# Sexual Past



## Bam85

I thought about this after reading another post, here. Why do people feel the need to talk to their partners about their sexual past?

Before you answer, hear me out; I know some will argue that you can learn a lot about a person from their sexual past. I hate to say it but there's just no truth to that. If that's what it takes for you to feel like you understand someone's character then you're just not very observant. 

It seems to be common practice in a relationship but it's SUCH a sadomasochistic behavior. There are no right answers to these questions. No matter what you say, even if it's 100% honest, your So will eventually find a way to feel ****ty about it. Besides that, some people change over time. A good-two-shoes virgin might one day decide to go on a sexual rampage. A person who slept around may have tired of it and is capable/willing to be a loyal partner. There's no sure way to evaluate this.

Does anyone see it that way? I often feel like I'm along in thinking that discussion is a dumb idea and adds nothing positive to a relationship.


----------



## Plan 9 from OS

Nope. I want to know what I'm signing up for. But as I stated in the other thread, it extends beyond just sexual pasts. I want to know all about my partner before marriage.


----------



## Idyit

When I invest my money, time or talent into something I investigate what I'm getting into. The notion that I should blindly invest significantly into anything is ludicrous. 

When I've bought a used vehicle the seller or car history are absolutely known. Do I just trust some used car salesman that it's never been parked in a lake? NO!

Every house I've bought has been thoroughly inspected. There is no way I would simply trust a realtor or seller with so large an investment or the potential safety of my family. According to OP and others of similar slant I have no business wondering if there's mold behind those freshly painted walls. Nonsense!

Likewise I very much want to know what I will be investing my heart and soul into. In a lifetime partner I do want to know their history, what damage has been incurred and what their joys are. Not just sexually, but the whole person. This is not about **** shaming, jealousy or weakness. Rather, it is about making an informed decision and if I choose to have this person as a mate, how to love and care for all of her.

~ Passio


----------



## Bam85

_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

There are many threads here on TAM on this subject. It's hashed and rehashed every few weeks.


----------



## Bam85

Well, let's not put words in OPs mouth. OP can speak for OPs self. I'm not saying you have no business in asking. I'm saying that there's no winning or positive growth happening from those conversations. They're abusive to our own psyche and end up coming out in spiteful little ways, toward our partners. We're not talking about a sale here. There's no 3rd party holding a gun to your head telling you to be with someone. I can understand wanting to know and understand the person you intend to spend your life with. What I don't understand is how their pre-you sex life has any bearing on who they are when it comes to their ability to be a great fit, as a spouse.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## T&T

I agree with you, BAM. But, everyone is different...

I never asked my wife about previous lovers or how many.

I did ask what she likes and dislikes. We also lived together for years before getting married. So, I knew what I was signing up for (and with age) it just keeps getting better!


----------



## lifeistooshort

I'm not a fan of sharing details from one's past. If my husband asked I wouldn't lie, but I would answer specifically what was asked and nothing more. I'm of the opinion that the past belongs there, but everyone is different in this regard. My husband had a bad oversharing habit and it didn't go well.


----------



## Idyit

Over 7000 threads in the sex in marriage section and a majority are about sexual mis-matches. It's probably fair to say that some people aren't communicating very well.

I'm not at all for digging up gory details to lord over someone. Just enough information to know what I'm getting into. TMI versus transparency if you will.

My take is that sex is a part of who we are. It's a defining feature of an exclusive relationship and compatibility in this area MAY have some bearing on the health of said relationship. Generally I'd like to be comfortable enough with my partner to share this info and be accepted by them. And vice versa.

~ Passio


----------



## lifeistooshort

Idyit said:


> Over 7000 threads in the sex in marriage section and a majority are about sexual mis-matches. It's probably fair to say that some people aren't communicating very well.
> 
> I'm not at all for digging up gory details to lord over someone. Just enough information to know what I'm getting into. TMI versus transparency if you will.
> 
> My take is that sex is a part of who we are. It's a defining feature of an exclusive relationship and compatibility in this area MAY have some bearing on the health of said relationship. Generally I'd like to be comfortable enough with my partner to share this info and be accepted by them. And vice versa.
> 
> ~ Passio




I see your point, but I don't think most of the sexual mismatch threads are the result of not sharing details. They're mismatched in terms of drive and desires, but you don't need details of one's sexual past to figure out what kind of drive and preferences your partner has. But as I said if my husband asked I would answer, I just feel that a partner should ask for what they want.

I also think you should think hard about what you're going to accomplish by sharing details. You should have a good answer for this before you ring that bell.


----------



## FrazzledSadHusband

In my case, my wife said she was a virgin, told the pastor in pre-maritial counseling that she had no past or hangups. Then, after marriage, it comes out that she had a abusive multi-year relationship with a bf that raped her. The past has affected our marriage for many years. It has finally gotten better. Lot of work on her part, along with book The Sexually Confident wife by Shannon Etheridge, articles from The Forgiven Wife - Learning to Dance with Desire. A person's past has a way of affecting your present.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Idyit said*: *My take is that sex is a part of who we are. It's a defining feature of an exclusive relationship and compatibility in this area MAY have some bearing on the health of said relationship. Generally I'd like to be comfortable enough with my partner to share this info and be accepted by them. And vice versa*.


:iagree: Sexual views and compatibility here is not a little thing.. some people think nothing of hooking up (casual sex)... One night stands, for others that is not acceptable behavior.. sure people can change..... but if you are even considering spending the rest of your life with someone.. those who have more conservative sexual views DO care to understand where you have been .. ..what you have experienced in life.. what has shaped you, molded you.. this is a huge part of emotional intimacy.. sharing the good, the bad, the ugly , the regrets.... it all spells who we are.. how we THINK.. how we love.. what sex means to us...if you spend your youth with a "sex is just sex" view.. what changed ?

After all, someday you will have children together, what are you going to teach them.. will you be divided here or be on the same page?? 

My primary sexual view is Romantic.. taken from this thread...

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/genera...ual-views-have-they-changed-over-years-2.html 

Although I wouldn't care if a man only slept with those he loved (long term relationships with commitment strings) .... if he had a past full of causal sex, this would be a problem for me...I would have to be convinced he is no longer the man he was before chasing tail for purely physical pleasure.. that he has come to a new light...and feels as I do TODAY ...that love making is Emotional & all encompassing , vulnerable and it's so much more than just for a physical release...



> *3. ** Romantic View *~
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "save yourself for the one, your beloved"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL]
> Sex should be reserved for those who are deeply in love with the strings of emotional attachment/commitment. Loveless sex is not appropriate, People should be sexually faithful as long as love lasts. Those who hold the romantic view often talk in terms of sex as sacred, as a Gift to be preserved & given to someone of profound significance.
> 
> Romantic view holds that sex should be connected with a thirst for deep psychological & bodily knowledge, Mutually reciprocated gift-giving & intimacy are it's purpose.
> 
> The feeling of being in love is a feeling that one’s beloved is an irreplaceable soul mate.
> 
> Complications arise, however, when romantic feelings do not last or when someone who has made a commitment to sexual exclusivity finds himself or herself in love with someone else.
> 
> The romantic view emphasizes interpersonal intimacy, but sees the duration of commitment as contingent. Commitment lasts for as long as romantic love lasts. But commitment is a must. A one-time encounter with a stranger may be consensual -but it would not be appropriate for those who hold the Romantic view.


----------



## EleGirl

FrazzledSadHusband said:


> In my case, my wife said she was a virgin, told the pastor in pre-maritial counseling that she had no past or hangups. Then, after marriage, it comes out that she had a abusive multi-year relationship with a bf that raped her. The past has affected our marriage for many years. It has finally gotten better. Lot of work on her part, along with book The Sexually Confident wife by Shannon Etheridge, articles from The Forgiven Wife - Learning to Dance with Desire. A person's past has a way of affecting your present.


There are things that are important to know... like this. That she was in an abusive relationship and had not done what was needed to heal.

But there are also things that are asked and that some guys (at least on TAM) seem to obsess about that are, in my opinion, way over the top. Like wanting to know about every relationship, sexual positions and sexual details. 

There was a guy who posted here who asked his girlfriend, who he was already having sex with how many partners she had in the past. She told him that she did not have a number off the top of her head. Now this is a 40some year old woman who had been single for a long time. So he immediately assumed that meant that she had slept with 100's and thus could not remember. She came back later and gave him the number . It was not as high as his. But this caused a lot of issues for him.. because she does not keep a running total in her head. 

There is another guy on TAM who said that his wife has to do anything sexual with him that she has ever done with anyone else. He said even if was something forced on her by an abusive husband/SO. If some other guy got that... she has to do it with him and she has no choice.

This is the kind of nonsense that people are concerned about.


----------



## ConanHub

I suppose it's really dependant on the couple. Your observations can only be applied to you. I have to know some things regarding sexual history and Mrs. Conan needed some information as well. The longer we are together, the more we learn. Sex and other histories are important.

If you are with someone that is tripping over your past then I guess they aren't for you.

I am actually a bit perplexed at the thought of lying by omission or commission about your past to secure a mate.

It is very obvious that if you have to lie to them you shouldn't be with them.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Thundarr

Bam85 said:


> I thought about this after reading another post, here. Why do people feel the need to talk to their partners about their sexual past?
> 
> Before you answer, hear me out; I know some will argue that you can learn a lot about a person from their sexual past. I hate to say it but there's just no truth to that. If that's what it takes for you to feel like you understand someone's character then you're just not very observant.
> 
> It seems to be common practice in a relationship but it's SUCH a sadomasochistic behavior. There are no right answers to these questions. No matter what you say, even if it's 100% honest, your So will eventually find a way to feel ****ty about it. Besides that, some people change over time. A good-two-shoes virgin might one day decide to go on a sexual rampage. A person who slept around may have tired of it and is capable/willing to be a loyal partner. There's no sure way to evaluate this.
> 
> Does anyone see it that way? I often feel like I'm along in thinking that discussion is a dumb idea and adds nothing positive to a relationship.


I read the thread topic and thought (oh crap; another sexual past thread). But here goes anyway.

There's no substitute for dating someone long enough that we know the character of who they are. That takes care of almost all concern. But life isn't black and white. Some men and women want to know; others don't. So it's okay for a partner to want to know things like this and it's okay for the other to say I'm not telling you. What's not okay is deception.


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> I suppose it's really dependant on the couple. Your observations can only be applied to you. I have to know some things regarding sexual history and Mrs. Conan needed some information as well. The longer we are together, the more we learn. Sex and other histories are important.
> 
> If you are with someone that is tripping over your past then I guess they aren't for you.
> 
> I am actually a bit perplexed at the thought of lying by omission or commission about your past to secure a mate.
> 
> It is very obvious that if you have to lie to them you shouldn't be with them.



I do not think that anyone is suggesting to lie by omission or to lie directly.

I've never asked a man about his sexual past. I've never been asked about my sexual past.

We have discussed things like previous marriages and relationship. But not to the point of saying that we are giving a complete list of everyone we have ever been with and every sex act we have ever done. I have never needed or wanted that kind of info. Nor has any guy I've ever had a relationship with.

Now I want to know about marriages and long term relationship, if someone is a prostitute, drug user (now or in the past), has a criminal record or has committed crimes that they have not yet been arrested for, and other such stuff... this stuff comes out during dating, hopefully before ever having an sex with them.

This is why I believe that the idea of a 3 date sex rule that seems to be popular with some is ridicules.. sure if someone wants to hop in the sack that's their choice. Getting to know who the person is makes a lot more sense to me.


----------



## Thundarr

ConanHub said:


> If you are with someone that is tripping over your past then I guess they aren't for you.
> 
> I am actually a bit perplexed at the thought of lying by omission or commission about your past to secure a mate.
> 
> It is very obvious that if you have to lie to them you shouldn't be with them.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I've wondered that myself. Who wants a partner that wouldn't accept them.


----------



## Plan 9 from OS

Thundarr said:


> I've wondered that myself. Who wants a partner that wouldn't accept them.


I can only speak for myself, but I'm one of those people that wanted to know about past relationships with my partners. That doesn't mean that I whip out a survey and demand every minutia of detail needs to be given. However, I do think a certain level of discussion is needed in order to determine the MO of the person you dated when it comes to relationships plus whether there is compatibility there. I'd bet a lot of people would have wished they had some discussion about sexual pasts before they married and later found out that their partner is a sexual dud, crazy freak or simply not a good match to what you need from a frequency and quality of sex standpoint. With my first GF there was some jealousy inside me, but I was young then and that went by the wayside pretty quickly as I became more mature in the ways of relationships.

But these types of discussions are a 2 way street. So while the focus is primarily on the person pushing for answers, the one who is not inclined to talk about pasts also get the chance to vet who they are with and decide that the relationship is not worth keeping if my partner is too hung up on past experiences.


----------



## MountainRunner

EleGirl said:


> There was a guy who posted here who asked his girlfriend, who he was already having sex with how many partners she had in the past.


After D-Day, I made a commitment to "full disclosure". Several weeks ago, without provocation (but knowing she wanted to know because she had intimated as much before), I told her about ALL my sexual partners since I became sexual. I have NEVER told another soul what I told her. She listened as I exposed myself....and then she thanked me for my honesty. I was scared out of my gourd having never done that with another soul (not even with another guy for bragging rights).

I swear it brought us closer together....if you can believe that.


----------



## EleGirl

MountainRunner said:


> After D-Day, I made a commitment to "full disclosure". Several weeks ago, without provocation (but knowing she wanted to know because she had intimated as much before), I told her about ALL my sexual partners since I became sexual. I have NEVER told another soul what I told her. She listened as I exposed myself....and then she thanked me for my honesty. I was scared out of my gourd having never done that with another soul (not even with another guy for bragging rights).
> 
> I swear it brought us closer together....if you can believe that.


That's fine because it worked for the two of you. She wanted to know and you were ok with giving the info. That's you and your wife.

Many people do not care. I don't. I would not want to sit there and list to him say "I dated Sally for 4 months and we had wild monkey sex." So he had sex. Who the hell is Sally? I don't know her form Eve. It means nothing to me. Most people never ask for details and never tell. They are not keeping secrets.. they never bring it up. And that's ok for a lot of us.

What bothers me are the threads that have been on here where years later some one, usually a guy, starts driving himself crazy because of something this wife told him years ago. And then he starts punishing her and ragging on her for it. That's wrong, just wrong. If he could not handle it, he should not have married her.


----------



## Thundarr

EleGirl said:


> What bothers me are the threads that have been on here where years later some one, usually a guy, starts driving himself crazy because of something this wife told him years ago. And then he starts punishing her and ragging on her for it. That's wrong, just wrong. If he could not handle it, he should not have married her.


You're passing judgement on the concept of disclosure and the male gender based on a few adolescents who have jealously and insecurity issues.


----------



## EleGirl

Thundarr said:


> You're passing judgement on the concept of disclosure and the male gender based on a few adolescents who have jealously and insecurity issues that ask questions they can't deal with the answers for That a group not worth continuing to stay with.


No I am not passing judgment on the male gender. I specifically said that I was talking about men who do what I describe. I was not talking about any man who does not use his wife's/gf's past against her. 

The men on TAM who have posted about how their spouse's/gf's past bothers them and who use it against her, are not adolescents. They were grown men.

Note the above clearly does not judge all men. It's talking about a subset of men who have a particular behavior.


----------



## Thundarr

EleGirl said:


> No I am not passing judgment on the male gender. I specifically said that I was talking about men who do what I describe. I was not talking about any man who does not use his wife's/gf's past against her.
> 
> The men on TAM who have posted about how their spouse's/gf's past bothers them and who use it against her, are not adolescents. They were grown men.
> 
> Note the above clearly does not judge all men. It's talking about a subset of men who have a particular behavior.


Actually when you only say "yea but" and the follow it with something negative repeatedly, it does indeed show indictment and unwillingness to acknowledge the context of the other posters you're quoting. ConanHub's comment was more than about he and his wife. It was about the concept of simple disclosure of partners.

Throw us an olive leaf about something you actually agree with. I used to hold you in the highest esteem of TAM posters yet lately everything seems gender divided.


----------



## MountainRunner

EleGirl said:


> That's fine because it worked for the two of you. *She wanted to know and you were ok with giving the info.* That's you and your wife.


Actually I wasn't, but I really had no choice if I was serious about saving my marriage. But I hear what you're getting at. It's all good.


----------



## ConanHub

Your situation doesn't really apply Ele. If no one cares then no big deal. But if someone does care it becomes an issue. I have also seen people, mostly women, lie by omission or commission to get a mate.

They justify it by telling themselves, and this forum, that it is none of their business, the past is the past, yet they still lied knowing that their spouse would have an issue with the truth.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jdawg2015

Thundarr said:


> Throw us an olive leaf about something you actually agree with. I used to hold you in the highest esteem of TAM posters yet lately everything seems gender divided.


:iagree:


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> Your situation doesn't really apply Ele. If no one cares then no big deal. But if someone does care it becomes an issue. I have also seen people, mostly women, lie by omission or commission to get a mate.
> 
> They justify it by telling themselves, and this forum, that it is none of their business, the past is the past, yet they still lied knowing that their spouse would have an issue with the truth.


There is no situation on the thread. This thread is not about anyone lying about their sexual past. No where in the OP does it mention lying.

And yes some people do lie. I would not be surprised if a good number of women lie. I'm sure that some men lie as well. Probably because they fear being judged. It's a stupid thing to lie about. 

If a person fears that someone they are dating will judge them badly, then move on.


----------



## ConanHub

You are correct in that the word "lying" does not appear in the op. It is, however, very much in line with the subject and has been discussed with this subject much on this forum.

You and I definitely agree that lying, in any form, about your past to secure a mate is wrong.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

This is what I find really sad...

I've read a # of articles on the net...how people deal with these things... .

I swear the majority of these articles outright tell women to LIE... that's the new way... because it's no one's business....and it looks bad if you try to change the subject.. you just HOPE it doesn't come back to bite....

Should You Share Your Sexual Past with Your Husband? | hitched

Should I Disclose the Number of Sexual Partners I've Had In the Past?

Advice like this..


> Similarly, it’s none of your business how many people he’s slept with. This is a classic “don’t ask, don’t tell” situation, on par with “Are you dating anyone else right now?” and “Have you ever had a drug fueled orgy with six Polynesian dwarves?” If you say yes, you’ve got a lot of explaining to do, and frankly, you shouldn’t have to explain….


This article... ..."1. How many sexual partners you’ve had. Trust us, he does not need to know this information."

5 Things You Should Never Tell Your Man | 29secrets

This article says approx 1/3 lie... 



> We know that admitting to more than a chaste handful of encounters means a continual drip of pestering questions for the next 10 years. Far easier to pick something close to the average, and conveniently forget the rest. Why do women lie? The same reason men do. Because it makes our lives a whole lot easier.


All I can think when I read sh** like this is.. and we wonder why people don't have any TRUST anymore ....Billy Joels "Honesty.. such a lonely word, everyone is so untrue"...

Isn't honesty something we all want in a partner .. above ALL ? Isn't this the foundation we need to build upon? 

The 1 person that you would HOPE that you can be completely open & honest with is your husband, or your wife... In my opinion, this starts from the beginning when you are getting to know each other ...the past will come up.. our choices here & how we deal.. if we give the other the benefit of the doubt, to allow them into our world.. because we refuse to block them out.. I just feel...authentic Love will be understanding -with the stories attached to where we were & WHY... If not, then this person is NOT right for us...better to learn THEN.. while dating....not going through marriage with hidden secrets, never feeling 100% accepted.... Best to end it.. so many have similar experiences .. find one of those. 

Me personally.. I have FAR MORE issues with the Privacy/ Lying over where one has been, has experienced...... Oh I have my preferences.. but a willingly transparent , openly honest person who can share their heart - showing me their soul.. that's [email protected]# ...this surpasses many things...it's the deepest of sharing....and giving of yourself to another .... And you don't hurt someone who goes there ! 

Otherwise...it would be like an impenetrable wall , a barrier....I believe this could manifest itself in other areas down the road..... over those who willingly share...because that's part of who they are... I guess it's all in what a person wants and expects in a partner.... My bar is high here.. this I can not deny...


----------



## Married but Happy

I don't need much information about a partner's sexual past, unless it has relevancy to their ability to have a good, sexually active and committed relationship. If they have suffered from sexual abuse, or have low libido after the initial stages of a relationship, I need to know that. I don't really care about number of partners or specific sex acts (only that we engage in the ones that we both like and want).

So, there is some information I'd want to know, but really only that which has a direct bearing on the quality and frequency of the sex life we can expect to have together.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Married but Happy said:


> I don't need much information about a partner's sexual past, unless it has relevancy to their ability to have a good, sexually active and committed relationship. If they have suffered from sexual abuse, or have low libido after the initial stages of a relationship, I need to know that. I don't really care about number of partners or specific sex acts (only that we engage in the ones that we both like and want).
> 
> So, there is some information I'd want to know, but really only that which has a direct bearing on the quality and frequency of the sex life we can expect to have together.


Yes, agree completely.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

Bam85 said:


> It seems to be common practice in a relationship but it's SUCH a sadomasochistic behavior.
> 
> Does anyone see it that way? I often feel like I'm along in thinking that discussion is a dumb idea and adds nothing positive to a relationship.


Nah. I agree with you. I don't want to hear about gritty details of my partner's sexual past. No, thank you.


----------



## Thundarr

SimplyAmorous said:


> This is what I find really sad...
> 
> I've read a # of articles on the net...how people deal with these things... .
> 
> I swear the majority of these articles outright tell women to LIE... that's the new way... because it's no one's business....and it looks bad if you try to change the subject.. you just HOPE it doesn't come back to bite....


I've seen that too and it's just not the right direction. There needs to be more out there telling women to be okay with their past and when they find someone they want to share their life with then be okay with sharing that too. That's what trust is really. Knowing the other person has your back and loves you; skeletons and all.

I understand the mindset of why people say to lie. I just think it misses the point of trust. There are some men who have retroactive jealously issues or who are judgemental IRL. I think women fear that their awesome guy who they are falling for will turn out to be one of those guys. To me if a girl lies to avoiding the possibility that her guy would judge her then she has settled. He never got the opportunity to prove otherwise and she still has to feel like he would judge her if he knew. That cannot be the right solution.


----------



## BradWesley

EleGirl said:


> There are many threads here on TAM on this subject. It's hashed and rehashed every few weeks.


More like beaten to death.


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> Don't feel like you're on an island all on your own with this thinking. I see it the same as you do Bam. However, I can respect those that feel strongly enough about sexual pasts that they make it a priority question at the onset of a relationship.
> 
> The ones that boggle my mind are the people that cry foul over a "lie by omission". Personally, I don't believe in lies of omission. If it's an important enough topic then due diligence is necessary on the part of the person who places a premium on the topic. In other words, if you want the answer, ask the darn question. Don't expect someone to place the same level of importance on the issues you consider pivotal to a happy long-term relationship. To add, when the question is asked, a non-answer _is_ an answer. It says the other person does not share compatibility with your values and it's time to seek someone else who does.


The omission comes into play when a SO knows very well that something about their history flies right in the face of their SOs values and purposely avoids revealing it, knowing that their SO would possibly move on if they knew.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jld

I put everything on the table right away with Dug. Just put it all out there so he could see if he still wanted me or not. I did not want to waste my time with someone who could not love me just as I was, flaws and all.


----------



## TAM2013

If someone refuses to give you their Resume in a job interview, would you still give them a job? And if their resume is good and they are proud of it whatever it be, why wouldn't they hand it over? What sort of an employer would take a chance on someone who won't let them even see their Resume.

We can all answer those questions easily.

So will someone tell me why many people think "the past is the past and it's none of your business" is going to work out for anyone but the most naive and desperate or who have stuff to hide themselves.


----------



## Anon Pink

I think everyone should follow the RedCross's questions.

1. Have you ever, even once, had sex in exchange for goods or money?
2. Have you ever, even once, had sex with someone else who has had sex in exchange for goods or sex?
3. Have you ever been exposed to HIV?
4. Are you eligible to donate blood? If not why not?



EleGirl said:


> No I am not passing judgment on the male gender. I specifically said that I was talking about men who do what I describe. I was not talking about any man who does not use his wife's/gf's past against her.
> 
> The men on TAM who have posted about how their spouse's/gf's past bothers them and who use it against her, are not adolescents. They were grown men.
> 
> Note the above clearly does not judge all men. It's talking about a subset of men who have a particular behavior.


:iagree::iagree:

I have never seen a woman on TAM, and obviously real life, complain that her husband's legendary sexual history meant that she too was owed the same experiences and wasn't getting them. 

So many threads on TAM by men who can't get past their wives history and it makes no sense to me, as well as to most other members. A few men will agree with the retroactive jealousy but most men will tell the OP that he's off his rocker.


----------



## Thundarr

Lila said:


> To add, when the question is asked, a non-answer _is_ an answer. It says the other person does not share compatibility with your values and it's time to seek someone else who does.


I agree. A non-answer or 'I'm not going to say' answer is some times the right answer and it's not even a sign of incompatibility sometimes. It could be a sign of a guy being a dumbarse and asking things it doesn't need to know Asking things like precise number, positions, sizes, etc is probably asking for trouble. On the other hand if general topics of moral importance to most people come up like sexual preference, sex for money, etc then seeing your partner clam up would be disturbing. Common sense really.


----------



## ConanHub

I still maintain that it depends on the preference of each couple.

Many don't want to ask or tell and turn out ok. Many do and, if honest, turn out ok as well.

Mrs. Conan and I each had to know a few things. She actually asked more questions than me. I mostly let her know what I could and couldn't accept in our relationship going forward.

There are some occasions where someone probably should tell regardless because their past might bite them in the ass in the future.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jld

Anon Pink said:


> I have never seen a woman on TAM, and obviously real life, complain that her husband's legendary sexual history meant that she too was owed the same experiences and wasn't getting them.


:iagree:


----------



## Anon Pink

TAM2013 said:


> If someone refuses to give you their Resume in a job interview, would you still give them a job? And if their resume is good and they are proud of it whatever it be, why wouldn't they hand it over? What sort of an employer would take a chance on someone who won't let them even see their Resume.
> 
> We can all answer those questions easily.
> 
> So will someone tell me why many people think "the past is the past and it's none of your business" is going to work out for anyone but the most naive and desperate or who have stuff to hide themselves.


On the surface I agree. Both women and men should OWN their sexuality, stop pretending.

But life doesn't work that way. Men tend to be territorial about their woman's body, even retroactively. Women are not territorial about their man's body retroactively, only presently.

Let's not forget the slvt shaming that happens along side the retroactive jealousy. "OMG she is such a slvt! She's had so many more sexual partners than me. I can't handle walking down the street and wondering if the old friend was a guy who fvcked her."

While women can have that same feeling, she is not wondering if this is a woman who's had sex with her H, she is wondering how she ranks compared to the old GF. And that is not a common thing. Most women wouldn't be very bothered by that.


----------



## jld

But why would a woman want to be with a man like that, AP? Wouldn't it just spell trouble for the future if he could not react with genuine compassion and acceptance to her past?

Honestly, why would she not want to get that out of the way immediately? It surely is a window into his character to see his reaction. And if his character is shallow, she is much better off without him.


----------



## Thundarr

Anon Pink said:


> So many threads on TAM by men who can't get past their wives history and it makes no sense to me, as well as to most other members. A few men will agree with the retroactive jealousy but most men will tell the OP that he's off his rocker.


I suspect when we weed out the troll threads and weed out the threads where prior deception is fuelling the OP's emotional state then we're looking at a really small number of threads where it's just flat out retroactive jealousy or judgement alone. Yes I've seen a couple of those but that's a couple of threads out of thousands of male members.

And then much of the discussion on those threads is just poor communication from all of us. I think everyone agrees that someone asking questions doesn't mean they're entitled to getting answers.


----------



## ConanHub

jld said:


> But why would a woman want to be with a man like that, AP? Wouldn't it just spell trouble for the future if he could not react with genuine compassion and acceptance to her past?
> 
> Honestly, why would she not want to get that out of the way immediately? It surely is a window into his character to see his reaction. And if his character is shallow, she is much better off without him.


Exact same view point here.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> This is where people get into trouble. My advice is don't ever assume your partner shares your values. If it's not written on the proverbial stone, then it's up for interpretation. "I _assumed_ we were on the same page" is not good enough.


You and I agree. Values need talked about period. I was referring to cases where the values are crystal but a specific question was not asked about sexual history but one person knows without a doubt that their history flies in the face of their SOs values but omits it instead of saying that they have something that might impact the relationship and fess up.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TAM2013

Most women play down their histories or outright lie to get what they want. I have seen this first hand time and time again. It makes them look/feel better than they are. They actually believe it after a while. It's not until they meet someone who's clued up with all that sh!t that they (hopefully) learn their lesson. But often for that particular pairing, it's too late. This is why 9/10 issues of Retroactive Jealousy are from men. Should we rephrase RJ as "I just found out through a mutual friend my wife has been lying to me for years and I'm fvcking livid" 

Men don't play their histories down, they exaggerate. Women don't care where their blokes been. They just want the one all the other women want, whether he's had them or not. High sexual market value.

A womans SMV declines for every encounter, we all know it and that's why they lie.

They get the kids after divorce, we're cannon fodder. That's life.

You can't have it both ways ladies. Correction. You can because you can just lie and marry a chump who'll go along with it.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening thundarr
I'm afraid that I need to agree with elegirl here. Too often people blame an entire gender, race, whatever for the actions a a minority. She has very carefully NOT done that and I appreciate it. 

Not counting trolls, there clearly are men who are very concerned (obsess? pick your term) over their wife's past, and there are men who do not. 




Thundarr said:


> Actually when you only say "yea but" and the follow it with something negative repeatedly, it does indeed show indictment and unwillingness to acknowledge the context of the other posters you're quoting. ConanHub's comment was more than about he and his wife. It was about the concept of simple disclosure of partners.
> 
> Throw us an olive leaf about something you actually agree with. I used to hold you in the highest esteem of TAM posters yet lately everything seems gender divided.


----------



## samyeagar

Jellybeans said:


> Nah. I agree with you. I don't want to hear about gritty details of my partner's sexual past. No, thank you.


Neither did I, and my wife didn't want to disclose them either. The problem is, circumstances led to my wife having to disclose a lot of things over time so I wouldn't be blind sided hearing them from other people.

The past is only the past when it stays there.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

jld said:


> But why would a woman want to be with a man like that, AP? Wouldn't it just spell trouble for the future if he could not react with genuine compassion and acceptance to her past?
> 
> Honestly, why would she not want to get that out of the way immediately? It surely is a window into his character to see his reaction. And if his character is shallow, she is much better off without him.


You can look at this -this way. but also.. why would some of us want to be with someone .. who slept with umteen number of people and easily walked away, thinking nothing of it.. those people aren't even an after thought...

There is a flip side of this. I read continually on here how women NEVER look back to an old BF.... or a man who NEVER thinks anything of his past partners... they will go on how they meant *NOTHING TO THEM*....

Well speaking my point of view.. I would be very very upset to sleep with anyone who had so little regard for WHO I AM.. sex to me = commitment , even for life.. so yeah.. I PREFER men who are particular like that. There is a place for all.. but I think those who care the most are the harder ones to find.. because many of these men also slept around.. and I personally don't agree with the double standard.. 

I think very very very highly of men who conduct themselves in the same manner they expect the woman to. ...talk about a rarity !


----------



## ConanHub

Actually agree with you too SA. You would have rejected me as a mate and I would not have thought any less of you. I actually did get rejected once by a woman with strong beliefs and it made me think but I didn't think bad of her.

Got to be compatible.&#55357;&#56842;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

ConanHub said:


> Actually agree with you too SA. You would have rejected me as a mate and I would not have thought any less of you. I actually did get rejected once by a woman with strong beliefs and it made me think but I didn't think bad of her.
> 
> Got to be compatible.��
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Let me say something ConanHub... there is one thing you have and a few others on this thread -feel strongly about ... JLD and Thundarr comes to mind...you are impeccably HONEST ...and believe that is ALWAYS the right way to go.. nor would you think it's infringing to ask [email protected]#$ 

... and as I said in another post....THIS would surpass "*the past*" to me....learning where a man is *NOW*... why he has changed..I know you have found God and have a new lifestyle.. it's blessed you in many ways.. and you would be in agreement with a more conservative type women on raising your kids the same.. all of that needs taken into consideration...those are not little things. those are life changing, and it speaks to who you have become.. :smthumbup::smthumbup::smthumbup: 

I LOVE YOUR STORY ... and I ALSO LOVE YOUR HONESTY IN TELLING IT..


----------



## Wolf1974

I guess on the other side of the spectrum of some of the posters I can't understand why you wouldn't have a complete and open discussion about sex and sexual history. Past is best indication of future behavior. In my person example my x cheated on her first husband, I knew it ignored it and paid the price for it 13 years later.

I have always asked, when in a committed relationship, sexual partner history, things they liked, didn't like, and so on. Never blow by blow detail just the basics to have an understanding of what we have both experienced and what we are still perhaps interested in exploring together. NEVER once has a woman gotten so upset that she wouldn't answer. Not even slightly. If you are committed to one another and want a future then past is just part of you......not something that should be hidden. And honestly someone who couldn't have an open and frank converstaion about sex is not someone I would see myself with long term. Communication is important to me

To me this is what intimacy is.

I have a female friend for example who shared with me all her sexual exploits. I married her to her now husband and they are on year two. He has NO clue about how many partners she had. He doesn't want to know. She hopes he never asks because it is high and to her embarassing. But I know. So to me I know her more than her own husband. That seems very weird to me but works for them.

Everyone is different and can't fault them for what works but that would never work for me


----------



## larry.gray

Anon Pink said:


> I have never seen a woman on TAM, and obviously real life, complain that her husband's legendary sexual history meant that she too was owed the same experiences and wasn't getting them.


One of the causes of that is that very few men marry a woman that doesn't excite them because she is a good provider. Women who come here because their men are LD and/or boring in bed are married to men who have always been boring in bed and/or LD. They don't have a wild past.

Women using bait and switch is more common. It's a hell of a hit for a guy to find that his wife wasn't always boring, only that she is boring for him.

Note that I'm directly answering the part about refusing sex acts she did before and not RJ in general...


----------



## TAM2013

Lila said:


> 30-day trial period


30 day trial period after a 30 minute interview? Says it all really.

That's a ONS. Who vets for a ONS? Fits my analogy absolutely perfectly.

That's not a good employer either.


----------



## larry.gray

Thundarr said:


> I suspect when we weed out the troll threads and weed out the threads where prior deception is fuelling the OP's emotional state then we're looking at a really small number of threads where it's just flat out retroactive jealousy or judgement alone. Yes I've seen a couple of those but that's a couple of threads out of thousands of male members.
> 
> And then much of the discussion on those threads is just poor communication from all of us. I think everyone agrees that someone asking questions doesn't mean they're entitled to getting answers.


I suspect the bulk of the extreme RJ threads are trolls. And they work well. It brings certain women out of the woodwork to defend the fictitious wife no matter how wild the story is.


----------



## TheColonel

There are some things that I do think people are required to disclose. For ex. whether or not their partner has been tested for STDs and whether the test results were positive or not. 

I don't think anything else is required though. It MIGHT be helpful to know that the partner has been abused and may be hesitant or perhaps hasn't had sex in a while but it's by no means required.

I'm a virgin and am still on the fence as to whether or not I should disclose it if the opportunity presents itself. Not on the first date of course but when the time for sex arrives.

Some things are mandatory, others are helpful to know but are not mandatory by any means. I don't really understand why people want details, like number of partners or positions. I mean...... that's just gross.


----------



## jld

I think you should be proud of being a virgin.


----------



## Anon Pink

TAM2013 said:


> Most women play down their histories or outright lie to get what they want. I have seen this first hand time and time again. It makes them look/feel better than they are. They actually believe it after a while. It's not until they meet someone who's clued up with all that sh!t that they (hopefully) learn their lesson. But often for that particular pairing, it's too late. This is why 9/10 issues of Retroactive Jealousy are from men. Should we rephrase RJ as "I just found out through a mutual friend my wife has been lying to me for years and I'm fvcking livid"
> 
> Men don't play their histories down, they exaggerate. Women don't care where their blokes been. They just want the one all the other women want, whether he's had them or not. High sexual market value.
> 
> A womans SMV declines for every encounter, we all know it and that's why they lie.
> 
> They get the kids after divorce, we're cannon fodder. That's life.
> 
> You can't have it both ways ladies. Correction. You can because you can just lie and marry a chump who'll go along with it.


I find your thoughts and opinions, as exposed above, despicable, neanderthalic, and completely untrue!

From what branch of research have you conducted your study to arrive at your conclusions?

What credentials do you possess that entitle you to make such claims?


----------



## Anon Pink

larry.gray said:


> One of the causes of that is that very few men marry a woman that doesn't excite them because she is a good provider. Women who come here because their men are LD and/or boring in bed are married to men who have always been boring in bed and/or LD. They don't have a wild past.
> 
> Women using bait and switch is more common. It's a hell of a hit for a guy to find that his wife wasn't always boring, only that she is boring for him.
> 
> Note that I'm directly answering the part about refusing sex acts she did before and not RJ in general...



Do we have to turn this into another thread about a woman OWING her husband her complete list of prior sex acts?
*Hint: she doesn't, not ever.*

Have we not discussed the fallacy of bait and switch ad nauseum?
*Hint: while it might exist the most likely sitch is that her H became boring, fat, distant, repetitious, and she lost interest in sex with him because she lost her attraction toward him! *


----------



## NobodySpecial

TAM2013 said:


> A womans SMV declines for every encounter, we all know it and that's why they lie.


Thank goodness my husband does not share this thinking!


----------



## TAM2013

Anon, life experience mainly. They're not nasty ladies, just conditioned to be like this. A little misguided and unfortunately, very, very common. If their history didn't go against them, why would they not want to discuss it? This is the whole point.

NS. He wouldn't be your husband if he did.


----------



## NobodySpecial

TAM2013 said:


> Anon, life experience mainly. They're not nasty ladies, just conditioned to be like this. A little misguided and unfortunately, very, very common.
> 
> NS. He wouldn't be your husband if he did.


Bingo. Must be the front row. Relationships are about actions and reactions. If my DH's response to my having the exact same type of history that he had was to somehow think I was of less value, yah nope.

Another topic of this thread, If DH's response to my fear based on past experience was to get angry and decide I OWED him something. Yah nope.


----------



## Anon Pink

TAM2013 said:


> Anon, life experience mainly. They're not nasty ladies, just conditioned to be like this. A little misguided and unfortunately, very, very common.
> 
> .


Conditioned by whom and for what purpose?

You said most women down play their past or outright lie to get what they want. Do you really believe that! Women, as in most or all, lie to get what they want? Or could it be that the women you know have done that, which actually means you don't know how to pick women.


You said: "Should we rephrase RJ as "I just found out through a mutual friend my wife has been lying to me for years and I'm fvcking livid" 

So the RJ isn't jealousy but anger about being lied to? Which is it?

You said a man with lots of sexual experience has a high market value while a woman's market value decreases with each partner and with each year.

Is this not the exact reason why men don't deserve that info, because "you can't handle the truth!" Because you actually believe a woman's "market value" decreases with each partner and each year? Because it is men like you, who believe it's fine and dandy for men to get all the tail they want but for a woman to do the same she lowers her market value.

Don't your knuckles bleed when you walk?


----------



## Thundarr

NobodySpecial said:


> Another topic of this thread, If DH's response to my fear based on past experience was to get angry and decide I OWED him something. Yah nope.


Often when a relationship is going down hill and a guy is insecure because of it is when he actually starts digging and then finds out something irrelevant about his partner from years ago. Of course he thinks it matters but it's really a symptom of insecurity and trying to get "proof that you love me". When a relationship is in a bad place I doubt the spouse wants to do anything much less something out of the ordinary.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> Conditioned by whom and for what purpose?
> 
> You said most women down play their past or outright lie to get what they want. Do you really believe that! Women, as in most or all, lie to get what they want? Or could it be that the women you know have done that, which actually means you don't know how to pick women.
> 
> 
> You said: "Should we rephrase RJ as "I just found out through a mutual friend my wife has been lying to me for years and I'm fvcking livid"
> 
> *So the RJ isn't jealousy but anger about being lied to? Which is it?*
> 
> You said a man with lots of sexual experience has a high market value while a woman's market value decreases with each partner and with each year.
> 
> Is this not the exact reason why men don't deserve that info, because "you can't handle the truth!" Because you actually believe a woman's "market value" decreases with each partner and each year? Because it is men like you, who believe it's fine and dandy for men to get all the tail they want but for a woman to do the same she lowers her market value.
> 
> Don't your knuckles bleed when you walk?


Not dragging myself into this argument you are having, but as a point of clarification...

I have contended that the term Retroactive Jealousy is a misnomer in addition to be applied too broadly and loosely. Sort of like calling a selfish person a Narcissist.

The Jealousy part very often is not actual jealousy, and most of the credible situation we see here on TAM are triggered by something, usually feelings of being deceived, inadequacy, feeling the chump. Those feelings are often very justified.


----------



## Anon Pink

Thundarr said:


> Often when a relationship is going down hill and a guy is insecure because of it is when he actually starts digging and then finds out something irrelevant about his partner from years ago. Of course he thinks it matters but it's really a symptom of insecurity and trying to get "proof that you love me". When a relationship is in a bad place I doubt the spouse wants to do anything much less something out of the ordinary.


:iagree:
:iagree:
:iagree:


----------



## Anon Pink

samyeagar said:


> Not dragging myself into this argument you are having, but as a point of clarification...
> 
> I have contended that the term Retroactive Jealousy is a misnomer in addition to be applied too broadly and loosely. Sort of like calling a selfish person a Narcissist.
> 
> The Jealousy part very often is not actual jealousy, and most of the credible situation we see here on TAM are triggered by something, usually feelings of being deceived, inadequacy, feeling the chump. Those feelings are often very justified.


Okay thanks for the clarification SAM. I know you have experience in this.

But help me understand how we get from the relationship going down in flames to feeling like a chump because she had some sexual experience you didn't know about? How does that figure into the failing relationship?


----------



## lucy999

larry.gray said:


> Women who come here because their men are LD and/or boring in bed are married to men who have always been boring in bed and/or LD. They don't have a wild past.


Popping in to say I might be the anomaly. My BF had quite a wild past. I feel robbed.


----------



## soccermom2three

TAM2013 said:


> Anon, life experience mainly. They're not nasty ladies, just conditioned to be like this. A little misguided and unfortunately, very, very common. If their history didn't go against them, why would they not want to discuss it? This is the whole point.
> 
> NS. He wouldn't be your husband if he did.


Looks like you have a bad picker, unfortunately.


----------



## soccermom2three

Thundarr said:


> Often when a relationship is going down hill and a guy is insecure because of it is when he actually starts digging and then finds out something irrelevant about his partner from years ago. Of course he thinks it matters but it's really a symptom of insecurity and trying to get "proof that you love me". When a relationship is in a bad place I doubt the spouse wants to do anything much less something out of the ordinary.


Yes! If the guy is angry, mopey and/or pouty about whatever he found out about, that's even a bigger turn off to his wife. She's not going to want to have sex with that. Add in that he might be shaming her about her sexual past? Vaclang!


----------



## Idyit

I threw my hat into this (circus) ring because the prior threads all seemed to devolve into the basest of polar arguments. The options boiled down to:

1) You must never ask ANYTHING about the sexual past of your partner (exception - ?s about STD/HIV status seem to be permissible) or 
2) You are an insecure creep who wants details of sexual positions who WILL demand that all previous acts be performed, you WILL **** shame your spouse and are a likely candidate for retroactive jealousy.

Is it possible that there is a middle ground? One where some questions can be asked to gain a better understanding of the one you love? If I couldn't be transparent with someone whom I plan to spend the rest of my life with I would be sacrificing the very intimacy that makes a marriage strong. 

~ Passio


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Idyit said:


> I threw my hat into this (circus) ring because the prior threads all seemed to devolve into the basest of polar arguments. The options boiled down to:
> 
> 1) You must never ask ANYTHING about the sexual past of your partner (exception - ?s about STD/HIV status seem to be permissible) or
> 2) You are an insecure creep who wants details of sexual positions who WILL demand that all previous acts be performed, you WILL **** shame your spouse and are a likely candidate for retroactive jealousy.
> 
> Is it possible that there is a middle ground? One where some questions can be asked to gain a better understanding of the one you love? If I couldn't be transparent with someone whom I plan to spend the rest of my life with I would be sacrificing the very intimacy that makes a marriage strong.
> 
> ~ Passio


I feel the same as you in what you said here .. everyone loves to slap the old "Insecurity card" on anyone who doesn't agree... blanket judgement to shut them down.. so typical... 

It's just not always so... when one fails to acknowledge a difference in how we deeply feel about sex, its expression, it's meaning to us in how we love.. that we desire to be with another who feels the same...it does a grave disserive to this discussion.. and many of us will never agree, or really understand why the other feels that way.. as we are not wired like them. 



> *Lila said*: I can only speak for myself, but I think people are entitled to ask whatever questions they feel they need to have answers to in order to feel comfortable in a relationship. *However, I don't think one should wait until after they fall in love to ask questions about a partner's sexual history.
> 
> If someone feels it's necessary to ask about sexual history, then it should be done at the the onset of the relationship during the 'getting to know you' phase. If the answers don't suit the asker, or the other person chooses not to answer, then no harm, no foul. Each party goes their separate ways not having vested too much time with people who are incompatible in that way*.


I much agree with this... the earlier the better.. to not waste anyone's time getting too emotionally invested.


----------



## Idyit

Excellent Lila! At first you agreed with OP that one should never ask questions about a partners sexual past because it only leads to trouble. Now you are parsing my words to define when it would be appropriate to ask such questions.

For the record I agree that these questions/conversations should come some time after the first date and prior to falling in love. Not attempting to define when though. Only that it is possible to have good intention and outcome from learning a bit about your partners sexual past.

~ Passio


----------



## jld

SimplyAmorous said:


> I much agree with this... the earlier the better.. to not waste anyone's time getting too emotionally invested.


:iagree:


----------



## I Don't Know

Why is it that going home with a different person every night from the bar is OK and expressing your sexuality but having sex for money once or twice in your life makes you morally bankrupt? 

Why does it matter if I did drugs hard and heavy 5 years ago, but what sex I had with whom and how much is inconsequential?

I don't get how the stuff in the past that one person is concerned about is no ones business, but other stuff is fair game.


----------



## Lon

If I've ever cared about a partners sexual past, it's not because I want to know what she has done, it's to know the kind of relationships she has had, and to be aware of any social implications her past may have in store for our current and future relationship together. This is why details like "what" is not important to me personally as one like "who".

As for her character, I come to that determination on my own, based on the behaviors and choices she shows me, not past conjecture from someone else's point of view.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

I'll speak for myself and my wife. We both talked 100% openly and honestly about our sexual past during the first year of our relationship. We have/had the kind of relationship where we were both lovers and best friends. We both share the same thought process in regards to sex, and that it is an expression of love to be reserved for someone you're very close with. THAT was the key issue for me about my wife's past. I couldn't be with someone who saw sex as "just a physical activity that's fun". Not that that mentality is wrong...it just doesn't MATCH my own mentality.

With the establishment of our views on sex being compatible, we talked completely openly and without judgement in regards to our sexual pasts. We laughed at each other's funny stories. We talked about situations. I could tell you which guys were big and which were small. It didn't bother me because I judged our sexual relationship on what WE shared, not what she did in the past.

That said, her past WAS important to me because it showed her mentality and views about sex. I'm not saying that a man or woman who partakes in ONS doesn't value sex or see it as special, but it's not the same view as someone who reserves sex to be with only someone they love for instance. It's also not a black and white issue. Through open and honest communication, you can look at the grey areas.

When my daughter gets married, I don't want her marrying a male prostitute, gigolo, or even a big time player...I'd hope she's marry a man who shares MY views on sex because I know that THAT man will always value her and not see her as a sex object.

Now that said, I'm also amazed at some of the hypocrisy. Some say the past doesn't matter, but then also say as long as it wasn't with a prostitute/etc.....HUH? Does the past matter or not.

So who would you rather date...a guy who has bedded HUNDREDS of strangers because for a number of years, he played the field and had ONS after ONS. Or the guy who married his "first" was dedicated to her etc. etc. but that relationship fell apart, wanted to save himself for his next partner, but after a couple years of "nothing" succumbed to a massage parlor happy ending once?


----------



## Idyit

Lila said:


> ..but it's not my place to tell someone else that what they believe is wrong. Respect my beliefs and I'll respect yours.


Fair enough Lila. I do respect the above and truly have no beef with you. ...looks like I connected and A and B that weren't there. Apologies.

The reason I bothered to post here was precisely because other threads seemed to respond with 1) NO questions or 2) You're a jerk for asking. My belief is that there could be legitimate and good reasons for having these conversations as well.

~ Passio


----------



## larry.gray

SimplyAmorous said:


> I feel the same as you in what you said here .. everyone loves to slap the old "Insecurity card" on anyone who doesn't agree... blanket judgement to shut them down.. so typical...


The arguement has shifted. Once it was those that slept around that were judged. Now it's those that don't that are judged.


----------



## larry.gray

Lila said:


> As I said in a different post, I do believe that the past should stay in the past but that in no way precludes someone else from believing differently. If I ever find myself in the dating scene again and am asked to list my sexual history, I would decline and discontinue that relationship. No harm, no foul. *I don't think it's anyone's business who and how I had sex with previously..but it's not my place to tell someone else that what they believe is wrong. Respect my beliefs and I'll respect yours.*


:iagree:

My issue is dishonesty.

I will further state that if you state the above, the dude should terminate the relationship or STFU about the issue.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> Okay thanks for the clarification SAM. I know you have experience in this.
> 
> But help me understand how we get from the relationship going down in flames to feeling like a chump because she had some sexual experience you didn't know about? How does that figure into the failing relationship?


More often than not, it's not about the past acts or anything like that. I was actually thinking about this today after reading this thread, and something dawned on me about my own feelings.

One of the ongoing issues my wife and I have had is her difficulties in overt initiation. She is very passive and subtle. That really is her personality because she is the type that when she had a true crush on someone, she would keep it very close to the vest...not even telling her best friend, and certainly not the object of her affection. I can accept that as is...but it's not clear cut as is.

In her relationship with her ex husband, she actively sought out women who would have threesomes with them, took the initiative, spent time and effort. Granted, that was in a misguided attempt and thought process that she could control his serial cheating by doing that. The whole situation with her step son...again...she spent weeks trying to get him on board with it, and finally seduced him into it. Again...not for good reasons, pretty effed up ones actually, but still...time, effort, initiative. I could give two sh1ts about what she actually did, the acts, but damn...I know she knows how to pursue something when properly driven to do so.


----------



## bandit.45

Bam85 said:


> Well, let's not put words in OPs mouth. OP can speak for OPs self. I'm not saying you have no business in asking. I'm saying that there's no winning or positive growth happening from those conversations. They're abusive to our own psyche and end up coming out in spiteful little ways, toward our partners. We're not talking about a sale here. There's no 3rd party holding a gun to your head telling you to be with someone. I can understand wanting to know and understand the person you intend to spend your life with. What I don't understand is how their pre-you sex life has any bearing on who they are when it comes to their ability to be a great fit, as a spouse.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It speaks to their moral compass.


----------



## norajane

samyeagar said:


> More often than not, it's not about the past acts or anything like that. I was actually thinking about this today after reading this thread, and something dawned on me about my own feelings.
> 
> One of the ongoing issues my wife and I have had is her difficulties in overt initiation. She is very passive and subtle. That really is her personality because she is the type that when she had a true crush on someone, she would keep it very close to the vest...not even telling her best friend, and certainly not the object of her affection. I can accept that as is...but it's not clear cut as is.
> 
> In her relationship with her ex husband, she actively sought out women who would have threesomes with them, took the initiative, spent time and effort. Granted, that was in a misguided attempt and thought process that she could control his serial cheating by doing that. The whole situation with her step son...again...she spent weeks trying to get him on board with it, and finally seduced him into it. Again...not for good reasons, pretty effed up ones actually, but still...time, effort, initiative. I could give two sh1ts about what she actually did, the acts, but damn...I know she knows how to pursue something when properly driven to do so.


Sounds like she acted out of desperation and pain and humiliation. I would not call that "properly driven" to initiate, personally.

If you want to force her back to the wall like that, then maybe you'll get the initiation you crave with the obvious downside to that. Otherwise, it's probably best for both of you to accept her initiation methods as-is under "normal" and "healthy" circumstances.


----------



## GusPolinski

samyeagar said:


> More often than not, it's not about the past acts or anything like that. I was actually thinking about this today after reading this thread, and something dawned on me about my own feelings.
> 
> One of the ongoing issues my wife and I have had is her difficulties in overt initiation. She is very passive and subtle. That really is her personality because she is the type that when she had a true crush on someone, she would keep it very close to the vest...not even telling her best friend, and certainly not the object of her affection. I can accept that as is...but it's not clear cut as is.
> 
> In her relationship with her ex husband, she actively sought out women who would have threesomes with them, took the initiative, spent time and effort. Granted, that was in a misguided attempt and thought process that she could control his serial cheating by doing that. *The whole situation with her step son...again...she spent weeks trying to get him on board with it, and finally seduced him into it.* Again...not for good reasons, pretty effed up ones actually, but still...time, effort, initiative. I could give two sh1ts about what she actually did, the acts, but damn...I know she knows how to pursue something when properly driven to do so.


Wait... what?!?


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

norajane said:


> Sounds like she acted out of desperation and pain and humiliation. I would not call that "properly driven" to initiate, personally.
> 
> If you want to force her back to the wall like that, then maybe you'll get the initiation you crave with the obvious downside to that. Otherwise, it's probably best for both of you to accept her initiation methods as-is under "normal" and "healthy" circumstances.


You're focusing on the motivation and ignoring her actions. Sam is doing the opposite.

The fact is that when his wife wanted to have sex with her ex-husband, she made it happen. Even though the motivation was perverse, her actions were unambiguous and decisive. Now, when she wants to have sex with Sam, she is demure and secretive. Since he doesn't read her mind well, he probably misses out on a lot of sex.

There's nothing wrong with being frustrated at his wife's inconsistent behavior in initiating sex. It's perfectly understandable. It would certainly be easy for Sam to conclude that she's just not as into him as she was into her ex.


----------



## I Don't Know

:rofl: I don't know if Sam could actually have any more sex! Not if he wants to walk anyway.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

I Don't Know said:


> :rofl: I don't know if Sam could actually have any more sex! Not if he wants to walk anyway.


Yep.. he averages 10 times a week.. one of his posts from last week I caught said this.. I was thinking.. "Wow, they're still at it hot & heavy !"..


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

I Don't Know said:


> :rofl: I don't know if Sam could actually have any more sex! Not if he wants to walk anyway.


Well, good for him. I don't know his story. I'm just going off the last few posts on this thread. But I can sympathize with wanting more overt initiation and not getting it, and then being hurt to learn that she was more overt in a past relationship.


----------



## I Don't Know

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Well, good for him. I don't know his story. I'm just going off the last few posts on this thread. But I can sympathize with wanting more overt initiation and not getting it, and then being hurt to learn that she was more overt in a past relationship.


Agreed


----------



## TheColonel

jld said:


> I think you should be proud of being a virgin.


I'm not really ashamed of it but I'm not really proud either. I'm sort of on the fence about it.


----------



## samyeagar

norajane said:


> *Sounds like she acted out of desperation and pain and humiliation. I would not call that "properly driven" to initiate, personally.
> *
> If you want to force her back to the wall like that, then maybe you'll get the initiation you crave with the obvious downside to that. Otherwise, it's probably best for both of you to accept her initiation methods as-is under "normal" and "healthy" circumstances.


That was exactly the reason behind her actions, though she did seek out her ex husband for sex as far out as two years after their divorce, so that does kind of belie the motivations a bit. I have largely accepted her way of initiating as it does fit her default personality.

Taking a step back however to a more general thought that active pursuit indicates desire...be it going out and getting a pizza because you're hungry, or a earning college degree because you want to earn more money. In the above examples regarding my wife, she is no different. Misguided as they were to us on the outside, she had a desire, set goals and made plans to achieve those goals, and took action to to carry out those plans to achieve those goals. I don't think it is an unreasonable goal for her to show me her desire in a more active way, any more than it would unreasonable if she came up to me and said she wanted to feel more appreciated.


----------



## NobodySpecial

samyeagar said:


> but damn...I know she knows how to pursue something when *properly driven *to do so.


So I know this PoV may not make sense to you. But reading that filled me with fear and pain. She was "properly" motivated by complete dysfunction. And you want to replicate that? She is SAFE with you. Or is she?

My husband had the exact opposite feelings. Why would I want you to replicate behaviors that were motivated by fear, hurt and dysfunction.


----------



## samyeagar

NobodySpecial said:


> So I know this PoV may not make sense to you. But reading that filled me with fear and pain. She was "properly" motivated by complete dysfunction. And you want to replicate that? She is SAFE with you. Or is she?
> 
> My husband had the exact opposite feelings. Why would I want you to replicate behaviors that were motivated by fear, hurt and dysfunction.


Many identical behaviors are motivated by vastly different things.

A pretty innocuous example here...

I made coffee every morning for my ex-wife...tried to make sure I never forgot because I didn't want to get yelled at all day for forgetting.

I make coffee every morning for my wife...try to make sure I never forget because I know she values her sleep and loves waking up to a fresh hot cup of coffee.


----------



## NobodySpecial

samyeagar said:


> Many identical behaviors are motivated by vastly different things.
> 
> A pretty innocuous example here...
> 
> I made coffee every morning for my ex-wife...tried to make sure I never forgot because I didn't want to get yelled at all day for forgetting.
> 
> I make coffee every morning for my wife...try to make sure I never forget because I know she values her sleep and loves waking up to a fresh hot cup of coffee.


Coffee not filled with associations of pain and hurt.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Lila said:


> I'd date the one that I liked the most. The one that treats me with kindness, love, and respect. The one that cherishes every moment with me and makes me happy.
> 
> Which one is that? Could be either one, I don't ask about their past.


And I 100% agree and support that point of view.

I don't believe you were one of the ones saying

"The past doesn't Matter"...
and then adding in caveats after the fact of components of someone's past that does in fact matter.

I think that for ANYONE, there are certain components that matter.

I'd be hard pressed to see any woman who would date a man who had been convicted of molesting a child, for instance.

If a man had been a male prostitute...that would exclude him off a number of women's lists who normally would take the stance that the past doesn't matter.

I'm not saying this to you Lila specifically, just in general.

Everyone has different criteria. For some the past doesn't matter, others it matters very little minus a few HARD boundaries, while others it's somewhat important and for some it's EXTREMELY important.

The key is NONE of them are wrong. These threads tend to devolve into each point of view trying to say that another point of view is wrong....and that's not the case, everyone is justified to their own point of view. 

The key to this entire issue is to be open and honest about what one parties real boundaries are and the other person to be open and honest about if they fit those boundaries. Most of these problems are when 2 people are polar opposites on the issue and think it won't effect them long term, or worse are dishonest about it because they know the results would be bad.


----------



## GusPolinski

Dad&Hubby said:


> And I 100% agree and support that point of view.
> 
> I don't believe you were one of the ones saying
> 
> "The past doesn't Matter"...
> and then adding in caveats after the fact of components of someone's past that does in fact matter.
> 
> I think that for ANYONE, there are certain components that matter.
> 
> *I'd be hard pressed to see any woman who would date a man who had been convicted of molesting a child, for instance.
> 
> If a man had been a male prostitute...that would exclude him off a number of women's lists who normally would take the stance that the past doesn't matter.*
> 
> I'm not saying this to you Lila specifically, just in general.
> 
> Everyone has different criteria. For some the past doesn't matter, others it matters very little minus a few HARD boundaries, while others it's somewhat important and for some it's EXTREMELY important.
> 
> The key is NONE of them are wrong. These threads tend to devolve into each point of view trying to say that another point of view is wrong....and that's not the case, everyone is justified to their own point of view.
> 
> The key to this entire issue is to be open and honest about what one parties real boundaries are and the other person to be open and honest about if they fit those boundaries. Most of these problems are when 2 people are polar opposites on the issue and think it won't effect them long term, or worse are dishonest about it because they know the results would be bad.


Uhhh... I can _kind of_ understand what you're saying (or, at the very least, what I _think_ you're trying to say), but _you've chosen a couple of *very poor analogies* to make your point._

After all, promiscuity falls far, far short of either prostitution or pedophilia.


----------



## samyeagar

NobodySpecial said:


> Coffee not filled with associations of pain and hurt.


Except that coffee and my ex wife was associated with the pain and hurt of a verbal tirade followed by silent treatment.


----------



## GusPolinski

NobodySpecial said:


> Coffee not filled with associations of pain and hurt.


And yet the act of preparing coffee for a wife that doesn't quite reciprocate his feelings of desire for her may be associated w/ a certain degree of pain and hurt for sam.

Still, I get what you're saying.


----------



## I Don't Know

GusPolinski said:


> Uhhh... I can _kind of_ understand what you're saying (or, at the very least, what I _think_ you're trying to say), but _you've chosen a couple of *very poor analogies* to make your point._
> 
> After all, promiscuity falls far, far short of either prostitution or pedophilia.


I don't see prostitution being too far from promiscuity. I'm not talking about trafficking or any of that stuff. But surely there are fairly ordinary people who turned a trick or two to make ends meet. How are they different than someone who hooks up with anyone who buys them a few drinks at the club?


----------



## NobodySpecial

GusPolinski said:


> And yet the act of preparing coffee for a wife that doesn't quite reciprocate his feelings of desire for her may be associated w/ a certain degree of pain and hurt for sam.
> 
> Still, I get what you're saying.


So you may be able to tell from other posts that there has been a fair amount of sexual dysfunction in my past. IF my husband had been sore that I had _done specific things_ under duress or dysfunction and wanted me to do with him despite that, that would have been a Very, Very, Very large impediment to the trust that developed over the years that opened me up to pretty much anything and everything. Food for thought. I do not believe that I would be with a man who would use the fact that I did something under duress and dysfunction as a reason to think I SHOULD do it with him.


----------



## norajane

samyeagar said:


> That was exactly the reason behind her actions, though she did seek out her ex husband for sex as far out as two years after their divorce, so that does kind of belie the motivations a bit. I have largely accepted her way of initiating as it does fit her default personality.
> 
> Taking a step back however to a more general thought that active pursuit indicates desire...be it going out and getting a pizza because you're hungry, or a earning college degree because you want to earn more money. In the above examples regarding my wife, she is no different. *Misguided as they were to us on the outside, she had a desire, set goals and made plans to achieve those goals, and took action to to carry out those plans to achieve those goals.* I don't think it is an unreasonable goal for her to show me her desire in a more active way, any more than it would unreasonable if she came up to me and said she wanted to feel more appreciated.


I assume the desire of which you speak is sexual desire, lust. You want your wife to initiate out of sexual desire for you, lust for you.

However, the initiating she did with her ex and her step-son was NOT driven by sexual desire AT ALL. It was driven by pain and desperation. Do you see how that is totally different from sexual desire? Do you see how that is totally different from what you actually want (presumably)?

Introduce pain, humiliation and desperation into your relationship and she might show you that initiation, but I doubt it will fulfill you in the way that you want. Thinking that you are being ripped off because she isn't initiating the way she showed she could in the past under duress...that seems like self-sabotage, frankly.


----------



## GusPolinski

NobodySpecial said:


> So you may be able to tell from other posts that there has been a fair amount of sexual dysfunction in my past.


No, actually. Sorry, that's not to say that I doubt or disagree w/ your assessment w/ respect to whatever it is that you've shared regarding said dysfunction... I just don't recall reading any of it. I'll take your word for it, though. 



NobodySpecial said:


> IF my husband had been sore that I had _done specific things_ under duress or dysfunction and wanted me to do with him despite that, that would have been a Very, Very, Very large impediment to the trust that developed over the years that opened me up to pretty much anything and everything. Food for thought. I do not believe that I would be with a man who would use the fact that I did something under duress and dysfunction as a reason to think I SHOULD do it with him.


Given much of what has been hashed out in many of the "sexual history" threads, I've given ^this^ exact sentiment plenty of thought. And it makes perfect sense to me. I wouldn't want my wife to do _anything_ w/ me or for me that she found displeasurable, painful, or traumatic simply because she'd previously done it w/ or for a previous lover.

By the same token, if I were to discover that she'd done a certain thing w/ or for a previous lover (and possibly multiple times), and had enjoyed it, and had since refused to do the same w/ or for me...? Well... I'd feel pretty terrible about that.


----------



## GusPolinski

norajane said:


> I assume the desire of which you speak is sexual desire, lust. You want your wife to initiate out of sexual desire for you, lust for you.
> 
> However, *the initiating she did with her ex and her step-son *was NOT driven by sexual desire AT ALL. It was driven by pain and desperation. Do you see how that is totally different from sexual desire? Do you see how that is totally different from what you actually want (presumably)?
> 
> Introduce pain, humiliation and desperation into your relationship and she might show you that initiation, but I doubt it will fulfill you in the way that you want. Thinking that you are being ripped off because she isn't initiating the way she showed she could in the past under duress...that seems like self-sabotage, frankly.


I'm still REALLY confused by ^this^... did she have a threesome w/ her ex and stepson (presumably, her ex's son)...?


----------



## norajane

GusPolinski said:


> I'm still REALLY confused by ^this^... did she have a threesome w/ her ex and stepson (presumably, her ex's son)...?


I'll let Sam fill in the details, but she engineered a fling (or ONS) with her step-son in order to get revenge on her ex-husband. The threesomes were with her ex and other women in order to try to save their dysfunctional marriage. It all sounds like 50 shades of extremely emotionally messed-up behavior.


----------



## samyeagar

At it's most base level...my wife saw her former marriage as miserable. Thought her ex husband was unhappy. She wanted to make her marriage happy, and her husband happy. She formed a plan to achieve that, and although it failed miserably, she put that plan into action. AT an even more base level, when she sets her mind to something, what ever it is, she goes to great lengths to accomplish it

We have a very happy marriage. She has a happy husband. I have expressed a desire for her to be more forward in initiation. I know for a fact, because of past behavior, that she is capable of doing that. I'm not even looking at it as she had the threesomes as a show of desire for her ex, or any of the specific act she did as a show of desire and lust for him. Frankly I don't care about that. It feels as if in this one thing that I have expressed that I want, there is a disparity of effort on her part to make it happen.

I don't push this issue because I am very happy with the framework of our marriage and our sex life, and if I have created an environment for her that is safe and secure enough that in this one thing, that she feels no need to put in effort, then that is certainly a huge positive in this context, and I am content with that. That doesn't change the fact that I would like to feel a level of effort that I know she is capable of.


----------



## samyeagar

norajane said:


> I'll let Sam fill in the details, but she engineered a fling (or ONS) with her step-son in order to get revenge on her ex-husband. The threesomes were with her ex and other women in order to try to save their dysfunctional marriage. It all sounds like 50 shades of extremely emotionally messed-up behavior.


I think this sums it up quite nicely.


----------



## GusPolinski

samyeagar said:


> At it's most base level...my wife saw her former marriage as miserable. Thought her ex husband was unhappy. She wanted to make her marriage happy, and her husband happy. She formed a plan to achieve that, and although it failed miserably, she put that plan into action. AT an even more base level, when she sets her mind to something, what ever it is, she goes to great lengths to accomplish it
> 
> We have a very happy marriage. She has a happy husband. I have expressed a desire for her to be more forward in initiation. I know for a fact, because of past behavior, that she is capable of doing that. I'm not even looking at it as she had the threesomes as a show of desire for her ex, or any of the specific act she did as a show of desire and lust for him. Frankly I don't care about that. It feels as if in this one thing that I have expressed that I want, there is a disparity of effort on her part to make it happen.
> 
> I don't push this issue because I am very happy with the framework of our marriage and our sex life, and if I have created an environment for her that is safe and secure enough that in this one thing, that she feels no need to put in effort, then that is certainly a huge positive in this context, and I am content with that. That doesn't change the fact that I would like to feel a level of effort that I know she is capable of.


sam, I think she'll get there. My guess is that she's probably just working up to it. Hell... she's probably enjoying being pursued by a husband that loves and values her for who she is rather than the women that she's bringing home.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

GusPolinski said:


> Uhhh... I can _kind of_ understand what you're saying (or, at the very least, what I _think_ you're trying to say), but _you've chosen a couple of *very poor analogies* to make your point._
> 
> After all, promiscuity falls far, far short of either prostitution or pedophilia.


As I was typing it, I didn't "enjoy" those examples, but they are actually perfect analogies.

Sexual past isn't solely about promiscuity. Sexual past is about proclivities, desires, what has turned someone on previously etc. etc. 

My point was simply that you can't ever say that NOTHING in a person's sexual past (what they have done sexually previous to meeting you) is 100% none of your business. If you take my analogies...I couldn't imagine a single HEALTHY person who would accept a relationship with someone who could do such things in their past.


----------



## Anon Pink

SimplyAmorous said:


> I feel the same as you in what you said here .. everyone loves to slap the old "Insecurity card" on *anyone who doesn't agree... blanket judgement to shut them down.. so typical... *


I disagree SA. It's not done to shut someone down, it's to call out flimsy excuse making. If the partner is what you describe below, a man who deeply feels that sex is or should be reserved ONLY as an expression of deeply felt love and a commitment to that love, that would be not only obvious in his demeanor but also a rightful exception to the general rule of "it's really none of your business." ...IMO.



> It's just not always so... when one fails to acknowledge a difference in how we deeply feel about sex, its expression, it's meaning to us in how we love.. that we desire to be with another who feels the same...it does a grave disserive to this discussion.. and many of us will never agree, or really understand why the other feels that way.. as we are not wired like them.
> 
> I much agree with this... the earlier the better.. to not waste anyone's time getting too emotionally invested.





Is it possible that these questions of sexual history have an expiration date? For instance, with two people in their 20's their sexual history is limited, by time, and therefor might indicate who they are or lately were. While two people in their 40's or 50's who are divorced their sexual histories would be completely insignificant compared to the marriages they had and what went wrong.

I come to this problem, obviously, from my own perspective. If I was single now, and a man I was dating wanted to know my sexual history prior to my marriage, I would think this man had some serious insecurity issues and he clearly wasn't right for me. However if he asked about my marriage, that would be appropriate to gain an understanding of who I am and who I lately was.


----------



## Anon Pink

norajane said:


> I'll let Sam fill in the details, but she engineered a fling (or ONS) with her step-son in order to get revenge on her ex-husband. The threesomes were with her ex and other women in order to try to save their dysfunctional marriage. It all sounds like *50 shades of extremely emotionally messed-up behavior*.


Love your new diagnosis!

The excellent point being that people grow, learn, change. Things from the past don't always have a bearing on who we are at present.

Maybe SAM isn't there yet due to his own issues with his first marriage. But it's obvious to me at least that his wife behaved, past tense, in a way she now find repugnant and can't bring herself to get close to duplicating that behavior. It takes her too close to the extremely messed up emotional basket case she once was.

As Gus says, give it time.


----------



## I Don't Know

Anon Pink said:


> I disagree SA. It's not done to shut someone down, it's to call out flimsy excuse making. If the partner is what you describe below, a man who deeply feels that sex is or should be reserved ONLY as an expression of deeply felt love and a commitment to that love, that would be not only obvious in his demeanor but also a rightful exception to the general rule of "it's really none of your business." ...IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it possible that these questions of sexual history have an expiration date? For instance, with two people in their 20's their sexual history is limited, by time, and therefor might indicate who they are or lately were. While two people in their 40's or 50's who are divorced their sexual histories would be completely insignificant compared to the marriages they had and what went wrong.
> 
> I come to this problem, obviously, from my own perspective. If I was single now, and a man I was dating wanted to know my sexual history prior to my marriage, I would think this man had some serious insecurity issues and he clearly wasn't right for me. However if he asked about my marriage, that would be appropriate to gain an understanding of who I am and who I lately was.


What if he asked about sexual history since your marriage? Say you were D for a year and met someone, would you say how you had conducted yourself in that year would be fair to ask about? 

My wife was D for a year and a month when I met her. She told me she had learned from her mistakes and wasn't looking for a bad boy now. She had stayed single, only "dated" and "talked to" guys and 2 of those she had sex with. What she didn't mention was that after her D she still (mostly) went for the bad boys for the year before she met me. So if she "learned her lesson" it wasn't after her D as she led me to believe. OH and it wasn't 2 guys either. She really wasn't single (as in not seeing and sleeping with someone) for more than a few weeks at a time during that year.


----------



## Anon Pink

I Don't Know said:


> What if he asked about sexual history since your marriage? Say you were D for a year and met someone, would you say how you had conducted yourself in that year would be fair to ask about?
> 
> My wife was D for a year and a month when I met her. She told me she had learned from her mistakes and wasn't looking for a bad boy now. She had stayed single, only "dated" and "talked to" guys and 2 of those she had sex with. What she didn't mention was that after her D she still (mostly) went for the bad boys for the year before she met me. So if she "learned her lesson" it wasn't after her D as she led me to believe. OH and it wasn't 2 guys either. She really wasn't single (as in not seeing and sleeping with someone) for more than a few weeks at a time during that year.



Wow, how old was she? I ask because I my age, 52, if I find myself single and a man I was interested in wanted to know my recent single sexual activities, I would laugh. Honestly? I'm 52 years old for crying out loud! What I decide to do and with whom I do it is none of your damn business! At this age, I can't imagine any valid reason for wanting to know. Other than health issues that is.

However, if this fictions man replied along the lines of what SA suggested above, an IF I believed him,(a big IF) I would be honest if I really wanted that relationship to work.

The cynic in me tends to believe that men who think sex, at my age, is some mystical deeply spiritual expression of earnest love and reserved only for that, are way to religious me for me. Besides, I like sex way too much and would want a man who also likes sex a lot.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> Wow, how old was she? I ask because I my age, 52, if I find myself single and a man I was interested in wanted to know my recent single sexual activities, I would laugh. Honestly? I'm 52 years old for crying out loud! What I decide to do and with whom I do it is none of your damn business! At this age, I can't imagine any valid reason for wanting to know. Other than health issues that is.
> 
> However, if this fictions man replied along the lines of what SA suggested above, an IF I believed him,(a big IF) I would be honest if I really wanted that relationship to work.
> 
> The cynic in me tends to believe that men who think sex, at my age, is some mystical deeply spiritual expression of earnest love and reserved only for that, are way to religious me for me. Besides, I like sex way too much and would want a man who also likes sex a lot.


I have an interesting experience with this. I didn't give a second thought to this question while my wife and I were dating, because I really didn't care. I just assumed she had possibly slept with some guys in the couple of years between her divorce and me.

No biggie to me until...I found out through a third party about a year into our relationship, that she had continued to sleep with her ex husband, the guy who had been abusive in every imaginable way, a serial cheat, that she had gone to the lengths she had to keep him...continued to sleep with him up until a couple of months before we got together. When we talked about this, she flat out told me she never wanted me to find out. 

I think that was kind of an important detail for me to know as that really doesn't count as the past given how recent it was, and having a better understanding of her continued ties to her ex husband, I think would have been very prudent on my part.


----------



## Idyit

Full circle.....

1) You are never allowed to ask anything
2) If you do you're an insecure jerk

Help me out here. Is this truly a "never ask any questions" issue or is it more about the types of questions and timing?

I've never asked details and honestly think that depth of questioning is a bit weak and voyeuristic(?). When you're saying "none of your business" do you really mean that there is zero conversation about prior history etc...ever?

And as to timing are you saying you would never discuss prior history? Early on I totally get that but what about if the relationship progresses to exclusive...engaged...married..?

~ Passio


----------



## I Don't Know

She was 34. And if she had said none of my business, fine. But I think if you're looking to see if you really fit the mold for what a person really wants (or better yet is strongly attracted by) or if they are just settling, it is pretty relevant info. Maybe not.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

norajane said:


> I assume the desire of which you speak is sexual desire, lust. You want your wife to initiate out of sexual desire for you, lust for you.
> 
> However, the initiating she did with her ex and her step-son was NOT driven by sexual desire AT ALL. It was driven by pain and desperation. Do you see how that is totally different from sexual desire? Do you see how that is totally different from what you actually want (presumably)?
> 
> Introduce pain, humiliation and desperation into your relationship and she might show you that initiation, but I doubt it will fulfill you in the way that you want. Thinking that you are being ripped off because she isn't initiating the way she showed she could in the past under duress...that seems like self-sabotage, frankly.


Why insist on equating an action with its motivation? Most people are perfectly capable of distinguishing between the two. Killing someone in self-defense is legal. Premeditated murder isn't.

You're also assuming that the simple action of actively and overtly initiating sex, by Sam's wife, will introduce pain and humiliation where none currently exist. That gets cause and effect exactly backward. I understand how her desperation in her last marriage caused her to initiate. I can't understand how initiating will cause her to feel desperation.

I understand where Sam's coming from. It's depressing for your wife to give you some version of, "I swung from the chandeliers and broke out the porno moves for my ex. But with you, I feel safe and comfortable enough to close my eyes and starfish."


----------



## norajane

You are mischaracterizing what I said, BT. And it's not the first time you've done that.

If Sam introduces pain and desperation into their relationship by destabilizing it in some way like her ex did, it might elicit some kind of reaction from her like initiating in order to save the relationship. But that won't be her initiating out of lust, which I assume is what Sam wants; it will be her initiating out of desperation to save the relationship. So he has to accept her as she is in a normal relationship, not a dysfunctional one. If he makes their relationship dysfunctional in order to get her to initiate, he's shooting himself in the foot. 

Motivation for why we do things or why someone else did something is important to understand because nothing occurs in a vacuum. If I kill someone in self-defense, I am not likely to run around killing people randomly. If you only consider that I killed someone without considering my motive as well, you might wonder if you're next but it wouldn't happen unless you were the one threatening my life.


----------



## Anon Pink

Idyit said:


> Full circle.....
> 
> 1) You are never allowed to ask anything
> 2) If you do you're an insecure jerk
> 
> Help me out here. Is this truly a "never ask any questions" issue or is it more about the types of questions and timing?
> 
> I've never asked details and honestly think that depth of questioning is a bit weak and voyeuristic(?). When you're saying "none of your business" do you really mean that there is zero conversation about prior history etc...ever?
> 
> And as to timing are you saying you would never discuss prior history? Early on I totally get that but what about if the relationship progresses to exclusive...engaged...married..?
> 
> ~ Passio





I Don't Know said:


> She was 34. And if she had said none of my business, fine. But I think if you're looking to see if you really fit the mold for what a person really wants (or better yet is strongly attracted by) or if they are just settling, it is pretty relevant info. Maybe not.


I have to grant that you each make decent points. Sam too.

I can only look at this through my eyes.

I don't care about a man's sexual past except for curiosity sake. Knowing him. It would not make any difference to me what he answered, it would only mean I knew him that much better. So if a man asks, after having been on TAM, I would no longer be able to assume he just wanted to know me better.

The way you guys put it, the woman is clearly being judged by her answers or lack there of. I guess it is the fact that even though you do not admit it, there is a judgment waiting in your questions.

FTR, my H and I went through our sexual histories piece by piece of the course of several month once we became serious. For me, and I assume for him, it was an exercise in knowing one another intimately. In knowing each other's histories we understood a bit more about one another. But the way you guys put it, it's not about knowing. It's about judging.

Sam, I fully believe your wife omitted the romps with her ex because she was ashamed of them. And it turns out she should be, it sounds like you are judging her.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> I have to grant that you each make decent points. Sam too.
> 
> I can only look at this through my eyes.
> 
> I don't care about a man's sexual past except for curiosity sake. Knowing him. It would not make any difference to me what he answered, it would only mean I knew him that much better. So if a man asks, after having been on TAM, I would no longer be able to assume he just wanted to know me better.
> 
> The way you guys put it, the woman is clearly being judged by her answers or lack there of. I guess it is the fact that even though you do not admit it, there is a judgment waiting in your questions.
> 
> FTR, my H and I went through our sexual histories piece by piece of the course of several month once we became serious. For me, and I assume for him, it was an exercise in knowing one another intimately. In knowing each other's histories we understood a bit more about one another. But the way you guys put it, it's not about knowing. It's about judging.
> 
> Sam, I fully believe your wife omitted the romps with her ex because she was ashamed of them. And it turns out she should be, *it sounds like you are judging her*.


I call BS on this. I don't judge her at all. There are only a select few things that I questioned. She's been with over 30 men, and really, it doesn't bother me. What has caused me pause is that some of her behavior, some of the things she has done, and in the relatively recent past are not healthy. I think we can all agree on that. Those are the things I care about, because those are the types of things that can indicate whether or not we can have a healthy relationship.


----------



## I Don't Know

There is judgment in every aspect of sizing someone up for a relationship. Why should I not attempt to determine how much the risk is of her ditching me later when a bad boy comes along?


----------



## samyeagar

I Don't Know said:


> There is judgment in every aspect of sizing someone up for a relationship. Why should I not attempt to determine how much the risk is of her ditching me later when a bad boy comes along?


Or the risk of my wife falling back into bed with her ex husband? Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't have been overly concerned about that. I don't even give any of her other exes a second thought. Her ex husband on the other hand...I mean, the guy was a serial cheat, physically, sexually, emotionally, financially abused her, and finally, he left her. Even after all of that, after being so angry with him, she lashed out to hurt him by sleeping with his son, all the while, continuing to sleep with her ex, right up until almost when we started dating. Yeah, I think it was important for me to understand the nature of the obviously strong draw he had on her.


----------



## GusPolinski

samyeagar said:


> Or the risk of my wife falling back into bed with her ex husband? Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't have been overly concerned about that. I don't even give any of her other exes a second thought. Her ex husband on the other hand...I mean, the guy was a serial cheat, physically, sexually, emotionally, financially abused her, and finally, he left her. Even after all of that, after being so angry with him, she lashed out to hurt him by sleeping with his son, all the while, continuing to sleep with her ex, right up until almost when we started dating. Yeah, I think it was important for me to understand the nature of the obviously strong draw he had on her.


Not only do I fail to see "judgement" in any of ^this^, but I'd like to also point out what so many seem to either forget, overlook, or never even consider in the first place...

Judgement does not equal condemnation.


----------



## Idyit

Anon Pink said:


> I have to grant that you each make decent points. Sam too.
> 
> I can only look at this through my eyes.
> 
> I don't care about a man's sexual past except for curiosity sake. Knowing him. It would not make any difference to me what he answered, it would only mean I knew him that much better. So if a man asks, after having been on TAM, I would no longer be able to assume he just wanted to know me better.
> 
> *The way you guys put it, the woman is clearly being judged by her answers or lack there of. I guess it is the fact that even though you do not admit it, there is a judgment waiting in your questions.*
> 
> FTR, my H and I went through our sexual histories piece by piece of the course of several month once we became serious. For me, and I assume for him, it was an exercise in knowing one another intimately. In knowing each other's histories we understood a bit more about one another. *But the way you guys put it, it's not about knowing. It's about judging.*


If the bolded above is directed at me, please help me understand how. I've stated my position early on and it had nothing to do with judgement or condemnation. 

Also, can you help me out by answering my questions that you quoted?

~ Passio


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

norajane said:


> You are mischaracterizing what I said, BT. And it's not the first time you've done that.


I don't think I have. Sam stated that he wanted his wife to initiate more directly. Because her last relationship, when she initiated directly, was dysfunctional, you've apparently assumed that she's incapable of initiating in a healthy relationship.



> If Sam introduces pain and desperation into their relationship by destabilizing it in some way like her ex did, it might elicit some kind of reaction from her like initiating in order to save the relationship. But that won't be her initiating out of lust, which I assume is what Sam wants; it will be her initiating out of desperation to save the relationship.


That's true. But he never stated that he planned to do so. He simply stated that he would like for her to initiate the way she did for her ex. I will assume that she is capable of doing so as a good faith gesture to please her husband.

Frankly, why stop at equating initiating sex with dysfunction? She had sex with her ex while in a dysfunctional relationship. Does that mean that she and Sam having sex is unhealthy? Of course not. In fact, her withholding sex because she's had dysfunctional sex in the past would turn her current relationship dysfunctional. She can do the same act for different reasons.


----------



## NobodySpecial

samyeagar said:


> Or the risk of my wife falling back into bed with her ex husband? Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't have been overly concerned about that. I don't even give any of her other exes a second thought. Her ex husband on the other hand...I mean, the guy was a serial cheat, physically, sexually, emotionally, financially abused her, and finally, he left her. Even after all of that, after being so angry with him, she lashed out to hurt him by sleeping with his son, all the while, continuing to sleep with her ex, right up until almost when we started dating. Yeah, I think it was important for me to understand the nature of the obviously strong draw he had on her.


I don't know. That seems fair.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Anon Pink said:


> I disagree SA. It's not done to shut someone down, it's to call out flimsy excuse making. If the partner is what you describe below, a man who deeply feels that sex is or should be reserved ONLY as an expression of deeply felt love and a commitment to that love, that would be not only obvious in his demeanor but also a rightful exception to the general rule of "it's really none of your business." ...IMO.


 MY H would be this type ....his general demeanor would be to love .. to trust.. commitment, all that playing off of her show of affection for him/ treatment of him..... OH yeah... but I also feel my husband is a sucker.. you know why.. *HE WOULDN'T ASK *..... we've had this conversation.. (I find that foolish....but ya know. .. maybe he's not , he's just realistic as he feels many would just downplay/ downsize the #'s, basically the "truth" anyway.)

He's also the type ....IF he came to find out later on that she was one who has lots of casual sex.. he'd NEVER look upon her the same way again, something would be forever lost..

Is that fair to her????? 

Beings he IS the sort of man who would look down upon her.. and no, it's not insecurity at all..* its comes back to how he conducts himself.* ....he is not the type of man who would sleep with a woman unless he LOVED HER, and had a commitment to her...he would never feel it is OK to f**k someone & walk away...actually it's all Love making to him anyway.... that is how he is wired.. 

His reasoning to not be "Chumped" is.... he would NEVER jump in too soon with a woman, and if he got any indication she was a wild mustang who had a different set of sexual values (Bad boy past)....he'd leave her.. He just feels those things would come out eventually... 



> Is it possible that these questions of sexual history have an expiration date? For instance, with two people in their 20's their sexual history is limited, by time, and therefor might indicate who they are or lately were. While two people in their 40's or 50's who are divorced their sexual histories would be completely insignificant compared to the marriages they had and what went wrong.


I just don't see it the same .... I see no expiration date on getting to know someone or where they have been, to me, this is all about openness, honesty and intimacy.. I could get past anything if I trusted where the person is *NOW*.. but I'd struggle to do that if they had a blocker on any part of their lives towards... my H is different over me .. I am more forgiving but require* to KNOW*.. he is less forgiving/understanding- but wouldn't ask !!

Which is better ?? People can be all over the map in this.. shouldn't we all be aware. 



> I come to this problem, obviously, from my own perspective. If I was single now, and a man I was dating wanted to know my sexual history prior to my marriage, I would think this man had some serious insecurity issues and he clearly wasn't right for me. However if he asked about my marriage, that would be appropriate to gain an understanding of who I am and who I lately was.


 If a woman asks a man questions....I don't think he would look upon her as insecure.. more that she has a right to know what she is attaching herself to.. seeking to weigh her options.. 

BUT when a man seeks to know more about a woman, its always that he is insecure. I just don't see this the same way..he has as much of a right to know & seek where she has been , what she has learned along the way -to bring her to NOW.. as any of us women.. Just my take on it all.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Anon Pink said:


> *However, if this fictions man replied along the lines of what SA suggested above, an IF I believed him,(a big IF) I would be honest if I really wanted that relationship to work*.
> 
> *The cynic in me tends to believe that men who think sex, at my age, is some mystical deeply spiritual expression of earnest love and reserved only for that, are way to religious me for me. Besides, I like sex way too much and would want a man who also likes sex a lot. *


Since my H fits this.. you can take out the spiritual.. but he feels it's "*VERY VERY SPECIAL*".. (his words as we've had this conversation... I have said that sex is near "sacred" to me... but he wouldn't go THAT FAR, that's when he said "very very special")....

Not long ago, playing off of one of JLD's threads asking this question..... I asked him how much of sex was *Physical* / How much *Emotional*.. his reply was *70% emotional / 30% physical* for him.... I said "wow I was thinking you might be 90%!".... then he said that really it should all be about the emotional bonding...even 100%... 

My husband has never been religious ironically.. he could care less... (I was the christian, he just went to church with me)... Once I asked him in the car driving down the road....what he thought of GOD....never forget this moment... his reply had me laughing ...(after I lost my religion of course).. the way MAN has made God out to be is this Power Hungry Ogre who expects us to pray & worship around the clock, almost like an EGO TRIP..... and for us to give our last dime & live like paupers down here.. I mean, in his view.. there is nothing to enjoy in life at all - if one lived like this.. 

Also the way some believers go on about Heaven, it's like they *want to die.*.... this greatly disturbs him -he can't understand what is wrong with these people... He doesn't want to DIE...." LIFE IS GOOD!".. he'll say !.... 

He'd always joke every time he went to church with me....the sermon was about the widow & the penny.. No, religion was never his thing! Although he does see common sense in many scriptures.. "If you don't DO this.. THAT won't happen to you" sort of thing. 

He is just a sensitive natured Giving man who loves very deeply.. he's a bonafide Romantic at heart...he believes in cherishing his woman, and sex is deeply emotionally bonding, expressing that Love.



> *Besides, I like sex way too much and would want a man who also likes sex a lot*.


Just because someone feels like that, the very special .... doesn't mean they are not CRAZY about sex.. It's just not always accurate... we're both addicted to orgasms.. if I can say that so bluntly .


----------



## SimplyAmorous

norajane said:


> You are mischaracterizing what I said, BT. And it's not the first time you've done that.
> 
> If Sam introduces pain and desperation into their relationship by destabilizing it in some way like her ex did, it might elicit some kind of reaction from her like initiating in order to save the relationship. But that won't be her initiating out of lust, which I assume is what Sam wants; it will be her initiating out of desperation to save the relationship. So he has to accept her as she is in a normal relationship, not a dysfunctional one. If he makes their relationship dysfunctional in order to get her to initiate, he's shooting himself in the foot.
> 
> *Motivation for why we do things or why someone else did something is important to understand because nothing occurs in a vacuum. * If I kill someone in self-defense, I am not likely to run around killing people randomly. If you only consider that I killed someone without considering my motive as well, you might wonder if you're next but it wouldn't happen unless you were the one threatening my life.


This is precisely why I think it's GOOD to open up about the past.. I think it's great that Sam's wife and HIM had these conversations, jolting to learn from a 3rd party of course...as to her motivations in that with her Ex.. the desperation she felt .... so he can better understand her.. 

What IF he tried to bury what he learned as to not stir the pot.. or she blocked his seeking why she did those things.... these can be difficult discussions.. but they ultimately bring understanding and acceptance.. they are in a much better place today BECAUSE they have opened up. 

There is much peace in understanding ...and accepting where one WAS at one time. ..and moving forward together.


----------



## Anon Pink

samyeagar said:


> I call BS on this. I don't judge her at all. There are only a select few things that I questioned. She's been with over 30 men, and really, it doesn't bother me. What has caused me pause is that some of her behavior, some of the things she has done, and in the relatively recent past are not healthy. I think we can all agree on that. *Those are the things I care about, because those are the types of things that can indicate whether or not we can have a healthy relationship.*


Yes, you are judging her. You are judging whether or not she is emotionally healthy enough to fully engage with you as you would expect a significant other to engage. And considering you felt this prior to marriage and married her anyway, continuing to "wonder" if you two can have a healthy marriage is in fact judging her. It is challenging her to prove her love and loyalty because she has this past.

Sam, once you marry you accept that she *can* and *will* and then you seek to make it happen.

What you're doing is like the woman who gains 400 pounds after marriage and expects her H to continue to love and desire her. "Prove it!" The woman shouldn't demand her H prove it but instead make it happen by maintaining her appearance as best she can.

Since you are currently married to her, the judgment should not be on IF she can, but HOW she can. How she can engage as you expect considering HOW emotionally messed up she was as a result of her history. IOW, this is what you want so HOW can you make that happen? How can you present yourself as confidently safe enough for her to do the work to become the strong(instead of desperate) woman she should be. 

IF she is capable is a question long passed, you are married now. The question is HOW, not IF. You already decided the IF doesn't matter. 

IF= judgement, prove it.
HOW= support, how can I help.




> Yeah, I think it was important for me to understand the nature of the obviously strong draw he had on her.


She loved him. He abused and used her. So she loved him more. And he abused her more. Round and round it went, year after year until she no longer recognized where her boundaries were. Where her loved began and ended and where this sick pattern of desperation to be loved in return warped into emotional instability. 

"Maybe he is right? Maybe I'm doing something wrong? Maybe I should not up upset him? Maybe I drive him to ...? Maybe I should be what he wants and then he will love me?"

And then she snapped. Tried to get off the spiral but fell back a few times before she was able to fully and completely walk away. This is kinda normal. You know all of this but for some reason it's not enough. 

You still doubt her. Doubting can be felt a mile away Sam.

I wonder if you would be as doubting, and more confidently safe for her, if you had no knowledge of those things that make you worry?


----------



## Anon Pink

SA, I think it's adorable how you approach this question based on your husband not being chumped should, God forbid, you no longer be his wife.  always looking out for him!

I never considered how much of sex is emotional and how much is physical. Probably because with a few exceptions here and there I've never felt very much emotion coming from my partner. So the sex I've experienced has been DRIVEN by mostly physical, maybe 70% and the rest being based on emotional/trust. I've been married for nearly 30 years and the trust I have for me husband is unquestionable. So perhaps I'm unable to predict with any accuracy how sex might be had should I find myself single. I can predict I might be a highly sexually frustrated woman though...  it takes much time to build trust. But then again, I might just go hog wild and bed many men? Can't predict.

But I can predict that SHOULD I become single and ran across a man like your H, I probably would have no idea how to interpret him and probably keep him at arms length since his approach to relationships and sex is so foreign to me. Does that make sense?

And...yeah! You got my screen name right! I never corrected you because I could understand how your eyes turned the N in aNon into a V for aVon.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Anon Pink said:


> Yes, you are judging her. You are judging whether or not she is emotionally healthy enough to fully engage with you as you would expect a significant other to engage. And considering you felt this prior to marriage and married her anyway, continuing to "wonder" if you two can have a healthy marriage is in fact judging her. It is challenging her to prove her love and loyalty because she has this past.
> 
> Sam, once you marry you accept that she *can* and *will* and then you seek to make it happen.


I am, apparently, confused. I thought the revelation of history happened after marriage? I don't agree with what he wants to DO with the information, but if I did not know that my spouse was still pursuing her abuser mere months before our togetherness, that would bug me.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Anon Pink said:


> *SA, I think it's adorable how you approach this question based on your husband not being chumped should, God forbid, you no longer be his wife.  always looking out for him!*


 I am smiling that you can see THIS in my response ... he's just not like many men.. He is tremendously honest & TRUE... Heck I could have manipulated him with his GOOD NATURE!!! But how could I do that.. I HATE & despise that in other people.... especially when you hurt someone who cares so much, and has the best of intentions.. Now if they are a son of a B.. that's a little different...I wouldn't feel so bad ! 

Good Guys shouldn't finish last. 

Even if something came out later.. he'd still do his best to Be a good husband....he's the type that would stay FOR THE KIDS -even if he wasn't happy.. he wouldn't complain, he wouldn't bring up things to hurt a woman- *even if HE was hurt*.. I just know how he is.. 



> *I never considered how much of sex is emotional and how much is physical. Probably because with a few exceptions here and there I've never felt very much emotion coming from my partner. So the sex I've experienced has been DRIVEN by mostly physical, maybe 70% and the rest being based on emotional/trust.*


It's another aspect not much talked about...but it does play into our differing views.. 

I am on the opposite side of this entirely.. I have never had sex without feeling deeply loved, wanted, basking in the emotion... & always an afterglow......without even understanding this in our younger years.. it explains why I always felt he was a great lover ...even if we were very "vanilla" in comparison to the norm... It never dawned on me I needed anything else.. I was "filled".




> *I've been married for nearly 30 years and the trust I have for me husband is unquestionable. So perhaps I'm unable to predict with any accuracy how sex might be had should I find myself single. I can predict I might be a highly sexually frustrated woman though...  it takes much time to build trust. But then again, I might just go hog wild and bed many men? Can't predict.*


 I'd be highly frustrated too.... it's all in what matters to you, how sex makes you feel....not just in the moment but afterwards..where will the 2 of you be....will you be telling a GF what a Di** he was.. . 

MANY women do not NEED or CRAVE what I do... I get that.. they are content with the temporary... will it last or not, it's still worth the ride for them...... 

I would be very angry...if I felt "used" by too many , them walking away-being with another.... I know it would take a huge HIT on screwing with my head.. and trusting men.. I'd start to think they are all the same.. Just looking for a warm hole...

If that makes me too sensitive. I'll take it. Ya know.. it is what it is... but I don't see it has to be ALL or nothing sexually... I know how to have fun.. but hold some boundaries while we get to know each other.. building upon the emotional slowly..... nothing wrong with some anticipation....I just see less regrets in that.. That's my mindset.. 

But yeah....it would be very tempting to JUMP IN... go all the way... I can easily understand this.... Hormones are hormones!! 



> *But I can predict that SHOULD I become single and ran across a man like your H, I probably would have no idea how to interpret him and probably keep him at arms length since his approach to relationships and sex is so foreign to me. Does that make sense?*


 We're always going to be more attracted and feel most comfortable with what we are, or how we foresee a relationship unfolding.. I would not at all feel comfortable with a man expecting sex by the 3rd date. I'd be so let down..if he expected physical without taking the time to get to know me & show me I meant something to him.. 



> *And...yeah! You got my screen name right! I never corrected you because I could understand how your eyes turned the N in aNon into a V for aVon*.


I noticed it a couple months ago that I was doing it wrong FOR YEARS.. I didn't say anything .... but thought to myself >>


----------



## EleGirl

I Don't Know said:


> I don't see prostitution being too far from promiscuity. I'm not talking about trafficking or any of that stuff. But surely there are fairly ordinary people who turned a trick or two to make ends meet. How are they different than someone who hooks up with anyone who buys them a few drinks at the club?


When a woman excepts a drink or two from a man, it does not imply that she is going to have sex with the man.

If sex happens later, then it's a separate thing.

With your way of thinking, traditional marriage is prostitution.. after all a man supported a woman and she had sex with him.

Further, can you please explain what you define as promiscuity? 

How many sex partners and what circumstances does a woman have to have to be considered promiscuous.

How many sex partners and what circumstances does a man have to have to be considered promiscuous.


----------



## samyeagar

NobodySpecial said:


> I am, apparently, confused. I thought the revelation of history happened after marriage? I don't agree with what he wants to DO with the information, but if I did not know that my spouse was still pursuing her abuser mere months before our togetherness, that would bug me.


I'm confused as to what you think I want to DO with the information?

The revelation about things with her ex husband happened after we had been together about a year and a half, we were engaged, four months before our wedding day.

I think one of the issues here is the fact that I have been speaking in present tense, when in reality, we have worked through most of these things. One of the reasons we have been able to have some of the discussions we have is because we have built a very safe environment to be vulnerable with each other.

One of the reasons I chime in on these types of threads is that more often than not, things become very quickly polarized into black and white, where actually understanding what's going on is often somewhere in between.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> Yes, you are judging her. You are judging whether or not she is emotionally healthy enough to fully engage with you as you would expect a significant other to engage. And considering you felt this prior to marriage and married her anyway, continuing to "wonder" if you two can have a healthy marriage is in fact judging her. It is challenging her to prove her love and loyalty because she has this past.
> 
> Sam, once you marry you accept that she *can* and *will* and then you seek to make it happen.
> 
> What you're doing is like the woman who gains 400 pounds after marriage and expects her H to continue to love and desire her. "Prove it!" The woman shouldn't demand her H prove it but instead make it happen by maintaining her appearance as best she can.
> 
> Since you are currently married to her, the judgment should not be on IF she can, but HOW she can. How she can engage as you expect considering HOW emotionally messed up she was as a result of her history. IOW, this is what you want so HOW can you make that happen? How can you present yourself as confidently safe enough for her to do the work to become the strong(instead of desperate) woman she should be.
> 
> IF she is capable is a question long passed, you are married now. The question is HOW, not IF. You already decided the IF doesn't matter.
> 
> IF= judgement, prove it.
> HOW= support, how can I help.


I think part of this is that I have been speaking in present tense, and the things I have been relaying here...we have moved long past, and aren't issues any more. The questions above such as "can she", again, we've moved way past that, and I don't wonder that at all anymore, and she's foud most of the how's.




> She loved him. He abused and used her. So she loved him more. And he abused her more. Round and round it went, year after year until she no longer recognized where her boundaries were. Where her loved began and ended and where this sick pattern of desperation to be loved in return warped into emotional instability.
> 
> "Maybe he is right? Maybe I'm doing something wrong? Maybe I should not up upset him? Maybe I drive him to ...? Maybe I should be what he wants and then he will love me?"
> 
> *And then she snapped. Tried to get off the spiral but fell back a few times before she was able to fully and completely walk away. This is kinda normal. You know all of this but for some reason it's not enough.*
> 
> You still doubt her. Doubting can be felt a mile away Sam.
> 
> I wonder if you would be as doubting, and more confidently safe for her, if you had no knowledge of those things that make you worry?


You were pretty much spot on up until the bolded part. She wasn't the one who snapped.  Her ex husband left her. It took her a while to get to the point where she no longer wanted to get back together with him, and I believe entirely that there is no way she would ever get back into a relationship with him, regardless of circumstances.

The sex on the other hand is a different story. She was the one pursuing him after the divorce, after the emotional ties had been broken, the sexual draw was still as strong as ever...strong enough to overcome all the emotional devistation. There was simply a complete disassociation between the physical and emotional...something that is utterly foreign to me. I'm not worried about any of that anymore. Not a doubt in my mind that she's completely devoted to me in every way. 

Just some random things...Not a chance in hell of me destabilizing the relationship to force more overt initiation, or anything else for that matter. I'm not going to make her uncomfortable to get something I want. I don't do tit for tat.


----------



## I Don't Know

EleGirl said:


> When a woman excepts a drink or two from a man, it does not imply that she is going to have sex with the man.
> 
> If sex happens later, then it's a separate thing.
> 
> With your way of thinking, traditional marriage is prostitution.. after all a man supported a woman and she had sex with him.
> 
> Further, can you please explain what you define as promiscuity?
> 
> How many sex partners and what circumstances does a woman have to have to be considered promiscuous.
> 
> How many sex partners and what circumstances does a man have to have to be considered promiscuous.


I understand what you are saying about the drinks. The drinks weren't really the point other than she got something. But I will say, not in every case but in a lot, the possibility of sex IS being traded for drinks, dinner, or whatever. I've heard too many women talk about how they get free drinks to believe otherwise. It's more about why does money changing hands make that sex any different than any other two consenting adults. What's different than sleeping with someone just because you can or just because you feel like it.

I define promiscuous as having a sting of short term purely sex partners with very little time between. Or regularly having multiple sex partners at the same time. The occasional overlap doesn't necessarily mean promiscuity but a pattern does. Doesn't matter if it's a man or woman.


----------



## Tubbalard

Bam85 said:


> I thought about this after reading another post, here. Why do people feel the need to talk to their partners about their sexual past?
> 
> Before you answer, hear me out; I know some will argue that you can learn a lot about a person from their sexual past. I hate to say it but there's just no truth to that. If that's what it takes for you to feel like you understand someone's character then you're just not very observant.
> 
> It seems to be common practice in a relationship but it's SUCH a sadomasochistic behavior. There are no right answers to these questions. No matter what you say, even if it's 100% honest, your So will eventually find a way to feel ****ty about it. Besides that, some people change over time. A good-two-shoes virgin might one day decide to go on a sexual rampage. A person who slept around may have tired of it and is capable/willing to be a loyal partner. There's no sure way to evaluate this.
> 
> Does anyone see it that way? I often feel like I'm along in thinking that discussion is a dumb idea and adds nothing positive to a relationship.


A relationship is an investment. Would you apply this methodology with finances? It's important to do your due diligence and history to know what you are investing into.


----------



## EleGirl

I Don't Know said:


> I understand what you are saying about the drinks. The drinks weren't really the point other than she got something. But I will say, not in every case but in a lot, the possibility of sex IS being traded for drinks, dinner, or whatever. I've heard too many women talk about how they get free drinks to believe otherwise. It's more about why does money changing hands make that sex any different than any other two consenting adults. What's different than sleeping with someone just because you can or just because you feel like it.
> 
> I define promiscuous as having a sting of short term purely sex partners with very little time between. Or regularly having multiple sex partners at the same time. The occasional overlap doesn't necessarily mean promiscuity but a pattern does. Doesn't matter if it's a man or woman.


So if I take by bf out to dinner, pay and then we have sex.. he's a prostitute.

If I'm married and I, the wife, am the bread winner, my husband is a prostitute.

Got it.

When people go out to dinner, money is not exchanging hands between the two dinners. Neither of them are paying the other for sexual services.

Also, while the couple might have sex later, there is no obligation for sex. Either party can leave at any time and no sex will happen. But the person who is paying the bill for dinner is still obligated to pay for it.

It's a pretty sick outlook on human relationships to try to turn just about everything into sex for payment.. dating, going out for drinks, dinner, and even marriage.


----------



## I Don't Know

No, and I don't see how you got that from what I said. Actually I asked how money changing hands makes the prostitution any different from any other act of consentual sex? Why is selling sex immoral but doing it for free is not?

And I believe it's naive to believe some women don't use the possibility of sex to get things. Actually they use the illusion of the possibility of sex. Most of the time they have no intention of sleeping with the guy.


----------



## altawa

I Don't Know said:


> No, and I don't see how you got that from what I said. Actually I asked how money changing hands makes the prostitution any different from any other act of consentual sex? Why is selling sex immoral but doing it for free is not?
> 
> And I believe it's naive to believe some women don't use the possibility of sex to get things. Actually they use the illusion of the possibility of sex. Most of the time they have no intention of sleeping with the guy.


It happens all the time. Anybody who thinks otherwise is delusional or deliberately lying.


----------



## Wolfman1968

Lila said:


> I can only speak for myself, but I think people are entitled to ask whatever questions they feel they need to have answers to in order to feel comfortable in a relationship. However, I don't think one should wait until after they fall in love to ask questions about a partner's sexual history.
> 
> If someone feels it's necessary to ask about sexual history, then it should be done at the the onset of the relationship during the 'getting to know you' phase. If the answers don't suit the asker, or the other person chooses not to answer, then no harm, no foul. Each party goes their separate ways not having vested too much time with people who are incompatible in that way.
> 
> ETA: I'm one that doesn't believe in sharing one's sexual history and would probably walkaway from anyone who would ask me about it. However, I would respect that person simply for being upfront about it.


This seems like a rational approach.

Although I think there will be some debate about where exactly that "getting to know you" type question should be. These types of questions are too personal to give out on the first date for most people. There generally would be some level of intimacy to feel comfortable to bare their past like this.


----------



## Wolfman1968

EleGirl said:


> So if I take by bf out to dinner, pay and then we have sex.. he's a prostitute.
> 
> If I'm married and I, the wife, am the bread winner, my husband is a prostitute.
> 
> Got it.
> 
> When people go out to dinner, money is not exchanging hands between the two dinners. Neither of them are paying the other for sexual services.
> 
> Also, while the couple might have sex later, there is no obligation for sex. Either party can leave at any time and no sex will happen. But the person who is paying the bill for dinner is still obligated to pay for it.
> 
> It's a pretty sick outlook on human relationships to try to turn just about everything into sex for payment.. dating, going out for drinks, dinner, and *even marriage*.


It may be a sick outlook, but actually, it appears to be a prominent belief among feminist circles. Here is a review from the British newspaper The Guardian about the feminist author Shiela Jeffreys and her book "The Industrial Vagina":

Julie Bindel meets Sheila Jeffreys, author of The Industrial Vagina | Life and style | The Guardian

Some quotes from the article:

..."She says that she would love to write a history of the women's movement from a "revolutionary feminist perspective"; the common theme of her work is her firm belief that men maintain power over women by the act of sexual intercourse, and that heterosexuality is therefore bad for women.

This belief is reflected in The Industrial Vagina in her description of marriage as a type of prostitution; a legal transaction that has traditionally guaranteed sexual access to women's bodies in return for subsistence. "Prostitution and marriage have always been related," says Jeffreys. "What is shocking is that today marriage is becoming more fashionable amongst some young women".".....

I have read other feminists voicing similar "marriage = prostitution" statements, so it appears to be a common sentiment among feminist thought leaders.


----------



## Wolfman1968

norajane said:


> You are mischaracterizing what I said, BT. And it's not the first time you've done that.
> 
> If Sam introduces pain and desperation into their relationship by destabilizing it in some way like her ex did, it might elicit some kind of reaction from her like initiating in order to save the relationship. But that won't be her initiating out of lust, which I assume is what Sam wants; it will be her initiating out of desperation to save the relationship. So he has to accept her as she is in a normal relationship, not a dysfunctional one. If he makes their relationship dysfunctional in order to get her to initiate, he's shooting himself in the foot.
> 
> Motivation for why we do things or why someone else did something is important to understand because nothing occurs in a vacuum. If I kill someone in self-defense, I am not likely to run around killing people randomly. If you only consider that I killed someone without considering my motive as well, you might wonder if you're next but it wouldn't happen unless you were the one threatening my life.


I don't think your example about Sam holds up if you look at other behavior changes in a marriage done in response to complaints/dissatisfaction by one partner.

For example if a wife causes a crisis by saying her husband emotionally neglects her, and the husband responds by improving his emotional investment to her, is his action just as tainted as Sam's partner because he reformed under the threat of losing the relationship? If not, why not? It seems it is done just as much "under the gun" as Sam's wife initiating. Are all behavior changes that occur under the threat of losing the relationship therefore tainted? If not, what criteria separate the "legitimate" from "tainted" changes?

And I will take issue with your statement that Sam would be "destabilizing" the relationship. Wouldn't his partner really be the one "destabilizing" the relationship by lying/misrepresenting/hiding her unhelathy relationship with her ex from Sam? If not, then in my example, wouldn't the dissatisfied wife really be at fault for "destabilizing" the relationship, since the emotionally distant huband, oblivious for years, thought everything was fine? If so, then, why wouldn't the wife, who "destabilized" the relationship by complaining, be "shooting herself in the foot" just as you say Sam would be?


----------



## tech-novelist

Wolfman1968 said:


> It may be a sick outlook, but actually, it appears to be a prominent belief among feminist circles. Here is a review from the British newspaper The Guardian about the feminist author Shiela Jeffreys and her book "The Industrial Vagina":
> 
> Julie Bindel meets Sheila Jeffreys, author of The Industrial Vagina | Life and style | The Guardian
> 
> Some quotes from the article:
> 
> ..."She says that she would love to write a history of the women's movement from a "revolutionary feminist perspective"; the common theme of her work is her firm belief that *men maintain power over women by the act of sexual intercourse*, ....


She's almost correct, other than the slight detail of interchanging "men" and "women" in that bolded part. :rofl:


----------



## southbound

I want to know about a person I'm getting together with, especially if it's a going to be a long term relationship, and I'm willing to share everything about my past. I'm sure people would talk about other aspects of their life, why should that be a secret? 

I also believe sexual compatibility is important. If two people are 30 years old and one has had 100 sexual partners and the other has been saving theirself for that special one, they probably aren't going to be well matched sexually, and that can obviously lead to problems.

In addition, whether everyone thinks it's a big deal or not, this can be a big deal with a lot of people or the question wouldn't even be worth asking. So, better to talk about it while dating than have it come up years down the line that one of you had a wild sexual past and have the other faint.


----------



## soccermom2three

If for whatever reason I found myself single again, (divorced or widowed), I think it would be very disrespectful to my husband to discuss our past sex life with a new partner. What I did or didn't do with my husband is none of my new partner's business. I wouldn't want my husband discussing our past sex life with any of his new partners either. To me, a new relationship should be a clean slate and a fresh start.


----------



## altawa

soccermom2three said:


> If for whatever reason I found myself single again, (divorced or widowed), I think it would be very disrespectful to my husband to discuss our past sex life with a new partner. What I did or didn't do with my husband is none of my new partner's business. I wouldn't want my husband discussing our past sex life with any of his new partners either. To me, a new relationship should be a clean slate and a fresh start.


While it's your perogative to hold that opinion, if your new partner doesn't, it might be his deal breaker. If so, he would probably dump you and move on to somebody that is compatible with him.


----------



## soccermom2three

altawa said:


> While it's your perogative to hold that opinion, if your new partner doesn't, it might be his deal breaker. If so, he would probably dump you and move on to somebody that is compatible with him.


That's fine. I don't need to have someone like that in my life anyway, lol. I think you're assuming that would break my heart.


----------



## southbound

soccermom2three said:


> If for whatever reason I found myself single again, (divorced or widowed), I think it would be very disrespectful to my husband to discuss our past sex life with a new partner. What I did or didn't do with my husband is none of my new partner's business. I wouldn't want my husband discussing our past sex life with any of his new partners either. To me, a new relationship should be a clean slate and a fresh start.


I certainly understand that. I don't think married sex is of as much interest to people as other things, unless you had an open relationship or something of that nature. If I knew a woman had been married for 30 years and widowed, I wouldn't expect her to fill me in on what turned her husband on and their choice of lube. 

I do think, however, that anything that could be a potential issue down the line should be discussed, and I don't think we should necessarily use our own opinion as to what should be a big deal; there are things we know could be a big deal to some people.

I wouldn't be so interested in the married sex life, but If a woman had cheated on her spouse, I'd hate to discover that years into the new marriage. Just some examples.


----------



## Wolf1974

soccermom2three said:


> If for whatever reason I found myself single again, (divorced or widowed), I think it would be very disrespectful to my husband to discuss our past sex life with a new partner. What I did or didn't do with my husband is none of my new partner's business. I wouldn't want my husband discussing our past sex life with any of his new partners either. To me, a new relationship should be a clean slate and a fresh start.


Does that mean you discuss nothing of your past then? Or just your sexual history?


----------



## altawa

soccermom2three said:


> That's fine. I don't need to have someone like that in my life anyway, lol. I think you're assuming that would break my heart.


No, but the common assumption is that no questions should be asked (and that has been said on this forum, such as 'the past is the past' and 'it's none of his business'). Thats all well and good, but the flip side is that the guy you are interested in has every right to ask and if you don't want to answer he will probably just walk instead of dealing with dodging or no answers.


----------



## southbound

altawa said:


> No, but the common assumption is that no questions should be asked (and that has been said on this forum, such as 'the past is the past' and 'it's none of his business'). Thats all well and good, but the flip side is that the guy you are interested in has every right to ask and if you don't want to answer he will probably just walk instead of dealing with dodging or no answers.


That's true. I don't know why someone wouldn't want to talk about something unless it's ridiculously weird, like, "hey let's talk about our typical bowel movements," or if it is something they know could be a problem, like their sexual past.

If someone is in the 40s or more especially, why pretend their life is a blank slate prior to meeting them; that would seem weird to me.

I wouldn't mind sharing all of my past. I had a WAW, and I'll never fully understand her reasons for leaving, but I wouldn't mind revealing the reasons she gave to my new romantic interest. Who knows, she might feel the same way my x did, and it's better she know it sooner than later.


----------



## Tubbalard

A past is the past female, is someone I would advise all males to STAY AWAY from. Its code red of epic proportions. No matter how hot you think she is or good her fellatio game rivals a Hoover vacuum a relationship is not worth it. Some guys are so desperate that they look over it, and was never possesed the tools to understand women, only to find out later they were taken for chumps.


There are PLENTY of nice and sweet women that readily divulge their past. And I mean plenty. Men should always understand what they are dealing with because most of the time they are assuming the most risk.

A P.I.T.P woman is a variation of: I had sex with 20+ plus men, multiple threesomes, I was a member of sex clubs, I went on multiple sex party cruise ships etc.

I had an encounter with a woman that told me she was a stone cold freak and did EVERYTHING under the sun. I respected her and still to this day chat with her sometimes. No way in Hell there is going to be in a relationship, but I bet my botom dollar she wont have a problem finding one, because not only is she striking, she is open and honest about who she is.

Any woman that tells you the past is the past is hiding something and/or ashamed of her past and has no respect for you.(assuming there is going to be a relationship). Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior.


This also goes for women that have an encounter with a PITP man.

If the two parties are both PITP's then hey its all fine and dandy. Obtain someone that is suitable for you.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wolf1974

Lila said:


> :iagree:
> 
> For those asking why someone would not share their sexual history here's my reason. I am made up by so much more than who or how many people I had sex with. If a potential partner needed my sexual history to judge me as worthy to date then we're probably not suited. Tbh, I dont understand why anyone would want to know this information since discussing sexual likes and dislikes can be done without bringing up specifics about past experiences. Imo that's all the information one needs to determine if there's potential sexual compatibility.


But isn't that what we are talking about. Number of partners. Hey have you ever tried this or that? Like it ? Those types of things. Not what was your favorite position with your x husband.

And yes you are made up of more than your sexual history. We all are. However it it is still part of our history. So to me it's as strange that you wouldn't answer if I asked ......hey have you ever been to Hawaii, and your response is hey what's the past is the past I'm not answering that.

I'm not judging. As I said some are fine with not knowing. But the only person I know that hid her sexual past with intention from her husband did so out of embarassment. That can't be the only reason people don't want to answer this question.

If we strive for open communication then how can you have a subject that is taboo? Or is it,as I asked soccer mom, that some are just ok not knowing more than the basics about thier spouse?


----------



## altawa

FrenchFry said:


> Or, they have encountered a few of ^ these guys.


Yeah.....no. Somebody that either dodges or refuses to answer questions that I find relevant to a mate I am in a LTR with, I find that a problem and a basic, ground level incompatibility. Not to mention a red flag for other issues.


----------



## altawa

Wolf1974 said:


> But isn't that what we are talking about. Number of partners. Hey have you ever tried this or that? Like it ? Those types of things. Not what was your favorite position with your x husband.
> 
> And yes you are made up of more than your sexual history. We all are. However it it is still part of our history. So to me it's as strange that you wouldn't answer if I asked ......hey have you ever been to Hawaii, and your response is hey what's the past is the past I'm not answering that.
> 
> I'm not judging. As I said some are fine with not knowing. But the only person I know that hid her sexual past with intention from her husband did so out of embarassment. That can't be the only reason people don't want to answer this question.
> 
> If we strive for open communication then how can you have a subject that is taboo? Or is it,as I asked soccer mom, that some are just ok not knowing more than the basics about thier spouse?


It's a double standard. Open, honest communication.....about everything except what they don't want to talk about. Then, you just accept what they want to offer.

Just as has been said, if I ask and the question is dodged/not answered....that is enough of an answer in and of itself for me. If you cannot be honest with me, I don't want you around.


----------



## altawa

FrenchFry said:


> And asking those kind of questions are my own red flag for that kind of guy. Also signifies incompatability.


And thats fine. But, I think it's funny that there are some here that think that even asking those questions should be off limits. It just blows my mind that since they feel _they_ don't need to share, it doesn't matter. They fail to realize that it does matter to some people and their own personal preferences don't get to override that or stigmatize it.


----------



## Thundarr

my past is none of your business and you must tell me everything are two sides of the same coin. In bazaaro world where every person's gender is reversed, I bet we'd find that people who are chanting one would now be chanting the other. That's because both views are extreme. Fortunately the majority of people are more objective than this.


----------



## altawa

Thundarr said:


> my past is none of your business and you must tell me everything are two sides of the same coin. In bazaaro world where every person's gender is reversed, I bet we'd find that people who are chanting one would now be chanting the other. That's because both views are extreme. Fortunately the majority of people are more objective than this.


I dont think people would change just based on gender change. I think it has to do with how people are raised. We see both men and women on here that say they are fine with telling about their pasts, both men and women that say they wouldnt tell, and both men and women that admit that they would not date a person with a promiscuous past. It's not a gender thing, it is an upbringing thing, a values thing.


----------



## Thundarr

FrenchFry said:


> I don't think it's off limits, but my time here and my experience IRL has lead me to believe that it's not that it doesn't matter, but if you are having to ask to get information about my past--it's not a match. Also, that anything that does get shared can potentially be used against you later--so best not say much, if anything, if asked.
> 
> I wouldn't share too much of anything not because my past is wild but because those who assume that my past is wild because I am not comfortable sharing it right away are those who I don't want to date.


Correct me if I'm wrong but I bet IRL that you and your husband know a lot about each other's past. It didn't feel like an interrogation when you learned bits and piece because it wasn't. It was two people connecting and communicating about life; likes, dislikes, desires, and sometimes regrets.


----------



## Thundarr

altawa said:


> I dont think people would change just based on gender change. I think it has to do with how people are raised. We see both men and women on here that say they are fine with telling about their pasts, both men and women that say they wouldnt tell, and both men and women that admit that they would not date a person with a promiscuous past. It's not a gender thing, it is an upbringing thing, a values thing.


Yea but..... well you have a point. I definitely agree that most people are pretty objective when it's not a hypothetical debate.


----------



## southbound

Lila said:


> :iagree:For those asking why someone would not share their sexual history here's my reason. I am made up by so much more than who or how many people I had sex with. If a potential partner needed my sexual history to judge me as worthy to date then we're probably not suited.


That sounds like all the more reason that you hope someone asks. If asking about past sexual partners is a sign to you that a person isn't suited to you, then that allows that one to be marked off the list and you can move on.

I don't think this is something you would ask on a first date, but if the relationship starts developing into serious feelings, it's something I would want to know, and as i said, I wouldn't mind sharing anything about my past. Probably because I don't have anything to reveal that's going to shock a woman, unless she feels my story is shockingly boring.  If that's the case, she has the right to move on due to that as well. 

I just can't imagine being in a lengthy relationship and not sharing something like that.


----------



## altawa

southbound said:


> That sounds like all the more reason that you hope someone asks. If asking about past sexual partners is a sign to you that a person isn't suited to you, then that allows that one to be marked off the list and you can move on.
> 
> I don't think this is something you would ask on a first date, but if the relationship starts developing into serious feelings, it's something I would want to know, and as i said, I wouldn't mind sharing anything about my past. Probably because I don't have anything to reveal that's going to shock a woman, unless she feels my story is shockingly boring.  If that's the case, she has the right to move on due to that as well.
> 
> I just can't imagine being in a lengthy relationship and not sharing something like that.


Something to note as well are the women that purposely hide their past from their SO's knowing they would not have married them if their husbands knew. Then, years later, their husbands find out. Does anybody really think that is fair?


----------



## GusPolinski

FrenchFry said:


> The only reason my husband knows as much as he does is because I felt comfortable sharing it with him because I've never detected a hint of the attitude that I must tell him or I'm hiding, I must tell him or I'm lying or I must tell him period.


Makes perfect sense.


----------



## jdawg2015

altawa said:


> Something to note as well are the women that purposely hide their past from their SO's knowing they would not have married them if their husbands knew. Then, years later, their husbands find out. Does anybody really think that is fair?


I think this is much more the case with women hiding the past. It's understandable as their chasity is scrutinized more then men.

But, this is also a case where so many people think short-term and the past always bites them in the behind.

For my fiance I wanted to know enough but don't need the nitty gritty. 

And for me, the key is that the past never blends with the present. So by knowing, you also are aware in case some person comes along in the future you can be clued in of this is a flame from the past. Seems that alone makes it worth knowing.

Right now your spouse may tell you details but if things go sideways, in the future that person could just be labled a "friend" and you'd be none the wiser.


----------



## altawa

jdawg2015 said:


> I think this is much more the case with women hiding the past. It's understandable as their chasity is scrutinized more then men.
> 
> But, this is also a case where so many people think short-term and the past always bites them in the behind.
> 
> For my fiance I wanted to know enough but don't need the nitty gritty.
> 
> And for me, the key is that the past never blends with the present. So by knowing, you also are aware in case some person comes along in the future you can be clued in of this is a flame from the past. Seems that alone makes it worth knowing.
> 
> Right now your spouse may tell you details but if things go sideways, in the future that person could just be labled a "friend" and you'd be none the wiser.


That is one reason I have an 'ex no contact' rule. Everybody needs different levels of knowledge, just like everybody needs different levels of disclosure regarding the affair when dealing with infidelity.


----------



## Idyit

FrenchFry said:


> I don't think it's off limits, but my time here and my experience IRL has lead me to believe that it's not that it doesn't matter, but if you are having to ask to get information about my past--it's not a match. *Also, that anything that does get shared can potentially be used against you later-*-so best not say much, if anything, if asked.
> 
> I wouldn't share too much of anything not because my past is wild but because those who assume that my past is wild because I am *not comfortable sharing it right away* are those who I don't want to date.


I tried to ask earlier if the questions about history were a black/white issue or if they had more to do with the depth of relationship or nitty gritty nature of the questions. 

French Fry brings in some motivation for not answering in the first bolded part re: "used against you later". If this has happened I can understand reluctance to divulge much if anything. 

The second bolded part is telling too. I'm all for transparency within a committed relationship and beyond but would agree that early in a relationship, sexual history questions would cause red flags for even me. 

So, help me understand the "none of your business" and "you're a jerk for asking" side of the debate. Is it truly black and white or is it more nuanced. Does revelation of personal history have a depth of relationship component and type of question tolerance? 

~ Passio


----------



## Wolf1974

Lila said:


> I think you can get the same information about likes and dislikes by simply asking about hard or soft limits, or whether that person would be interested in XYZ. The reason I don't like "have you ever tried XYZ and did you like it?" is because 9 out of 10 times, "Yes I tried XYZ and liked/disliked it" is never enough. The next question is usually when or how was it or tell me more. Not something I would feel comfortable doing.
> 
> 
> 
> C'mon Wolf, we both know that discussing sexual history does not even come close to discussing vacation locations. Sharing details about intimate encounters with someone who was not a part of that encounter just doesn't sit well with me.
> 
> *You may have that view I dont . I don't value or devalue this information any more than any other. If someone is unwilling to discuss the past in any way that's a red flag for me personally*
> 
> My reason is actually the complete opposite. My sexual past is something of which I am proud. I enjoyed all of my previous sexual experiences to one extent or another. These were happy times in my life and it would hurt me to my soul to have someone judge those happy times as wrong or me as somehow lacking for having enjoyed them. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way either.
> 
> *Then why not share it then?:scratchhead*:
> 
> To use an analogy, if dating were a competition where contestants were going to be asked about their sexual history, I would choose to withdraw from the competition. Doesn't mean the judges can't ask the question, I just won't be one of the contestants.
> 
> 
> 
> Every relationship has it's own dynamic, and no two relationships are alike. I have learned through my own life experiences that this extends to sexual dynamics or compatibility within the relationship. No one person will have two sexual relationship that are exactly alike.
> 
> With that said, I believe that disclosing the details of previous sexual relationships is a sure fire way to add bias to a newly burgeoning relationship. My opinion is that it's best to start every relationship on a blank canvas. The sexual relationship is then created based on the _current_ relationship dynamic instead of on historical information that may be flawed or incompatible to the current relationship dynamic. For eg. Woman was in a relationship with Man 1 where she was the dominant in the relationship (relationship dynamic). Man 1 enjoyed getting pegged (sexual dynamic or compatibility). They split up. She meets Man 2 who is very dominant. Their relationship is 180 from what she had with Man 1. She enjoys it and thrives, he enjoys it and thrives. Their blank canvas approach helps them develop a sexual dynamic unique to that particular pairing. Biasing it with sexual history would only make it awkward at best or not exist at all.


I understand. Just different people I guess. To each their own thanks for answering


----------



## Wolf1974

Idyit said:


> I tried to ask earlier if the questions about history were a black/white issue or if they had more to do with the depth of relationship or nitty gritty nature of the questions.
> 
> *French Fry brings in some motivation for not answering in the first bolded part re: "used against you later". If this has happened I can understand reluctance to divulge much if anything.
> *
> The second bolded part is telling too. I'm all for transparency within a committed relationship and beyond but would agree that early in a relationship, sexual history questions would cause red flags for even me.
> 
> So, help me understand the "none of your business" and "you're a jerk for asking" side of the debate. Is it truly black and white or is it more nuanced. Does revelation of personal history have a depth of relationship component and type of question tolerance?
> 
> ~ Passio


As do I. If it was used against you I would understand a reluctance to answer. Or if this is first date question and answer that's disturbing. But we are talking about the formation of a long term commitment. You would hope that a person you are going to marry wouldn't use this against you...and if they did should you really be marrying them anyway?

But seems like some here have never been asked and so its never been a problem.

Other side like me has always asked and it has never been an issue. Guess we just have different outlooks is all


----------



## unhappy74

I am going thru that exact dilemma. I hate ppl that ask about prior sex lives. I have had enough partners to last 3 lifetimes (not bragging) & I dont like having that convo. The not asking always leads to the accidental discovery after the fact. That is when the hard reality kicks you in the stomach. I knew my current wife dated women before me, but the uncovered fact was troubling. She liked women that were trans-gender. Basically a bearded man with out a penis. Now, as a born male, how do i feel when my wife says I'm all that? this is my dilemma.


----------



## Tubbalard

To people are ardent believers in PITP theory, does this only apply to sexual escapades or can it be applied to criminal or financial history too? Women are usually judged off their sexual pasts, but a man is moreso judged off his ability to gain capitol. With that said if you wish not to declare your sexual pasts, shouldnt it be ok not to disclose his financial or criminal past?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Thundarr

altawa said:


> Something to note as well are the women that purposely hide their past from their SO's knowing they would not have married them if their husbands knew. Then, years later, their husbands find out. Does anybody really think that is fair?


Insecurity drives this. I say no risk, no reward. Risk opening up and challenging someone to love you. That should be the target to open up however much you think the other person wants to know.


----------



## altawa

Thundarr said:


> Insecurity drives this. I say no risk, no reward. Risk opening up and challenging someone to love you. That should be the target to open up however much you think the other person wants to know.


So, do you think it is fair to say that those that dont wish to disclose their past to their partners are equally as insecure?


----------



## Thundarr

altawa said:


> So, do you think it is fair to say that those that dont wish to disclose their past to their partners are equally as insecure?


Sorry Altawa. I should have clarified that not sharing past is what I was saying is driven by insecurity. When my wife and I were dating and she fudged things early on it was because she was afraid I would judge her. So she didn't trust me yet. As we were together longer though, she was honest-honest and I'm glad she was because that's how people connect. We dated for a LONG time before marriage so it worked out fine. That's not always the case though since a lot of people marry before they've built a real trust.


----------



## Wolfman1968

Thundarr said:


> Sorry Altawa. I should have clarified that not sharing past is what I was saying is driven by insecurity. When my wife and I were dating and she fudged things early on it was because she was afraid I would judge her. So she didn't trust me yet. As we were together longer though, she was honest-honest and I'm glad she was because that's how people connect. We dated for a LONG time before marriage so it worked out fine. That's not always the case though since a lot of people marry before they've built a real trust.


OK, but then your experience says that the approach of those who say "have the discussion of whether or not you will reveal your parst early in the relationship so you can decide if you're a match," wouldn't have worked in your case. Maybe many cases.

It's a catch-22. For people in your situation, you have to have a long relationship to feel comfortable to answer these personal questions (or to say, "no, the past is the past, it's not open to discussion"). On the other hand, with this long relationship, you have a greater "investment" (time, emotion, etc.), so SOME people are more likely to lie in order save the relationship because it is much harder to just walk away after that time.


----------



## Faithful Wife

FrenchFry said:


> The only reason my husband knows as much as he does is because I felt comfortable sharing it with him because I've never detected a hint of the attitude that I must tell him or I'm hiding, I must tell him or I'm lying or I must tell him period.


My H has never asked anything beyond the most minor yet informative questions. No details, names, places, numbers, nothing like that ever. 

I on the other hand, thinking I was a big girl and could handle it, have asked lots of questions. He usually gets a grin and just says "now you know I don't kiss and tell" or similar. If I really press him, he gets put off by it. He really DOESN'T kiss and tell. He feels:

A. It is none of my business.

B. It is disloyal to his previous partners to spill details.

C. He has plenty to share with me about himself without going into any of that.

D. It would just be tacky.

I'm glad he stuck to his position, because it made me really respect him and now of course I'm really glad I don't know a bunch of details that would be seared into my mind.

I really did think I could handle it when I asked, I thought it would be fun to know about anyone's past at that time. I was wrong. Especially later as his history got filled in for me over time in small bits and pieces...that's when it hit me "oh...yeah...I'm glad I don't know those details". 

Yet there's also just enough mystery that I am still slightly curious. I'm glad I don't know everything about him. It's sexy. 

And he's glad he doesn't know everything about me. He seemed to know always that he didn't want to know details about my sexual past. He knows himself that way, I think, and could probably fill in the blanks about me even without details. He sized me up pretty well, though I'm sure he figures me about 15% more sl*tty than I actually am.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

What I find interesting though to it, is that I did what is standard advice here. When we first started dating I told him about each sexual relationship I had. 

I then apologized to him later as it gave him mind movies. I thought I was trying to be honest so he knew what he was getting. 

Perhaps to some people that will work, but I don't think for everyone and I don't think it can be standard advice. For me and my fiance, saying "yes there were people" and "here is my attitude" would have been better than "This person and I did this".

(I wrote this in another thread, but I think it is more fitting here)


----------



## samyeagar

Faithful Wife said:


> My H has never asked anything beyond the most minor yet informative questions. No details, names, places, numbers, nothing like that ever.
> 
> I on the other hand, thinking I was a big girl and could handle it, have asked lots of questions. He usually gets a grin and just says "now you know I don't kiss and tell" or similar. If I really press him, he gets put off by it. He really DOESN'T kiss and tell. He feels:
> 
> A. It is none of my business.
> 
> B. It is disloyal to his previous partners to spill details.
> 
> C. He has plenty to share with me about himself without going into any of that.
> 
> D. It would just be tacky.
> 
> I'm glad he stuck to his position, because it made me really respect him and now of course I'm really glad I don't know a bunch of details that would be seared into my mind.
> 
> I really did think I could handle it when I asked, I thought it would be fun to know about anyone's past at that time. I was wrong. Especially later as his history got filled in for me over time in small bits and pieces...that's when it hit me "oh...yeah...I'm glad I don't know those details".
> 
> Yet there's also just enough mystery that I am still slightly curious. I'm glad I don't know everything about him. It's sexy.
> 
> And he's glad he doesn't know everything about me. He seemed to know always that he didn't want to know details about my sexual past. He knows himself that way, I think, and could probably fill in the blanks about me even without details. He sized me up pretty well, though I'm sure he figures me about 15% more sl*tty than I actually am.


This post really shows me the irony in my own marriage...

I never asked the questions because I knew I didn't want to know the answers, yet have learned all those details I had no desire to ever know. Some of it was due to circumstances where she felt there was a good chance I'd find out from a third party, and she wanted to control the flow of information, and others were just poorly timed overheard conversations she was having with other people. The thing is, I have never used any of it against her, have never thrown any of it back in her face, nor ever made her feel judged. That's not just my perception of things...she has told me as much when we've had discussions about why our sex life far surpasses anything we've ever known.

Her on the other hand...she's asked for a few details, and I have been very close lipped. Those things are in the past, and I don't have any desire to bring them into the present, even in thought...even the good things, and believe me, there were some really good things  I don't really have a no kiss and tell policy as I don't feel any allegiance to any past lovers, but this ties right back to me wanting to leave things in the past. I just don't see the benefit as outweighing the possible drawbacks.

I am fortunate in that I have been very discriminating in what I have done and with whom, so the likelihood of anything coming out due to circumstances is just about zero.

All that said, the few details she does know have been thrown back in my face, have been used against me, have been used to shame me. Just the other night, one of my rare ED episodes brought some of this out...again.

Just for you FW, and how you essentially asked me when I was going to stop tolerating her brattiness? It appears that something I said during our argument hit home with her, validated my feeling of "you did it for him, but not for me", and actually spurred her to action. She started looking into the ED issue on the internet yesterday. Notice I said my feeling, and not my words...I have never once vocalized those thoughts.

I asked her what got her to do that, and it ended up being something I said, that I didn't give much thought to after I said it. In her hurt and anger, she said she felt like we should never try to have sex again, I reminded her that she knew I would not stay in a sexless marriage, she threw the sexless final four years of my marriage at me, and how I would tolerate it with my saintly ex wife who could always get me up...my response was "We both did things out of self preservation in our former marriages, so let's call it a wash" I had no idea how hard that simple statement was going to hit her, but it did.

Another sign of slow but sure progress...the other night, she found one of those internet lists "11 places everyone needs to have sex before they die" I braced myself for more revelling in the past, but to my surprise, every one of things one the list, she talked about in the context of US...not a single mention of anything she has done in the past.


----------



## Thundarr

Wolfman1968 said:


> OK, but then your experience says that the approach of those who say "have the discussion of whether or not you will reveal your parst early in the relationship so you can decide if you're a match," wouldn't have worked in your case. Maybe many cases.
> 
> It's a catch-22. For people in your situation, you have to have a long relationship to feel comfortable to answer these personal questions (or to say, "no, the past is the past, it's not open to discussion"). On the other hand, with this long relationship, you have a greater "investment" (time, emotion, etc.), so SOME people are more likely to lie in order save the relationship because it is much harder to just walk away after that time.


You're seeing this for the trap or a catch22 that it is and I agree with you. It's natural to be a little guarded about things we think will bring judgement and if while being guarded early on there was deception it's natural to keep that up too. But then a guy learns something by chance conversation that doesn't match what he knows he was led to believe and it doesn't feel good. The end result is the man is hurt and angry about being lied to and the woman is reading all of that as validation that he's judging her just like she thought he would.

More articles should stress that lying is the wrong answer. Instead this gets painted in articles and such as little white lies similar to telling someone they look great in that dress. I'm not saying anyone has to divulge things they don't want to but it's not a white lie to fib about our past. It's a legitimate deception.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

FrenchFry said:


> The only reason my husband knows as much as he does is because I felt comfortable sharing it with him because I've never detected a hint of the attitude that I must tell him or I'm hiding, I must tell him or I'm lying or I must tell him period.


Thank you FF for sharing this tidbit because it really focuses on the KEY to this entire issue that seems to be left out.

The true crux of this issue isn't about openness and communication and what's "allowable" conversation and what's not...It's HOW this communication happens.

If a guy (or woman) treats their prospective partner like it's an interview...or worse...an interrogation.....then this is unhealthy. The asker is probably curious out of some negative issues going on. 

I'm a fan of the "total openness" and full disclosure, but in a safe and judgement free environment.

My wife and I know more about each other's sexual past than what anyone on this forum would say is "smart"...but they're not us. I didn't and don't judge my wife for having a sexual past. I'm VERY lucky that my wife is and was a very sexual person...now she was also selective (mostly ) because sex is something that she associates as an expression of love. I would be disappointed if my wife (who is supposed to be my best friend, the person I can confide ANYTHING with, the person who is supposed to be someone that I can completely open up to...and vice versa) felt like she couldn't tell me something. We talked about things that she and I never shared with anyone else. Because we had/have an environment that is safe to talk like that. I had 1 critical boundary to who I'd consider to marry when it came to sex and that was how they viewed sex.


----------



## Wolf1974

Lila said:


> Not to beat a dead horse but I wanted to make my reason for not sharing clearly known. It was easily missed in the middle of my long post.
> 
> ​


I did see it and that's why I asked. If you enjoyed them as a positive experience why not share them with the person you are to spend your life with? If they judged you then honestly they aren't worth spending your life with.

I have done some things in my past that...well I wouldn't say I regret but I wasn't proud of either. I've shared those with my GF as she has shared hers. Neither of us judged each other. If she did judge me I wouldn't be with her. I'm human and flawed and made mistakes but don't expect myself to be punished for them.


----------



## Wolf1974

Lila said:


> I will caveat my post by saying that I've never been asked about my sexual history but, as has been made apparent to me on this thread, there are people who do ask about it and have no issues getting responses from potential partners. I'm not implying that my sexual experiences and number of partners are outlandish but none of my previous partners, nor my husband, has asked about sexual history.
> 
> *Having said that, I do agree that if someone is going to use sexual history to determine whether or not to enter into a relationship with a person, then that metrics (for lack of a better word) should be made known early on in the dating phase.*


I agree. And things tend to come out later anyway so if you have a deal breaker that needs to be figured out up front and not wait until after marriage.


----------



## altawa

Thundarr said:


> Sorry Altawa. *I should have clarified that not sharing past is what I was saying is driven by insecurity. *When my wife and I were dating and she fudged things early on it was because she was afraid I would judge her. So she didn't trust me yet. As we were together longer though, she was honest-honest and I'm glad she was because that's how people connect. We dated for a LONG time before marriage so it worked out fine. That's not always the case though since a lot of people marry before they've built a real trust.


I can agree with that. IMO, using myself as an example, if my wife knew something she did in her past was a deal breaker for me and didn't tell me, I would have a problem with that. It comes down to basic compatibility. And, for all some people know, it may be something as simple as number, position, etc. Every person has different deal breakers. I think that while it may take a long time for many details to come out, as soon as a deal breaker is known about, it needs to be addressed if it exists. It is only fair to both parties. Anything less is lying.


----------



## Wolf1974

Lila said:


> I would never lie about my past but I would also not risk the chance of other people judging my happy memories as unworthy or lacking.
> 
> For me, it's all about assessing the odds and risk vs. reward. In my world, the potential portion of those "need to know" people that judge me as acceptable is not worth the hurt caused by the "need to know" people that judge me as unacceptable. Whereas there can't be judgement or hurt if the topic is not discussed.


True but we arent talking about "people" we are talking about someone who you are suppose to share your life with. If they did judge then I would submit they aren't the right person for you. That doesn't mean they are wrong,Or bad, just goes to the greater compatability issue. 

As an example I have technically been married twice although the first was annulled. It was suggested by many of my friends that I never share that information while dating. Nope I don't agree. If some woman will judge me based on that, and it has happend, I would rather know up front than later on. Can't hide what I am or what my past is...honestly I wouldn't want to anyway 

Anyone I will spend my life with will have to take the good and the bad that is me.


----------



## altawa

New catchphrase suggestion:

"You can't change the past, but you sure can hide it." TM


----------



## altawa

Lila said:


> To be completely honest, I don't think mismatches on this subject are common. I agree with SA where she mentioned in her post that people who seek information regarding sexual histories tend to be more conservative minded that those that don't. Like tends to attract like, so it's hard to imagine a sexually liberal person attracting a sexually conservative person and vice versa, but maybe I'm wrong and there's no correlation.


I am sure it happens, but when it comes to the questions part, the sexually liberal person dodges, refuses to answer because 'the past is the past', or lies. In the case of the first two, the relationship either ends, or limps on. If it limps on it either ends soon thereafter, or they get married and when the guy realizes that he really isn't compatible with her/details come out/ he realizes that she has done things with others that she won't do with him, he gets pissed and leaves her. In the case of the third, he finds out she lied and is double pissed that A) she misrepresented herself, likely because she knew it was a deal breaker, and B) the extended deceit that led to a marriage and the divorce lottery for the wife.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Lila said:


> To be completely honest, I don't think mismatches on this subject are common. * I agree with SA where she mentioned in her post that people who seek information regarding sexual histories tend to be more conservative minded that those that don't. Like tends to attract like, so it's hard to imagine a sexually liberal person attracting a sexually conservative person and vice versa,* but maybe I'm wrong and there's no correlation.


 I deleted that post after reading Dad&Hubby's post.. even for me.. it's more about WHERE someone is NOW .....I wouldn't hold the past against them.... but I wouldn't accept *not* being let in , not when I am building a foundation with someone...what he said was.... "I had 1 critical boundary to who I'd consider to marry when it came to sex and that was how they viewed sex."...this is true of myself also...

Some people like some MYSTERY.. they don't mind it.... I've never been this type of person...

Even aside from the more conservative viewpoint..I think this can also fall under an "*emotional need*".. for instance...in "*His Needs/ Her Needs*".. 
one of the 10 is " Honesty and Openness"... it explains that for some of us , the need for Openness is an essential part of our bonding...(explained below)...








...Honesty and Openness



> Most of us want an honest relationship with our spouse. But some people have a need for honesty and openness -- it gives them a sense of security and helps them become emotionally bonded to the one who meets that need.
> 
> Those with a need for honesty and openness want accurate information about their spouses' thoughts, feelings, habits, likes, dislikes, *personal history*, daily activities and plans for the future.
> 
> If their spouse does not provide honest and open communication, trust is undermined and the feelings of security can eventually be destroyed. They cannot trust the signals that are being sent and feel they have no foundation on which to build a solid relationship. Instead of adjusting, they feel off balance; instead of growing together, they feel as if they are growing apart.
> 
> Honesty and openness helps build compatibility in marriage. When you and your spouse openly reveal *the facts of your past*, your present activities, and your plans for the future, you are able to make intelligent decisions that take each other's feelings into account. And that's how you create compatibility -- by making decisions that work well for both of you simultaneously.
> 
> But aside from the practical considerations of honesty and openness, those with this need feel happy and fulfilled *when their spouses reveal their most private thoughts to them, and feel very frustrated when they are hidden.* That reaction is evidence of an emotional need, and if that is the way you feel, include honesty and openness as one of your most important emotional needs.


----------



## Wolf1974

Lila said:


> FTR, I was responding based on the dating phase not the "share your life" phase of courtship.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree that accepting a partner means taking the good and the bad. Where you and I differ is on our opinion of whether sexual experiences with previous partners should be open to judgment as good or bad by a new partner. This is simply a matter of preference.
> 
> To be completely honest, I don't think mismatches on this subject are common. I agree with SA where she mentioned in her post that people who seek information regarding sexual histories tend to be more conservative minded that those that don't. Like tends to attract like, so it's hard to imagine a sexually liberal person attracting a sexually conservative person and vice versa, but maybe I'm wrong and there's no correlation.


Could be right. Would explain how I have never had an issue asking these questions and always got the same back from my relationships and others never asked and have never been asked. Makes sense that it falls in you're either conservative or not and generally establish that prior to having this converstaion in the first place.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Lila said:


> I agree that accepting a partner means taking the good and the bad. Where you and I differ is on our opinion of whether sexual experiences with previous partners should be open to judgment as good or bad by a new partner. This is simply a matter of preference.
> 
> To be completely honest, I don't think mismatches on this subject are common. I agree with SA where she mentioned in her post that people who seek information regarding sexual histories tend to be more conservative minded that those that don't. Like tends to attract like, so it's hard to imagine a sexually liberal person attracting a sexually conservative person and vice versa, but maybe I'm wrong and there's no correlation.


I think mismatches are much more common. And I think the reason is the same old assumption that the opposite sex thinks like "we" do. Men assume that sex will be important for their wives. That just goes without saying. We can just get a cursory acknowledgement without going into gory details of whether X times per week is satisfactory.

Similarly, women assume that talking will be important for their husbands. It's too obvious to spend time on.

Along those lines, I knew my wife wasn't a virgin when I married her. But, I didn't have the specifics. I never asked my wife if she participated in any threesomes. I never asked her if she had sex with animals. I never asked her if she shot a man in Reno just to watch him die. I'm very confident she hasn't done any of those things. And I'm very confident that she would be insulted if I genuinely asked her. But, if it turns out that she has, I will feel justified in being upset about it, even though I never asked the questions.


----------



## southbound

BronzeTorpedo said:


> I think mismatches are much more common. And I think the reason is the same old assumption that the opposite sex thinks like "we" do. Men assume that sex will be important for their wives. That just goes without saying. We can just get a cursory acknowledgement without going into gory details of whether X times per week is satisfactory.
> 
> Similarly, women assume that talking will be important for their husbands. It's too obvious to spend time on.
> 
> Along those lines, I knew my wife wasn't a virgin when I married her. But, I didn't have the specifics. I never asked my wife if she participated in any threesomes. I never asked her if she had sex with animals. I never asked her if she shot a man in Reno just to watch him die. I'm very confident she hasn't done any of those things. And I'm very confident that she would be insulted if I genuinely asked her. But, if it turns out that she has, I will feel justified in being upset about it, even though I never asked the questions.


Good post. It is a tough thing that has a lot to do with the feel of the relationship I suppose. It is weird to picture a couple sitting down and just saying, "Ok, let's have it, I want to know all your sexual history." But if two people get close, I believe they will have a feel for what each other expects. There may be people who really don't care about each other's sexual past, and maybe they can sense that in each other.

If I'm dating a woman who gives off a June Cleaver vibe, and that's just what I'm looking for, I may not ask much about sexual past, I may assume some things; however, if I discover several years into the relationship that she has had sex with every man that looked her way, had sex with animals, and shot a man in Reno, I too feel that I have the right to be upset. On the other hand, there may be men that don't care, and maybe that is the type she goes for anyway.

If a man is dating June Cleaver and she's pure as gold, and he has had sex with everything with a pulse, and shot two men in Reno, he should have an idea that she might want to know that.


----------



## soccermom2three

southbound said:


> If someone is in the 40s or more especially, why pretend their life is a blank slate prior to meeting them; that would seem weird to me.


It's not pretending. It's being respectful of my prior relationship. I'm 50 years old and gave birth to 3 kids. I think it goes without saying that I've had sex. Really, what is there more to know?


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

soccermom2three said:


> It's not pretending. It's being respectful of my prior relationship. I'm 50 years old and gave birth to 3 kids. I think it goes without saying that I've had sex. Really, what is there more to know?


If you're in a relationship with a man who only cares whether you're a virgin, or not, then nothing. However, there is often much more to it than that. Sex runs the gamut. Having been married, of course you had sex with your husband. But, that could have been a relationship where leaving the lights on was considered kinky, or one where everything was on the table.

Now, in most cases, if you're kinky, you're going to seek out a partner who is also kinky. In those cases, one can share experiences, or not. But there are also times where one partner wants to run to the other end of the spectrum. If a promiscuous woman decides she wants to be a born again virgin and withholds information about her past from her partner, who is looking for a virginal woman, she's not being fair.


----------



## JCD

EleGirl said:


> There is no situation on the thread. This thread is not about anyone lying about their sexual past. No where in the OP does it mention lying.
> 
> And yes some people do lie. I would not be surprised if a good number of women lie. I'm sure that some men lie as well. Probably because they fear being judged. It's a stupid thing to lie about.
> 
> *If a person fears that someone they are dating will judge them badly, then move on*.



That's the whole point. They are NOT moving on.

Liz likes Greg. Liz knows that Greg has some conservative views about sex. In fact, he said something rather judgmental about Becky who was dating and sleeping with two guys separately but at the same time.

Liz considers her rather quixotic past. Would he understand that frat party? How about that MMF she enjoyed in Daytona Beach? That married man she hung with for six months until he wouldn't leave his wife for her?

She has a few doubts on this issue.

Now, knowing this, she can MOVE ON.

Or

She can look at him with calf eyes and say "I totally agree honey" and pray he never finds out. 

In most of the cases you mention, the wife picked option b. And WITHOUT asking, many of these men found out anyway.

If this was a house sale, it would be fraud.


----------



## samyeagar

JCD said:


> That's the whole point. They are NOT moving on.
> 
> Liz likes Greg. Liz knows that Greg has some conservative views about sex. In fact, he said something rather judgmental about Becky who was dating and sleeping with two guys separately but at the same time.
> 
> Liz considers her rather quixotic past. Would he understand that frat party? How about that MMF she enjoyed in Daytona Beach? That married man she hung with for six months until he wouldn't leave his wife for her?
> 
> She has a few doubts on this issue.
> 
> Now, knowing this, she can MOVE ON.
> 
> Or
> 
> She can look at him with calf eyes and say "I totally agree honey" and pray he never finds out.
> 
> In most of the cases you mention, the wife picked option b. *And WITHOUT asking, many of these men found out anyway.*
> 
> If this was a house sale, it would be fraud.


And this right here is what exposes the whole "Past is the past" fallacy.

In many case, men and women both DON'T ask about the past because they have no desire to know, and they are self aware enough to know how it will make them feel, how they will react, and yet find it thrust upon them through no fault of their own.


----------



## Faithful Wife

samyeagar said:


> And this right here is what exposes the whole "Past is the past" fallacy.
> 
> *In many case*, men and women both DON'T ask about the past because they have no desire to know, and they are self aware enough to know how it will make them feel, how they will react, and yet find it thrust upon them through no fault of their own.


Sam, your case is quite rare I believe. I'm sure that from your position it doesn't seem so rare but I've literally never heard any other case like yours and I have been on message boards with this type of content for a long long time.


----------



## sisters359

Houses and cars are incapable of growth. Humans are. A person's past is relevant only in terms of their character--do they have integrity (how do they behave when no one is looking). Sexual behavior is not--IMO--a character issue. Lying and cheating and otherwise intentionally harming others, especially for one's own pleasure or gain, are character issues. How many people I--or you--have or have not slept with is, in and of itself, no indication of character. Sure, if he or she's a "playa," taking advantage of others (not in a sexual way, but freeloading, etc), that's an issue, but not how many partners or what acts one has done. People who were not part of your past don't have to rehash theirs for your investigation. Pay attention to how they behave now, especially what they unintentionally reveal. That's all the information one needs.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

sisters359 said:


> Sexual behavior is not--IMO--a character issue.


And that's the crux of the issue. You have your opinion, others have theirs. You shouldn't be allowed to impose your values on others. If you're dating a man who views premarital sex, or promiscuity, or threesomes, or whatever, as immoral, then you owe it to him to be transparent, especially in areas where your morals don't coincide with his. Otherwise, you're just hoping that he never finds out that you tricked him into believing your character was different than he would have otherwise believed.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Faithful Wife said:


> Sam, your case is quite rare I believe. I'm sure that from your position it doesn't seem so rare but I've literally never heard any other case like yours and I have been on message boards with this type of content for a long long time.


I've seen several other cases on other boards. But, it's understandable that it isn't reported much. By definition, one spouse is trying to be secretive. Most of the time, the secret will probably be kept. So, the ignorant spouse will never know the past of the secretive spouse.


----------



## samyeagar

BronzeTorpedo said:


> I've seen several other cases on other boards. But, it's understandable that it isn't reported much. By definition, one spouse is trying to be secretive. Most of the time, the secret will probably be kept. So, the ignorant spouse will never know the past of the secretive spouse.


In my case with my wife, she has never tried to hide, deny or minimize anything. She has always been open and honest.


----------



## Faithful Wife

BronzeTorpedo said:


> I've seen several other cases on other boards. But, it's understandable that it isn't reported much. By definition, one spouse is trying to be secretive. Most of the time, the secret will probably be kept. So, the ignorant spouse will never know the past of the secretive spouse.


I'm talking about the specific circumstances of sam's wife's escapades and the severity of them, compared to other things spouses may find out about their spouse's past.

I'm fairly certain that if sam's wife had just had a few random encounters or gave one back seat bj, he wouldn't have been so traumatized by those things.

And sam, whether you can see it or not, you are definitely traumatized by this. I don't blame you, I would be, too. I don't think I could get past it. 

But again, your story is WAAAAYYY different than most.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm talking about the specific circumstances of sam's wife's escapades and the severity of them, compared to other things spouses may find out about their spouse's past.


Being open and honest about seducing her ex and his son? Yeah, that's probably unique. I was thinking of the general case of one spouse hiding, or lying about, elements of his/her sexual past. That's not very unusual.


----------



## JCD

sisters359 said:


> Houses and cars are incapable of growth. Humans are. A person's past is relevant only in terms of their character--do they have integrity (how do they behave when no one is looking). Sexual behavior is not--IMO--a character issue. Lying and cheating and otherwise intentionally harming others, especially for one's own pleasure or gain, are character issues. How many people I--or you--have or have not slept with is, in and of itself, no indication of character. Sure, if he or she's a "playa," taking advantage of others (not in a sexual way, but freeloading, etc), that's an issue, but not how many partners or what acts one has done. People who were not part of your past don't have to rehash theirs for your investigation. Pay attention to how they behave now, especially what they unintentionally reveal. That's all the information one needs.


First, you may be correct that factually it may make no difference...but the people (men and women) who feel differently FEEL it matters a great deal. This, BTW, is your opinion. No one has done any research into that kind of thing outside the pages of Cosmo, who finds that, gee...whatever a woman does in her past is awesome!

Secondly, assume you are correct.

It is not the sex. It is the LYING and HIDING the sex. What else is she hiding and lying about?

I recall this man who married a woman. She suddenly showed up one day with her KID. He went ballistic. Then she showed up with her OTHER kid. Repeat...then the next one...then the next one.

Tell me...what is the quality of her character? Because this is willfully hiding *what the spouse considers important information.*

You don't get to rule what the other person thinks is important. That person does.

And in the majority of the cases, like Emma, like the others they knew 'if he knew about my past, he wouldn't have married me'.

And yet they went ahead anyway.

So they have low character regardless of whom they were sleeping with.


----------



## Faithful Wife

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Being open and honest about seducing her ex and his son? Yeah, that's probably unique. I was thinking of the general case of one spouse hiding, or lying about, elements of his/her sexual past. That's not very unusual.


Correct, it is not unusual to NOT kiss and tell.

But sam's story is quite unusual and is outside the normal range for this topic. And again, I'm sure if she had just had a few random encounters, even if she never told him and he found out later, he wouldn't be traumatized by that. It was the nature of the stuff his wife did, plus a long period of time where she was still talking about those prior acts with friends at times when he could over hear it, plus drunken confessions. The whole picture taken together is quite a lot and I don't know how sam has dealt with it so well, but he has.


----------



## southbound

BronzeTorpedo said:


> And that's the crux of the issue. You have your opinion, others have theirs. You shouldn't be allowed to impose your values on others. If you're dating a man who views premarital sex, or promiscuity, or threesomes, or whatever, as immoral, then you owe it to him to be transparent, especially in areas where your morals don't coincide with his. Otherwise, you're just hoping that he never finds out that you tricked him into believing your character was different than he would have otherwise believed.


True. It's not about convincing someone that they are wrong for judging someone over their past sex life, it's about what a particular person wants. If one person wants to know the past and the other doesn't want to share it, then they can move on. If they are that far apart on that view, they probably wouldn't make a good match anyway. 

If J.R. Ewing were hooking up with someone, I'm sure he wouldn't care much about sexual past; if Mr. Rogers were hooking up, he might care, and I think it's a person's right to know.

Even if one forgets about character, judging, or morals, If one person has had sex with everything that moves in the last 10 years, and another person has been saving themselves for that special one, I feel that it does show a major difference in personality which should be taken into account. 

Just the same as if one person is a Clark Griswold when it comes to Christmas, and another person is Scrooge; I think it shows a huge personality difference that could cause a problem. 

Those who want to know are usually the ones who would prefer someone who hasn't slept with everything with a pulse from coast to coast; some people are just that way. If that doesn't suit people who feel their sexual past wouldn't be appealing to those people, then move on.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

JCD said:


> First, you may be correct that factually it may make no difference...*but the people (men and women) who feel differently FEEL it matters a great deal.* This, BTW, is your opinion.


 Being someone who would care, I often feel in the minority on this forum... it's not the culturally accepted norm today.


----------



## southbound

SimplyAmorous said:


> Being someone who would care, I often feel in the minority on this forum... it's not the culturally accepted norm today.


I am certainly with you on this.

If nothing else, coming to this forum has shown me how different people are. I didn't realize there were people who didn't care about this. Being on a forum, however, it is difficult to sometimes see the whole picture. When I think of "the average person," on the other side of my computer discussing relationships, I guess I'm imagining the modern-day Waltons, but there must be a lot of Ewings from Dallas here too.


----------



## youkiddingme

To say that the past is the past....is simply not true. The same people that say that often say "it is their past that makes them who they are today". Come on now. It is one or the other. You cannot have it both ways.

From personal experience, my wife's past injured our marriage for 25 years. And I never had a clue what was up. What was the problem? The things she had done before us that so many of you say do not matter and are none of my business. So, I struggled through 25 years with a woman that could not be intimate, could not let me see her heart, could not show love.....all because of the injuries that occurred before me.

The past does have a huge impact on the present. To deny it is simply to deny reality.


----------



## norajane

youkiddingme said:


> To say that the past is the past....is simply not true. The same people that say that often say "it is their past that makes them who they are today". Come on now. It is one or the other. You cannot have it both ways.
> 
> From personal experience, my wife's past injured our marriage for 25 years. And I never had a clue what was up. What was the problem? The things she had done before us that so many of you say do not matter and are none of my business. *So, I struggled through 25 years with a woman that could not be intimate, could not let me see her heart, could not show love.....all because of the injuries that occurred before me.*
> 
> The past does have a huge impact on the present. To deny it is simply to deny reality.


How did you end up married to someone who could not be intimate, could not let you see her heart, and could not show love? Isn't that something you would notice right away during dating?

That's what I mean when I say "it's the past who makes them who they are today." The person in front of you with the characteristics and quirks and feelings they currently have is the person they've become over time. If that person suits you, great. If not, fine, move on. Knowing the details of their past doesn't actually change their present character.


----------



## Wolf1974

SimplyAmorous said:


> Being someone who would care, I often feel in the minority on this forum... it's not the culturally accepted norm today.


I agree with you that's it's probably not the culture norm here on TAM but in real life it's probably way more common to ask basic questions on sexual past. Like southbound it was never on my radar that these were conversations that some never had. To me it's as common as asking about how and where you grew up. Here was the first place I ever heard of don't ask don't tell.

I respect people who want to live without that knowledge and marry people without ever having the discussion so long as all people are on the same page about it


----------



## Wolf1974

norajane said:


> How did you end up married to someone who could not be intimate, could not let you see her heart, and could not show love? Isn't that something you would notice right away during dating?
> 
> That's what I mean when I say "it's the past who makes them who they are today." The person in front of you with the characteristics and quirks and feelings they currently have is the person they've become over time. If that person suits you, great. If not, fine, move on. *Knowing the details of their past doesn't actually change their present character*.


Past can show character that isn't presented in dating though

I can't answer for him but can with my own example of how the past comes back around. I knew my x wife cheated on her first husband. This was of GREAT concern to me as I figured I would be next. I can still hear my uncle saying to me over and over people don't change if she cheated once she will do it again. 

I was so concerned with this we had literally 100 hours of conversation about how concerned I was about being cheated on. So much in fact that it was my suggestion that no marriage would take place without pre martial counceling which we did. And ohh she had a great line I heard over and over. Her husband was controlling, emotionally abusive, unable to communicate. She tried to fix the problems they had but he wouldn't. And she would tell me every time I was different, we were different, the situation was different and she would NEVER do that to me.

Well guess what. She did the very thing to me. And what did she tell her friends.... I was controlling, emotionally abusive and unable to communicate. Fortunately everyone but her mother finally figured her out that she was liar and blame shifted. She lay most all of her friends because they all figured her out

I had my role to play. I outthought my common sense. Convinced myself that if I loved enough that would be enough. I was naive at 25 and loved her and wanted to belive what she told me. But it wasn't true. I own my part for outthinking my common sense.

So her present character came across as changed, honest and sincer. Capable of having an adult relationship. But that wasn't her true character. That's just what was presented to me at that time. It took years for her real self to show and ultimately revert to the same person she was before...the real her if you will


----------



## Faithful Wife

It is interesting that some of you see TAM as having members who are "way far out there" on the edge or something....whereas I see this place as predominantly uber conservative. The average views around here shock me sometimes...but apparently, what I feel are the average views are not what some of the more conservative members feel are the average views...because I think the conservative ones have the majority, but they think the liberal ones do. Interesting.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Wolf1974 said:


> Past can show character that isn't presented in dating though
> 
> I can't answer for him but can with my own example of how the past comes back around. I knew my x wife cheated on her first husband. This was of GREAT concern to me as I figured I would be next. I can still hear my uncle saying to me over and over people don't change if she cheated once she will do it again.
> 
> I was so concerned with this we had literally 100 hours of conversation about how concerned I was about being cheated on. So much in fact that it was my suggestion that no marriage would take place without pre martial counceling which we did. And ohh she had a great line I heard over and over. Her husband was controlling, emotionally abusive, unable to communicate. She tried to fix the problems they had but he wouldn't. And she would tell me every time I was different, we were different, the situation was different and she would NEVER do that to me.
> 
> Well guess what. She did the very thing to me. And what did she tell her friends.... I was controlling, emotionally abusive and unable to communicate. Fortunately everyone but her mother finally figured her out that she was liar and blame shifted. She lay most all of her friends because they all figured her out
> 
> I had my role to play. I outthought my common sense. Convinced myself that if I loved enough that would be enough. I was naive at 25 and loved her and wanted to belive what she told me. But it wasn't true. I own my part for outthinking my common sense.
> 
> So her present character came across as changed, honest and sincer. Capable of having an adult relationship. But that wasn't her true character. That's just what was presented to me at that time. It took years for her real self to show and ultimately revert to the same person she was before...the real her if you will


Wolf, that really sucks and I can see how you feel, I would feel the same if I put that much effort into protecting myself and got so burned. 

Just for clarification, she was already divorced at age 25? (just curious)


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> It is interesting that some of you see TAM as having members who are "way far out there" on the edge or something....whereas I see this place as predominantly uber conservative. The average views around here shock me sometimes...but apparently, what I feel are the average views are not what some of the more conservative members feel are the average views...because I think the conservative ones have the majority, but they think the liberal ones do. Interesting.


You honestly feel TAM is uber conservative? That's shocking to me. I only consider myself moderately at best conservative and have been reading here for years before I ever made a post. I've never felt this place was conservative at all. Just the opposite.

Maybe when we come from a specific background or world view it shapes how we read things?


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> Wolf, that really sucks and I can see how you feel, I would feel the same if I put that much effort into protecting myself and got so burned.
> 
> Just for clarification, she was already divorced at age 25? (just curious)


Yes she was married at 21 and divorced at 23 We married when she was 26


----------



## Faithful Wife

Wolf1974 said:


> You honestly feel TAM is uber conservative? That's shocking to me. I only consider myself moderately at best conservative and have been reading here for years before I ever made a post. I've never felt this place was conservative at all. Just the opposite.
> 
> Maybe when we come from a specific background or world view it shapes how we read things?


Yes, very conservative, IMO. On average though, I mean. Obviously many are not conservative but on average I feel it is so, here. Probably what happens is that the ultra conservative posts annoy me so I notice and remember them more. 

You have never annoyed me, by the way. I don't know a lot about you, I would consider you conservative from the little I know...but not OTT conservative. In fact, I would say the majority and average posters are a lot like you (that's not saying it is a bad thing, just different than what I am used to in daily life).

Probably the same is true for others who see this place as some kind of wild kingdom...like myself, I'm outspoken and am literally out there on the edge, and those who are annoyed by me think I am the average or majority or that I speak for them. Though I personally don't see a lot of people who are as far out there as I am...there are many though who I feel are in my general vicinity of out there.


----------



## Decorum

Interesting.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

SimplyAmorous said:


> Being someone who would care, I often feel in the minority on this forum... it's not the culturally accepted norm today.


I feel that a lot of times what is negative stands out to us the most. I know that I have felt that this forum is so completely opposite to what I feel and think, but I also realize that that is sticking in my head more. 

I think that whatever you are, you will feel resistance. I had sex before marriage. I met with a lot of resistance. You did not. You met with a lot of resistance. 

But there are other people who are in your flow. People who waited for sex before marriage. There is a lot of people in my flow, people who did not wait before marriage.

I also want to say. I tend to say "the past is the past and it is judging the present that is important. It is not that the past makes no impact, but that the present person may be impaced by their past and act on it in a way that is different from the stereotype or their opinion on the right and wrongness of their actions has changed over time.

I may be biased because that is what happened to me.

I was waiting for marriage and never even held the hand of a boy before. Then I was raped. Sex became about power and abuse. After about a year, I had sex with a boyfriend. I realized, sex was about connection and love. Pleasure and joy. I then got hurt by that man I had sex with as he cheated on me. I realized that sex can hurt even without being raped. I realized that I was going to hold the man's heart I had sex with in high regard because I had felt all experiences of it. The ecstasy of being in love and having sex, and the darkest layers of hell of rape. I realized it was the beautiful act of giving all of myself and being vulnerable and having a man give all of himself and being vulnerable. I did not want to be with a man who did not experience sex in the same way. It did not matter to me if he was a virgin or not. 

I did end up with a virgin and it was so beautiful to have that experience as I had never known what it was to lose my virginity. Sorry, I am crying as I type this.

That was what I learned. I did not stay a virgin. But that does not mean that I do not hold sex in high regard. I had to go through a journey. I would want a man to hear my journey and understand it. I also do understand that if I am not a virgin and he says no, that is fine. It is his body and he does not have to share it with anyone for any reason. 

I just want to give a different view as to why it is not so easy to separate it as virginity or not and assume that one has certain views of sex or not. For some of us, it had to be formed on the path.


----------



## JCD

I have this little maxim I go by 'Don't ask any question you really don't want an answer to.'

If this seems at odds with the ideas I have heretofore espoused, well, I'm a hypocrite (or I can hold two contradictory principles as important at the same time)

I think some (not all) of the 'I don't care about his/her past' comes from self defense. If you don't KNOW you aren't the biggest, the best, the prettiest, the most loved...then that past doesn't exist you and you can blithely make your own reality without the shadow of comparison.

This isn't necessarily a horrible idea... Do I WANT to know about that party where she orgasmed for three hours straight with whomever? No I do not!

But by the same token, I think willful blindness is just plain stupid. And someone hiding something in the past which COULD hurt your loved one...that's some callous negligence there.

So I have a foot in both camps...but hold that some truths are owed the other spouse.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

JCD said:


> I have this little maxim I go by 'Don't ask any question you really don't want an answer to.'
> 
> If this seems at odds with the ideas I have heretofore espoused, well, I'm a hypocrite (or I can hold two contradictory principles as important at the same time)
> 
> I think some (not all) of the 'I don't care about his/her past' comes from self defense. If you don't KNOW you aren't the biggest, the best, the prettiest, the most loved...then that past doesn't exist you and you can blithely make your own reality without the shadow of comparison.
> 
> This isn't necessarily a horrible idea... Do I WANT to know about that party where she orgasmed for three hours straight with whomever? No I do not!
> 
> But by the same token, I think willful blindness is just plain stupid. And someone hiding something in the past which COULD hurt your loved one...that's some callous negligence there.
> 
> So I have a foot in both camps...but hold that some truths are owed the other spouse.


I actually agree that openness is the best policy. Now, I think the degree of openness can be established. Some people on here push for every position and detail. I don't think everyone needs to do that or would be comfortable either saying or listening to that. 

I stand in the side that the past does matter, but we should listen to how that person frames their past so we understand their values on sex and how they would view sex with us. I think trying to make it an algorithm doesn't work. 

I think it is a combination of past and present. Past gives us the experience to form our present philosophies. Sometimes our philosophies are framed by our mistakes or bad experiences as well. 

For example, a woman may have never had sex in her life. However, her philosophy is one of using men. So she never has sex until marriage but then engages with APs. 

Or a woman may have had a string of sexual partners early in her life. She then stopped and her current philosophy is that she regards those as mistakes that no longer jive with what she believes, but as stepping stones to get to the mindset she is in now and truly wants a monogamous relationship.

Black and white situations, but I'm just trying to frame it in a different way.


----------



## tech-novelist

I consider it mandatory to be truthful with your spouse about these issues, as with every other issue. And this conversation should happen well before the wedding so that either party can call it off if the answers are unacceptable.


----------



## Faithful Wife

SimplyAmorous said:


> Being someone who would care, I often feel in the minority on this forum... it's not the culturally accepted norm today.


But SA...don't most of the people on this very thread "care"? I didn't count or even read all the posts...but it seems like those who do "care" outnumber those who don't. How does that put you in the minority?

Also...for me, I am able to say "well it is this way for me and whoever I end up with, but I don't care what anyone else does". Whereas, it seems to me that those who "care" want to make those who "don't care" (on this particular item) change their view. Can we care or not care without trying to make others change their position?


----------



## southbound

Wolf1974 said:


> Past can show character that isn't presented in dating though
> 
> I can't answer for him but can with my own example of how the past comes back around. I knew my x wife cheated on her first husband. This was of GREAT concern to me as I figured I would be next. I can still hear my uncle saying to me over and over people don't change if she cheated once she will do it again.
> 
> I was so concerned with this we had literally 100 hours of conversation about how concerned I was about being cheated on. So much in fact that it was my suggestion that no marriage would take place without pre martial counceling which we did. And ohh she had a great line I heard over and over. Her husband was controlling, emotionally abusive, unable to communicate. She tried to fix the problems they had but he wouldn't. And she would tell me every time I was different, we were different, the situation was different and she would NEVER do that to me.
> 
> Well guess what. She did the very thing to me. And what did she tell her friends.... I was controlling, emotionally abusive and unable to communicate. Fortunately everyone but her mother finally figured her out that she was liar and blame shifted. She lay most all of her friends because they all figured her out
> 
> I had my role to play. I outthought my common sense. Convinced myself that if I loved enough that would be enough. I was naive at 25 and loved her and wanted to belive what she told me. But it wasn't true. I own my part for outthinking my common sense.
> 
> So her present character came across as changed, honest and sincer. Capable of having an adult relationship. But that wasn't her true character. That's just what was presented to me at that time. It took years for her real self to show and ultimately revert to the same person she was before...the real her if you will


I'm sorry this happened to you, and I appreciate you sharing. I think this is a perfect example of why the past can't be ignored.

At my age, if I ever get into another relationship, there is a possibility it will be with someone who is divorced. I want to know why they are divorced. If they walked away from three other husbands because they were "not happy" anymore, I'd like to know that, and it will probably put a halt to the relationship. 

By the same token, I would assume a woman would want to know why I'm divorced, and I would be glad to share it. To be honest, I would volunteer to share it even if she didn't ask.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Maria Canosa Gargano said*: I was waiting for marriage and never even held the hand of a boy before. *Then I was raped. Sex became about power and abuse. After about a year, I had sex with a boyfriend. I realized, sex was about connection and love. Pleasure and joy. I then got hurt by that man I had sex with as he cheated on me. I realized that sex can hurt even without being raped. I realized that I was going to hold the man's heart I had sex with in high regard because I had felt all experiences of it. The ecstasy of being in love and having sex, and the darkest layers of hell of rape. I realized it was the beautiful act of giving all of myself and being vulnerable and having a man give all of himself and being vulnerable. I did not want to be with a man who did not experience sex in the same way. *It did not matter to me if he was a virgin or not.
> 
> *I did end up with a virgin and it was so beautiful to have that experience as I had never known what it was to lose my virginity. Sorry, I am crying as I type this.*
> 
> *That was what I learned. I did not stay a virgin. But that does not mean that I do not hold sex in high regard. I had to go through a journey. I would want a man to hear my journey and understand it. I also do understand that if I am not a virgin and he says no, that is fine. It is his body and he does not have to share it with anyone for any reason.
> *
> I just want to give a different view as to why it is not so easy to separate it as virginity or not and assume that one has certain views of sex or not. For some of us, it had to be formed on the path.










to all you have been through Maria...

Please know I feel as strongly as you do... in what you have expressed here.... that it's so much more & beyond any labels others put upon us.... can a before or after marriage define us... NO!..... we are all multi-faceted... it's so much more about the giving of the person.. What's in our hearts.... 

In no way do I think just cause a woman makes a man wait ....till engagement, till marriage...this makes her more loving, more ____ or more _____ frankly she could be a "nose in the air" / prudish WITCH that would cause any man to curse the day he was born even marrying her.. . I mean that in all seriousness... I am concerned for my own sons to be careful to marry a higher drive woman. NOT a PRUDE. Of course honesty & faithfulness , devotion to him.. this is what I care about..above all. 

I've always been one to look at the







, what we learn on the surface could be so misleading [email protected]#...there is a "deeper" to all of us..

And it's true...also makes me feel a little better behind this keyboard, it's not JUST ME.. but that many of us are sensitive to the other side's perceived slights... to something we care about....I know when I read some things ... they jump out at me... I'm sure it's the same for others.. it's magnified in our heads...

I have tried leaving here on occasion for a more conservative atmosphere ...once I got banned within hrs on a Christian forum..too naughty & sinful for them (liking some romantic porn & premarital petting)....might as well laugh about it... at least here I do feel I have some friends.. 



Maria Canosa Gargano said:


> *I stand in the side that the past does matter, but we should listen to how that person frames their past so we understand their values on sex and how they would view sex with us. I think trying to make it an algorithm doesn't work*.


 I really really enjoy your posts Maria Canosa Gargano! ...What you said here...I am 100 times in agreement with... 



> *I think it is a combination of past and present. Past gives us the experience to form our present philosophies. Sometimes our philosophies are framed by our mistakes or bad experiences as well*.


 Could even be the experiences of someone close to us... For me.. watching my mother self destruct after being used by a variety of men....(she opened the door to that ...she always said passion was her demise)....The mother I knew was no more, she was ripped from my life... I have spent a lifetime grieving for her..... so yeah..even though not my own experience... what I witnessed had a profound effect on me.. in ways others may not understand.. But yeah.. such things shaped my strong feelings that a MAN will NEVER use me.. only the man who was willing to give me his ALL (and that meant his hand in marriage) ..he was the worthy one... 



> *Black and white situations, but I'm just trying to frame it in a different way*.


Life is full of grey ... that's why it's so important to have these heart to hearts..












> *Faithful wife said*: *Yes, very conservative, IMO. On average though, I mean. Obviously many are not conservative but on average I feel it is so, here. Probably what happens is that the ultra conservative posts annoy me so I notice and remember them more*.


 I wonder if I am one of the ones who annoy you ?

Ya know what I was thinking the other day.. it's ironic ... you are the WILD CHICK on TAM, boisterous, has a Sex Blog, pounds the whole "sex positive" thing....(and I appreciate the passion & your intelligence -you know your sh**).....

When single you encourage causal sex, it's empowering & expressive.... and you chose "Faithful Wife" as your Username..(sounds so conservative!) then there's me... Mrs Conservative - wait for 1 special man, wanted to marry young & have babies .. never sexually Wild like that in my early years (but I wasn't a prude either, I loved orgasms !!)......and I come on the scene with a name like "Simply Amorous"...who would THINK [email protected]#$ 

See, we're MUCH deeper than our stories on the surface..



> *Faithful Wife said*: *But SA...don't most of the people on this very thread "care"? I didn't count or even read all the posts...but it seems like those who do "care" outnumber those who don't. How does that put you in the minority? *


 Well we all care -since we're posting our thoughts and feelings on it.. right.. I think it's a constant RUB with me since I feel on the outskirts with the majority of women here.. if you counted how many women care on this thread.. It would be very low.. in comparison to the men.. And I swear on the life of my children, I am not trying to cater to anyone here.. to win favor.. I post as I personally feel.. 



> *Also...for me, I am able to say "well it is this way for me and whoever I end up with, but I don't care what anyone else does". Whereas, it seems to me that those who "care" want to make those who "don't care" (on this particular item) change their view. Can we care or not care without trying to make others change their position?*


 Oh I am not foolish enough to think I could change anyone's position on this...we're all adults that feel passionately -and have stories attached to why (like Wolf sharing his).....none of us appreciate when another tells us how stupid we are *for caring*.... *or not caring*...I try to not go there.. just share my own feelings on it.. just like everyone else is doing. 

For a new comer landing here - maybe getting into dating after a Divorce.....a thread like this with the varying back & forths...it opens their eyes to the varying views on this.. it's good to be aware that not everything thinks likes us.. and to be prepared if we face that.. how to broach it with the other if we really care about them, and want it to work... 


.


----------



## Faithful Wife

SimplyAmorous said:


> I wonder if I am one of the ones who annoy you ?
> 
> Ya know what I was thinking the other day.. it's ironic ... you are the WILD CHICK on TAM, boisterous, has a Sex Blog, pounds *the whole "sex positive" thing*....(and I appreciate the passion & your intelligence -you know your sh**).....
> 
> *When single you encourage causal sex*, it's empowering & expressive.... and you chose "Faithful Wife" as your Username.. then there's me... Mrs Conservative - wait for 1 special man, wanted to marry young & have babies .. never sexually Wild like that in my early years (but I wasn't a prude either, I loved orgasms !!)......and I come on the scene with a name like "Simply Amorous"...who would THINK [email protected]#$
> 
> See, we're MUCH deeper than our stories on the surface..
> 
> Well we all care -since we're posting our thoughts and feelings on it.. right.. I think it's a constant RUB with me since I feel on the outskirts with the majority of women here.. if you counted how many women care on this thread.. It would be very low.. in comparison to the men.. And I swear on the life of my children, I am not trying to cater to anyone here.. to win favor.. I post as I personally feel..
> 
> Oh I am not foolish enough to think I could change anyone's position on this...we're all adults that feel passionately -and have stories attached to why (like Wolf sharing his).....none of us appreciate when another tells us how stupid we are *for caring*.... *or not caring*...I try to not go there.. just share my own feelings on it.. just like everyone else is doing.
> 
> For a new comer landing here - maybe getting into dating after a Divorce.....a thread like this with the varying back & forths...it opens their eyes to the varying views on this.. it's good to be aware that not everything thinks likes us.. and to be prepared if we face that.. how to broach it with the other if we really care about them, and want it to work...
> 
> 
> .


I agree that the back and forth is helpful for many readers!

However...I do not EVER think when I'm sharing what *I* do and believe is what others *should* do or believe, and I don't suggest any such thing (speaking specifically on this topic for now). 

The bolded above...no I do NOT encourage people having casual sex.

What I do say is that if THEY want to, then they should do it without shame and get all the good out of that they can.

I would never suggest to YOU, for instance, if you became single or widowed that YOU should have casual sex. Do you see the difference there? I respect your views on what you want in your life, and I do not look down on them. I do not think you should do what anyone else does, you should do what you want and feel is right.

Yet...I do feel sometimes that you would actually look down on someone for making the choice to have casual sex. You speak about that a lot, whereas, I have never spoken down about any person who wanted to remain a virgin or never have casual sex or anything on either end of that spectrum.

This is what I mean by, can't we all care or not care but not try to change each other's minds?

I honestly have never in my life thought someone who didn't want to sleep around had any problem that should be fixed.

Yet some here definitely think those who sleep around have problem that should be fixed.

Other than those we might actually date or marry, why does it matter what others do? Part of the sex positive agenda is to accept the choices others make without trying to shame them, including the choice to be celibate or a virgin, as well as the choice to have as much consensual sex with as many people as one wants to.

These are honest questions. And you know I love ya.


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> I agree that the back and forth is helpful for many readers!
> 
> However...I do not EVER think when I'm sharing what *I* do and believe is what others *should* do or believe, and I don't suggest any such thing (speaking specifically on this topic for now).
> 
> The bolded above...no I do NOT encourage people having casual sex.
> 
> What I do say is that if THEY want to, then they should do it without shame and get all the good out of that they can.
> 
> I would never suggest to YOU, for instance, if you became single or widowed that YOU should have casual sex. Do you see the difference there? I respect your views on what you want in your life, and I do not look down on them. I do not think you should do what anyone else does, you should do what you want and feel is right.
> 
> Yet...I do feel sometimes that you would actually look down on someone for making the choice to have casual sex. You speak about that a lot, whereas, I have never spoken down about any person who wanted to remain a virgin or never have casual sex or anything on either end of that spectrum.
> 
> This is what I mean by, can't we all care or not care but not try to change each other's minds?
> 
> I honestly have never in my life thought someone who didn't want to sleep around had any problem that should be fixed.
> 
> *Yet some here definitely think those who sleep around have problem that should be fixed.*
> 
> Other than those we might actually date or marry, why does it matter what others do? Part of the sex positive agenda is to accept the choices others make without trying to shame them, including the choice to be celibate or a virgin, as well as the choice to have as much consensual sex with as many people as one wants to.
> 
> These are honest questions. And you know I love ya.


I certainly hope that's not the case. People should be free to live their life how they choose to. at the same time others should feel free to say that's not really for me or something that will coincide with my belief sysetm. I don't think either are wrong. We should be honest about who we are and what we want in a partner .


----------



## Faithful Wife

Wolf1974 said:


> I certainly hope that's not the case. People should be free to live their life how they choose to. at the same time others should feel free to say that's not really for me or something that will coincide with my belief sysetm. I don't think either are wrong. We should be honest about who we are and what we want in a partner .


You don't see those who go around slamming the choices others make? :scratchhead: For instance, statements like "well, if you're going to be a c*m dumpster, what do you expect?" when speaking to a woman who had sex before marriage in some way her husband doesn't like? And I don't mean the woman was a sex freak, she just had sex before marriage. This type of thing gets said a lot around here. Sometimes it is implied without using such harsh language. But the harsh language happens plenty.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

SimplyAmorous said:


> to all you have been through Maria...
> 
> Please know I feel as strongly as you do... in what you have expressed here.... that it's so much more & beyond any labels others put upon us.... can a before or after marriage define us... NO!..... we are all multi-faceted... it's so much more about the giving of the person.. What's in our hearts....
> 
> ....(Edited for length)
> 
> .


I felt that your whole post was beautiful and encapsulates a lot of how I feel about this whole topic in general. You and I have very different backgrounds and goals 

You waited until marriage, wanted many Kids

I did not wait until marriage and do not want any kids

But underneath those two seemingly polar opposites are two women who have gone through the darkest spots of this thing we called life to reach our highest potentials and selves. You took the horrible self-destruction of your mother, which is truly a hell onto itself to live through, and used that to become your highest self and your goals

While I still have a very long way to go on reaching my potential and my goals, we can connect on the fact that we have been in the lows and highs of life. 

That picture of the moon perfectly encapsulates it.

I think conversations like these are what needs to happen between two people entering a relationship and discussing the past. On the surface, it may seem like they cannot connect, but if they have a real conversation, not a bullet point list, they can find there is similarities and even value harmony.


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> You don't see those who go around slamming the choices others make? :scratchhead: For instance, statements like "well, if you're going to be a c*m dumpster, what do you expect?" when speaking to a woman who had sex before marriage in some way her husband doesn't like? And I don't mean the woman was a sex freak, she just had sex before marriage. This type of thing gets said a lot around here. Sometimes it is implied without using such harsh language. But the harsh language happens plenty.


No where is the cum dumpsters thread I missed that one.

I have seen here where those who do care about sexual pasts were called insecure That was a fun thread


----------



## Faithful Wife

I wish it were just one thread. It happens all the time actually. I will go ask some others who see these posts to help me copy some for you, if you like. There are DOZENS of examples like that.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

I can vouch for Faithful_Wife that I have seen sentiment like that.

I attribute it to the extremists though. There are extremely hurt people here who post extremist views. That does not mean that the majority of posters agree with it. I think the lack of backlash comes from how unseriously people take it. You know that they have an extreme position, arguing with them gets your head beating against the wall. Those are the people who are seething inbetween their teeth at every woman who walks by and projecting onto them the hurt they felt or just the general hatred they feel. These posters usually have at the maximum 20 posts and then drop off the radar. 

The people who stay on longer and are interested in creating discussions and learning do not ascribe to that extremist view.

It is disturbing, but I don't think it is being promoted here by those who uphold the values and culture of TAM.


----------



## sisters359

BronzeTorpedo said:


> And that's the crux of the issue. You have your opinion, others have theirs. You shouldn't be allowed to impose your values on others. If you're dating a man who views premarital sex, or promiscuity, or threesomes, or whatever, as immoral, then you owe it to him to be transparent, especially in areas where your morals don't coincide with his. Otherwise, you're just hoping that he never finds out that you tricked him into believing your character was different than he would have otherwise believed.


Tricking someone, for one's own benefit, is a form of dishonesty--and that's wrong. But that has nothing to do with a person's sexual past, except that you have linked them as though the two go together. The woman who would lie about her past to avoid getting dumped is just a liar. She'll lie about other stuff, too.


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> I wish it were just one thread. It happens all the time actually. I will go ask some others who see these posts to help me copy some for you, if you like. There are DOZENS of examples like that.


And dozens or so the other way as well so not sure what your point is. It's the Internet people are rude and trollish. Doesn't mean it's productive at all but guess if you want to gather up posts and post them you can :scratchhead:


----------



## Thundarr

Wolf1974 said:


> No where is the cum dumpsters thread I missed that one.
> 
> I have seen here where those who do care about sexual pasts were called insecure That was a fun thread
> 
> 
> 
> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wish it were just one thread. It happens all the time actually. I will go ask some others who see these posts to help me copy some for you, if you like. There are DOZENS of examples like that.
> 
> 
> 
> Maria Canosa Gargano said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can vouch for Faithful_Wife that I have seen sentiment like that.
> 
> I attribute it to the extremists though. There are extremely hurt people here who post extremist views. That does not mean that the majority of posters agree with it. I think the lack of backlash comes from how unseriously people take it. You know that they have an extreme position, arguing with them gets your head beating against the wall. Those are the people who are seething inbetween their teeth at every woman who walks by and projecting onto them the hurt they felt or just the general hatred they feel. These posters usually have at the maximum 20 posts and then drop off the radar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Maria hit the nail on the head. I've seen CDumpster comments. Just not by anyone who any of us care to listen to anything from. I've seen the "your insecure for wanting to know" comments to. They are also off the mark as well.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Wolf...I only offered it to show that there are many of them not just one. Yes I also see the you're insecure posts. And I agree there shouldn't be any bashing of either side. It should be accepted that we all either care about this topic in our our relationships or we don't.

However, being called a cum dumpster is just blatant mean and sexist name calling, whereas being insecure is the natural outcome of having been burned. So I would much rather be called insecure than a cum dumpster. Some people are openly saying they are insecure and have no problem with saying it because it is simply true. There is no one who can't be insecure now and then or at some point in their life. It is normal and natural.

I don't think it is fair to compare it to the cum dumpster comments.

But again...being bashed for being insecure isn't right either.


----------



## altawa

Well, if we are going to start taking tally of who cares about the past and who doesn't, if it wasn't clear enough, I care, and I think it matters.


----------



## Faithful Wife

It would be interesting to take some statistics.


----------



## Thundarr

altawa said:


> Well, if we are going to start taking tally of who cares about the past and who doesn't, if it wasn't clear enough, I care, and I think it matters.
> 
> 
> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> It would be interesting to take some statistics.
Click to expand...

Here are the stats. 99.9% care about the past of their partner. It's just not always sexual past that matters. I remember a thread from a couple of years ago where there was a poster particularly feeling judged about others saying that sexual past mattered to them. In that 60+ page thread I remember her pointing out that drug addiction history would be a deal breaker for her. What I gathered from that thread is that most of us care about some kind of past.

This poster is no longer with us because she had an EA with another TAM member. In her case I suspect something about her past showed a lack of good judgement . It turns out that she repeated that cycle of poor judgement .


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Ok fair enough *Faithful Wife*.. I think your post was very balanced... and I probably DO speak against Casual sex more than I should .....(I'll attempt to shut up.. I might have to slap myself at times)....

Ya know...some of this is just listening to our teens talking about what goes on in high school today...it seems EVERYONE is doing it..or SURE BRAGGING ABOUT IT...then drama, breakup , drama , break up... I don't think it's healthy.. 

Our sons are the odd ones out ... I know it's not your circles.. but these are my circles... We encourage them to get to know a girl ...take time with her.... build an emotional connection ....could they see marring her someday?....wait at the very least till age 18 for going all the way...... If they get her pregnant, they better be prepared to marry her for life!! ...We feel this is right , responsible and good.....even if the STUDS get the majority of women... that's not something they should aspire to...

It's true ..... I have strong opinions on these things...how hooking up can hurt people , affecting emotional vulnerability & bonding in future relationships.... this is not about shaming...it's about what is best for who we are, how some of us are wired.. .

Add peer pressure....it's a losing battle for our young people...How many start down a path that may NOT be the best for them, then they get hooked on the roller coaster highs & lows...(Personally I can't think of anything more addicting than SEX!).....I will always feel more women get hurt in those hookups... hormonally speaking this can be explained.... from reputable Sex therapists ....absolutely nothing to do with over bearing religious men, judging , or shaming.. 

From lust to love: sex and emotional attachment




> *Ian Kerner, a sex therapist and relationship counsellor, argues that even though men and women are free to have casual sex, women almost always form some sort of attachment. Kerner says that with women, “deeper pleasures require some level of emotional attachment”*. This is mainly because oxytocin, “the cuddle hormone”, is released during the female orgasm. Dr Lauren Berman, a sex and relationship educator and therapist, says that “oxytocin can inspire feelings of closeness, affection, and intimacy”. Berman goes on to say that “This is why women might ‘catch feelings’ after a one-night stand or a so-called casual hook-up.”
> 
> When Perdeby spoke to Tuks student Tamara*, she agreed with Kerner that women feel an attachment after sex, saying, “As soon as sex is over and a guy doesn’t want you anymore, then you get emotional. So it’s more of an emotional attachment to the feeling of being wanted and being close to someone than the actual feeling of being attached to men.”
> 
> Berman further mentions that even though men also release oxytocin during orgasm, their high levels of testosterone combat the effect of “lovey-dovey” feelings, making casual one-night stands less meaningful to them. Men’s dopamine (the “pleasure reward” hormone released during orgasm) levels decrease after orgasm is achieved, resulting in men having negative withdrawal symptoms after sex. This makes men feel irritated along with the need to flee from their sexual partners.
> 
> Kerner says that it is possible for women to have meaningless sex like men. He believes that the real question is whether they should or not? Although this answer is up to each individual, there are things for both parties to consider. Kerner feels that “We can treat sex lightly, but sex doesn’t always treat us lightly back in return.” He further explains that casual sex can make a person feel depressed after climax has been reached because people, though mostly women, can sometimes feel “post-orgasm regret” along with anger and sadness if there was a feeling of hollowness and a lack of passion during sex.
> 
> It seems that the orgasm, which is the main goal of sex, may have a negative side effect after all. Although casual sex may not affect you directly, the other person could have unwillingly broken the core rule of engagement – no emotional attachment. It appears that men and women can view casual sex in the same way, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that they will come out on the other side seeing eye to eye.





> *Thundarr said*: *Maria hit the nail on the head. I've seen CDumpster comments. Just not by anyone who any of us care to listen to anything from. I've seen the "your insecure for wanting to know" comments to. They are also off the mark as well.*


 and let me raise my hand here.. Is it fair for me to say FW.... just as the C Dumpster comments put a fire under you.. and these are from posters no one cares about - only seen as the extremists .. I rattles my cage (& may I add these are NOT from extremists posters, but many popular posters here)....with all the blanket "insecurity" comments -any time someone does care.. It's THESE comments that make ME , irritating as I may be to some.. want to step in and say "Wait a minute"... it's not always the case!


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> Wolf...I only offered it to show that there are many of them not just one. Yes I also see the you're insecure posts. And I agree there shouldn't be any bashing of either side. It should be accepted that we all either care about this topic in our our relationships or we don't.
> 
> However, being called a cum dumpster is just blatant mean and sexist name calling, whereas being insecure is the natural outcome of having been burned. So I would much rather be called insecure than a cum dumpster. Some people are openly saying they are insecure and have no problem with saying it because it is simply true. There is no one who can't be insecure now and then or at some point in their life. It is normal and natural.
> 
> I don't think it is fair to compare it to the cum dumpster comments.
> 
> But again...being bashed for being insecure isn't right either.


Neither is being told that the death of my child isn't emotionally upsetting. When your on the Internet its best to ignor the ridiculous posts and move on. We all have been insulted here at on time or another FW. None of it is ok from gender bashing to comments about dead children. 

If you think being called a name type is worse than another its certanly your right to. I don't put much merit in what I know isn't true


----------



## Threetimesalady

Your sexual past is your sexual past...Don't make he/she suffer for your conscience...It's not always easy, but these are days gone by...Move on and learn to like yourself...


----------



## Faithful Wife

I don't know how to answer you SA...you may not realize it, but you are making character judgments based on whether someone has casual sex or not. 

There is no way to judge someone's character, good or bad, based on ANY of the following:

*whether they are a virgin or not

*whether they have had a lot of sex or not

*whether they feel knowing a potential partner's sexual past is important or not

*whether someone is insecure or not

So anytime we are talking about casual sex OR waiting for marriage, I hear you implying that casual sex either includes or causes character defects, and I just don't think that is true or fair.

I also don't think being a virgin means there is a character defect.

Do you see my point? 

You may not hear it in your own posts but I'm sure if you search your heart, you will find that you actually do look down on people who have casual sex. You may "feel sorry" for them or feel they are misguided...yet you still judge their character as defective.

Or that is the way a lot of your posts sound. 

If you honestly don't feel that way, then I am sure you will not sound like that going forward just for having it pointed out. 

But if you do feel that way, I would urge you to not judge people for the sex they have, and I won't judge people for the sex they do OR don't have.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Wolf1974 said:


> Neither is being told that the death of my child isn't emotionally upsetting. When your on the Internet its best to ignor the ridiculous posts and move on. We all have been insulted here at on time or another FW. None of it is ok from gender bashing to comments about dead children.
> 
> If you think being called a name type is worse than another its certanly your right to. I don't put much merit in what I know isn't true




I did not know about the death of your child, I'm so so sorry. I also don't know about the post you are referring to about being told it isn't emotionally upsetting. (WHAT?!?!) :scratchhead:

But just to note...no one here (or anywhere) has called me a cum dumpster. I was never making a complaint about posts that were about me. And yeah, I still believe that particular type of comment should not be allowed here at all, yet it is. I don't see why saying it isn't nice or fair gets me a "well it's the internet". I was actually making a point, but it is lost now. No worries.


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> I don't know how to answer you SA...you may not realize it, but you are making character judgments based on whether someone has casual sex or not.
> 
> There is no way to judge someone's character, good or bad, based on ANY of the following:
> 
> *whether they are a virgin or not
> 
> *whether they have had a lot of sex or not
> 
> *whether they feel knowing a potential partner's sexual past is important or not
> 
> *whether someone is insecure or not
> 
> So anytime we are talking about casual sex OR waiting for marriage, I hear you implying that casual sex either includes or causes character defects, and I just don't think that is true or fair.
> 
> I also don't think being a virgin means there is a character defect.
> 
> Do you see my point?
> 
> You may not hear it in your own posts but I'm sure if you search your heart, you will find that you actually do look down on people who have casual sex. You may "feel sorry" for them or feel they are misguided...yet you still judge their character as defective.
> 
> Or that is the way a lot of your posts sound.
> 
> If you honestly don't feel that way, then I am sure you will not sound like that going forward just for having it pointed out.
> 
> But if you do feel that way, I would urge you to not judge people for the sex they have, and I won't judge people for the sex they do OR don't have.


Not to speak for SA but for me I don't judge people who have casual sex as good or bad. I hold myself to a standard and if I want to share my life with someone then I want them to have the same standard and same outlook. So when I say I wouldn't be with a woman who treats sex casually it's not a one way street. I also don't treat sex casually. much like a political or religious view I just want us to be on the same page about it as all. 

And honestly , and I have said this is the past, it's not the number of partners or things that have or haven't been done sexually. I have very few hard and fast 100% deal breakers. But one I do have is someone who considers a subject taboo to talk about between spouses. The ability to talk about something is more important to me than the outcome of that converstaion in many cases. True I may be a bit alone in that stance but communication is and always will be a big thing for me.


----------



## norajane

I'm sorry, SA, but this part made me laugh:




> This is mainly because oxytocin, “the cuddle hormone”, is released during the female orgasm. Dr Lauren Berman, a sex and relationship educator and therapist, says that “oxytocin can inspire feelings of closeness, affection, and intimacy”. Berman goes on to say that “*This is why women might ‘catch feelings’ after a one-night stand or a so-called casual hook-up.*”



I'll venture to guess that a majority of ONS's and casual hook-ups do NOT lead to an orgasm for the woman, so their premise might be a bit flawed.


----------



## Threetimesalady

Faithful Wife said:


> I don't know how to answer you SA...you may not realize it, but you are making character judgments based on whether someone has casual sex or not.
> 
> There is no way to judge someone's character, good or bad, based on ANY of the following:
> 
> *whether they are a virgin or not
> 
> *whether they have had a lot of sex or not
> 
> *whether they feel knowing a potential partner's sexual past is important or not
> 
> *whether someone is insecure or not
> 
> So anytime we are talking about casual sex OR waiting for marriage, I hear you implying that casual sex either includes or causes character defects, and I just don't think that is true or fair.
> 
> I also don't think being a virgin means there is a character defect.
> 
> Do you see my point?
> 
> You may not hear it in your own posts but I'm sure if you search your heart, you will find that you actually do look down on people who have casual sex. You may "feel sorry" for them or feel they are misguided...yet you still judge their character as defective.
> 
> Or that is the way a lot of your posts sound.
> 
> If you honestly don't feel that way, then I am sure you will not sound like that going forward just for having it pointed out.
> 
> But if you do feel that way, I would urge you to not judge people for the sex they have, and I won't judge people for the sex they do OR don't have.


I agree with you 100%...That part of life disappeared years ago when I was young...It's a new world out there...Even though I don't regret not having full sexual intercourse before marriage with my husband-to-be, he would not have respected me any less...


----------



## Threetimesalady

norajane said:


> I'm sorry, SA, but this part made me laugh:
> 
> 
> I'll venture to guess that a majority of ONS's and casual hook-ups do NOT lead to an orgasm for the woman, so their premise might be a bit flawed.


This is a book she wrote to sell....Not a book of her life...


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> I did not know about the death of your child, I'm so so sorry. I also don't know about the post you are referring to about being told it isn't emotionally upsetting. (WHAT?!?!) :scratchhead:
> 
> But just to note...no one here (or anywhere) has called me a cum dumpster. I was never making a complaint about posts that were about me. And yeah, I still believe that particular type of comment should not be allowed here at all, yet it is. I don't see why saying it isn't nice or fair gets me a "well it's the internet". I was actually making a point, but it is lost now. No worries.


Thanks but it was a long time ago and off subject really I didn't mean to thread jack. My only point was that people here post some downright stupid and hurtful comments. Some come from long time posters who hurl insults and never get seem to have any consequence. Other come from clearly troll posters who post a few nonsense comments then are gone. None of it is right but I like to give the mods the benefit of the doubt that they are doing the best they can controlling the board. Unfortunately some here are only interested in hurling insults and not having actual conversations or debates.


----------



## EleGirl

SimplyAmorous said:


> This is mainly because oxytocin, “the cuddle hormone”, is released during the female orgasm.


Oxytocin is also released in men when men have an orgasm. It's the hormone that cases bonding between two people.

However one sexual encounter is not enough to cause bonding. As we can see in marriage where the two spouses continue to have sex.... the bond can still be broken even with a sex life because it takes more than the amount of oxytocin released during sex to create and maintain a bond (or in-love feelings).


----------



## Faithful Wife

Wolf1974 said:


> Thanks but it was a long time ago and off subject really I didn't mean to thread jack. My only point was that people here post some downright stupid and hurtful comments. Some come from long time posters who hurl insults and never get seem to have any consequence. Other come from clearly troll posters who post a few nonsense comments then are gone. None of it is right but I like to give the mods the benefit of the doubt that they are doing the best they can controlling the board. Unfortunately some here are only interested in hurling insults and not having actual conversations or debates.


Hmmmm....I don't know. I guess we just don't see things the same way. I don't see these particular comments as coming from trolls and insult hurlers. I honestly see these comments as coming from a lot of people.

This whole back and forth between me and you started because you quoted me and said you would hope that people don't look down on those who have casual sex, and that's when I said really? Because I see comments like cum dumpster. That was why I even brought it up, was because you had made it sound like you weren't aware of anyone feeling that way around here. Yet you do see those comments, you apparently just ignore them. But just because you ignore them doesn't mean they are not part of the voice here, making up the average.

Again, I don't see those voices as outliers, I see them coming from regulars. A lot. (Yes, I'm aware the "you're insecure" comes from regulars too, but again my point originally was to show surprise that you said you hoped it wasn't the case that people look down on those who have casual sex).


----------



## Wolf1974

Faithful Wife said:


> Hmmmm....I don't know. I guess we just don't see things the same way. I don't see these particular comments as coming from trolls and insult hurlers. I honestly see these comments as coming from a lot of people.
> 
> This whole back and forth between me and you started because you quoted me and said you would hope that people don't look down on those who have casual sex, and that's when I said really? Because I see comments like cum dumpster. That was why I even brought it up, was because you had made it sound like you weren't aware of anyone feeling that way around here. Yet you do see those comments, you apparently just ignore them. But just because you ignore them doesn't mean they are not part of the voice here, making up the average.
> 
> Again, I don't see those voices as outliers, I see them coming from regulars. A lot. (Yes, I'm aware the "you're insecure" comes from regulars too, but again my point originally was to show surprise that you said you hoped it wasn't the case that people look down on those who have casual sex).


Then you misunderstood what my intent was. I was saying that I hope people don't honestly believe some of the nonsense they type here. Meaning the cruel and minimalizing crap hurled here which I honestly believe that if this was all face to face most of that crap would stop because their would be immediate accountability for the things said. Guess I have just seen enough here to take much of what is thrown around with a grain of salt.

As you say guess we just don't see it the same way but for what it's worth I appreciate that you keep the converstaion civil. Just because we don't see eye to eye on something doesn't mean the conversation can't be handled civilly


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Faithful wife said:* *If you honestly don't feel that way, then I am sure you will not sound like that going forward just for having it pointed out.
> 
> But if you do feel that way, I would urge you to not judge people for the sex they have, and I won't judge people for the sex they do OR don't have*


 I never mentioned anything about waiting till marriage.... I mentioned age 18 .... everyone is always reminding people to not marry young as we aren't mature till mid /late 20's.... yet it's judgmental of me to suggest our young people should wait to have sex till they are 18... is there anything I can say that is acceptable? 

It's almost like I have to have the same mindset ....or I am suspect to judging...

I feel as Wolf said in his post (as does my H).... "I hold myself to a standard and if I want to share my life with someone then I want them to have the same standard and same outlook. So when I say I wouldn't be with a woman who treats sex casually it's not a one way street. I also don't treat sex casually. much like a political or religious view I just want us to be on the same page about it as all."... is this OK to speak or will this always read as Judging to others?? 




Maria Canosa Gargano said:


> I felt that your whole post was beautiful and encapsulates a lot of how I feel about this whole topic in general. You and I have very different backgrounds and goals
> 
> You waited until marriage, wanted many Kids
> 
> I did not wait until marriage and do not want any kids
> 
> *But underneath those two seemingly polar opposites are two women who have gone through the darkest spots of this thing we called life to reach our highest potentials and selves. You took the horrible self-destruction of your mother, which is truly a hell onto itself to live through, and used that to become your highest self and your goals*.
> 
> While I still have a very long way to go on reaching my potential and my goals, we can connect on the fact that we have been in the lows and highs of life.
> 
> That picture of the moon perfectly encapsulates it.
> 
> I think conversations like these are what needs to happen between two people entering a relationship and discussing the past. On the surface, it may seem like they cannot connect, but if they have a real conversation, not a bullet point list, they can find there is similarities and even value harmony.










I appreciate your giving me the benefit of the doubt.. trying to understand where I came from...I have memories that children should not have been exposed to....my life hasn't always been daisies...

I probably had some abandonment issues even... I did the best I could .. as I am sure you did as well.. in trying to live in a way to find happiness one day...and love... 



> *norajane said*: I'll venture to guess that a majority of ONS's and casual hook-ups do NOT lead to an orgasm for the woman, so their premise might be a bit flawed.


Oh I agree... though it would make sense for those who did get off easier who would be more addicted to the hormonal highs. 












> *EleGirl said*: *Oxytocin is also released in men when men have an orgasm. It's the hormone that cases bonding between two people.
> 
> However one sexual encounter is not enough to cause bonding. As we can see in marriage where the two spouses continue to have sex.... the bond can still be broken even with a sex life because it takes more than the amount of oxytocin released during sex to create and maintain a bond (or in-love feelings)*.


 Well the article resonates with me a great deal.. I can easily attest to being the attacher type...even with one time.. but that's how I view sex.. and it would hurt very very VERY much ...if the man just walked away.. I can only speak for myself..


----------



## Faithful Wife

SimplyAmorous said:


> ....is this OK to speak or will this always read as Judging to others??


The way you speak it often sounds judgmental. I do think that you could get your point across without sounding judgmental...but again, I get the idea that you do actually feel those who have casual sex have a defective character or that it causes a defective character. Is that not correct? I'm not trying to pick on you, you seem to be genuinely asking the question I've quoted.

Again, I don't think one way or the other about your actual choices for yourself and what you guide your kids to do...I am NOT saying you don't have a wonderful life outlook and plan for yourself and your family. I am not dissing your lifestyle or your marriage or your choices. (ETA: actually, I'll change that...I do think one way about it: I think you all sound like a wonderful bunch of folks and I think people who are sexually responsible are the bomb!)

I am just pointing out that technically, you DO diss my choices in life. And it gets hard to hear it over and over in your posts. I'm not saying you are directing anything at me. But when you talk about all the issues and problems with casual sex or going from guy to guy and having sex with a bunch of them...how am I not supposed to feel that this applies to me too since I have had plenty of sex with plenty of people?


----------



## Mostlycontent

Thundarr said:


> Here are the stats. 99.9% care about the past of their partner. It's just not always sexual past that matters. I remember a thread from a couple of years ago where there was a poster particularly feeling judged about others saying that sexual past mattered to them. In that 60+ page thread I remember her pointing out that drug addiction history would be a deal breaker for her. What I gathered from that thread is that most of us care about some kind of past.
> 
> 
> I love your post because it's the truth. I haven't read all 19 pages of this thread as you can get the gist of it in a few pages. The reality is that everyone lies, particularly to themselves. We human beings have a remarkable ability of self deception and delusion. Most all of us believe things about ourselves that simply aren't true.
> 
> I also agree with Wolf in that knowing someone's sexual past is imperative to understand if they share the same views as you do. Understanding someone's past goes a long way in determining their values, moral compass and character. All things that would be wise to know in choosing a life partner.
> 
> The big objection seems to be over the issue of judgment. This is where self deception seems to step right in. Everyone judges everyone, particularly those with whom they have fundamental differences and conflicting core beliefs and I'm not purely speaking of sexual pasts but of all behaviors. There are consequences to our actions. It's cause and effect.
> 
> Should we judge? No, but we all do. If I think someone's life choices are strange, illogical or harmful in some way, I'm likely to think them foolish and perhaps they truly are.
> 
> In my view, people's pasts are typically a direct reflection of how much or how little they value themselves and this will manifest itself in some other way in a relationship with that person. This goes for both men and women.
> 
> I recall that my Wife didn't want to reveal much of any of her past dating life and I told her that it was a requirement if we were to get married. I was trying to make a determination if this woman viewed things as I did. I told her that if she refused to tell me these things or concealed them from me that she was robbing me of the power of choice.
> 
> Once she understood that my intent was not to judge her character but rather our compatibility, she was willing. Now the reality was that I was judging her. Was she a suitable mate, life partner and mother for my future children? I deemed that she was. Both of us had previous relationships so we had very similar experiences and more conservative shared values.
> 
> The basic point is that if you want to do whatever you want, then don't get married and you won't have to worry about one day being judged by a member of the opposite sex but the moment you enter into the relationship bonanza, all bets are off.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Faithful Wife said:


> *The way you speak it often sounds judgmental. I do think that you could get your point across without sounding judgmental..*.


 Then others are as well.. it's not just me.. it's not like these are the only type threads I post on.. 

If there is some sort heated discussion... I may stick my head in there- just like anyone else does. ..then I fly away... I do seem to get called out more so than others though.. it's hard for me to not take this personally.... you can say "I love ya" but come on FW.. if you feel I am judgmental , *you do not like me. *... 



> *but again, I get the idea that you do actually feel those who have casual sex have a defective character or that it causes a defective character. Is that not correct? I'm not trying to pick on you, you seem to be genuinely asking the question I've quoted.*


 No, it doesn't mean they have a defective character... if that's what they enjoy...variety... it's consensual.. this is what makes them happy....no one is getting hurt.....I mean...true...."it's not about Love and belonging" ... they can walk away & handle it.. I guess that makes them stronger over me.. they don't NEED the emotional... they don't CRAVE the man.....I will admit I find a callousness in that....It's not something I understand. I would find it a mistake... and please don't tell me I am wrong to feel this way.. 

I care deeply about the Love & belonging ... Does that make me weak then?? Some could go there.... so I am the one with the defective character...I need to get tougher ! Dvsladv8 thinks women like me are all HUNG UP.... we have issues.. some think it's gravely stupid to not just jump into sex.. see what happens...it's just sex.. 

Maybe we just operate out of what is best FOR US...being self aware enough to know what that is .. is pretty da** important, wouldn't you say.. I PREFER sensitive men who care about marriage...like attracts like.. 

I will not put myself down for feeling as I do.. ..anymore than you would put yourself down for enjoying variety, if that's your spice & brings you happiness.. for me , it's more about the giving, receiving and romanced entanglement. 

If a man felt HOW I FEEL IS foolish, stomping on what matters to me... I would flip him the F-ing bird.....just as you would do the same ...*.we both seek to be understood and accepted for how we feel and how we've lived.*. 

We're different...is all.. you will resonate with those like you...and I will resonate with those more geared like me... 



> *I am just pointing out that technically, you DO diss my choices in life. *


I would diss them *FOR ME*.. they are not right for ME.. and ya know.. when speaking about kids.. me being ME.. and him being him.. our kids , so far are a chip off the old block.. I have even tried to get our oldest to be more of a Playboy.. can't do it FW.. it's not who he is .. even if I feel he could use a little more of that ...



> *And it gets hard to hear it over and over in your posts. I'm not saying you are directing anything at me. But when you talk about all the issues and problems with casual sex or going from guy to guy and having sex with a bunch of them...how am I not supposed to feel that this applies to me too since I have had plenty of sex with plenty of people?*


 we just couldn't be married is all !  I feel similar to this when others post how archaic older fashioned anything is.. or we're not living in the 1940's anymore adding an exhilarating "THANK GOD!".. or "where do these people come from?".. there are plenty of jabs to go around on both sides.. ( I don't associate everything older fashioned as being repressive either..some words conjure different things for different people ..I am looking at the romance of it.. something I see less today)....

I am not for censoring when people are polite about their views... 

As atheist Christopher Hitchens once said - someone asked him if all the christians could be taken, gone , vanished .. would that be something he'd want -to make the world a better place?".. he relied "No.. then I wouldn't have anyone to argue with"....and smiled.. He is confident where he is .. and gives his side.. just as you do.. we all do... I don't find myself intolerable of others as much as you may think.... I would not judge a couple who agreed upon an Open marriage ...or wanted to get into swinging... if they are  both on board with it ....now I'm surely alienating others who think that is too whacked out -how could I say that!!!! .. 

Because it's their life.. what they do & allow is between *them*.. 

Myself and H enjoy that we are both clingy & mushy... others would spit on that.. call us "Smothering"... whatever.. we love it... it floats our boat... To each their own.. I think I am am pretty open minded really.. even if I am a little high on the bar in this area..


----------



## larry.gray

The label 'conservative' or 'liberal' about sex I think is too confining. 

Do I think it's pretty cool that wifey and I are each others only? Yes. Do I think it's cool I don't have mind movies of her previous lovers? Yes. Do I like the fact that we don't have cold sores, herpies and the lack of worry about cervical cancer? Yes.

So does that make me conservative?

Are we boring in bed? Hell no. Not in frequency nor variety. We're at the very top end of HD. I'm betting we've had more outdoor sex than anybody here. I don't have body fluid squemaishness, for hers or mine. I'm not repressed in any way. I view my wife as both a mother and a lover (I do think that's a hangup for many guys). I express my wants and views openly without euphanisms and can do crude, aggressive sex when my wife is getting into it. I'm open about orientation; I think being stuck in the closet would suck horribly and I would never be there myself. I want my two post pubescent daughters to be themselves. I wouldn't ever judge them about their sexual choices, to never feel they have to hide anything from me and know I that I always love them. 

So which am I? Am I banned from the sexually liberal club because of the first paragraph? Is the whole definition based on me not boning multiple women and burying my head in the sand about my wife's past?


----------



## Faithful Wife

SA....You danced around what I said without getting my point. I have felt offended by things you say, yet you didn't hear that. You tell us how offended you feel, but if we say it you can't hear that?

I don't know why you get to feel offended all the time but you can't see that you may be offending others.

I thought you actually wanted to discuss the topic openly, but it doesn't seem so. You just want to discuss your side.

Which was kind of my point to begin with about the conservative team.

But oh well. You can think what you wish. Just because you come across as judgmental doesn't mean I "don't like you", but again, think what you want. I was actually hoping you might find some compassion for those you may be offending since you are always talking about how offended you are. I do like you, but I don't get why you think this doesn't matter. Again, oh well.


----------



## larry.gray

Personal said:


> Why should one not get married if they want to? I've always done whatever I want with whomever I wanted and unsurprisingly have had a terrific marriage.


I think there are several camps here and people in one can end up painting everybody else not in theirs with the same brush.

I like to think those with mostly's view are the small minority. Vocal as heck, but a minority. As a defense mechanism against those folks, people will take the position that the past is the past I'm good there. Some go further and say 'none of your business.' I don't judge, but that's not a woman for me. The extreme opposite position is that because those that have a hangup about the past are so unreasonable, it's OK to lie. Now I have an issue. Somebody finding out their spouse lied to land them genuinely has something to be upset about. I vehemently disagree with those that defend lying. I also consider that if one person KNOWS that the other would never marry them if they knew and buries it, it is lying.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Faithful Wife said:


> I don't know how to answer you SA...you may not realize it, but you are making character judgments based on whether someone has casual sex or not.


I think you're correct. But I disagree that it's negative. I would argue that objective morality is a good thing. If one believes in the Judeo-Christian tenet of premarital sex being immoral, then it doesn't matter if the participants are really into it, or whatever else. It's just immoral, period. And that belief should be acceptable to the sex positive police.



> There is no way to judge someone's character, good or bad, based on ANY of the following:
> 
> *whether they are a virgin or not
> 
> *whether they have had a lot of sex or not
> 
> *whether they feel knowing a potential partner's sexual past is important or not
> 
> *whether someone is insecure or not


I think a more honest statement would be, "According to my values, there is no way to judge someone's character, good or bad, based on ANY of the following ..."



> But if you do feel that way, I would urge you to not judge people for the sex they have, and I won't judge people for the sex they do OR don't have.


But, as another poster pointed out, you're still judging. We all judge. You're simply upset for SA judging based on values that you don't share.

In SA's defense, while she states that she values committed sex and disagrees with promiscuity, she has never suggested that promiscuous people be jailed or wear scarlet letters. She simply acknowledges that there are pros and cons which, for her, tilt promiscuity too negatively to practice. That doesn't seem like such a sin to me.


----------



## minimalME

SimplyAmorous said:


> is there anything I can say that is acceptable?
> 
> It's almost like I have to have the same mindset ....or I am suspect to judging...
> 
> ... is this OK to speak or will this always read as Judging to others??


I've been reading your posts for a few years now - longer than my 'join' date, and I wanted you to know that I've NEVER felt judged when reading your posts. You and I may not agree, but that not a problem for me.

You have a wonderful, genuine, pure spirit in what you write. I can tell it's from your heart, and that you truly believe what you say. 

I think if others feel judged, then perhaps they need to ask _themselves_ why. I DON'T think that you should censor yourself so that others will feel better about their choices.

You are entitled to your opinions, values and beliefs. Please don't ever feel like you have to explain yourself or apologize.

Personally, I like your emoticons and wild colors and different fonts. And posting in a more 'monotone' fashion doesn't make me take you more seriously or add weight or value to what you have to say. (If I remember correctly, this has been suggested to you in the past.)

I see you as one of the most authentic, kind-hearted and gracious posters on this forum.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

I suspect that those who want to leave their past behind them and never discuss it aren't quite as proud as they claim to be.

For example, if a woman asked me about my college degree, or the time I climbed Mount Everest, or swam the English Channel, or hit the game winning home run in the World Series (some examples are hypothetical), I would happily discuss them with her. I wouldn't get upset and proclaim that she is insecure for wanting to know about my awesome accomplishments.


----------



## Faithful Wife

BronzeTorpedo said:


> In SA's defense, while she states that she values committed sex and disagrees with promiscuity, she has never suggested that promiscuous people be jailed or wear scarlet letters. She simply acknowledges that there are pros and cons which, for her, tilt promiscuity too negatively to practice. That doesn't seem like such a sin to me.


You really don't know me, nor do you know what I'm "upset" about. It is fine to defend SA, but don't tell me what I think at the same time since you don't know what I think. Which is obvious by your statement above.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Faithful Wife said:


> *SA....You danced around what I said without getting my point. I have felt offended by things you say, yet you didn't hear that. *


I most definitely hear you.. can any of us help when another doesn't like what we say... I really don't know what you expect from me FW? You're asking me to never post another thought on casual sex , when such discussions are being engaged in here ...on an open forum......so I don't offend another ?? or If I don't update my thinking to match yours ?? 



> *I don't know why you get to feel offended all the time but you can't see that you may be offending others.*


 I am speaking as openly as you are in this.. I don't see a difference...



> *I thought you actually wanted to discuss the topic openly, but it doesn't seem so. You just want to discuss your side*.


 I am not sure what you expect from me. I feel I have been open to your questions.. if I remove my feelings on it.. what would my answer really be worth, would it be from me.. or just saying what you want to hear? 



> Which was kind of my point to begin with about the conservative team.
> 
> But oh well. You can think what you wish. Just because you come across as judgmental doesn't mean I "don't like you", but again, think what you want.* I was actually hoping you might find some compassion for those you may be offending since you are always talking about how offended you are. * I do like you, but I don't get why you think this doesn't matter. Again, oh well.


I don't feel I have been rude or hurtful to anyone in how I have handled myself on this forum , or this thread..... I always answer a question when asked...nor do I think anyone should censor their feelings on it..everything can shared in a civil way -even when we don't see things the same.

We'll have to to agree to disagree then. 

But I want to say something about myself.. You don't know me in real life.. I am not this intolerant "nose in the air" person you may have painted me....there is a reason a lady from our church chose ME to open up to about being bi-sexual..do you think she would have went there if she found me the judgmental type.. ....did I break the friendship -NO.. I listened to her..I was there for her... I couldn't relate to all she struggles with but I appreciated she trusted me enough to go there with.. 

Oldest son had friend whose parents were swingers.. we didn't rip them from playing with each other or his coming to our house.. We had a guy friend who was a swinger, he was in a sexless marriage, he felt at ease speaking to us.. we didn't mock him behind his back.. we treated him as a friend. I don't appreciate being called Judgmental when I have treated various sexual views and the people who hold them - in a caring manner .... 

Here is a definition of* Judgmental *: "Judgmental is a negative word to describe someone who often rushes to judgment without reason. The adjective judgmental describes someone who forms lots of opinions — usually harsh or critical ones — about lots of people. Judgmental types are not open-minded or easygoing."

If that's how you see me.. not much I can do.. I need to stop trying to defend myself though....I still don't feel I have been hostile to anyone here. ..


----------



## NobodySpecial

SimplyAmorous said:


> It's true ..... I have strong opinions on these things...how hooking up can hurt people , affecting emotional vulnerability & bonding in future relationships.... this is not about shaming...it's about what is best for who we are, how some of us are wired.. .


I have never been super into hurt avoidance. But I am very, very good at learning from hurt. I am very grateful for the hurt which I learned from which allowed me to make smarter future decisions. Including to marry my lovely man *****.


----------



## JCD

sisters359 said:


> Tricking someone, for one's own benefit, is a form of dishonesty--and that's wrong. But that has nothing to do with a person's sexual past, except that you have linked them as though the two go together. The woman who would lie about her past to avoid getting dumped is just a liar. She'll lie about other stuff, too.


There are other issues at play here involved in this conversation.

Partner One: "So...tell me about your number."

Two: "Why?"

One: 'It's important to me. I want to see if we have compatible values."

Two: "My past is my past. It won't tell you anything anyway."

One: (joking) "So you're a virgin?"

Two: "NO! I am not going to give you the opportunity to make me feel bad about my past."

One: "Is there something you should feel bad about?"

Two: "See...you are already judging me!"

One: "So...you want me to take care of your babies, merge my bank account with yours, accept your bills and your lifestyle choices...but you aren't going to tell me anything about your history so I KNOW your lifestyle choices."

Two: "I don't think it's relevant and I won't let you shame me."

One: "So...you want to stay emotionally disconnected and you don't trust me."

Two: "I didn't say that."

One: "Yes you did."

That kind of distancing speaks volumes about trust, emotional investment and one's pride in one's acts.

It is a 'one way' trust street: "You must trust me that nothing in my past is relevant, because I don't trust you to not take advantage of that information or leave because of it without due consideration and conversation."

Not so pretty when seen in that light.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Faithful Wife said:


> You really don't know me, nor do you know what I'm "upset" about. It is fine to defend SA, but don't tell me what I think at the same time since you don't know what I think. Which is obvious by your statement above.


You're correct. I don't know you. And I'm not guessing at what you think. You've stated explicitly why you're upset. You feel negatively judged by SA's statements.

She obviously hasn't called you, or anyone else, a cumdumpster, so you're inferring her judgment based on her negative views of promiscuity. That seems too manufactured to be fair. SA's views are her own and that should be acceptable. How you choose to feel, based on the fact that someone doesn't share your values, is your own responsibility.


----------



## Faithful Wife

BronzeTorpedo said:


> You're correct. I don't know you. And I'm not guessing at what you think. You've stated explicitly why you're upset. You feel negatively judged by SA's statements.
> 
> She obviously hasn't called you, or anyone else, a cumdumpster, so you're inferring her judgment based on her negative views of promiscuity. That seems too manufactured to be fair. SA's views are her own and that should be acceptable. *How you choose to feel, based on the fact that someone doesn't share your values, is your own responsibility.*


So it is ok for SA to talk about how offended she is by how others feel and what they say, but it is not ok to tell SA that she may be offending others in the way she says things. 

Once again to make sure I have it...She can be offended by others views, but others cannot be offended by her views.

Got it. Thanks.


----------



## Faithful Wife

SimplyAmorous said:


> I most definitely hear you.. can any of us help when another doesn't like what we say... I really don't know what you expect from me FW? You're asking me to never post another thought on casual sex , when such discussions are being engaged in here ...on an open forum......so I don't offend another ?? or If I don't update my thinking to match yours ??
> 
> I am speaking as openly as you are in this.. I don't see a difference...


The difference is that even though I don't have the same lifestyle and choices you have, I uphold yours and think it is lovely. You cannot do the same for me.

Never said you should "never post another thought on casual sex".

Never said your "thinking has to match mine".


----------



## NobodySpecial

BronzeTorpedo said:


> You're correct. I don't know you. And I'm not guessing at what you think. You've stated explicitly why you're upset. You feel negatively judged by SA's statements.
> 
> She obviously hasn't called you, or anyone else, a cumdumpster, so you're inferring her judgment based on her negative views of promiscuity. That seems too manufactured to be fair. SA's views are her own and that should be acceptable. How you choose to feel, based on the fact that someone doesn't share your values, is your own responsibility.


I remember once upon a time when I was a UU my Mom saying people who are UUs are immoral and evil. When I called her on it, she said, I never called you immoral and evil. Mom, I was UU at the time. Yes you were.


----------



## sisters359

I am sorry, Wolf, for your loss--I cannot even begin to imagine. 

There is a huge difference between making the observation that someone seems "insecure," vs. labeling someone a c-dumpster. Many times, posters demonstrate behaviors that lead others to think "oh, this person has significant insecurities." The OP may not even be aware of it. This isn't name-calling or making a value-laden judgment. A lot of people are not even aware of their own insecurities, and having someone point it out to them might be helpful.

Now, if you think someone is sleeping around b/c they lack self-esteem (and you draw the conclusion not just b/c they are sleeping around, but b/c of the whole of what they have to say), and you say that, it's helpful--and maybe true. Calling someone a c-dumpster is completely the opposite.

If someone on here calls me a name, I ignore it. If they point out an issue I might have, I'll give it some serious thought. I am free to take or dismiss whatever is posted. I try to be thoughtful and to say "You seem insecure. . ." but I'm sure there have been times I was less than diplomatic. Still, name calling is always a cheap shot, and as far as I know, I've never done it. I try to fight fair!


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Faithful Wife said:


> So it is ok for SA to talk about how offended she is by how others feel and what they say, but it is not ok to tell SA that she may be offending others in the way she says things.
> 
> Once again to make sure I have it...She can be offended by others views, but others cannot be offended by her views.
> 
> Got it. Thanks.


Not exactly. If SA claimed that promiscuous women are damaged cumdumpsters with daddy issues, then that would be offensive. Her claiming that promiscuity has negative consequences that caused her to eschew that lifestyle isn't offensive, unless you're determined to interpret it as such.

And, conversely, claiming that promiscuity has been positive for you is simply a statement of your values and experience. But claiming that people who don't share your values are just insecure is more offensive and simply intended to shut them up.

Got it?


----------



## Faithful Wife

BronzeTorpedo said:


> And, conversely, claiming that promiscuity has been positive for you is simply a statement of your values and experience. *But claiming that people who don't share your values are just insecure is more offensive and simply intended to shut them up.*


Except that I don't claim that people who don't share my values are insecure, and please feel free to scour any and all of my posts anywhere....you will never find me saying anything like that. That is my point.

I can appreciate her values. She cannot appreciate mine. It is fine to say out loud what our values are, but I don't see why we have to put down the values of others.

Again feel free to find where I have put down the values of anyone, ever on this forum. You may have me confused with some other posters.

I have also never claimed that "promiscuity has been positive for me" or anyone else. This is something SA thinks I have said but I have not. Since I don't judge people as "promiscuous" simply because they have sex with more than one person in their lifetime.


----------



## BradWesley

Faithful Wife said:


> Except that I don't claim that people who don't share my values are insecure, and please feel free to scour any and all of my posts anywhere....you will never find me saying anything like that. That is my point.
> 
> I can appreciate her values. She cannot appreciate mine. It is fine to say out loud what our values are, but I don't see why we have to put down the values of others.
> 
> Again feel free to find where I have put down the values of anyone, ever on this forum. You may have me confused with some other posters.
> 
> I have also never claimed that "promiscuity has been positive for me" or anyone else. This is something SA thinks I have said but I have not. Since I don't judge people as "promiscuous" simply because they have sex with more than one person in their lifetime.


FW - I agree with most of what you have said. 

TAM is a very conservative website. Many here, when they post about morals, values, sexuality and ethics, those posts are driven by religious beliefs and convictions. Another poster mentioned to you that he didn't see it as conservative. He wouldn't, as he shares those same beliefs, and in his mind that's not conservative.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Faithful Wife said:


> So* it is ok for SA to talk about how offended she is by how others feel and what they say, but it is not ok to tell SA that she may be offending others in the way she says things.
> 
> Once again to make sure I have it...She can be offended by others views, but others cannot be offended by her views.
> Got it. Thanks.
> *


I think it's natural and normal for any of us to feel offended... when we feel a "slight" -shows we have a pulse....only the very cold are numb to it.... it's what we do with it ...rarely will we change another person's view.. we may be able to find some common ground though...(if we keep talking)

When you 1st landed here ...that ALPHA marriage thread you did... I was seriously irritated... felt this RISE under me with how you were mocking BETA traits in sharing how Alpha your husband is , always has been..... I took your word at face value that he's loved & chased after like that... but I had to point out that your husband has GOOD BETA.. and this is also why you LOVE and adore him.... that it shouldn't be mocked.. I was hot under the collar writing that.. 

I have to say.. I was impressed by your NOT getting offended at me for speaking out as I did ! You took it all in stride.. you're not normally one who even gets offended FW....I've noticed a # of times you going on how you don't care what anyone thinks... a "this is who I am.. hear me roar" attitude. 

I am the pu$$ycat who probably cares more than I should.. My H has to give me some "back talk" on this at times .. how stupid it all is.. that "life is good....get a grip woman!"



> The difference is that even though I don't have the same lifestyle and choices you have, I uphold yours and think it is lovely. *You cannot do the same for me.*
> 
> Never said you should "never post another thought on casual sex".
> 
> Never said your "thinking has to match mine".


I appreciate your clarifying that.. I wouldn't have guessed it at all.. It sounded it had all to do with my mentioning the casual .... offering discussions about it, dealing with our young people.....with hormonal findings affecting the emotional.. You know I like to read how hormones mess with our minds..(as they sure affected ME years ago-in some unexpected ways -I was wondering if I had a darn sex addiction suddenly!)...... it's all very fascinating to me.. 

Had I felt LIKE THAT when I was younger...and single... I might have knocked a few guys down and taken them! I had a whole new appreciation for being insane drive ! 

You say I can't do the same for you.. You have a success story ... I give you kudos...WELL DONE !...2 strong willed ALPHA's -with those volatile tempers in conflict.. ..I'd like to be Fly on the wall !! And here you are ... another Happy couple on TAM.. you've done WELL for yourself....it sounds we have more in common today -in how we look at LOVE than probably many posters here even.. we both do the Radical Honesty thing.. 

Also impressed how you've used "Marriage Builders" , such an authority on it when you 1st came here ....(this website being ran by a christian author no less)..... you have much MORE to offer here over me.. who's just lived a simple life... from the varied experiences, and what you've overcome in spite of them....so don't think I would ever see you in some lessor anything...it's just not so.. Happy marriages are not easy to come by.. I'm happy you're here & sharing .. You bring a unique -yes wilder view.. but I love the honesty in it.. 



> *Since I don't judge people as "promiscuous" simply because they have sex with more than one person in their lifetime.*


 I don't think even 5% of posters here would feel this way.. .only those who hold a covenant view of sexuality (strict faith based)... I don't even use the word promiscuity on here.. I am far more inclined to offer the Romantic sexual view as trying to explain where some of us are coming from...when I read that in the book I have, it's like the author captured my deepest feelings on this.. spilling it out on the page.... It was an "awe" moment ...

But even with THAT view...not everything works out- people break up, move on to another... but at the time.. there was trust & exclusivity going forth.... that's all.



> *Faithful Wife said*: *I have also never claimed that "promiscuity has been positive for me" or anyone else. This is something SA thinks I have said but I have not. *


Yes.. this is true.. I have assumed this.. even if you have not spoken it outright....probably has to do with reading articles written from the empowerment perspective..they also report women who are educated and smarter have more casual sex and are loving it.. I try to read both sides..


----------



## Wolf1974

sisters359 said:


> I am sorry, Wolf, for your loss--I cannot even begin to imagine.
> 
> There is a huge difference between making the observation that someone seems "insecure," vs. labeling someone a c-dumpster. Many times, posters demonstrate behaviors that lead others to think "oh, this person has significant insecurities." The OP may not even be aware of it. This isn't name-calling or making a value-laden judgment. A lot of people are not even aware of their own insecurities, and having someone point it out to them might be helpful.
> 
> Now, if you think someone is sleeping around b/c they lack self-esteem (and you draw the conclusion not just b/c they are sleeping around, but b/c of the whole of what they have to say), and you say that, it's helpful--and maybe true. Calling someone a c-dumpster is completely the opposite.
> 
> If someone on here calls me a name, I ignore it. If they point out an issue I might have, I'll give it some serious thought. I am free to take or dismiss whatever is posted. I try to be thoughtful and to say "You seem insecure. . ." but I'm sure there have been times I was less than diplomatic. Still, name calling is always a cheap shot, and as far as I know, I've never done it. I try to fight fair!


If that's the way you see it then that's ok for you. It's not the way I see it. I see all dismissal and belittling statments the same... As belittling and dismissing. I don't assign a number value to which be more insulting and which are less. If you choose to you can. But I dont. 

I don't have insecurities about my views on life. My views didn't come quickly or without thought and I am comfortable with who I am. At the same time Im fine with how others choose to live their lives but reserve the right to say that's not compatable with mine either. When called insecure it was an insult to who I am . Being called a cum dumpster is the same thing. You are either supportive of other people's positions in life or not. and when you get insulted for having an opinion or life style choice it certainly can be upsetting. So again I don't assign which insults are better or worse. They are all the same to me


----------



## Wolf1974

BradWesley said:


> FW - I agree with most of what you have said.
> 
> TAM is a very conservative website. Many here, when they post about morals, values, sexuality and ethics, those posts are driven by religious beliefs and convictions. Another poster mentioned to you that he didn't see it as conservative. He wouldn't, as he shares those same beliefs, and in his mind that's not conservative.


I agree we all come from a background and have opinions that shape our view of how we see things. I don't consider this place conservative by any stretch lol. But I have my view of it and FW has hers. One of the things I really do like about here is different views. This topic in particular. I consider myself a fairly open guy to differnt thoughts and ideas. I have friends from all cultures and backgrounds. But never knew anyone had problems with discussions like this until I came here so it was eye opening to learn some don't care about this stuff. I don't know that I ever would have known that unless I was here 

As one point of clarity though I'm atheist and almost to the point of anti religion. So none of my view points are based upon that


----------



## sidney2718

Wolf1974 said:


> And honestly , and I have said this is the past, it's not the number of partners or things that have or haven't been done sexually. I have very few hard and fast 100% deal breakers. But one I do have is someone who considers a subject taboo to talk about between spouses. The ability to talk about something is more important to me than the outcome of that converstaion in many cases. True I may be a bit alone in that stance but communication is and always will be a big thing for me.


I totally agree that communication is among the most important things in a relationship. And as for deal breakers, every situation is different, every couple is different, and everything requires different considerations.


----------



## RoseAglow

I am a poster who had no idea that these kinds of conversations ever happened. In all my dating history and my marriage, not one man has ever asked for details about my sexual past. No one has ever asked me for a number or even a ball-park number. 

I would not have been attracted to, or or attractive for, a guy for whom this was important. There have been several male posters who also indicated that they never would have thought to ask, so I think I'm more in their forests so to speak.

Here:



JCD said:


> There are other issues at play here involved in this conversation.
> 
> Partner One: "So...tell me about your number."
> 
> Two: "Why?"
> 
> One: 'It's important to me. I want to see if we have compatible values."


is where it would have ended if I were Two. I might have played along a little further if we were out to dinner or someplace without an easy exit. I might have gotten into:

Two: "The number is an interesting metric. What information are you looking to get from it? What do you want to know?"

But really, the fact that the question was asked would tell me all I needed to know. 

The answer is *"I am glad you brought it up since it is important to you. It's not important to me, so I think our values here are not in alignment. No harm, no foul. Take care."*

In no circumstance would I ever get into a conversation like the one below. I wouldn't provide the number because I'd already seen that this person was not going to be in my future. A person asking this question is asking to judge whether or not the values are compatible, so it would not be a surprise, and I am not ashamed of my sexual past, someone asking about it wouldn't successfully "shame" me for it.



> One: (joking) "So you're a virgin?"
> 
> Two: "NO! I am not going to give you the opportunity to make me feel bad about my past."
> 
> One: "Is there something you should feel bad about?"
> 
> Two: "See...you are already judging me!"
> 
> One: "So...you want me to take care of your babies, merge my bank account with yours, accept your bills and your lifestyle choices...but you aren't going to tell me anything about your history so I KNOW your lifestyle choices."
> 
> Two: "I don't think it's relevant and I won't let you shame me."
> 
> One: "So...you want to stay emotionally disconnected and you don't trust me."
> 
> Two: "I didn't say that."
> 
> One: "Yes you did."




It's really painful to read that second exchange. 

Since there are a zillion types of people on the planet, then I guess that kind of conversation could take place. It doesn't need to, though. In the same way that I could tell someone was not compatible by the question being asked, Number One above could have picked up right away that Number Two was not compatible by the answers. 

The rest of the conversation past the first line of questioning is just pushing Two to divulge something that s/he is clearly not comfortable answering, putting words in his/her mouth. It's not pretty at all.



> That kind of distancing speaks volumes about trust, emotional investment and one's pride in one's acts.
> 
> It is a 'one way' trust street: "You must trust me that nothing in my past is relevant, because I don't trust you to not take advantage of that information or leave because of it without due consideration and conversation."
> 
> Not so pretty when seen in that light.


For me, it wouldn't say anything about trust, or emotional investment, or pride in one's acts. 

Not everyone believes that the number of sexual partners is a important indicator of their lifestyle, or that it is relevant. The people who tend to believe that is it an important indicator are people with a high value on sexual purity/few partners- there is nothing wrong with that value. It's just not the belief for everyone. 

If it's important to know, then by all means ask; if someone resists, you already know that the person is not for you. There are plenty of people who will have the same value alignment. 

Over here in my tree, I and the guys I dated/got in long-term relationships/married, well, we just hung out together, and this let us know if we were compatible. I was interested in their past and vice versa- have you been in love before? What is your family like? What are your favorite escapades that you've gotten yourself into and out of? What do you want to do with your life? etc. We found out if our lifestyles were compatible by building a lifestyle together. We figured out if we were sexually compatible by our experiences together.

Since none of us held sexual purity at high value, it never came into play. It was never a question, or at least it was never a question anyone asked me.

If I was deeply involved with someone and he wanted to know, I would tell him. I would tell my husband anything he wanted to know-- that is our deal, our agreement. It's just that the people with whom I am most compatible probably wouldn't even think to ask. It's a non-issue. That has been the case to date for me. 

I've even asked my husband if he wanted to know and he just laughed and said, "Rose, I really don't care how many people you've slept with, I only care that I'm the last one."

But, that is me and my husband. To each their own.


----------



## southbound

Faithful Wife said:


> I don't know how to answer you SA...you may not realize it, but you are making character judgments based on whether someone has casual sex or not.
> 
> There is no way to judge someone's character, good or bad, based on ANY of the following:
> 
> *whether they are a virgin or not
> 
> *whether they have had a lot of sex or not
> 
> *whether they feel knowing a potential partner's sexual past is important or not
> 
> *whether someone is insecure or not
> 
> So anytime we are talking about casual sex OR waiting for marriage, I hear you implying that casual sex either includes or causes character defects, and I just don't think that is true or fair.


I looked up "character" to see if there was something I misunderstood. This is a definition i found:

1. the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual.
"running away was not in keeping with her character"
synonyms:	personality, nature, disposition, temperament, temper, mentality, makeup;

With that said, I think anything any of us does can play into our character. I guess it's just a matter of what type of character we like.

As for judging, we've had threads on this before, and my view is this: It seems like these days that people want to say "judging" is a terrible thing, but why? How does anybody not judge something? We make judgements about things everyday, and I'm sure that includes people.

Human beings having an idea of what they think is right or wrong and good or bad is nothing new; I assumed we all had our own moral code, and how do we guide ourselves without judging actions that we are aware of? I haven't quite bought into this modern view of just "anything goes".

As for judging, I admit that I make judgements; I didn't realize that was weird until the last few years, but why should anyone care if I judge them? I'm not God. My judgement isn't going to keep you out of Heaven. I'm not a court judge either, so my judgement isn't going to send you to jail. And I assure you I'm not going to try to run you out of town, so why should people care if others judge them. People don't seem to mind positive judgements. 

Isn't going to the point of bringing it to someone's attention that they judge a judgement within itself. Aren't you trying to correct SA's way of commenting? Isn't it saying, "you shouldn't do that, shame on you?"




Faithful Wife said:


> I am just pointing out that technically, you DO diss my choices in life. And it gets hard to hear it over and over in your posts. I'm not saying you are directing anything at me. But when you talk about all the issues and problems with casual sex or going from guy to guy and having sex with a bunch of them...how am I not supposed to feel that this applies to me too since I have had plenty of sex with plenty of people?


I thought there could be issues and problems with casual sex and going from person to person. There is a sex education class at our middle and high school that talks about those issues, and not just because of one's youth. Are they giving false information? I didn't think so, but what do I know.


----------



## JCD

Rose Aglow

I agree that with the first exchange, the relationship is over. It continued just to provide some definition. It is a hypothetical of two people who just 'hung around' and were thinking very seriously of taking it to the next level...but the next level starts getting into higher levels of emotional intimacy.

And for partner one, emotional intimacy involves knowing if he or she is going to be bushwhacked by the other partners' sexual past. We have had enough threads of people being in just that situation that you can't just wave your hands and say 'no, that doesn't happen'. It does. We've seen it.

The people who espouse the 'past privacy act' generally seem pretty defensive. I certainly grant that these people have legitimate concerns. These conversations tend to happen somewhat early in a relationship because they are important to one of the people and who wants to be excoriated or backhandedly insulted by someone they open up to? (Granted, they also tend to be very sensitive on this topic so the mildest of disagreements becomes 'slvt shaming' in their eyes quickly)

Because at the end of the day, their principle is this: I don't owe you truth and I don't owe you trust in whatever matter I decide. I am in charge of this relationship and I will make the decisions about my life and past and will not trust you to accept ALL of me.

Now, here is the thing: You gave your hubby the opportunity. You actually trusted him enough to get inside, even though that violated your belief. Because for whatever reason, you felt you owed him that opportunity and courtesy.

So well done! While this may be a principle of yours, you had enough love trust and respect for your husband to go there.

So this conversation really doesn't apply to your situation.


----------



## Threetimesalady

SimplyAmorous said:


> I never mentioned anything about waiting till marriage.... I mentioned age 18 .... everyone is always reminding people to not marry young as we aren't mature till mid /late 20's.... yet it's judgmental of me to suggest our young people should wait to have sex till they are 18... is there anything I can say that is acceptable?
> 
> It's almost like I have to have the same mindset ....or I am suspect to judging...
> 
> I feel as Wolf said in his post (as does my H).... "I hold myself to a standard and if I want to share my life with someone then I want them to have the same standard and same outlook. So when I say I wouldn't be with a woman who treats sex casually it's not a one way street. I also don't treat sex casually. much like a political or religious view I just want us to be on the same page about it as all."... is this OK to speak or will this always read as Judging to others??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I appreciate your giving me the benefit of the doubt.. trying to understand where I came from...I have memories that children should not have been exposed to....my life hasn't always been daisies...
> 
> I probably had some abandonment issues even... I did the best I could .. as I am sure you did as well.. in trying to live in a way to find happiness one day...and love...
> 
> Oh I agree... though it would make sense for those who did get off easier who would be more addicted to the hormonal highs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well the article resonates with me a great deal.. I can easily attest to being the attacher type...even with one time.. but that's how I view sex.. and it would hurt very very VERY much ...if the man just walked away.. I can only speak for myself..


SA, I think your posts are so right about young people having sex at 18....But, I also wish for world peace...They (especially this new group of younger generation kids) have their own ideas...Then add to this they have the Internet, movies and a new code of morality...Already when mine were young there really was no controlling them..Then I wonder if it's right to inform them of this thought and then have a girl get pregnant rather than trust their parent to help...I would have listened...But then I didn't lose weight until I was near 19 and then the s*** hit the fan...I became this attractive woman in a child's body and along the way paid a price for my actions...

I agree with your thoughts...yet question how we can't change what we can't change...Yet I am aware that this life and I, like many older people, have to accept it...

I believe that I, even if living in this new spicy, sex hungry world, would still put the brakes on as far as allowing full sexual intercourse before marriage...This for one reason and one reason only...That being I think I'm special and someone has to deserve me...Sounds corny, but this is who I am...and probably why I'm here and have not run for the hills...

My best to you and your lovely family...Caroline...


----------



## Tubbalard

I usually find men that don't ask are men that allow women to control them or generally are not good at picking women. Or their past is wild and they just don't ask in hopes of the female not asking them.

Most likely the case is that women are picking up on men who probably won't ask or that is okay with their lifestyle. Women are good at sniffing men out, who are apt to follow their scent so to speak.

I've asked every woman that I was in a relationship and everyone has given me an answer. 

People that know each other's past usually have longer and more fulfilling marriages. The one's that don't usually end up in Coping with infidelity or been in multiple marriages. Reason being, people don't take the time to develop a relationship. They just hop and skip into marriage without doing their due diligence. Manage your marriage like your money.


----------



## JCD

Tubbalard said:


> I usually find men that don't ask are men that allow women to control them or generally are not good at picking women. Or their past is wild and they just don't ask in hopes of the female not asking them.


I can actually think of a bunch of other reasons why men don't ask:

1) He is so sexually confident that he can't imagine that ANY woman would ever cheat on him (Alpha Ass)

2) He feels (correctly or incorrectly) that she is outside of his league and so this is a price he has to pay to get her.

2a) OR...that he figures this is a deal breaker for her, and he already finds himself emotionally invested in her that he has to suck it up *whatever his true feelings on the issue* and accept this is a taboo topic. This is exactly the sort of absolutism that the women who hold these views would never accept themselves, in many cases. 

3) While he is happy to marry her as a transactional benefit, he is emotionally distant enough that he really doesn't care about her past...despite his protestations of love and adoration. 

4) He doesn't ask because he has enough skeletons in his closet that he doesn't dare open that door because questions go both ways...

5) They have been in the same circles for a long time and he already knows.



> People that know each other's past usually have longer and more fulfilling marriages. The one's that don't usually end up in Coping with infidelity or been in multiple marriages. Reason being, people don't take the time to develop a relationship. They just hop and skip into marriage without doing their due diligence. Manage your marriage like your money.


Hmm. I've been married two decades and we didn't do 'due diligence'. Guess what? Yeah, it made it harder at times, but it also wasn't a necessity.

While I like to think you are right, you really don't have any evidence backing this up as far as I can see.


----------



## Mostlycontent

larry.gray said:


> I think there are several camps here and people in one can end up painting everybody else not in theirs with the same brush.
> 
> I like to think those with mostly's view are the small minority. Vocal as heck, but a minority. As a defense mechanism against those folks, people will take the position that the past is the past I'm good there. Some go further and say 'none of your business.' I don't judge, but that's not a woman for me. The extreme opposite position is that because those that have a hangup about the past are so unreasonable, it's OK to lie. Now I have an issue. Somebody finding out their spouse lied to land them genuinely has something to be upset about. I vehemently disagree with those that defend lying. I also consider that if one person KNOWS that the other would never marry them if they knew and buries it, it is lying.



I think you would be surprised at how many people share my views on this subject. It's usually folks with strong convictions, many based on faith, who aren't afraid to speak the truth. So many people here dance around the truth for fear of being shouted down.

I know what's right and will never back down from saying it. There is moral right and wrong and those that deny that only do so for their own sexual freedom, or sin, if you will.

As to your other points, I completely agree. Lying is never the solution for anything and if someone asks, a straightforward and honest answer should be given. Conversely, if the past is not important to someone, I'm fine with that as well.

In my view, things in the past, whether it be past relationships or other troublesome behaviors, always seem to surface throughout a long term relationship. I just think it best to be upfront with people and not blindside anyone, particularly a spouse, with something you may have purposely concealed.


----------



## Mostlycontent

Tubbalard said:


> I usually find men that don't ask are men that allow women to control them or generally are not good at picking women. Or their past is wild and they just don't ask in hopes of the female not asking them.
> 
> Most likely the case is that women are picking up on men who probably won't ask or that is okay with their lifestyle. Women are good at sniffing men out, who are apt to follow their scent so to speak.
> 
> I've asked every woman that I was in a relationship and everyone has given me an answer.
> 
> People that know each other's past usually have longer and more fulfilling marriages. The one's that don't usually end up in Coping with infidelity or been in multiple marriages. Reason being, people don't take the time to develop a relationship. They just hop and skip into marriage without doing their due diligence. Manage your marriage like your money.



I tend to agree with this line of thinking. I had a rather storied past, or as storied as one could be at 23. I was an athlete in college though and had more than my fair share but I was strong willed and knew what I wanted. 

Interestingly, my wife, then girlfriend, was the only woman I had ever asked about previous relationships. I remember telling her that she should have been flattered about it. The other relationships I had had prior to her were obviously not very important to me.


----------



## soccermom2three

I don't understand how a new partner knowing every who, how, what, when and where of my sexual past = emotional connection. I don't want or care about his past. I just don't want those images in my brain. I just think these questions are creepy or voyeuristic.


----------



## southbound

soccermom2three said:


> I don't understand how a new partner knowing every who, how, what, when and where of my sexual past = emotional connection. I don't want or care about his past. I just don't want those images in my brain. I just think these questions are creepy or voyeuristic.


I suppose it's like everything else; to each his own. I think some other posters have given very good reasons as to why they would want to know, but it's obviously not your thing. Some have expressed that they didn't know conversations like this existed, while others weren't aware they didn't exist. Sexual personality is an important thing to some people, while to others it's not. I just don't see how it couldn't come up if two people are close.


----------



## sisters359

samyeagar said:


> That was exactly the reason behind her actions, though she did seek out her ex husband for sex as far out as two years after their divorce, so that does kind of belie the motivations a bit. I have largely accepted her way of initiating as it does fit her default personality.
> 
> Taking a step back however to a more general thought that active pursuit indicates desire...be it going out and getting a pizza because you're hungry, or a earning college degree because you want to earn more money. In the above examples regarding my wife, she is no different. Misguided as they were to us on the outside, she had a desire, set goals and made plans to achieve those goals, and took action to to carry out those plans to achieve those goals. I don't think it is an unreasonable goal for her to show me her desire in a more active way, any more than it would unreasonable if she came up to me and said she wanted to feel more appreciated.


You are making a huge assumption that she was driven by sexual desire. I don't see sexual desire in her behaviors at all. If you know for a fact that she was so horny she did these things, then ok. But her behaviors scream out an emotional or mental dependency that was pretty severe--the lengths she went to seem to have little to do with simply wanting to have sex and a lot more to do with obsessive need. She did things to keep that man attached to her, and she seems to have used her body to do it. 

As always, this is meant to be an observation based on what the described behaviors seem to suggest. YMMV


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Mostlycontent said:


> I tend to agree with this line of thinking. I had a rather storied past, or as storied as one could be at 23. * I was an athlete in college though and had more than my fair share but I was strong willed and knew what I wanted.
> *
> Interestingly, my wife, then girlfriend, was the only woman I had ever asked about previous relationships. I remember telling her that she should have been flattered about it. * The other relationships I had had prior to her were obviously not very important to me.*


 This here ^^^ is one of the reasons I find it so sad / almost repulsive to the thought... to give yourself to someone who -just doesn't care.. or maybe I am just awfully VAIN.. but I want to be *THE SPECIAL ONE*, the girl of HIS dreams he can't get off his mind.. THE ONE he would do anything for..... I want it to BE memorable in every way.. 

I DON'T want to be the Girl who didn't matter , who wasn't good enough ... so easily forgotten... like Personal mentioned ... he doesn't even remember their names!!....(I do not revolve in this world view, can't comprehend it)....maybe those women didn't care either.. (hopefully they didn't , they just wanted a good fu**king)...but still ..I don't like that at all.. It's cringe worthy to me.. and I'd regret it something fierce!!! ......Better to get yourself off with a hot fantasy while waiting for someone who is REALLY INTO YOU, wants YOU & only you.. 



> *Mostlycontent said*:* I think you would be surprised at how many people share my views on this subject. It's usually folks with strong convictions, many based on faith, who aren't afraid to speak the truth. So many people here dance around the truth for fear of being shouted down.*


 My H has never been a religious man ... though his thoughts on this is as Rose Aglow spoke...he places a higher value on sexual purity /fewer partners ...(purity may not be the right word, but emotional connection / deep bonding IS).....at least she didn't call it stupid or foolish but said "there is nothing wrong with that value"... she speaks this even though she doesn't understand it or care about it in the least way.. 

I think what we all want to hear from the other side is some tolerance that our differences don't make us Bad people , foolish or Judgmental.... 



> *Personal said*: *The sad thing is, there have been plenty of posters here on TAM that have had miserable marital relationships with people that have had either no sexual past or a very limited past. So evidently picking someone on that criteria alone is unlikely to guarantee marital success.*


 No, it should never be alone...compatibility in a # of areas is essential for a smoother long term ride.. areas like money (HUGE!)....High drive/ Low drive (this could = misery , resentment with it all going to hell if overlooked).... communication/ conflict styles , Love languages, kids or no kids, traditional lifestyle vs modern, even transparency is a huge compatibility issue that can KILL a marriage... 



> *Threetimesalady said*: *SA, I think your posts are so right about young people having sex at 18....But, I also wish for world peace...They (especially this new group of younger generation kids) have their own ideas...Then add to this they have the Internet, movies and a new code of morality...Already when mine were young there really was no controlling them..Then I wonder if it's right to inform them of this thought and then have a girl get pregnant rather than trust their parent to help...I would have listened....*


 Well ...you know.. we're all speaking out of our own experiences ....

Myself & H did contain ourselves when we met - for his to not stick it in... Oh it wasn't easy... I remember every fiber of my body wanting to ....like "OMG how in the world are we NOT going to go there!!".... but ya know.. we had our hands.. ...we were satisfied.. once you go over that threshold.. all the way.. there is no going back! 

Had I not met him when I did...I would have likely been dumped by this guy, the next guy, another... and my life would have been very different ... I probably wouldn't be here annoying all of TAM with my sexual views. I'd have a slew of sh** stories to tell how all men suck and they dumped me .. and I hate men.. and Love is fool's game...I might even be a radical feminist on top of it all.. Who knows. 

Our 1st 3 sons are very gentlemanly...more like their dad... not the Playboy type at all.. maybe it's just cause they have our Genes flowing through their veins...we've always been very open about sex, Love, Life, ethics -all of it...anything controversial.. we've probably discussed it openly in our house.. I want them to see ALL sides.. the good, the bad.. weigh it.. we encourage them to seek out the best for them...but KNOW the consequences at the same time... being responsible is #1.. 



> *I agree with your thoughts...yet question how we can't change what we can't change...Yet I am aware that this life and I, like many older people, have to accept it.*..


 I was influenced by people in my life when growing up.. my Grandmother next door, books I read, what I learned in Youth group, and how I didn't want my life to go, mothers example, also seeing friends pregnant in high school/ the guy vanish, the aftermath....... 

I want to believe we can have some influence on others.... in how we live, if we planted seeds of wisdom in them... if they respect us of course..



> I believe that I, even if living in this new spicy, sex hungry world, would still put the brakes on as far as allowing full sexual intercourse before marriage...*This for one reason and one reason only...That being I think I'm special and someone has to deserve me...Sounds corny, but this is who I am...and probably why I'm here and have not run for the hills*...


 NOT CORNY at all...


----------



## SimplyAmorous

sisters359 said:


> You are making a huge assumption that she was driven by sexual desire. I don't see sexual desire in her behaviors at all. If you know for a fact that she was so horny she did these things, then ok. But *her behaviors scream out an emotional or mental dependency that was pretty severe--the lengths she went to seem to have little to do with simply wanting to have sex and a lot more to do with obsessive need. She did things to keep that man attached to her, and she seems to have used her body to do it. *
> 
> As always, this is meant to be an observation based on what the described behaviors seem to suggest. YMMV


I think you are right about this.. having heard her story ...this guy was rotten.. but she held on to him for dear life..it's not something I personally understand ... ..she didn't even orgasm with her ex husband.... so she's told SAM.. so it was something else -besides Pleasurable desire / lustful satisfaction...


----------



## southbound

SimplyAmorous said:


> This here ^^^ is one of the reasons I find it so sad / almost repulsive to the thought... to give yourself to someone who -just doesn't care.. or maybe I am just awfully VAIN.. but I want to be *THE SPECIAL ONE*, the girl of HIS dreams he can't get off his mind.. THE ONE he would do anything for..... I want it to BE memorable in every way..
> 
> I DON'T want to be the Girl who didn't matter , who wasn't good enough ... so easily forgotten... like Personal mentioned ... he doesn't even remember their names!!....(I do not revolve in this world view, can't comprehend it)....maybe those women didn't care either.. (hopefully they didn't , they just wanted a good fu**king)...but still ..I don't like that at all.. It's cringe worthy to me.. and I'd regret it something fierce!!! ......Better to get yourself off with a hot fantasy while waiting for someone who is REALLY INTO YOU, wants YOU & only you..


Good post. I've known many people in my life with similar views. I assume you wouldn't want a potential partner to have lived like this previously; I think your view makes perfect sense. I'm sure we wonder why people would want to live like that anyway, just being another number, or barely that. 

Some people still hold sex as a sacred thing, and would like to be with someone who feels the same.


----------



## Thundarr

IRL there's a lot more tolerance for differing opinions of past and what it means to people than suggested in this thread.

What's rare?
1: Two people who love each other have a discussion, the past comes up , and it ends the relationship in it's tracks. No that isn't common. 

2: Two people who love each other have a discussion, one asks about past and the other is so offended that it stops things in their tracks. No that isn't common.

What's common?
Now philosophical, what if, scenarios are debated like crazy. I suggest that most of us don't know how we would react given a different set of circumstances so temper the mud slinging and passive aggressive jabs. It's not so hard to let others have differing views without feeling judged and without judging them.


----------



## NobodySpecial

southbound said:


> Good post. I've known many people in my life with similar views. I assume you wouldn't want a potential partner to have lived like this previously; I think your view makes perfect sense. I'm sure we wonder why people would want to live like that anyway, just being another number, or barely that.


Why would you think that they were just another number? When you don't value sexual purity, that does not mean that there is any value in achieving a high number of partners. It is not like we think, sh!t I have not achieved 20 yet. Hey 20, wanna get busy? Every one of my experiences were meaningful for me in some way. Some were learning experiences. Some were loving experiences if not forever experiences. Some were mutual fun.

For me, the fact that my husband never asked because he just did not care was part of why he was so perfect for me. He had no mind movies because it was not important to him.


----------



## Tubbalard

soccermom2three said:


> I don't understand how a new partner knowing every who, how, what, when and where of my sexual past = emotional connection. I don't want or care about his past. I just don't want those images in my brain. I just think these questions are creepy or voyeuristic.




I don't think anyone here is arguing who, what, when, where, why, how? I think its a little bit of a straw man youre putting up. People are saying they want to know a general figure, or some insight to your sexual pasts for compatibility reasons. Details aren't necessary and asking for details can come can off pushy and condemning. 

Do you not want to know anything about a person's past? Or does it just pertain to sexual history? Would you not care if he was a rapist? Woman Beater? Pegging recipient? Ex con? How do you not want to know anything about a person's past?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## southbound

NobodySpecial said:


> Why would you think that they were just another number? When you don't value sexual purity, that does not mean that there is any value in achieving a high number of partners. It is not like we think, sh!t I have not achieved 20 yet. Hey 20, wanna get busy? Every one of my experiences were meaningful for me in some way. Some were learning experiences. Some were loving experiences if not forever experiences. Some were mutual fun.
> 
> For me, the fact that my husband never asked because he just did not care was part of why he was so perfect for me. He had no mind movies because it was not important to him.


"Just another number" was just my way of phrasing it, but the poster I quoted said: "The other relationships I had had prior to her were obviously not very important to me."

Apparently he had had an active sexual life at age 23, but none of them meant anything until his wife. If all yours were meaningful, that's great, but it doesn't sound like this person's past relationships were. 

In talking with some women during my life, I think this is why many wait for that special one; they don't want to be one that "wasn't very important" to someone. Apparently that doesn't matter to some, but those two schools of thought may not always go together well in a relationship.


----------



## NobodySpecial

southbound said:


> "Just another number" was just my way of phrasing it, but the poster I quoted said: "The other relationships I had had prior to her were obviously not very important to me."
> 
> Apparently he had had an active sexual life at age 23, but none of them meant anything until his wife. If all yours were meaningful, that's great, but it doesn't sound like this person's past relationships were.
> 
> In talking with some women during my life, I think this is why many wait for that special one; they don't want to be one that "wasn't very important" to someone. Apparently that doesn't matter to some, but those two schools of thought may not always go together well in a relationship.


I clearly lost the thread. Thanks for clarifying. I do not feel the way that poster did. Nor do I care that I am not forever to someone. Different strokes.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Lila said:


> *Why would you think your future would have been so grim had you not met your H when you did?*​


I did not have a lot of faith in men when I was younger....just seen too many things..UGLY THINGS.....I witnessed a lot of drama/ heartbreak that my GF's went through with guys....

Coming from where I came from... I've always felt HE kinda "saved me".. thinking about it though....there was 2 other VERY NICE boys who REALLY liked me back then.....that I could have ended up with ... and probably been happy....I wasn't as physically attracted to them though. 

My H was just very different from the typical young WILD "I want to get off" male... he respected me more for how I felt, never pushed.. he's always given me his everything & put me 1st. 

....It's all speculation of course.. I could just see me growing weary looking for Mr Right..(I had high expectations- that's just the truth)... though maybe I am comparing what I see in today's society to back then.. I don't know. 



southbound said:


> *Some people still hold sex as a sacred thing, and would like to be with someone who feels the same*.


I'd have to say ..deep down.. I've always felt -when you find your soul mate... you go on to marry... that the marriage bed is /or supposed to be a "*Sacred sharing*"...

I asked my H one day his feelings.. as to the SACRED aspect.. he said he wouldn't go that far.. but described it as "very very special"..


----------



## southbound

NobodySpecial said:


> I clearly lost the thread. Thanks for clarifying. I do not feel the way that poster did. Nor do I care that I am not forever to someone. Different strokes.


That's true. It's just all based on our personal culture and what has shaped us thus far in our life. When I read SA's comments on this topic, I feel that I know exactly what she is writing about; there is no puzzle here. It seems like it could be someone typing that I grew up with or that I see daily. To some here, it's apparently unusual and puzzling stuff. Different strokes. 

I don't think anyone intends to offend. Sometimes the continued back and forth I think comes from feeling that others never even heard of what we are saying, even though it's as common to us getting water from a faucet, and we just want to explain it. I'm sure many feel that way regardless of their view on something. It's like I can just see the question marks over people's heads as they read other's posts. 

I must admit, I didn't know there could be so many different opinions on the same topic until coming here several years ago.


----------



## NobodySpecial

southbound said:


> That's true. It's just all based on our personal culture and *what has shaped us thus far in our life. *


I don't agree with this. I was raised Catholic. If my family knew of my opinions now, well let's just say that they would not agree with me. I think some people grow up and think for themselves. And, frankly, some don't. No offense, but your hearkening back to your grandparents and how you were "raised" has often left me wondering if you were in the latter category. You were married, and if I get this right, really hurt and ruined by the divorce. But it never occurred to you that I can see to see what was YOUR marriage but instead chose to focus on your perception of marriage. The latter is why so many fail. I don't mean to attack you personally. Let me know if that is what you feel. I will delete. But it is a thought that has been on my mind. I feel at some age, we get to choose what we accept and what we reject of our upbringing. Failure to do that is failure to grow and be the best person you can be.




> When I read SA's comments on this topic, I feel that I know exactly what she is writing about; there is no puzzle here. It seems like it could be someone typing that I grew up with or that I see daily. To some here, it's apparently unusual and puzzling stuff. Different strokes.


Which I think is great. That kind of relationship is important to you. Know yourself.



> I don't think anyone intends to offend.


I do. All the time.  JK.



> Sometimes the continued back and forth I think comes from feeling that others never even heard of what we are saying, even though it's as common to us getting water from a faucet, and we just want to explain it. I'm sure many feel that way regardless of their view on something. It's like I can just see the question marks over people's heads as they read other's posts.


I think that is very true.



> I must admit, I didn't know there could be so many different opinions on the same topic until coming here several years ago.


My first foray into this topic was un-moderated usenet. Holy flame retardant suit, batman!


----------



## SimplyAmorous

NobodySpecial said:


> I don't agree with this. I was raised Catholic. If my family knew of my opinions now, well let's just say that they would not agree with me.* I think some people grow up and think for themselves. And, frankly, some don't. *


I do have to agree with you on this point.. I'm all for *critical thinking*.. no matter where we come from, weighing what we are taught (in church, at home, peer pressuring friends, etc) .... sometimes our best mentors may be someone outside the family even.. 

Although I liked what I saw from my Grandmothers life...it was something of stability & happiness...not because they were rich or successful , but the love they shared.. the family they raised together.. the way she talked about my Grandfather....just in the "simple things"...it gave me something to hope for. 



> *My first foray into this topic was un-moderated usenet. Holy flame retardant suit, batman!*










I can only Imagine [email protected]#..


----------



## southbound

NobodySpecial said:


> I don't agree with this. I was raised Catholic. If my family knew of my opinions now, well let's just say that they would not agree with me. I think some people grow up and think for themselves. And, frankly, some don't. No offense, but your hearkening back to your grandparents and how you were "raised" has often left me wondering if you were in the latter category. You were married, and if I get this right, really hurt and ruined by the divorce. But it never occurred to you that I can see to see what was YOUR marriage but instead chose to focus on your perception of marriage. The latter is why so many fail. I don't mean to attack you personally. Let me know if that is what you feel. I will delete. But it is a thought that has been on my mind. I feel at some age, we get to choose what we accept and what we reject of our upbringing. Failure to do that is failure to grow and be the best person you can be.


First of all, I appreciate the offer of deletion if I'm offended, but you don't have to worry too much about offending me. Even if you do, I'll get over it. that doesn't mean I won't enjoy throwing something right back at you, but I won't lose any sleep over things you say; feel free to say what you want to me. 

that's another old school thing about me; my skin is fairly thick. I'm still a believer in the "stick and stones may break my bones..........." phrase. I hear so many people claiming they are offended on tv these days and people having to apologize or lose their job aver a few comments that I could throw up, but that's an entirely different thread. 

As for the cultural part, I did say, "It's all based on our personal culture and what has shaped us thus far in life." Upbringing has a lot to do with it, but I didn't intend it to sound like we are forever molded in how we were raised. Choosing to go against how you were raised is actually something that has shaped a person thus far, and then becomes a part of our culture. By personal culture, i also meant that one person may live in Gotham City and another may live in Mayberry; what is normal in our surroundings can have an impact on how we are. If I lived in a place with a night club and a bar down the street instead of Fred's Hardware and the Ma's Caffee, I might be a totally different person. I'm not saying that has anything to do with you personally, but just an example.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Southbound said*: First of all, I appreciate the offer of deletion *if I'm offended, but you don't have to worry too much about offending me. Even if you do, I'll get over it. that doesn't mean I won't enjoy throwing something right back at you, *but I won't lose any sleep over things you say; feel free to say what you want to me.
> 
> that's another old school thing about me; my skin is fairly thick. *I'm still a believer in the "stick and stones may break my bones..........." phrase. I hear so many people claiming they are offended on tv these days and people having to apologize or lose their job aver a few comments that I could throw up, but that's an entirely different thread.*


 I want to say something about this.. although I consider myself on the sensitive side in some things.. and maybe this won't even make sense but my NEED & demand for honesty over-rides my worrying about being offended.. I would choose RUDE HONESTY over toned down







- trying to keep it NICE -if it's *not *in the







.. 

FW thinks I am worried about others offending me, like they need to stop...but this is not true.. Yes, things rub me the wrong way - I am just comparing how this happens to MANY of us here...depending on the issue ... 

But really I would choose for people to be downright HONEST in their posts, speak it LIKE IT IS...(for all of us to have that freedom).... it gives me/us more of a realistic view to what THEY REALLY THINK...even if it makes them come across cold & heartless.... I'd still rather the delivery be just that.. if that's the passion they feel... 

I have such a distaste for lying/"sucking up" ...basically I would choose the red pill. (still never seen "the Matrix" - if this is what it means.. I get the impression Blue pill = blissful ignorance , and RED PILL = harsh reality.. seeing down some rabbit hole ? I don't know... 

I am like you Southbound, NOT a politically correct person ... I don't like censorship.. though Moderation on forums like this -does keep the peace! Husband has been on some yahoo groups (a Gravely site) that were over taken by Islamic radicals telling people they were infidels & needed to be destroyed.... can you imagine ! 



southbound said:


> *If I lived in a place with a night club and a bar down the street instead of Fred's Hardware and the Ma's Caffee, I might be a totally different person. I'm not saying that has anything to do with you personally, but just an example*.


 I spent ONE MONTH in my teens living with my Mother...in a really bad section of a Big city , bar next door, Prostitute - her next door neighbor -she served prison time killing her 1st husband.. a drunk in the apartment below that almost killed her yrs before... I seen a side of life I wanted literally NOTHING to do with ..had my father knew what I was stepping into ... he wouldn't have allowed me to get on that airplane.

Luckily nothing bad happened.... I have wondered if I grew up in THAT atmosphere.. what I may have turned out like...


----------



## Aspydad

I have read through this thread and do find this topic very interesting. So i think back to 1983 when I was a 20 years old and actually did not fall for a very beautiful girl because of what I had found out about her sexual past. Now there were other things as well that I believe contributed to my just turning from this girl, but I know that what I had found out about this girl sexual past with the long term boyfriend she had broke up with prior to dating me - did effect me.

The last time I ever laid eyes on this girl was actually 1986 - I had already been dating my wife for about two years - this girl spotted me leaving the apartment of one of my best friends early on a Saturday morning - she yells my name, I see here across the complex, I get in my car anyway and drive off - she actually started running towards my car trying to get my attention and I just kept on driving.

So I decide today to see if I can track her down on the internet - and cannot find her by using her maiden name. So I know she graduated medical school in 1987 and look at that schools alumni site and see they have a reunion page - and low and behold they have her class listed and have a bunch of pictures (no names) but they all have name badges on - and I spot her - within two minutes, I find her, her husband, and her four daughters on Facebook!! and man - what the hell was I thinking back then!!! She is still smoking hot at age 52!! An Internal Medical Doctor - and from the looks of things - very, very well off. She ended up marrying some dude who is seven years older than her - I know this because I found him on Linkedin - is it not amazing what this digital age brings!!

I dated many types of girls from age 18 to 21 - a nympho, a crazy girl, a girl that was into to rough type sex - tie you up type stuff - and an old fashioned romance type that had been ridden more times than Seattle Slew - and this is the girl that was the old fashioned one - very sophisticated and experienced even though she was my age. It was like I was dating this older girl or should I say Women. 

Just to give you an example - our very last date (which really just drove me crazy) consisted of a nice dinner out - I had to get dressed up (like really!! I was only 20 years old and a college student - had to where a tie at her request) - so then after this expensive dinner - we go back to her apartment - she lights candles - turns all the other lights out - puts on music - then I have to slow dance with her (who does this at 20 years old??) so I am playing along with this and of course all that is on my mind is getting down to business like we had done all summer (1983) - so then - she tells me that she has desert for us - and she brings out two bowls of strawberries with whipped creme - and what I had to do was feed her the strawberries and let her feed them to me - then we started making out from there - get the drift??

I just could not get into it at all. As I think back though I try to figure out what was wrong with me - I mean this chick was smart, beautiful, and freaking wanting me - but when I kissed her - it was like kissing a cousin or something - she just did not do it for me - even though I really wanted that.

SO here is what bothered me 1) she was getting ready to start med school ( she had just got her undergrad degree - took her two years - now she was starting med school - versus me - screwed around for two years and had just figured out what my major was going to be . 2) for what ever reason - as beautiful as this girl was - she was NOT a good kisser even though the rest of her body was just SMOKING HOT 3) I did know that she was NOT a virgin - she had a serious boyfriend while in High School - and then another one in college that I had actually met - NOT sure if this was why I could not fall for her?? 4) this last boyfriend just about two weeks prior to this date had indicated to me (a ran into to him at the horse races in town) that he had heard that I was dating his old flame - and told me (as he was big jerk!!) that what he missed most were her BJs that she used to give him. Now this really bothered me - and I knew it was true because she had tried to give one to me but I had stopped her when we first started dating - so I knew she was into that and finding this out just really messed with my head - so when I went back to school that fall - I just completely stopped calling her. I had just joined a fraternity and all of a sudden had access to all the girls I wanted - laid eyes on my wife for the first time October 31, 1983 and the rest is history. This women that I told you about tried to contact me many times but I just ignored her completely.

I just wonder if I could have fallen for this girl if she would have been a virgin and had not done things like give BJs to other guys?? I mean the BJ thing really just freaked me out I think. 

This was my younger days - now - if I was ever available again - it would be impossible at my age to find a women who was desirable that did not have history. But, I am the old guy now - I am sure of myself and could handle this. Back when I was younger, I was just two immature and NOT sure of myself and that made me look for the virgin - my wife had just turned 18 when I met her and was certainly a virgin and I liked that.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Personal said*: At the end of the day though, I am ever faithful and solely committed to the one I am with, so *I don't dwell on the past hang onto old letters or photographs or cling to the idea of revisiting former relationships. Ever forward, which is the best thing I can do with my wife, how can I love her completely if I spend most of my time thinking about those I let go*.


 and here is another aspect of it.. .. I DO so enjoy looking back..memories are very precious to me.. had I been with another & let's say he was the love or my life before meeting my husband.. it could have messed with my head..badly....

And of course I could have broken some hearts, but I wouldn't have had sex with them.. so to me, that is not even comparable....sex to me is as vulnerable as one can possibly get with another human being, making love is the BOMB , the highest of Highs .....you just DON'T GO THERE unless the trust & commitment is already in place...

It's not a subject others will grasp when we're at different ends of the spectrum....our foundations and what we attach to the act is just worlds apart..

I used the term "radical" before Feminist.. I wasn't downing normal feminism ... the radicals always come off like they hate men...


----------



## Thundarr

SimplyAmorous said:


> and here is another aspect of it.. .. I DO so enjoy looking back..memories are very precious to me.. had I been with another & let's say he was the love or my life before meeting my husband.. it could have messed with my head..badly....
> 
> And of course I could have broken some hearts, but I wouldn't have had sex with them.. so to me, that is not even comparable....sex to me is as vulnerable as one can possibly get with another human being, making love is the BOMB , the highest of Highs .....you just DON'T GO THERE unless the trust & commitment is already in place...
> 
> It's not a subject others will grasp when we're at different ends of the spectrum....our foundations and what we attach to the act is just worlds apart..
> 
> I used the term "radical" before Feminist.. I wasn't downing normal feminism ... the radicals always come off like they hate men...


So my question to you SA is could you imagine a different path? Maybe one where you were abused growing up and learned to devalue sex? Or one where you were fooled by a first love and were left feeling used? Or just one where subtle little things we don't notice changed your beliefs a little bit? Maybe even things most of us consider being raised better.

I'm a big fan of yours and I love how you talk about your husband and family. You deserve a lot of credit for that by the way. Yet it does take two for a relationship to be great and we cannot read minds so for some very much like you, things didn't work out as well. One or two heartbreaks or being used early on can spin how someone views sex 180.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Personal said:* *Why would you have a slew of bad stories to tell?*


The comment was pretty stupid, wasn't it !? Oh me & my big rambling mouth......it's just the sheer difficulty alone in finding someone who "gets us" in the deepest ways that matter to us...I cared a great deal about this back then.. .. I found a man who treasured me for feeling as strongly as I did......instead of telling me I was uptight or whatever.... I am just being realistic here...



> *Personal said:* *Whereas I've never felt vulnerable sexually. Sharing my emotions on the other hand is where I am at my most vulnerable.* Although sex is tremendous, since I've thrown myself out of aeroplanes I don't consider it the highest of highs. As to going there, I won't go without attraction all else follows from there not the other way around.


.... I have noticed THIS before. .. on my thread about what I will teach my daughter about sex, her emotions, her life.. a male poster here ....he came on my thread to argue with me ....he didn't like my views.. he wanted to take me on ....and enlighten me... where I had it all wrong...

He was a former swinger....and he explained to me he could have SEX with ANYONE....that was EASY for him...but in sharing his deepest emotions... that to him is the MUCH HARDER, the most vulnerable... only his wife gets this part of him...... 

It was an interesting back & forth... the cool thing was... by the end of our haggling our differences.... I got more insight into the minds on the other side....and after listening to me.. told me he wouldn't change me...... he could see that THAT worked FOR ME... so that ended nicely.. 



> *Your world view is not more meritorious than mine, it's just different.*


 new word for me ... *Meritorious* = Deserving reward or praise; having merit.


----------



## sisters359

Sam, you do not write as though you have gotten past it--and the use of the present tense wasn't accidental. I'll shut up about this after this comment (of course), but I guess I wanted to try to help you understand b/c it seems to continue to bother you.

As a victim of abuse, your wife was in an altered mental state--and she acted *out of character* because of that. She probably cannot even understand how she came to that state, and may even find behaviors that remind her of that to be triggers for anxiety and self-loathing. Unless you have been a victim or otherwise experienced a mental- or emotional-health crisis, I doubt you can truly understand. The bottom line is that this part of her was so far removed from her sexual desire that the two things are completely disconnected. And having abused her body (in her mind) in such a way, she will need a lot of help and therapy to be able to separate acts of overt sexuality from something she connects (unconsciously) with the worst part of her. 

The fact that she sought him out after separation means that the emotional ties *weren't* cut. She stopped seeing him when they truly were cut. 

I'm sure that does not change the fact that you, like many other men, would like their wives to express overt desire. But I would encourage you to stop adding the part, "and I know she can, so when she won't, it means she's less attracted to me than to him." It feels like you are adding insult to injury, so to speak. 

Ok, I'll put the soapbox away and wish you and your wife every joy. Maybe given time (a decade?) to forgive herself for having acted like a victim, she will be able to loosen up. Maybe she'll become the randiest old lady in town. There is always hope. God bless.


----------



## samyeagar

sisters359 said:


> Sam, you do not write as though you have gotten past it--and the use of the present tense wasn't accidental. I'll shut up about this after this comment (of course), but I guess I wanted to try to help you understand b/c it seems to continue to bother you.
> 
> As a victim of abuse, your wife was in an altered mental state--and she acted *out of character* because of that. She probably cannot even understand how she came to that state, and may even find behaviors that remind her of that to be triggers for anxiety and self-loathing. Unless you have been a victim or otherwise experienced a mental- or emotional-health crisis, I doubt you can truly understand. The bottom line is that this part of her was so far removed from her sexual desire that the two things are completely disconnected. And having abused her body (in her mind) in such a way, she will need a lot of help and therapy to be able to separate acts of overt sexuality from something she connects (unconsciously) with the worst part of her.
> 
> The fact that she sought him out after separation means that the emotional ties *weren't* cut. She stopped seeing him when they truly were cut.
> 
> I'm sure that does not change the fact that you, like many other men, would like their wives to express overt desire. But I would encourage you to stop adding the part, "and I know she can, so when she won't, it means she's less attracted to me than to him." It feels like you are adding insult to injury, so to speak.
> 
> Ok, I'll put the soapbox away and wish you and your wife every joy. Maybe given time (a decade?) to forgive herself for having acted like a victim, she will be able to loosen up. Maybe she'll become the randiest old lady in town. There is always hope. God bless.


I do appreciate the response, and it is good, sound thoughts based on what I have posted in this thread, however, as you may have suspected, my story goes far deeper, and unfortunately, is spread over many, many threads. There are a few posters who know the much bigger picture beyond just this thread.

I do understand that there is a level of trauma involved in my wife's behavior, and I am very sensitive to that fact, and in some ways, perhaps too sensitive. She was in an abusive relationship that has left scars, however, knowing her as well as I do, there are certain personality traits that led to her being in the abusive relationship as much as the other way around...the abusive relationship leading to certain personality traits.

Myself...I spent 20 years in an emotionally, sexually, financially, abusive relationship with a diagnosed NPD woman, so this is all something I understand very well, and very personally.

I do think there is a difference in point of view you bring to this as you try and empathize with my wife in that you seem to be assuming a tie, almost a necessity between the emotional and physical.

My wife is wired differently than some in that she is fully capable of having and fully enjoying completely emotionally disconnected sex. She has always been that way, so when she said her pursuit of her ex was just about the sex with no emotional ties, I believe her completely.

For her, she wanted to have sex, it was easier to get him into bed than somebody new, and she knew it would be good sex. It really is that simple. As alien as her reasoning was to me, I can grasp it on an intellectual level, but as someone who is not capable of disconnected sex, that doesn't make it any easier to digest emotionally.


----------

