doubt that anyone who has been having sex with someone for more than a year and/or is living with the person hasn't turned down sex at least once.
On December 21 2009 11:33 baal wrote: Im a little bitch that gets emotionally involved too but i dont turn down sex , my penis is stronger, however, my lazyness is stronger than my penis like this good looking girl asks me in the middle of the night to pay her a visit, ive declined many times cuz i need to take a shower, get dressed, drive to her house etc... yawns.
It's not about the penis, it's about the <3. I have no problem with one night stands, I just don't do them.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
Ha, not when it only lasts for 30 seconds. No amount of masturbation can prepare you for it either.
I... I don't think this is what happens the first time.
30 seconds is hyperbole. But sex isn't all that amazing for the girl the first time a guy has sex, because he's most likely bad at it (and so is a girl having sex for the first time).
The idea that people are "bad" at sex if they haven't had it before is such a bunch of shit. The first time I had sex it lasted 30+ minutes and was amazing. I don't know if it's the media or what that keeps perpetuating this stupid idea that the first time you do it you'll be bad at it. It's pretty hard to be bad at sex, honestly.
The idea is that most people lose their virginity around 16~ and 16 year olds are fucking terrible at sex.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
Ha, not when it only lasts for 30 seconds. No amount of masturbation can prepare you for it either.
I... I don't think this is what happens the first time.
30 seconds is hyperbole. But sex isn't all that amazing for the girl the first time a guy has sex, because he's most likely bad at it (and so is a girl having sex for the first time).
The idea that people are "bad" at sex if they haven't had it before is such a bunch of shit. The first time I had sex it lasted 30+ minutes and was amazing. I don't know if it's the media or what that keeps perpetuating this stupid idea that the first time you do it you'll be bad at it. It's pretty hard to be bad at sex, honestly.
ROFL this is absolutely wrong and even irrational.
Ofcourse you will suck at sex as a novice, it doesnt mean a 50yo guy is amazing, same as a Taxi driver wont beat Schumacher just because he has driven more Kilometers.
However if you take interest in sex, dont have a narrow mind like to experiment and educate yourself, your skill will increase greatly, but you are probably still very young so you dont know this yet.
On December 19 2009 06:58 Emon_ wrote: Reading another topic here on TL got me thinking about attitudes towards sex. I've written out two situations bellow of typical circumstances when saying no to sex would be an option. I would love to hear if anyone would turn down sex in either one of them, and for what reasons.
Situation 1
Say you were looking for a relationship and could date a different girl every day of the week. After a few dates, you and the girl would get to know each other better and become intimate. Since you are dating several girls at once and aren't really committed to any one of them, you have a lot of sex with different girls. Would you at some point decide that you've had too many partners and start saying no to sex? Situation 2
Once a week for a year, a hot girl would come into your life and start flirting with you. You didn't sign up for this, but she's ready to go. There are no strings attached and a new one would take her place the next week. Would you turn it down and continue going about your day, or would you sleep with her?
#1 ... No? Only if a girl that I could see myself getting married to came along. #2 ..........Never, unless htey had STD;s otherwise id be tapping it weekly.
The day9 daily is in an hour, and there hasn't been one for a while. i was so hyped for last night's, but then there were software issues. there is NO WAY im missing it tonight (lol)
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
Ha, not when it only lasts for 30 seconds. No amount of masturbation can prepare you for it either.
I... I don't think this is what happens the first time.
30 seconds is hyperbole. But sex isn't all that amazing for the girl the first time a guy has sex, because he's most likely bad at it (and so is a girl having sex for the first time).
The idea that people are "bad" at sex if they haven't had it before is such a bunch of shit. The first time I had sex it lasted 30+ minutes and was amazing. I don't know if it's the media or what that keeps perpetuating this stupid idea that the first time you do it you'll be bad at it. It's pretty hard to be bad at sex, honestly.
Also, anyone who says they wouldn't turn down sex ever has never been in a long term relationship. I doubt that anyone who has been having sex with someone for more than a year and/or is living with the person hasn't turned down sex at least once.
Well, you either masturbated already or you got lucky or you have natural talent. Not every guy has those options on the first time. Girls is a different story. It's literally impossible to suck at sex the first time for girls - because of the whole v-card thing.
On December 19 2009 06:58 Emon_ wrote: Reading another topic here on TL got me thinking about attitudes towards sex. I've written out two situations bellow of typical circumstances when saying no to sex would be an option. I would love to hear if anyone would turn down sex in either one of them, and for what reasons.
Situation 1
Say you were looking for a relationship and could date a different girl every day of the week. After a few dates, you and the girl would get to know each other better and become intimate. Since you are dating several girls at once and aren't really committed to any one of them, you have a lot of sex with different girls. Would you at some point decide that you've had too many partners and start saying no to sex? Situation 2
Once a week for a year, a hot girl would come into your life and start flirting with you. You didn't sign up for this, but she's ready to go. There are no strings attached and a new one would take her place the next week. Would you turn it down and continue going about your day, or would you sleep with her?
edit: whoops.
Situation 1:
I would be choosey, as I am now. Once your game is on a certain level, you have the right to be choosey like a stuck up girl. Think about it, generally men are the ones trying to woo girls and get rejected and all that, but when you are good with women and dating, the roles reverse and you become the man to please. I just make my standards higher and make her work more for everything she gets out of me.
Situation 2.
Shes hot, why not. If you are attracted to her, and she wants it, then stick it to her. Wrap it up. Dont seem like you are putting the pussy on a pedastal. I would fuck her and continue my day like normal.
Well, you either masturbated already or you got lucky or you have natural talent. Not every guy has those options on the first time. Girls is a different story. It's literally impossible to suck at sex the first time for girls - because of the whole v-card thing.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh'
Some girls suck at sex. Wether they are virgins or not, I don't know what the fuck went wrong. Some women just don't know how to do it, and it is seriously a turn off. I would rather talk to her about SC.
Well, you either masturbated already or you got lucky or you have natural talent. Not every guy has those options on the first time. Girls is a different story. It's literally impossible to suck at sex the first time for girls - because of the whole v-card thing.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh'
Some girls suck at sex. Wether they are virgins or not, I don't know what the fuck went wrong. Some women just don't know how to do it, and it is seriously a turn off. I would rather talk to her about SC.
On December 20 2009 01:45 LaughingTulkas wrote: Probably the only one like this on here, but I'm engaged and we're waiting till we're married. The honeymoon is something to look forward to eh? Sometimes delayed gratification is better
Ha, not when it only lasts for 30 seconds. No amount of masturbation can prepare you for it either.
I... I don't think this is what happens the first time.
30 seconds is hyperbole. But sex isn't all that amazing for the girl the first time a guy has sex, because he's most likely bad at it (and so is a girl having sex for the first time).
The idea that people are "bad" at sex if they haven't had it before is such a bunch of shit. The first time I had sex it lasted 30+ minutes and was amazing. I don't know if it's the media or what that keeps perpetuating this stupid idea that the first time you do it you'll be bad at it. It's pretty hard to be bad at sex, honestly.
ROFL this is absolutely wrong and even irrational.
Ofcourse you will suck at sex as a novice, it doesnt mean a 50yo guy is amazing, same as a Taxi driver wont beat Schumacher just because he has driven more Kilometers.
However if you take interest in sex, dont have a narrow mind like to experiment and educate yourself, your skill will increase greatly, but you are probably still very young so you dont know this yet.
Just to reply to the couple of people on here who've replied to my post. I'm sure I'll have a lot to learn about sex, as will she, but that's kinda the point. We'll be getting good at having sex with each other, and each other only. I'll be learning what she likes, and her the same. There aren't going to be any comparisons, any "well so-and-so did this" or "so-and-so liked this." We'll both be learning each other only. And I'll be willing to bet after a while we'll get pretty good at it. I think it's going to be a fun process, and I'm looking forward to it! She's the only one I want to spend my life with, and want to share sex with.
As for the person who suggested we should be enjoying it now, again, I think delayed gratification isn't a bad thing, but also, if you want the sort of thing I described above, the commitment of marriage is a good thing to wait for. It kinda solidifies the whole "just each other" thing.
But I'm also the kinda person who never likes to see their gifts before Christmas, I like to wait and have the surprise be better. And I'm old-school romantic, I'll wait for the honeymoon :D
EPT
