# Why are men so fragile?



## Cletus

If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.

When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy". 

It seems so transparently counter-productive.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Word.


----------



## Marduk

Women are doing this too, in my experience. Differently, but also. 

I think there’s a lot of deep seated insecurity going on with our generation, possibly because everybody is replaceable. Or upgradable. 

I think the marriage-industrial complex has a lot to do with it. Also tinder, ****** *******, normalization of cheating, and people marrying later. 

Consumer culture as applied to relationships has to be a factor. 

As does the rampant job insecurity. I mean, the gig economy essentially means lots of people have high levels of job insecurity. Tinder and LinkedIn are essentially the same thing in two different markets. 

The men I talk to are primarily worried about physique and performance. The women about connection and compatibility. But the opposite also happens. 

Hell, my wife just asked me a few weeks ago what my ex’s body felt like, and if I can tell the difference. And she is hyper secure in that department.


----------



## Yeswecan

Marduk said:


> Women are doing this too, in my experience. Differently, but also.
> 
> I think there’s a lot of deep seated insecurity going on with our generation, possibly because everybody is replaceable. Or upgradable.
> 
> I think the marriage-industrial complex has a lot to do with it. Also tinder, ****** *******, normalization of cheating, and people marrying later.
> 
> Consumer culture as applied to relationships has to be a factor.
> 
> As does the rampant job insecurity. I mean, the gig economy essentially means lots of people have high levels of job insecurity. Tinder and LinkedIn are essentially the same thing in two different markets.
> 
> The men I talk to are primarily worried about physique and performance. The women about connection and compatibility. But the opposite also happens.
> 
> Hell, my wife just asked me a few weeks ago what my ex’s body felt like, and if I can tell the difference. And she is hyper secure in that department.



Maybe add in the porn industry that molds impressionable minds to what they think sex is? How large Johnny is but the viewer does not measure up?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> I think there’s a lot of deep seated insecurity going on with our generation, possibly because everybody is replaceable. Or upgradable.


I am not seeing only one generation do this. It seems a lot of older people are feeling RJ as well. I definitely wouldn't try to nail the whole thing on your generation or any single generation.


----------



## Casual Observer

Fragile? It's too easy to dismiss the issue by saying that. Most of the threads where RJ has come on really strong were based more on the lies that went on beforehand than the comparisons that the conversations led to. In some case the RJ started with discoveries of very differing views of privacy. One person being completely open and honest and believing the other person was doing the same, only to find out very differently later on.

In most of these cases, I believe the appropriate answer from the partner who is concerned discussions of his or her past could lead to problems... well, either tell the potential partner it's not something you wish to discuss, or get the hell out of there because things aren't going to work.

RJ doesn't just happen out of the blue. There are usually signs early on that it might be an issue. If not, and if you've got a past where it could be an issue, then test for it. And, like I said, if it comes up, then it's in the best interest of both parties to end things. If you have to blame your partner for how they feel about something, they're probably not the right partner.

Added after seeing the "worried about her past sexual relationship" thread- I do see @Faithful Wife 's point regarding RJ in some cases. But not all.


----------



## Yeswecan

Faithful Wife said:


> I am not seeing only one generation do this. It seems a lot of older people are feeling RJ as well. I definitely wouldn't try to nail the whole thing on your generation or any single generation.


Human nature has not changed over the span of 2000 years. The issue is multi-generational.


----------



## Cletus

Casual Observer said:


> Fragile? It's too easy to dismiss the issue by saying that. Most of the threads where RJ has come on really strong were based more on the lies that went on beforehand than the comparisons that the conversations led to.


This is just one man's opinion, but I believe the cause for most women lying about their past is because of this male fragility, not the cause.


----------



## farsidejunky

Cletus said:


> This is just one man's opinion, but I believe the cause for most women lying about their past is because of this male fragility, not the cause.


Furthermore, it's nothing really new...

"Of course I orgasmed, honey. It was great for me" said every 50's wife ever.

...except for maybe the magnitude of it. Where would a guy in the '50s...or even the '80s stumble across information that would cause his mind to wander down this road?

I see it much like everything else: anything you want information on is available at the tips of our fingers...even if it's about another individual. 

How about the sheer number of means available to share such information?

I believe people are simply not emotionally equipped to handle the information available to us.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife

farsidejunky said:


> ...except for maybe the magnitude of it. Where would a guy in the '50s...or even the '80s stumble across information that would cause his mind to wander down this road?


Some people just use their imagination and that's all they need to torture themselves with.


----------



## Luminous

Many men (and women) have a severe lack of self worth, and so rather than seeking validation from within, they seek it externally. This is not just an issue that men face, but it is one in which society doesn't offer a man with this issue much reinforcement.

They are meant to 'man up' and get on with it because that is what men are supposed to do. A lot of these people however, weren't given appropriate examples earlier in life about how to do this.

There is also the possibility that they have not had proper validation in their upbringing, and compensate by trying seek it elsewhere. 



Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky

Faithful Wife said:


> Some people just use their imagination and that's all they need to torture themselves with.


Indeed. However, imagination often takes a spark. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife

farsidejunky said:


> Indeed. However, imagination often takes a spark.


You can spark your own imagination. There's no need to look outward. Some do, but most don't need to. Insecurity will cause the imagination spark to go off, even if the SO hasn't done anything to cause any insecurity.

I'm thinking right now of a woman I know personally. She has some way deep underlying problems with insecurity. And any man she is with, she will torture herself all on her own about who he has been with in the past and was she better, was she prettier, etc. She does it to herself.

She's working on it but I've seen her through several relationships and it's always been the same. And most men she has been with ultimately can't take her extreme jealousy and insecurity. She does have BPD.


----------



## farsidejunky

Faithful Wife said:


> You can spark your own imagination. There's no need to look outward. Some do, but most don't need to. Insecurity will cause the imagination spark to go off, even if the SO hasn't done anything to cause any insecurity.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking right now of a woman I know personally. She has some way deep underlying problems with insecurity. And any man she is with, she will torture herself all on her own about who he has been with in the past and was she better, was she prettier, etc. She does it to herself.
> 
> 
> 
> She's working on it but I've seen her through several relationships and it's always been the same. And most men she has been with ultimately can't take her extreme jealousy and insecurity. She does have BPD.


I'm not disagreeing with you, FW, but rather taking a WAG as to why it appears to be more prevalent now than in the past.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife

farsidejunky said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you, FW, but rather taking a WAG as to why it appears to be more prevalent now than in the past.


How do we know it is more prevalent now? Just because people have a way to reach out for advice about this kind of thing now doesn't really mean it happens more. 

Maybe it does, I just don't know how we would know that.


----------



## Numb26

"Grabs popcorn"


----------



## Mr The Other

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.
> 
> When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy".
> 
> It seems so transparently counter-productive.


One thing I like in the youth is they actually see men and women as similar. 

As a middle aged man, it was perfectly normal to think that a man did not really have an emotional life. Men trying to live up to that, or thinking they should will make themselves worse. 

If these things are mor eopen, it is probably good. 

We accept that a man telling a woman that she is physically not good enough is abusive. Now, people see it the same way if a man is treated like that. Y'know, good.


----------



## FeministInPink

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.
> 
> 
> 
> When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy".
> 
> 
> 
> It seems so transparently counter-productive.


I don't know if it's a new thing... I remember when I was much younger, in middle/high school, at that age when you're starting to date. I wasn't interested in any of the boys who expressed interest in me... it was drilled into my head by my mom, my grandmothers, my aunts: you have to be very careful to let them down easy, because boys are very sensitive to rejection. You must never laugh at them, or make them feel like they are less than or not good enough, and do whatever you can to build them up while turning them down.

Boys/men, save for a few exceptions, have never been this kind when shooting me down. In fact, many of them have been downright cruel, either directly or by pulling crap like ghosting or whatever else. And they still do this as adults.

And yet, as a woman, I am still expected to be gentle because they are even more sensitive now, because some woman who came before me broke his heart because she cheated on him or walked out on him, or some other sob story. I can't tell you how many "sensitive" men with a "sob story" have later screwed me over and treated me badly. These days, I hear a sob story and I run the other way.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Young at Heart

As a man over 70, I will provide a slightly different perspective. 

As I have grown older, my T level dropped, that has resulted in my desiring to have my wife provide me with more emotional love It has also meant that I need more foreplay to have intense meaningful sex. I am much less into a quickie satisfying my needs than in my youth. 

So the whole youth generational things just doesn't jib with my experience in aging. Perhaps after a certain point in life you look at and understand your own mortality and want more emotional meaning in your life. Perhaps it is all hormonal. whatever it is, yes, I have become more emotionally fragile as I get older and what a little more TLC in my relationship.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Young at Heart said:


> As a man over 70, I will provide a slightly different perspective.
> 
> As I have grown older, my T level dropped, that has resulted in my desiring to have my wife provide me with more emotional love It has also meant that I need more foreplay to have intense meaningful sex. I am much less into a quickie satisfying my needs than in my youth.
> 
> So the whole youth generational things just doesn't jib with my experience in aging. Perhaps after a certain point in life you look at and understand your own mortality and want more emotional meaning in your life. Perhaps it is all hormonal. whatever it is, yes, I have become more emotionally fragile as I get older and what a little more TLC in my relationship.


I totally hear what you are saying. But it doesn’t seem to be related to RJ. 

If I remember your story correctly, your W was a virgin when you married and there is no other man for you to fear was better for her. 

Perhaps men in the past worried less about this type of thing because more people married as virgins back then.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Granted I'm a little jaded because of my ex's intense need to overshare regarding his exes for use as an emotional weapon, but he'd probably say I had RJ.

Not true at all..... i was fine with him having a past just as i did. I was not fine with him living in it and not in the present with me. It got to the point where a lot of our conversations would end up with him referencing exes and often intimately.

Some cases of rj are tied to insecurity, but others are created by rude behavior.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

I would say that in a lot of cases married couples were more of a solid team in times past where a W would want to continually be building up her H, helping his confidence not just in the bedroom but for each day when he went out if the home to make a living. 

Her confidence in him, shown to him, helped him do his job, plow the fields, defend the home from harm, etc.

And a man still had to care for his family, helpful W or not, or he would appear a ragamuffin socially. 

But my point is, I could see a Grandmother telling her daughter to bolster her H as it benefitted her, by having the H be a strong a Provider as he could to keep a roof over their head and food on the table.

And a man would still be expected to be so even if his W was a negative Nelly.

That's a double standard but that's the way many situations were.


----------



## Casual Observer

Faithful Wife said:


> How do we know it is more prevalent now? Just because people have a way to reach out for advice about this kind of thing now doesn't really mean it happens more.
> 
> Maybe it does, I just don't know how we would know that.


Maybe it's more prevalent because it's more difficult to reinvent yourself? Before Facebook, before the Internet in general took over as our source of information, what we presented to someone was 95% of what they could find out about us. And whatever we settled on as the truth, there wasn't likely to be anything coming our way, perhaps years down the road, to challenge that.


----------



## Faithful Wife

For me, I was told by both males and females beginning in adolescence, the following:

1. Never ever tell a man anything other than that he's great, he's perfect and you don't want any other guy in any way. Tell him all the guys in your past were nothing compared to him and that you never got it good until you met him. Never ever notice another man or make any mention of any other man. Make your man believe you only have eyes for him.

2. Meanwhile, every man you are ever with will always fantasize about your hot friends and sisters, will always look at porn, and will never want you if you are fat (or don't have FITB in the right quantities). So you need to always look hot or he won't want you, but no matter how hot you are, he will still want every other hot woman who exists.

The double standard finally broke my head. So I just gave up on it all and decided to be as honest as men are. So if I see a hot dude, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie. If your brother is hot, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie. If you are getting fat, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie.

This way works much better for me.

It used to confuse me that women would talk so openly about protecting men's egos while men talked so openly about how they will never ever only want one woman. I don't know why women did that or put up with it.


----------



## samyeagar

lifeistooshort said:


> Granted I'm a little jaded because of my ex's intense need to overshare regarding his exes for use as an emotional weapon, but he'd probably say I had RJ.
> 
> Not true at all..... i was fine with him having a past just as i did. I was not fine with him living in it and not in the present with me. It got to the point where a lot of our conversations would end up with him referencing exes and often intimately.
> 
> Some cases of rj are tied to insecurity, but others are created by rude behavior.


Word.


----------



## Faithful Wife

lifeistooshort said:


> Granted I'm a little jaded because of my ex's intense need to overshare regarding his exes for use as an emotional weapon, but he'd probably say I had RJ.
> 
> Not true at all..... i was fine with him having a past just as i did. I was not fine with him living in it and not in the present with me. It got to the point where a lot of our conversations would end up with him referencing exes and often intimately.
> 
> Some cases of rj are tied to insecurity, but others are created by rude behavior.


Yeah I don't think of you as having had RJ. You were just annoyed with his asshat behavior!! Which he WAS doing to trying provoke jealousy in you, which just made him look like a psycho and as jerk. Where he was hoping it made him look like a stud. Ugh.


----------



## ReformedHubby

Is RJ really that much of a problem outside of TAM though? I suppose its tough to say because perhaps my guy friends wouldn't exactly admit it to me. But I have a hard time believing *any* of my guy friends have this issue. There are some things that I feel are more prevalent on TAM, RJ is one of them. I am certainly not saying RJ doesn't exist. But the cases I see of it on TAM are somewhat extreme. I've seen cases where guys have been married for years and still have issues with it. I suppose I could understand trying to lean some things about the person your partner dated or was married to right before you. But we have guys on here reading diary entries from years before they even met their wives. I can't wrap my head around that at all.


----------



## Marduk

Yeswecan said:


> Maybe add in the porn industry that molds impressionable minds to what they think sex is? How large Johnny is but the viewer does not measure up?


Yes, for sure. For both genders.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I am not seeing only one generation do this. It seems a lot of older people are feeling RJ as well. I definitely wouldn't try to nail the whole thing on your generation or any single generation.


Hmm. 

I would expect with people marrying later in life, therefore having more partners and almost never being a virgin before marriage, RJ would be on the rise?


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

One reason I read, and share a comment here and there is the fact I learn here and there on the forum. 

I didn't know that RJ was even a thing either.


----------



## Mr The Other

Young at Heart said:


> As a man over 70, I will provide a slightly different perspective.
> 
> As I have grown older, my T level dropped, that has resulted in my desiring to have my wife provide me with more emotional love It has also meant that I need more foreplay to have intense meaningful sex. I am much less into a quickie satisfying my needs than in my youth.
> 
> So the whole youth generational things just doesn't jib with my experience in aging. Perhaps after a certain point in life you look at and understand your own mortality and want more emotional meaning in your life. Perhaps it is all hormonal. whatever it is, yes, I have become more emotionally fragile as I get older and what a little more TLC in my relationship.


I had my T results back, it turns out I have the levels of a young man. 

If it was all about testosterone, I would probably be in a fight now. 

Ageing and getting older are different, biologically. I think time has a great deal to do with it.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> For me, I was told by both males and females beginning in adolescence, the following:
> 
> 1. Never ever tell a man anything other than that he's great, he's perfect and you don't want any other guy in any way. Tell him all the guys in your past were nothing compared to him and that you never got it good until you met him. Never ever notice another man or make any mention of any other man. Make your man believe you only have eyes for him.
> 
> 2. Meanwhile, every man you are ever with will always fantasize about your hot friends and sisters, will always look at porn, and will never want you if you are fat (or don't have FITB in the right quantities). So you need to always look hot or he won't want you, but no matter how hot you are, he will still want every other hot woman who exists.
> 
> The double standard finally broke my head. So I just gave up on it all and decided to be as honest as men are. So if I see a hot dude, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie. If your brother is hot, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie. If you are getting fat, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie.
> 
> This way works much better for me.
> 
> It used to confuse me that women would talk so openly about protecting men's egos while men talked so openly about how they will never ever only want one woman. I don't know why women did that or put up with it.


I’ve always done #1 with every woman I’ve ever been serious with, and in fact that’s how I was taught to treat women. 

Meanwhile, I’ve had many women, including 2 wives now, do the same as #2 to me with the genders reversed. I would always have a running list of who they think is hot, be that movie stars, porn stars, friends of mine, or friends of hers. And I was always told (and are still told) to just suck it up and be a secure man about it. 

I have literally sat there at a restaurant with groups of couples, with the women running down every guy they’d do if they got the chance, and all the guys just looked at their shoes awkwardly and tried to not make a big deal about it. Any guy that does, gets berated for being controlling and insecure, because it’s just girls having fun. 

So go figure.


----------



## samyeagar

Marduk said:


> I’ve always done #1 with every woman I’ve ever been serious with, and in fact that’s how I was taught to treat women.
> 
> Meanwhile, I’ve had many women, including 2 wives now, do the same as #2 to me with the genders reversed. I would always have a running list of who they think is hot, be that movie stars, porn stars, friends of mine, or friends of hers. And I was always told (and are still told) to just suck it up and be a secure man about it.
> 
> I have literally sat there at a restaurant with groups of couples, with the women running down every guy they’d do if they got the chance, and all the guys just looked at their shoes awkwardly and tried to not make a big deal about it. Any guy that does, gets berated for being controlling and insecure, because it’s just girls having fun.
> 
> So go figure.


This is not all that different from my life's experience, and not specific to my relationship with my wife. She just took it to another level. I definitely learned that #1 was the decent way to treat women, and I always have.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> I’ve always done #1 with every woman I’ve ever been serious with, and in fact that’s how I was taught to treat women.
> 
> Meanwhile, I’ve had many women, including 2 wives now, do the same as #2 to me with the genders reversed. I would always have a running list of who they think is hot, be that movie stars, porn stars, friends of mine, or friends of hers. And I was always told (and are still told) to just suck it up and be a secure man about it.
> 
> I have literally sat there at a restaurant with groups of couples, with the women running down every guy they’d do if they got the chance, and all the guys just looked at their shoes awkwardly and tried to not make a big deal about it. Any guy that does, gets berated for being controlling and insecure, because it’s just girls having fun.
> 
> So go figure.


I'm not sure how to process that. Even though I was told all those things, at that time guys I was with may have been idiots in these ways, but that was certainly in high school. Grown men I've been with have never acted like what you are describing, they just did things like checked out women with their eyes and kept their porn hidden. They did not list out which of these women in the restaurant they would bang, not in front of me anyway. I'm sure they may have done that with a group of guy friends though. Likewise, I've never said things like that to men in person. Only with a group of ladies maybe. So I'm not sure if it's just a manners issue, what you have described? Even with the double standard I was taught, grown men did not behave this way that you describe. They did for sure though notice all of my hot friends or sister, whether they ever said anything about it or not. I've never been with other women where any of them talked that way in front of their man or a bunch of men. But we definitely catch them sneaking peeks at real life or virtual women.

Though as soon as someone asks "who do you think is hot" at TAM, both men and women are more than happy to tell us all and post pics, etc. So I think it is safe to assume that even if your spouse doesn't say they are hot for anyone else, they most certainly are.


----------



## Faithful Wife

samyeagar said:


> This is not all that different from my life's experience, and not specific to my relationship with my wife. She just took it to another level. I definitely learned that #1 was the decent way to treat women, and I always have.


I think maybe you and @Marduk have an excess of class and good manners, and you both have somehow dated women with a lack of class and manners (related to these areas).


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> For me, I was told by both males and females beginning in adolescence, the following:
> 
> 1. Never ever tell a man anything other than that he's great, he's perfect and you don't want any other guy in any way. Tell him all the guys in your past were nothing compared to him and that you never got it good until you met him. Never ever notice another man or make any mention of any other man. Make your man believe you only have eyes for him.
> 
> 2. Meanwhile, every man you are ever with will always fantasize about your hot friends and sisters, will always look at porn, and will never want you if you are fat (or don't have FITB in the right quantities). So you need to always look hot or he won't want you, but no matter how hot you are, he will still want every other hot woman who exists.
> 
> The double standard finally broke my head. So I just gave up on it all and decided to be as honest as men are. So if I see a hot dude, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie. If your brother is hot, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie. If you are getting fat, yeah I noticed, not gonna lie.
> 
> This way works much better for me.
> 
> It used to confuse me that women would talk so openly about protecting men's egos while men talked so openly about how they will never ever only want one woman. I don't know why women did that or put up with it.


There is a difference between noticing an object of beauty and having the self restraint and decency to not be a bullish prick and make note of it to someone you are interested in or that is interested in you. 

And if every wife had to always look hot then it would be men filing divorce 80% instead of women.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I think maybe you and @Marduk have an excess of class and good manners, and you both have somehow dated women with a lack of class and manners (related to these areas).


According to my wife, I'm a neanderthal bull that just charges through everything with zero manners at all... 0


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> According to my wife, I'm a neanderthal bull that just charges through everything with zero manners at all... 0


Sounds like she is an emotional bull in the china shop, stomping over what most people would consider normal human feelings.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Marduk said:


> I’ve always done #1 with every woman I’ve ever been serious with, and in fact that’s how I was taught to treat women.
> 
> Meanwhile, I’ve had many women, including 2 wives now, do the same as #2 to me with the genders reversed. I would always have a running list of who they think is hot, be that movie stars, porn stars, friends of mine, or friends of hers. And I was always told (and are still told) to just suck it up and be a secure man about it.
> 
> I have literally sat there at a restaurant with groups of couples, with the women running down every guy they’d do if they got the chance, and all the guys just looked at their shoes awkwardly and tried to not make a big deal about it. Any guy that does, gets berated for being controlling and insecure, because it’s just girls having fun.
> 
> So go figure.


Do these men have any self esteem or respect?


----------



## lifeistooshort

Faithful Wife said:


> Yeah I don't think of you as having had RJ. You were just annoyed with his asshat behavior!! Which he WAS doing to trying provoke jealousy in you, which just made him look like a psycho and as jerk. Where he was hoping it made him look like a stud. Ugh.


Yeah....it's funny how that works. This may be splitting hairs but I think it was less about him looking like a stud and more about passive aggressively conveying to me that I was part of a long line and thus nothing special. It fed his insecurity.

But yeah....it did make him look like a pathetic loser.

In my world the guy I'm with is usually perceived by me as the best I've had because past guys are just that and I'm emotionally invested in my present guy. That gives him a big advantage.

So is my current guy technically the biggest package I've ever seen? No, but he's got plenty and I'm so happy with him otherwise that it would never occur to me that this should make any difference at all. We're highly compatible and big penis guy and I weren't.


----------



## Lostinthought61

well technically we all started as girls in the wound....some of us kept more of the female traits...lol


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm not sure how to process that. Even though I was told all those things, at that time guys I was with may have been idiots in these ways, but that was certainly in high school. Grown men I've been with have never acted like what you are describing, they just did things like checked out women with their eyes and kept their porn hidden.


Yup. That's because of #1. You are a man, so you tend to think some women are hot. You don't want to be a **** about it, or be labelled a creep, so you try to be subtle. But you're a dude, so you're probably not real great at being subtle, and get busted often. Same thing with porn - I've never, ever had anyone fully 'deplete' me sexually except in rare occasions, and it's my understanding that this is very common for men. But you don't want to make the woman you're with feel like not enough, so you hide these kinds of things. But again, you're a dude, so you probably don't hide it well.




> They did not list out which of these women in the restaurant they would bang, not in front of me anyway. I'm sure they may have done that with a group of guy friends though. Likewise, I've never said things like that to men in person. Only with a group of ladies maybe.


So I guess we're on the same page here?



> So I'm not sure if it's just a manners issue, what you have described? Even with the double standard I was taught, grown men did not behave this way that you describe. They did for sure though notice all of my hot friends or sister, whether they ever said anything about it or not. I've never been with other women where any of them talked that way in front of their man or a bunch of men. But we definitely catch them sneaking peeks at real life or virtual women.


Maybe it's a culture thing. Almost inevitably when I go to a party, once the booze starts and the women start talking, this kind of stuff comes up. It doesn't bother me unless it goes over the top.



> Though as soon as someone asks "who do you think is hot" at TAM, both men and women are more than happy to tell us all and post pics, etc. So I think it is safe to assume that even if your spouse doesn't say they are hot for anyone else, they most certainly are.


And I think that's totally natural and I love to play those games. Partly because my wife will have none of it, even though she's happy to play. She 100% owns that it's a double standard she has, to her credit.

I'm not discounting anything you're saying, FW. I'm just trying to bring the opposite side also into focus, because I can 100% guarantee that I have had way more women I'm in a relationship with talk about wanting to do other guys than I've ever done to women, ever. And I very much don't think I'm alone. I do think porn is a very gendered issue currently, but I do also know that the highest growth in porn use is from women. I think we're catching up here, in very much the same way that women now cheat as much as men do.

I've also been asked to compare body parts with ex's in every LTR I've been in, which I refuse to do. I personally don't really remember or think about such things, anyway.


----------



## Marduk

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Do these men have any self esteem or respect?


What would you expect them to do? Get all bent out of shape in public because his wife said she'd like to do one of the Ryans if given the chance? I wouldn't do that.


----------



## Girl_power

My SIL berates my brother all the time in public and he just tries to laugh it off. He would never say anything negative about her in public. However, the things that she berates him about are real, he is lazy, and she does way more than he does around the house. They both know that she is in control. 
I think that when women berate men in public it’s because of growing resentment and frustration of a problem that isn’t resolving. 

I was also taught to always make a man feel like a man, and be gentle with their egos. To the extent of telling white lies to make them feel good. That’s how I want to be treated so I treat them that way. 
I have experienced men not being so gentle with me. Telling me to wear more dresses and makeup. Wear more lingerie etc. men pointing out that my legs aren’t shaved. And when they are having trouble getting or staying hard or finishing... it subliminally is my fault. Of course no one ever said that to me, but when I am told to wear/do/act a certain way in the bedroom and I don’t... of course it makes me feel like it’s my fault. Especially when I know what kind of porn they watch or that I know they masterbate without problems.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Yup. That's because of #1. You are a man, so you tend to think some women are hot. You don't want to be a **** about it, or be labelled a creep, so you try to be subtle. But you're a dude, so you're probably not real great at being subtle, and get busted often. Same thing with porn - I've never, ever had anyone fully 'deplete' me sexually except in rare occasions, and it's my understanding that this is very common for men. But you don't want to make the woman you're with feel like not enough, so you hide these kinds of things. But again, you're a dude, so you probably don't hide it well.


To me this is normal for both men and women and some try to hide it but...why? Why don't we just all admit that we will always have eyes even if we are in a relationship. By admitting this doesn't mean we have to push it in anyone's face. It just means being honest and not hiding, and then also not projecting upon the other gender that they are better or worse than our own, since we are all doing and admitting to the same thing. Namely, that other human beings are attractive and we see them and feel attraction. And that some of us will always watch porn, even if we don't share that with you, we can admit that we do. I think just being honest to this extent would help everyone. People can then just get used to it and not develop insecurities over what happens in our imagination that the other person may not even be thinking about or doing. Instead, we could just all get used to the fact that none of us will ever be the "only" thing in anyone else's eyes.

Even though we may feel that way when we are in a great relationship, like @LifeIsShort said. It isn't literally true though. Other people are still hot even if we are in a great relationship. Like she said, I don't go thinking back about previous lovers when I'm in a good relationship, but I will certainly notice a tall glass of water standing on the side of the street, just like any man I'm seeing will notice some hottie on the road, too.


----------



## Numb26

Marduk said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do these men have any self esteem or respect?
> 
> 
> 
> What would you expect them to do? Get all bent out of shape in public because his wife said she'd like to do one of the Ryans if given the chance? I wouldn't do that.
Click to expand...

Well. I wouldn't get bent out of shape but I can promise you that it would only happen once


----------



## Faithful Wife

Numb26 said:


> Well. I wouldn't get bent out of shape but I can promise you that it would only happen once


Yeah a lot of people put up with things I can't really relate to. 

Every man I've ever been with has turned his head at a pretty woman now and then. But none of them have ever done the "who would you do" game in front of me.

Likewise, I would never say such things. While of course I turn my head at a hottie, as that is simply a normal reaction. I would never say anything about the hottie though, as to do so would be rude.

But again...I think we all may do such things in a group setting with only our same sex friends, whooping it up and all of that. I think that's fun and normal friend bonding stuff.


----------



## Numb26

Faithful Wife said:


> Numb26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well. I wouldn't get bent out of shape but I can promise you that it would only happen once
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah a lot of people put up with things I can't really relate to.
> 
> Every man I've ever been with has turned his head at a pretty woman now and then. But none of them have ever done the "who would you do" game in front of me.
> 
> Likewise, I would never say such things. While of course I turn my head at a hottie, as that is simply a normal reaction. I would never say anything about the hottie though, as to do so would be rude.
> 
> But again...I think we all may do such things in a group setting with only our same sex friends, whooping it up and all of that. I think that's fun and normal friend bonding stuff.
Click to expand...

Yeah, when we were in high school and college my friends and I would but as adults we don't. I appreciate a well put together women but I don't hoot, point or stare. I've seen some men do it and I always have the same reaction, "Grow up". 

Maybe I am just weird since I don't.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> To me this is normal for both men and women and some try to hide it but...why? Why don't we just all admit that we will always have eyes even if we are in a relationship. By admitting this doesn't mean we have to push it in anyone's face. It just means being honest and not hiding, and then also not projecting upon the other gender that they are better or worse than our own, since we are all doing and admitting to the same thing. Namely, that other human beings are attractive and we see them and feel attraction. And that some of us will always watch porn, even if we don't share that with you, we can admit that we do. I think just being honest to this extent would help everyone. People can then just get used to it and not develop insecurities over what happens in our imagination that the other person may not even be thinking about or doing. Instead, we could just all get used to the fact that none of us will ever be the "only" thing in anyone else's eyes.


Sure, as an adult, that's where I'm mostly at. But from an early age, even though I was raised by a single mother that was fervently feminist, I was taught first and foremost not to be a creep.

Always to be gentle with women. Consent is paramount. Never degrade them, especially when it comes to comparing them to other women. She viewed that very much as a means for patriarchal control of women - using other women in a sexist way to control, manipulate, or as a kind of benchmark they have to meet.

I was always far more afraid of being creepy to women than I was ever afraid of rejection, for example. In fact, in thinking about it, one of my greatest fears was being rejected for being creepy. 

My (BSC) ex-wife for example, was very much anti-porn, and told me over and over again if she ever found anything like that with me she would leave me on the spot. Same with masturbation, or even checking out other women. Talking about other women would have been the apocalypse. Now, she was nuts, to be sure, but in thinking back to my LTRs, most of them were a bit shame-y about porn. A few not.



> Even though we may feel that way when we are in a great relationship, like @LifeIsShort said. It isn't literally true though. Other people are still hot even if we are in a great relationship. Like she said, I don't go thinking back about previous lovers when I'm in a good relationship, but I will certainly notice a tall glass of water standing on the side of the street, just like any man I'm seeing will notice some hottie on the road, too.


Sure, but I think you're also someone that would welcome a conversation about who your partner thinks is hot. I'm sure I have a bias towards the women I've chosen to be in relationships with, but I would say that's been very uncommon. 

Now that I think about it, the only one I really talked in depth about other women with was also bi. We weren't really together, but we did have the same taste in women.


----------



## Marduk

Numb26 said:


> Well. I wouldn't get bent out of shape but I can promise you that it would only happen once


How would you do that?


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> But again...I think we all may do such things in a group setting with only our same sex friends, whooping it up and all of that. I think that's fun and normal friend bonding stuff.


That's essentially what I'm talking about. A group of women talking at a gathering. That also has their partners there. It always struck me as some kind of "I am woman, hear me roar" kinda thing.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Sure, but I think you're also someone that would welcome a conversation about who your partner thinks is hot. I'm sure I have a bias towards the women I've chosen to be in relationships with, but I would say that's been very uncommon.
> 
> Now that I think about it, the only one I really talked in depth about other women with was also bi. We weren't really together, but we did have the same taste in women.


I've learned it usually backfires for me. Men want to tell me about women who are hot and they think it's fun if I chime in, but once I talk about men who are hot they seem to get their feelings hurt. So I just avoid those topics altogether and say something like "I think we can assume we are both healthy adults and therefore we think some other adults are hot, but there's not need to talk about it, is there?"


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> That's essentially what I'm talking about. A group of women talking at a gathering. That also has their partners there. It always struck me as some kind of "I am woman, hear me roar" kinda thing.


My friends do this but we certainly don't do it with our men around.


----------



## Numb26

Marduk said:


> Numb26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well. I wouldn't get bent out of shape but I can promise you that it would only happen once
> 
> 
> 
> How would you do that?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't disrespect my partner like that and I expect the same. She would find herself alone


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I've learned it usually backfires for me. Men want to tell me about women who are hot and they think it's fun if I chime in, but once I talk about men who are hot they seem to get their feelings hurt. So I just avoid those topics altogether and say something like "I think we can assume we are both healthy adults and therefore we think some other adults are hot, but there's not need to talk about it, is there?"


Lol. Sometimes I think we've had many similar life experiences, just with the genders reversed. I mean, like 1% of yours, but you know what I mean.


----------



## Marduk

Numb26 said:


> I wouldn't disrespect my partner like that and I expect the same. She would find herself alone


Let's game this out.

"Wife, all of you girls were laughing and talking about how your friend's pool boy with a six pack was hot and if you were 10 years younger and single, you'd hit that. If you do that again, I'm going to leave you, but in a totally secure way that has nothing to do with my masculinity or being jealous."

I totally get what you're saying here. I just have had zero success with trying to talk to any of my LTRs about it in general, or my wife in particular. What _did_ work with my wife, however, was talking about other women the way she talked about other men. That worked like a hot damn, even if it did mean she didn't speak to me for a day or two after.

But I will say that all of her friends do this, and all of my friends that are women do this, too. The women in my family have also done this. I wouldn't say it's universal, but I would say it's common. 

And I would say that saying something like I jokingly said above would just get me thrown into FW's insecure men bucket.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Let's game this out.
> 
> "Wife, all of you girls were laughing and talking about how your friend's pool boy with a six pack was hot and if you were 10 years younger and single, you'd hit that. If you do that again, I'm going to leave you, but in a totally secure way that has nothing to do with my masculinity or being jealous."
> 
> I totally get what you're saying here. I just have had zero success with trying to talk to any of my LTRs about it in general, or my wife in particular. What _did_ work with my wife, however, was talking about other women the way she talked about other men. That worked like a hot damn, even if it did mean she didn't speak to me for a day or two after.
> 
> But I will say that all of her friends do this, and all of my friends that are women do this, too. The women in my family have also done this. I wouldn't say it's universal, but I would say it's common.
> 
> And I would say that saying something like I jokingly said above would just get me thrown into FW's insecure men bucket.


I think he means like long ago when you were just dating, the first time she did it would be noted. The second time would be the end of the dates.

I've done similar with men who turn their heads a little too much or talk to the waitress's boobs a little too long right in front of me. There's no need for me to tell them what they did wrong, I just stopped returning their calls.


----------



## Numb26

Marduk said:


> Numb26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't disrespect my partner like that and I expect the same. She would find herself alone
> 
> 
> 
> Let's game this out.
> 
> "Wife, all of you girls were laughing and talking about how your friend's pool boy with a six pack was hot and if you were 10 years younger and single, you'd hit that. If you do that again, I'm going to leave you, but in a totally secure way that has nothing to do with my masculinity or being jealous."
> 
> I totally get what you're saying here. I just have had zero success with trying to talk to any of my LTRs about it in general, or my wife in particular. What _did_ work with my wife, however, was talking about other women the way she talked about other men. That worked like a hot damn, even if it did mean she didn't speak to me for a day or two after.
> 
> But I will say that all of her friends do this, and all of my friends that are women do this, too. The women in my family have also done this. I wouldn't say it's universal, but I would say it's common.
> 
> And I would say that saying something like I jokingly said above would just get me thrown into FW's insecure men bucket.
Click to expand...

To me, it has absolutely nothing to do with masculinity, insecurity, being jealous or anything else. It comes down to respect, plain and simple.

To do it when its "Girl's night out" is one thing and is expected. But to do it in front of your SO is a slap in the face. If I called my partner out on it and they threw the "you are just being insecure" BS at me it would definitely be time to leave


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

I would but that's just me. I'd probably leave and tell her she can get a ride home with the busboy (or his mom) that she thinks is so hot.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I think he means like long ago when you were just dating, the first time she did it would be noted. The second time would be the end of the dates.
> 
> I've done similar with men who turn their heads a little too much or talk to the waitress's boobs a little too long right in front of me. There's no need for me to tell them what they did wrong, I just stopped returning their calls.


Oh, I’ve done that. 

Except when she was really hot. 

Ok, I’m my own worst enemy here.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Oh, I’ve done that.
> 
> Except when she was really hot.
> 
> Ok, I’m my own worst enemy here.


Maybe that is how you have seen these behaviors in several women? By picking the hot ones? Maybe these are the one who act a bit more entitled or something?

I dunno, it just wouldn't be worth it to me to continue seeing someone so immature.

I'm one of the worst, most immature bone heads on earth when I'm with a group of certain friends. But when I'm not with them, I still *feel* the same way (oh yeah, that dude is smokin' hot) I just have no reason to tell anyone else about it. When the girls are all together, this is one of the few times we can actually state out loud these kinds of thoughts. The other 99.99% of my life I'm just a normal woman doing normal woman things, not out there craning my neck at the hotties or talking about them. There's no reason to.

But I'm mature enough to realize talking to men about any of that is just pointless.


----------



## Lila

Faithful Wife said:


> Maybe that is how you have seen these behaviors in several women? By picking the hot ones? Maybe these are the one who act a bit more entitled or something?


I was thinking the same thing. 

@Marduk, maybe it is something that is related to the hot ones. I don't think I have ever, in all of my years on this earth, felt the need to discuss with my SO or even a group of random straight men whether I'd **** a random hot guy given the opportunity. But then again, I'm also one of the those who puts away her cell phone and gives whomever is in my company my undivided attention. It's the least I could do.


----------



## Cletus

farsidejunky said:


> I believe people are simply not emotionally equipped to handle the information available to us.


So what information would that be, exactly?

Is there a constant drumbeat of male failure in the bedroom that's showing up as clickbait in our "You'll never believe what she looks like today" ads? Maybe, but then, given the orgasm gap, it's probably high time our radar was ping'd anyway.

Is it that our SOs are getting more comfortable telling us about their past? Not I think on this topic, since it's usually a case of Sturm und Drang with no substance, or imagining what must be the case even though fair maiden doth protest (just enough?). 

I doubt most men are getting #2 pencil filled questionnaires from their exes on their technique and How It Relates To Those Who Have Come (TM) Before...

I had never heard the term RJ before I came here, but I don't think people reading this forum are discovering a hitherto unknown anxiety. Most of them seem to arrive well and truly anxious.


----------



## Cletus

Luminous said:


> Many men (and women) have a severe lack of self worth, and so rather than seeking validation from within, they seek it externally. This is not just an issue that men face, but it is one in which society doesn't offer a man with this issue much reinforcement.


In all fairness, when it comes to your self-worth as a lover, isn't external validation soft of a requirement? My right hand thinks I'm a regular Casanova (left hand does NOT agree), but I would rather know what my spouse thinks.


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> Perhaps men in the past worried less about this type of thing because more people married as virgins back then.


I too have wondered if this did not play some part in the importance of virtue.


----------



## Cletus

Casual Observer said:


> Maybe it's more prevalent because it's more difficult to reinvent yourself? Before Facebook, before the Internet in general took over as our source of information, what we presented to someone was 95% of what they could find out about us. And whatever we settled on as the truth, there wasn't likely to be anything coming our way, perhaps years down the road, to challenge that.


But surely sexual ability has to fall into the 5%, no? 

H:"Honey, I'm the best lover you've ever had"
W:"Um, OK, if you say so".


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Maybe that is how you have seen these behaviors in several women? By picking the hot ones? Maybe these are the one who act a bit more entitled or something?
> 
> I dunno, it just wouldn't be worth it to me to continue seeing someone so immature.
> 
> I'm one of the worst, most immature bone heads on earth when I'm with a group of certain friends. But when I'm not with them, I still *feel* the same way (oh yeah, that dude is smokin' hot) I just have no reason to tell anyone else about it. When the girls are all together, this is one of the few times we can actually state out loud these kinds of thoughts. The other 99.99% of my life I'm just a normal woman doing normal woman things, not out there craning my neck at the hotties or talking about them. There's no reason to.
> 
> But I'm mature enough to realize talking to men about any of that is just pointless.


If it were isolated to women I’ve dated, I would agree with you - the problem is me. But it’s not. 

I’ve learned to live with it.


----------



## Cletus

I don't have a problem with my wife telling me who makes the grade. As long as mama brings her tail home to take our her sexual urges on me, I'll be the first to scroll to the latest Brad Pitt movie to make it happen.

I know I'm not the prettiest boy she ever dated. I'm not the largest. I am probably the best, but that's only because the sample size is so small and I've had a very long time to practice. 

But what if I wasn't? Well then, I would like to know. In fact, I'd like to know in excruciating detail what it was I needed to improve on, so that even if I never became "The Best", I at least gave it the ol' college try. 

My wife is not my best, and she knows it. Not because I ever made such an insensitive statement, but things can be inferred when you have to discuss why your expectations for your married sex life exceeded the reality. I think it used to bother her, but not so much any more. Coming to terms with "I am who I am" is an effective anxiety reducer.


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> But surely sexual ability has to fall into the 5%, no?
> 
> H:"Honey, I'm the best lover you've ever had"
> W:"Um, OK, if you say so".


For me, it’s more like: “after 20 years of dedicated practice getting you off, I better be the best one at it, or I really suck as a student.”


----------



## Cletus

Marduk said:


> For me, it’s more like: “after 20 years of dedicated practice getting you off, I better be the best one at it, or I really suck as a student.”


Or perhaps "you suck as a teacher". 

No one can improve in the absence of feedback.


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> I was thinking the same thing.
> 
> @Marduk, maybe it is something that is related to the hot ones. I don't think I have ever, in all of my years on this earth, felt the need to discuss with my SO or even a group of random straight men whether I'd **** a random hot guy given the opportunity. But then again, I'm also one of the those who puts away her cell phone and gives whomever is in my company my undivided attention. It's the least I could do.


Lol, like I said, if it were just the women I’ve picked, I would agree. I’ve literally had my buddy’s grandma get in on the “hot boy” talking action. Maybe she was hot in her day, but I doubt it’s a factor now. 

But I mean, I’m not alone here. 

Get a group of women together, add drinks, and this kind of “girl talk” just seems to come rolling out. 

My point in all this is not to complain about women. It’s to point out that it happens to us all, or at least more than you might think. What is to some just innocent talk or looks, is to others not innocent at all. And, all too often, it’s just “oh you’re insecure.”

Which is probably a good place to circle back around to RJ.


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> Or perhaps "you suck as a teacher".
> 
> No one can improve in the absence of feedback.


Sure. 

But there are ways of discovering what she likes whether she can admit it with words, tell you with words, or even know herself before both of you know. 

But you do have to be open, willing, and playful about it. You can’t learn lessons in a book without spreading those pages open.


----------



## Cletus

Marduk said:


> Get a group of women together, add drinks, and this kind of “girl talk” just seems to come rolling out.


I have no problem with it. I put it in the Sexual Reparations bin. "Free at last, sister, we are free at last!"


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> I have no problem with it. I put it in the Sexual Reparations bin. "Free at last, sister, we are free at last!"


Bingo. 

I chalk it up to late state sexual revolution stuff.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> If it were isolated to women I’ve dated, I would agree with you - the problem is me. But it’s not.
> 
> I’ve learned to live with it.


If we are talking about just men in general, not men I've dated, oh heck yes I've heard a whole lot about how hot such and such woman is, how much I'd love to bang or tap this or that. Men of a certain type love talking about this, and if I'm the gal friend in the group, they have no problem telling me all about it too.

That doesn't bother me really, it is normal and healthy, IMO. Not all men do this but some do. The ones who do talk like that who I have been friends with are just being jolly about it, not creeps. I think men and women both like to talk about and admire the opposite sex. It makes us feel tingly and silly and fun.


----------



## Rubix Cubed

Cletus said:


> This is just one man's opinion, but I believe the cause for most women lying about their past is because of this male fragility, not the cause.


 That's a "chicken or the egg" proposition. It's not defendable. The male fragility is caused by being lied to (or cheated on). The lying and cheating is because of the male fragility which is IMO just a history re-write for the most part.




farsidejunky said:


> Furthermore, it's nothing really new...
> 
> "Of course I orgasmed, honey. It was great for me" said every 50's wife ever.
> 
> ...except for maybe the magnitude of it. Where would a guy in the '50s...or even the '80s stumble across information that would cause his mind to wander down this road?
> 
> I see it much like everything else: anything you want information on is available at the tips of our fingers...even if it's about another individual.
> 
> How about the sheer number of means available to share such information?
> 
> I believe people are simply not emotionally equipped to handle the information available to us.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk





farsidejunky said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you, FW, but rather taking a WAG as to why it appears to be more prevalent now than in the past.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


 This holds true for everything politics, relationships, crime, violence, war, etc.. It's in your face w/ a 24/7 news cycle on dozens of different platforms and people get worked up over it more. A perfect example is gun crime is way down by statistics, but because of the press and their agenda, many think it's an epidemic.

That being said, I posit that RJ is not so prevalent everywhere as it is on infidelity forums and that would be the control group/bubble that all of us are responding to/from which leads back to my top response to @Cletus, being lied to and cheated on can make many guys "fragile" and where better to see that than on infidelity boards. You can't or shouldn't project this place on to society as a whole.


----------



## Sfort

Young at Heart said:


> As a man over 70, I will provide a slightly different perspective.
> 
> As I have grown older, my T level dropped, that has resulted in my desiring to have my wife provide me with more emotional love It has also meant that I need more foreplay to have intense meaningful sex. I am much less into a quickie satisfying my needs than in my youth.
> 
> So the whole youth generational things just doesn't jib with my experience in aging. Perhaps after a certain point in life you look at and understand your own mortality and want more emotional meaning in your life. Perhaps it is all hormonal. whatever it is, yes, I have become more emotionally fragile as I get older and what a little more TLC in my relationship.


This is what I was trying unsuccessfully to say in another thread.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Cletus said:


> I don't have a problem with my wife telling me who makes the grade. As long as mama brings her tail home to take our her sexual urges on me, I'll be the first to scroll to the latest Brad Pitt movie to make it happen.
> 
> I know I'm not the prettiest boy she ever dated. I'm not the largest. I am probably the best, but that's only because the sample size is so small and I've had a very long time to practice.
> 
> But what if I wasn't? Well then, I would like to know. In fact, I'd like to know in excruciating detail what it was I needed to improve on, so that even if I never became "The Best", I at least gave it the ol' college try.
> 
> My wife is not my best, and she knows it. Not because I ever made such an insensitive statement, but things can be inferred when you have to discuss why your expectations for your married sex life exceeded the reality. I think it used to bother her, but not so much any more. Coming to terms with "I am who I am" is an effective anxiety reducer.



To me the issue isn't whether I'm the best or you're the best....it's impossible to be the best at everything. The real question is do I make you happy enough that you have no interest in looking elsewhere?

If that answer is yes on both sides we're golden....and I might even feel good enough to make efforts to improve.


----------



## Blondilocks

Marduk said:


> I’ve always done #1 with every woman I’ve ever been serious with, and in fact that’s how I was taught to treat women.
> 
> Meanwhile, I’ve had many women, including 2 wives now, do the same as #2 to me with the genders reversed. I would always have a running list of who they think is hot, be that movie stars, porn stars, friends of mine, or friends of hers. And I was always told (and are still told) to just suck it up and be a secure man about it.
> 
> *I have literally sat there at a restaurant with groups of couples, with the women running down every guy they’d do if they got the chance, and all the guys just looked at their shoes awkwardly and tried to not make a big deal about it. Any guy that does, gets berated for being controlling and insecure, because it’s just girls having fun. *
> 
> So go figure.


My take is this is passive-aggressive payback for all those looks men sneak that they think they're getting away with, the jokes about the waitress (whoever) with the big hooters etc. There is courage in numbers so the women are putting the screws to the men and enjoying their discomfort in safety. It's a little steam valve. 

The women don't realize that they're displaying a distinct lack of class. Not to mention that it's just plain rude.

Why the men don't start their own convo about all of their lusts is puzzling. Make it a group fun-fest. Or, just get up and tell the women that you'll give them privacy to enjoy their fantasies and stroll to the bar and start chatting up a lady. You do not have to sit there and take it.


----------



## fto0293

Blondilocks said:


> My take is this is passive-aggressive payback for all those looks men sneak that they think they're getting away with, the jokes about the waitress (whoever) with the big hooters etc. There is courage in numbers so the women are putting the screws to the men and enjoying their discomfort in safety. It's a little steam valve.
> 
> The women don't realize that they're displaying a distinct lack of class. Not to mention that it's just plain rude.
> 
> Why the men don't start their own convo about all of their lusts is puzzling. Make it a group fun-fest. Or, just get up and tell the women that you'll give them privacy to enjoy their fantasies and stroll to the bar and start chatting up a lady. You do not have to sit there and take it.


Agreed.

The problem with this and all other kinds of gender-based attempts at collective historical payback in either direction, is that the subset of men perpetrating the big hooters comments aren't necessarily the same men who were presumably good enough to get invited to a group date/gathering with women and who are now feeling discomfort, at least based on what @Marduk and others have stated of their experiences and their own beliefs.

(Not to mention their discomfort is almost certainly influenced by the fact that they ARE distinct from those kinds of men.)


----------



## TAMAT

Part of it is because they notice that the intense love and physical fulfullment they felt when t first dating/married is replaced by something much less so as time goes by. 

Every time their W does not orgasm or seems strained to do so or is dry is a black mark on their manhood. Same for the reduction in the types of sexual acts she will engage in.

At the same time they find out small details about their Ws sexuality which makes them believe they were never their Ws number one choice for sex. So the natural question is who was or who is their number one. 

I'm also writing about myself not just generally.


----------



## Middle of Everything

Blondilocks said:


> My take is this is passive-aggressive payback for all those looks men sneak that they think they're getting away with, the jokes about the waitress (whoever) with the big hooters etc. There is courage in numbers so the women are putting the screws to the men and enjoying their discomfort in safety. It's a little steam valve.
> 
> The women don't realize that they're displaying a distinct lack of class. Not to mention that it's just plain rude.
> 
> Why the men don't start their own convo about all of their lusts is puzzling. Make it a group fun-fest. Or, just get up and tell the women that you'll give them privacy to enjoy their fantasies and *stroll to the bar *and start chatting up a lady. You do not have to sit there and take it.


Bingo. Even if Im not chatting up a lady, Im not sitting there.


----------



## Girl_power

Marduk said:


> Lol, like I said, if it were just the women I’ve picked, I would agree. I’ve literally had my buddy’s grandma get in on the “hot boy” talking action. Maybe she was hot in her day, but I doubt it’s a factor now.
> 
> 
> 
> But I mean, I’m not alone here.
> 
> 
> 
> Get a group of women together, add drinks, and this kind of “girl talk” just seems to come rolling out.
> 
> 
> 
> My point in all this is not to complain about women. It’s to point out that it happens to us all, or at least more than you might think. What is to some just innocent talk or looks, is to others not innocent at all. And, all too often, it’s just “oh you’re insecure.”
> 
> 
> 
> Which is probably a good place to circle back around to RJ.




I think this is pretty innocent compared to men watching porn, going to strip clubs where they often times watch a women their daughters age take her clothes off. Also... the term boys will be boys comes to my mind.


----------



## Girl_power

Blondilocks said:


> My take is this is passive-aggressive payback for all those looks men sneak that they think they're getting away with, the jokes about the waitress (whoever) with the big hooters etc. There is courage in numbers so the women are putting the screws to the men and enjoying their discomfort in safety. It's a little steam valve.
> 
> 
> 
> The women don't realize that they're displaying a distinct lack of class. Not to mention that it's just plain rude.
> 
> 
> 
> Why the men don't start their own convo about all of their lusts is puzzling. Make it a group fun-fest. Or, just get up and tell the women that you'll give them privacy to enjoy their fantasies and stroll to the bar and start chatting up a lady. You do not have to sit there and take it.




So women should do the same when their man looks at another women? Or watches porn? I mean is that not considered a lack of class and something the women shouldn’t put up with?


----------



## Casual Observer

Marduk said:


> For me, it’s more like: “after 20 years of dedicated practice getting you off, I better be the best one at it, or I really suck as a student.”


A: This is so true!
B: But it could be completely wrong!

It all depends upon your partner's willingness to allow herself not only to teach you what he or she desires, but also to see you as that "thing" that can fulfill her desires. Your partner has to believe in you. Want you. Desire you in some way.

Of course the devil is in the details. Some of our partners almost have to become distracted to get off.

It's so effin' complicated, and it shouldn't be. 

OK, let's get back to fragility. I've had "the" discussion with my wife many times. There are certain things that really shouldn't be brought up immediately prior to intimacy. So last night my wife tells me that, just a couple days ago, she retrieved a new memory from that past period in which something traumatic happened. Nothing crazy, just how she had met this guy that asked her out on a date, and the date was watching the sun come up. My wife is not/was not a morning person, so it was a one-time thing, she just remembered how stupid it was. 

But why tell me this 10 minutes before getting naked? Especially since it came to her a couple days ago? Why bring up something that's going to bring up other things I'm trying not to think about? It's clueless. But the TAM jury in this thread would say "One more example of a fragile male ego!" No mention that maybe it shows a lack of understanding from the woman. It's just factual, what's the big deal.


----------



## Girl_power

Casual Observer said:


> A: This is so true!
> 
> B: But it could be completely wrong!
> 
> 
> 
> It all depends upon your partner's willingness to allow herself not only to teach you what he or she desires, but also to see you as that "thing" that can fulfill her desires. Your partner has to believe in you. Want you. Desire you in some way.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course the devil is in the details. Some of our partners almost have to become distracted to get off.
> 
> 
> 
> It's so effin' complicated, and it shouldn't be.
> 
> 
> 
> OK, let's get back to fragility. I've had "the" discussion with my wife many times. There are certain things that really shouldn't be brought up immediately prior to intimacy. So last night my wife tells me that, just a couple days ago, she retrieved a new memory from that past period in which something traumatic happened. Nothing crazy, just how she had met this guy that asked her out on a date, and the date was watching the sun come up. My wife is not/was not a morning person, so it was a one-time thing, she just remembered how stupid it was.
> 
> 
> 
> But why tell me this 10 minutes before getting naked? Especially since it came to her a couple days ago? Why bring up something that's going to bring up other things I'm trying not to think about? It's clueless. But the TAM jury in this thread would say "One more example of a fragile male ego!" No mention that maybe it shows a lack of understanding from the woman. It's just factual, what's the big deal.




Yea that’s weird. But why is she trying to remember things?


----------



## Marduk

Blondilocks said:


> My take is this is passive-aggressive payback for all those looks men sneak that they think they're getting away with, the jokes about the waitress (whoever) with the big hooters etc. There is courage in numbers so the women are putting the screws to the men and enjoying their discomfort in safety. It's a little steam valve.
> 
> The women don't realize that they're displaying a distinct lack of class. Not to mention that it's just plain rude.



Insightful, thanks for this.


----------



## Marduk

Girl_power said:


> So women should do the same when their man looks at another women? Or watches porn? I mean is that not considered a lack of class and something the women shouldn’t put up with?


I don’t mind at all when my woman ogles other women or watches porn. I mean, that would be a pretty great date night, actually.


----------



## Marduk

Casual Observer said:


> So last night my wife tells me that, just a couple days ago, she retrieved a new memory from that past period in which something traumatic happened. Nothing crazy, just how she had met this guy that asked her out on a date, and the date was watching the sun come up. My wife is not/was not a morning person, so it was a one-time thing, she just remembered how stupid it was.
> 
> But why tell me this 10 minutes before getting naked?


Sadly, because she was trying to avoid having sex with you.


----------



## notmyjamie

Marduk said:


> I've also been asked to compare body parts with ex's in every LTR I've been in, which I refuse to do. I personally don't really remember or think about such things, anyway.


That's just messed up. If my guy wants to volunteer that he appreciates a body part of mine I enjoy the compliment. I certainly don't want to hear his thoughts on mine vs an old lover's ass for example or hear his rating of me vs her in bed. That's just begging for a self esteem problem. And I'm sure I wouldn't stick around with a guy who would want to discuss that stuff. I've never had a guy ask me how his penis measures up to my past lovers. I'd have a hard time remembering to be honest...I love the one I've got now and that's the only one I can picture anymore. 

Maybe I'm weird, but when I'm happy in a relationship I will notice that a man is handsome but it's a non issue for me. I don't dwell on it or imagine myself with him. In fact, I'm more likely to notice that a guy is handsome if there is something about him that reminds me of my partner.


----------



## Hiner112

Some philosophizing:

From the time boys enter elementary school they are implicitly or explicitly told that they are "less than" girls (boys are immature is the biggest culprit but the assumption that they are also up to no good "boys will be boys" doesn't help much either). It is also often implied that men are often given positions that rightfully belong to qualified women. OLD reinforces this "less than" somewhat (I'm going to mess up the vocabulary since I've only read about it) because it takes lots more attempts or swipes or whatever at a match for men than it does for women.

In a relationship there are some other cultural issues. Women have been outpacing male educational achievement since 94 or 95. For a quarter century women have been better educated, if not better paid. The culture still hasn't caught up to the possibility that a man's place might be in the home and he might have just as much to contribute there as he does outside the home. When reading articles about problems about in relationships, the clueless, emotionally stunted participant is almost always referred to as "he/him" while the long suffering, patient, and unheard spouse is "she/her". This sends the message that men are bad and likely hopeless at relationships in general.

Sexually, I don't think anyone would seriously imply that it is harder to bring a man to orgasm than it is a woman. Some of the surveys I've read have said that between 95% of men orgasm during sex while heterosexual women orgasm something like 65% of the time. The male percentage looks low to me. This imbalance leads to all kinds of side effects. Men kind of expect an orgasm to happen every single time. Women's motivation to have sex would be lower since they aren't enjoying it as much. Some men would get discouraged or, dare I say it, insecure. I've seen some threads here where the male SO doesn't orgasm or get hard a couple times and the reaction we see here is "what is wrong" and "I feel like a failure"? I understand the expectation that unless there is a medical condition men orgasm roughly every single time (because they do) but it is then a bit hypocritical to then criticize guys when they get worried when there is an unmet expectation roughly a third of the time.

references out of order:

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...sbian-gay-study-chapman-indiana-a7595181.html

https://www.loveisrespect.org/

https://quillette.com/2019/03/12/attraction-inequality-and-the-dating-economy/

Postscript:

I guess I have a different perspective of what my role in a relationship would be than some others here. I wouldn't ever discuss the attractiveness of another woman except in the most general and impersonal terms with someone I was dating. I would certainly not gush or talk about getting laid. The questions about whether clothes make you look fat or past lovers is less about clothes and lovers than it is about reassurance. The husband is going to be checking out the wife's ass in her jeans and not someone else's. The wife is going to be thinking about, having sex with, and emotionally connecting with the current husband and not previous (or future) lovers. In a committed relationship, you should be helping your partner's insecurities just as you do the other practical parts of life (chores, finances, etc). It might require professional help but it might just need the right kinds of reassurance and attention.


----------



## Casual Observer

Marduk said:


> Sadly, because she was trying to avoid having sex with you.


No, thankfully, that was not the case. She set up. The schedule and she’s seen it as something important to stick to. She’s just totally lacking in understanding where someone else is coming from. Could be from her meds, could be the trauma, could just be who she is.


----------



## Casual Observer

Girl_power said:


> Yea that’s weird. But why is she trying to remember things?


Part of the process of recovery from trauma. Long story discussed in another thread.


----------



## Blondilocks

Casual Observer said:


> No, thankfully, that was not the case. She set up. The schedule and she’s seen it as something important to stick to. She’s just totally lacking in understanding where someone else is coming from. Could be from her meds, could be the trauma, could just be who she is.


Your wife didn't read enough Cosmopolitan when she was a teenager. She seems to be lacking the romance gene.


----------



## Blondilocks

Girl_power said:


> So women should do the same when their man looks at another women? Or watches porn? I mean is that not considered a lack of class and something the women shouldn’t put up with?


If your man is craning his neck gawking at other women, walk away. No one wants to be seen with someone who openly disrespects them. As for porn, that depends on the woman.

One needs to strive to make their SO feel as though they are #1. If they aren't, why are you with them?


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Blondilocks said:


> Girl_power said:
> 
> 
> 
> So women should do the same when their man looks at another women? Or watches porn? I mean is that not considered a lack of class and something the women shouldn’t put up with?
> 
> 
> 
> If your man is craning his neck gawking at other women, walk away. No one wants to be seen with someone who openly disrespects them. As for porn, that depends on the woman.
> 
> One needs to strive to make their SO feel as though they are #1. If they aren't, why are you with them?
Click to expand...

Depends on what they are wearing. You expect a man to not look when a half naked floozy with buttcheeks and boobs hanging all out for the world to see? We all look, judge, then look some more. The polite way is to use your peripheries, of course.


----------



## Blondilocks

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Depends on what they are wearing. You expect a man to not look when a half naked floozy with buttcheeks and boobs hanging all out for the world to see? We all look, judge, then look some more. The polite way is to use your peripheries, of course.


Where I live that wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. We're used to it. 

A good way to handle spectacles, is to act like you've seen it all before. Otherwise, you'll come across as one of those bumpkins who is just off the farm and seeing gay Paree for the first time.


----------



## Lila

Marduk said:


> Lol, like I said, if it were just the women I’ve picked, I would agree. I’ve literally had my buddy’s grandma get in on the “hot boy” talking action. Maybe she was hot in her day, but I doubt it’s a factor now.
> 
> But I mean, I’m not alone here.
> 
> Get a group of women together, add drinks, and this kind of “girl talk” just seems to come rolling out.
> 
> My point in all this is not to complain about women. It’s to point out that it happens to us all, or at least more than you might think. What is to some just innocent talk or looks, is to others not innocent at all. And, all too often, it’s just “oh you’re insecure.”
> 
> Which is probably a good place to circle back around to RJ.


This must be a personality trait that I lack. Not saying that to make myself seem like I'm better but just different. I'm less of an open book but I can see how women like this are attractive. However like a beautiful rose, beware the thorns. Those with a less than rock solid self confidence should stay away or feel the effects of having their egos smashed to smithereens.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Blondilocks said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Depends on what they are wearing. You expect a man to not look when a half naked floozy with buttcheeks and boobs hanging all out for the world to see? We all look, judge, then look some more. The polite way is to use your peripheries, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> Where I live that wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. We're used to it.
> 
> A good way to handle spectacles, is to act like you've seen it all before. Otherwise, you'll come across as one of those bumpkins who is just off the farm and seeing gay Paree for the first time.
Click to expand...

I don't see it a lot, but I live in the southeast, albeit in a large metropolitan area. I do understand they are desperate for attention and I try not to look... but not easy when ass cheeks and boobs are on display...


----------



## Marduk

notmyjamie said:


> That's just messed up. If my guy wants to volunteer that he appreciates a body part of mine I enjoy the compliment. I certainly don't want to hear his thoughts on mine vs an old lover's ass for example or hear his rating of me vs her in bed. That's just begging for a self esteem problem. And I'm sure I wouldn't stick around with a guy who would want to discuss that stuff. I've never had a guy ask me how his penis measures up to my past lovers. I'd have a hard time remembering to be honest...I love the one I've got now and that's the only one I can picture anymore.
> 
> Maybe I'm weird, but when I'm happy in a relationship I will notice that a man is handsome but it's a non issue for me. I don't dwell on it or imagine myself with him. In fact, I'm more likely to notice that a guy is handsome if there is something about him that reminds me of my partner.


Same here. I remember (kinda) how a few looked naked, especially if there was something especially notable (good or bad), but I certainly couldn't tell you much else. Hell, I can't even remember most of their names because I simply don't think about them at all.


----------



## Marduk

Casual Observer said:


> No, thankfully, that was not the case. She set up. The schedule and she’s seen it as something important to stick to. She’s just totally lacking in understanding where someone else is coming from. Could be from her meds, could be the trauma, could just be who she is.


Ya.

Not buying that at all.

She might have had it scheduled, and might have committed to sticking to that schedule, but if she could "accidentally on purpose" get you to opt out, well she would be off the hook scott free here, man.

The timing here is very precise, as is the action. She's been in enough therapy to be mindful and aware of what she does. This was deliberate and planned.


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> This must be a personality trait that I lack. Not saying that to make myself seem like I'm better but just different. I'm less of an open book but I can see how women like this are attractive. However like a beautiful rose, beware the thorns. Those with a less than rock solid self confidence should stay away or feel the effects of having their egos smashed to smithereens.


Yup.


----------



## Marduk

fto0293 said:


> Agreed.
> 
> The problem with this and all other kinds of gender-based attempts at collective historical payback in either direction, is that the subset of men perpetrating the big hooters comments aren't necessarily the same men who were presumably good enough to get invited to a group date/gathering with women and who are now feeling discomfort, at least based on what @Marduk and others have stated of their experiences and their own beliefs.
> 
> (Not to mention their discomfort is almost certainly influenced by the fact that they ARE distinct from those kinds of men.)


Uh. 

Well.

I can't say I haven't ogled a waitress or two, or not commented to one of my friends about hot women in my youth.

I'm not exactly the poster child for taking a passive interest in attractive women while single. I guess I just shut up about it when in a relationship.


----------



## Mr The Other

When I was a kid, I still remember very old men occasionally have strange turns where acted out of their mind. It was shell shock then, PTSD now. 

That was in the 80's so they had been like that, showing that trauma, for about sixty years. Fragile as fine china, eh?


----------



## Casual Observer

Marduk said:


> Ya.
> 
> Not buying that at all.
> 
> She might have had it scheduled, and might have committed to sticking to that schedule, but if she could "accidentally on purpose" get you to opt out, well she would be off the hook scott free here, man.
> 
> The timing here is very precise, as is the action. She's been in enough therapy to be mindful and aware of what she does. This was deliberate and planned.


Your line of thinking would also call into question whether she actually doesn't remember the trauma that started it all. That's something I've questioned myself, but who in the world would go to so much trouble to cover their tracks, knowing that it's going to lead to some expensive and potentially-painful therapy? 

But just to make sure I'm straight on this- you're suggesting that she's deliberately trying to create retroactive jealousy as a way to avoid intimacy? Until now, I was thinking we were heading off in the wrong direction for this thread. But saying that _*causing*_ RJ is a *deliberate action* is an interesting premise.


----------



## Marduk

Casual Observer said:


> Your line of thinking would also call into question whether she actually doesn't remember the trauma that started it all. That's something I've questioned myself, but who in the world would go to so much trouble to cover their tracks, knowing that it's going to lead to some expensive and potentially-painful therapy?


I don't think that's necessarily true. She could remember it, and still be avoidant. Or she could not remember it, and be avoidant. Either way, my take is she's avoidant.



> But just to make sure I'm straight on this- you're suggesting that she's deliberately trying to create retroactive jealousy as a way to avoid intimacy?


Think about it. She says something stupid about another guy, knowing it will:
(a) hurt you
(b) turn you off
(c) if you pull the pin on sex because you're hurt and turned off, then she still lived up to her commitment
(d) if you voice your concerns, she's free to play the "I did my part, you're just being insecure/jealous" card



> Until now, I was thinking we were heading off in the wrong direction for this thread. But saying that _*causing*_ RJ is a *deliberate action* is an interesting premise.


I'm basing that on the fact she's actively in therapy, which means she must be thinking about her behaviour, must know she needs to change it (hence the schedule), and is self-aware enough to know based on both of those to know what the impact on you is going to be for her to bring it up.

I mean, in a weird way, she wins either way. If you still have sex, she wins, because she met her commitment. If you don't have sex because you're upset/turned off, she wins double, because she still met her commitment, but she also doesn't have to actually have sex.

It doesn't logically hold true for me that she said it right before she had it pre-planned with you to have sex spontaneously. I mean, the sex was planned. She was obviously thinking about it. It doesn't make sense that she would say that because she wanted to have sex, because she's smart enough to know that's not sexy to you. It also doesn't make sense that it was just a thing she blurted out randomly, because the odds on that are astronomical - and even if it did occur to her and she wanted to have sex, she'd likely kept it quiet until after. But she didn't.

That logically leaves only an attempt at avoiding sex while meeting her commitment as something that makes sense to me.

I would watch to see if she does this kind of thing again. It could have been a one-off thing. If it would have worked, you would have reinforced this behaviour.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> It doesn't logically hold true for me that she said it right before she had it pre-planned with you to have sex spontaneously. I mean, the sex was planned. She was obviously thinking about it. It doesn't make sense that she would say that because she wanted to have sex, because she's smart enough to know that's not sexy to you. *It also doesn't make sense that it was just a thing she blurted out randomly*, because the odds on that are astronomical - and even if it did occur to her and she wanted to have sex, she'd likely kept it quiet until after. But she didn't.
> 
> That logically leaves only an attempt at avoiding sex while meeting her commitment as something that makes sense to me.


Actually, all of this and many other issues CO has described could be explained by her being on the autism spectrum. Which I have suggested to him a few times but he never answers me when I bring it up. The more I read the more I believe this is probably the case.

Being self involved, lacking empathy for others or not understanding how they feel, these are classic autistic behaviors. Those on the spectrum don't do these things on purpose, it is because they don't have the same skills neuro-typical people have.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Actually, all of this and many other issues CO has described could be explained by her being on the autism spectrum. Which I have suggested to him a few times but he never answers me when I bring it up. The more I read the more I believe this is probably the case.
> 
> Being self involved, lacking empathy for others or not understanding how they feel, these are classic autistic behaviors. Those on the spectrum don't do these things on purpose, it is because they don't have the same skills neuro-typical people have.


Hadn't thought of that. That would make sense as to why she didn't self-censor if she thought of it. However, if she's high-functioning and on the spectrum, and is in active therapy, I'd still be asking myself why she did it. I mean, if she's autistic and just blurts things out... she should be doing it with other stuff, too. Is she, CO?

And it still leaves it in question why it occurred to her right before planned sex.

The whole deal feels premeditated to me here.


----------



## Cletus

Mr The Other said:


> When I was a kid, I still remember very old men occasionally have strange turns where acted out of their mind. It was shell shock then, PTSD now.
> 
> That was in the 80's so they had been like that, showing that trauma, for about sixty years. Fragile as fine china, eh?


If you would like me to amend the title to read "Why are men's egos so fragile?", I will gladly do so.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Hadn't thought of that. That would make sense as to why she didn't self-censor if she thought of it. However, if she's high-functioning and on the spectrum, and is in active therapy, I'd still be asking myself why she did it. I mean, if she's autistic and just blurts things out... *she should be doing it with other stuff, too*. Is she, CO?
> 
> And it still leaves it in question why it occurred to her right before planned sex.
> 
> The whole deal feels premeditated to me here.


I only know that she has said and done other things seemingly at the wrong time or without any concern for his or other's feelings. CO has written about a lot of these types of things over time.

Someone on the spectrum would/could definitely just blurt something out without regard to timing or other's feelings. If she is on the spectrum, they haven't figured that out in therapy yet.


----------



## Girl_power

I treat my SO how I want to be treated. And how they treat me, may or may not alter how I treat them. 
If you protest my ego and make me feel great about myself, then I’ll do the same to you.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Girl_power said:


> I treat my SO how I want to be treated. And how they treat me, may or may not alter how I treat them.
> If you protest my ego and make me feel great about myself, then I’ll do the same to you.


For me if they are not being kind and protective of me, I just have to move on. I can't treat them the same because it makes me feel bad even if they are doing it to me. But I can certainly remove them from my life.


----------



## Casual Observer

Faithful Wife said:


> Actually, all of this and many other issues CO has described could be explained by her being on the autism spectrum. Which I have suggested to him a few times but he never answers me when I bring it up. The more I read the more I believe this is probably the case.
> 
> Being self involved, lacking empathy for others or not understanding how they feel, these are classic autistic behaviors. Those on the spectrum don't do these things on purpose, it is because they don't have the same skills neuro-typical people have.


My apologies for not addressing the autism idea. It’s not something her therapist, psychologist or MC believe is the case. Closest thing they’ve got is a dissociative issue which they all now believe to be from trauma. 

Her “avoidance” of sex is so well integrated into her thinking that it’s something that just happens without thought or malice. Tonight I was saying something about how at some point I won’t be as, er, firm? And she reflexively said she’s been waiting years for that day. I reminded her that the point of therapy is to end that sort of thinking, as well as point out that loss of firmness does not equal loss of interest. 

She understood. She’s in an uncomfortable place because she sees the world she needs to move to, but she knows and understands the world of her past.


----------



## Blondilocks

"My apologies for not addressing the autism idea. It’s not something her therapist, psychologist or MC believe is the case. Closest thing they’ve got is *a dissociative issue *which they all now believe to be from trauma."

Between her brain and her tongue. The way she talks to you, you may as well be her brother. Sorry, man. She's got no filter.


----------



## Deejo

Generalizing here, but hey ... that makes things a whole lot easier. I've always tried to get my head around the concept of RJ being either; the case of a male that does NOT have a wholly integrated sense of self recognizing where any given partner has been intimately in the past, may in no way represent or correlate to where they are and how they feel now. Or ... this is straight up some kind of disorder.

I've never ever felt this way, so no I can't relate, but I do want to understand it. Primarily because I believe it is DESPERATELY unhealthy, both for the individual and the relationship.

In the case of deceit or lying about sexual history, I can certainly understand struggling with the trust paradigm. But in the case of a dude whose partner is sexually enthusiastic and engaged, and clearly expresses her satisfaction and love for her partner ... but he can't stop thinking about who's been in the saddle prior and how they rode? Or framing his mindset from the perspective of his value according to his partners feelings about him? It's got nothing to do with 'her' at that point.

That is nothing but destructive self-sabotage. It is a corrosive level of selfishness that I wonder if the individual can even see or acknowledge as selfishness. Which then to my mind lends itself to being a kind of disorder.

Bottom line, a well integrated man always appreciates acknowledgement by his partner, but he doesn't need it or crave it with the expectation he isn't going to get it. He KNOWS he is a good partner. And with that knowledge he can then determine if the person he is sharing his 'gifts' with, is worthy of them.


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> How do we know it is more prevalent now? Just because people have a way to reach out for advice about this kind of thing now doesn't really mean it happens more.
> 
> Maybe it does, I just don't know how we would know that.


We can't really know if the condition is more prevalent, but we can without doubt say that from a media perspective (the internet, mobile devices, social media, porn, sexting) that exposure and awareness is more prevalent.

I suppose there is a portion of men that may feel this way were we to transplant them to 30 or 40 years ago vs. now, but to my mind from a sexual awareness and availability perspective, that would be like comparing apples and dump-trucks.

Men now have the opportunity to give these feelings voice, anonymously on forums such as this, whereas in the past, I'm guessing they would have kept it to themselves.


----------



## SunCMars

We are valued for our face and form first, our minds, one sock higher than our shiny shoes.


----------



## SunCMars

It is this, it is our self-image that is fragile. 

Our societal image is never lasting, and is never fairly offered.

And our image is expiration-date, sensitive.

We are revered and valuable for some limited period, in this, our given and our self-assessed likeness.

The expiration date can slip forward, to some point, normally lesser, but individually differing.

We are given a vague high point in societal measured beauty, a possibly kind mid-point, and a misty later point.

At last, our image is old, void and disparaged.


----------



## Blondilocks

SunCMars said:


> *We are valued for our face and form first, *our minds, one sock higher than our shiny shoes.


At least, you didn't say wallet.


----------



## SunCMars

Blondilocks said:


> At least, you didn't say wallet.


When the face and form age and lose their value, the supple wallet will supplant the failing, as cash always maintains that in-vogue beauty.


----------



## Cletus

How do I put this delicately?

From my biased perspective, people should want to shack up with a partner who has had good experiences in the sack. The later one gets into life, the chances of finding someone who has not had a sexual partner prior to you drops to zero, while at the same the chances grow to near certainty that any partner you find with no experience is hopelessly sexually repressed. 

Now you can be jealous of those previous partners, or you can thank them for vetting your mate as someone who relishes a good rogering with YOU the person they are with NOW. You might as well be jealous of whomever introduced your mate to chocolate cake for all the good it does. Stop obsessing over it, put on the apron, and bake a new cake.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus said:


> How do I put this delicately?
> 
> From my biased perspective, people should want to shack up with a partner who has had good experiences in the sack. The later one gets into life, the chances of finding someone who has not had a sexual partner prior to you drops to zero, while at the same the chances grow to near certainty that any partner you find with no experience is hopelessly sexually repressed.
> 
> Now you can be jealous of those previous partners, or you can thank them for vetting your mate as someone who relishes a good rogering with YOU the person they are with NOW. You might as well be jealous of whomever introduced your mate to chocolate cake for all the good it does. Stop obsessing over it, put on the apron, and bake a new cake.


What confuses me is that the person experiencing RJ has also had prior experiences, haven't they? So when they think of their current partner and get jealous of his/her previous partners, does that mean that they are also pining away over their own past partners? Because it just seems illogical to think your partner is doing that unless you are also doing that. If you aren't doing that, why would they be?

Then bring in the whole thing about how supposedly we all have partner replacement fantasies. Does a man with RJ never EVER fantasize about anyone else? And if they do, why are they jealous if their partner might also do that?

It was so drilled into my head (mostly by men who were friends, not lovers) that no man will ever be faithful in his mind or with his eyes, that they will always still fantasize about other women and look at them (porn, on the street, anywhere) that it never occurred to me that a man would torture himself over what goes on in MY head. I just always figured well hey you wouldn't want me poking around inside your head I assume, so why would you poke around in mine?


----------



## Numb26

Faithful Wife said:


> Cletus said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do I put this delicately?
> 
> From my biased perspective, people should want to shack up with a partner who has had good experiences in the sack. The later one gets into life, the chances of finding someone who has not had a sexual partner prior to you drops to zero, while at the same the chances grow to near certainty that any partner you find with no experience is hopelessly sexually repressed.
> 
> Now you can be jealous of those previous partners, or you can thank them for vetting your mate as someone who relishes a good rogering with YOU the person they are with NOW. You might as well be jealous of whomever introduced your mate to chocolate cake for all the good it does. Stop obsessing over it, put on the apron, and bake a new cake.
> 
> 
> 
> What confuses me is that the person experiencing RJ has also had prior experiences, haven't they? So when they think of their current partner and get jealous of his/her previous partners, does that mean that they are also pining away over their own past partners? Because it just seems illogical to think your partner is doing that unless you are also doing that. If you aren't doing that, why would they be?
> 
> Then bring in the whole thing about how supposedly we all have partner replacement fantasies. Does a man with RJ never EVER fantasize about anyone else? And if they do, why are they jealous if their partner might also do that?
> 
> It was so drilled into my head (mostly by men who were friends, not lovers) that no man will ever be faithful in his mind or with his eyes, that they will always still fantasize about other women and look at them (porn, on the street, anywhere) that it never occurred to me that a man would torture himself over what goes on in MY head. I just always figured well hey you wouldn't want me poking around inside your head I assume, so why would you poke around in mine?
Click to expand...

Maybe it is because I don't have RJ but none of this makes sense to me at all. Why would somebody drive themselves crazy over their partners PAST?


----------



## minimalME

Pride and ego?



Numb26 said:


> Maybe it is because I don't have RJ but none of this makes sense to me at all. Why would somebody drive themselves crazy over their partners PAST?


----------



## Numb26

minimalME said:


> Pride and ego?
> 
> 
> 
> Numb26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe it is because I don't have RJ but none of this makes sense to me at all. Why would somebody drive themselves crazy over their partners PAST?
Click to expand...

More like insecurity and poor self esteem


----------



## notmyjamie

Cletus said:


> Now you can be jealous of those previous partners, or you can thank them for vetting your mate as someone who relishes a good rogering with YOU the person they are with NOW. You might as well be jealous of whomever introduced your mate to chocolate cake for all the good it does. Stop obsessing over it, put on the apron, and bake a new cake.


This is SO true. I have often said that the best thing my first lover did for me was to "normalize" certain sexual acts. He treated them like they were a given in a sexual relationship and he taught me what I needed to know to offer a man a satisfying sex life, not just techniques but a general attitude about things. If I'd been with someone who never did that I might not be willing and eager, in fact, to do some of the things that many men consider necessary in a relationship. I've seen it written here over and over "I'm going to start asking..."do you do ___" and if the answer is no, I will walk" Well, my current guy seems to enjoy my skill and enthusiasm for quite a few things. He doesn't ask where or when I learned them, he just enjoys them. He doesn't want to know the details about things but he's very grateful for the way I am. He's often said that I am the most kind and generous lover he's ever had. But to me, because of how normalized my first lover made everything, I just think it's the way it should be. 

He'd be an absolute fool to get jealous of that guy now, start hounding me with questions and ****ing the whole thing up. Just like he is very good at a few things that I enjoy immensely. I always say "I don't want to know who taught that to you, but I'm grateful they did!!!" and he always follows up with "self taught!!" LOL


----------



## Marduk

Numb26 said:


> Maybe it is because I don't have RJ but none of this makes sense to me at all. Why would somebody drive themselves crazy over their partners PAST?


Partly because of puritanical sexual ethics, I'd guess. Same thing that drives the whole madonna/***** thing.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> Cletus said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do I put this delicately?
> 
> From my biased perspective, people should want to shack up with a partner who has had good experiences in the sack. The later one gets into life, the chances of finding someone who has not had a sexual partner prior to you drops to zero, while at the same the chances grow to near certainty that any partner you find with no experience is hopelessly sexually repressed.
> 
> Now you can be jealous of those previous partners, or you can thank them for vetting your mate as someone who relishes a good rogering with YOU the person they are with NOW. You might as well be jealous of whomever introduced your mate to chocolate cake for all the good it does. Stop obsessing over it, put on the apron, and bake a new cake.
> 
> 
> 
> What confuses me is that the person experiencing RJ has also had prior experiences, haven't they? So when they think of their current partner and get jealous of his/her previous partners, does that mean that they are also pining away over their own past partners? Because it just seems illogical to think your partner is doing that unless you are also doing that. If you aren't doing that, why would they be?
> 
> Then bring in the whole thing about how supposedly we all have partner replacement fantasies. Does a man with RJ never EVER fantasize about anyone else? And if they do, why are they jealous if their partner might also do that?
> 
> It was so drilled into my head (mostly by men who were friends, not lovers) that no man will ever be faithful in his mind or with his eyes, that they will always still fantasize about other women and look at them (porn, on the street, anywhere) that it never occurred to me that a man would torture himself over what goes on in MY head. I just always figured well hey you wouldn't want me poking around inside your head I assume, so why would you poke around in mine?
Click to expand...

RJ isn't about fantasies, it's about past lovers and believing you somehow don't measure up. Might be the woman let it slip the ex was bigger or richer. Or for the woman, that his ex was skinnier or prettier.

Of course men look when they see a women with over half their body naked. I guess women would too if we all walked around in speedos (or atleast the ones confident enough to).


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> I guess women would too if we all walked around in speedos (or atleast the ones confident enough to).


It doesn't take wearing a speedo for me to check out a man. I can tell even if he is fully clothed that he has big arms and shoulders and a tight ass. Put him in just regular shorts jogging down the street and if he's got thick awesome legs, I can't take my eyes off of him (just saw one of those on my way in to work today). If I'm lucky and am in Hawaii and most of the guys do have their shirt off, then I get to sift and sort through all the HOTTTT ones and get an eyeful of their chests, too. But I'm more than happy to see one with his shirt on, like I said, those bulgy muscles are still on display.


----------



## Arkansas

I would explain it as something women don't understand

For me, my wife was MY wife, nobody else's. We gave each other to each other when we made our vows. That's a very strong thing for a man, to have his wife in those every ways. Women make men stronger with that love and support, and we cherish it.

Its not a possession thing as much as it knowing someone trusts you THAT much ... its a completeness that exists in men who love deeply


----------



## Numb26

Faithful Wife said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess women would too if we all walked around in speedos (or atleast the ones confident enough to).
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't take wearing a speedo for me to check out a man. I can tell even if he is fully clothed that he has big arms and shoulders and a tight ass. Put him in just regular shorts jogging down the street and if he's got thick awesome legs, I can't take my eyes off of him (just saw one of those on my way in to work today). If I'm lucky and am in Hawaii and most of the guys do have their shirt off, then I get to sift and sort through all the HOTTTT ones and get an eyeful of their chests, too. But I'm more than happy to see one with his shirt on, like I said, those bulgy muscles are still on display.
Click to expand...

You know, last year I never would have considered wearing shorts and no shirt. But now??? Maybe


----------



## Faithful Wife

Numb26 said:


> You know, last year I never would have considered wearing shorts and no shirt. But now??? Maybe


Please do. :grin2:


----------



## Faithful Wife

Arkansas said:


> *I would explain it as something women don't understand
> *
> For me, my wife was MY wife, nobody else's. We gave each other to each other when we made our vows. That's a very strong thing for a man, to have his wife in those every ways. Women make men stronger with that love and support, and we cherish it.
> 
> Its not a possession thing as much as it knowing someone trusts you THAT much ... its a completeness that exists in men who love deeply


I have known women who have RJ too, so I don't think it is something only men experience.

As for the rest of your post, all that makes sense, but are you also saying you spend time thinking about your wife's past lovers or experiences?


----------



## notmyjamie

Arkansas said:


> I would explain it as something women don't understand
> 
> For me, my wife was MY wife, nobody else's. We gave each other to each other when we made our vows. That's a very strong thing for a man, to have his wife in those every ways. Women make men stronger with that love and support, and we cherish it.
> 
> Its not a possession thing as much as it knowing someone trusts you THAT much ... its a completeness that exists in men who love deeply


I understand that...hell I even understand that once you marry you (meaning men in general, not you specifically) think of her as yours. But she wasn't yours back when she was with someone else so to go back and make yours and her life miserable over a time that you weren't even around is simply not fair. 

I love deeply as well but I would never harp on things that happened before my time. I sometimes feel a longing to have met my boyfriend many years ago so things could have been different. I'd have loved to have met him while I was young and had kids with him, built a life with him, etc. But that wasn't in the cards. I'm lucky to have found him now. I choose to focus on the here and now and be happy for the time I do have with him. In the here and now, he's mine and I'm his. That's all we need to know.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

I think people had it easier before the naivity of the sexual revolution. I believe that those that save themselves for marriage have a deeper more meaningful, even spiritual connection. The plate spinning society that has emerged has destroyed that specialness. Maybe I'm just old fashioned...


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> I think people had it easier before the naivity of the sexual revolution. I believe that those that save themselves for marriage have a deeper more meaningful, even spiritual connection. The plate spinning society that has emerged has destroyed that specialness. Maybe I'm just old fashioned...


I think a lot more men cheated back then, so I'm not sure how meaningful and spiritual it was. Now women cheat as often as men, or maybe it just gets reported more honestly now and maybe it has always been pretty equal. Seems to me that people have always been cheaters and have always been into sex. Also seems that people like to somehow romanticize about previous generations and think they were all "better" than current generations. Not sure why, is it self loathing?


----------



## Buddy400

I was just thinking about this from another angle...

My wife thinks I'm an exceptionally interesting person to talk to.

This makes me feel good but it isn't really needed for purposes of building my ego. I'm very confident in this area.

But, knowing that she finds me *the most* interesting is quite a bit different than her thinking that I'm *one of the most* interesting men she's known.

Your partner thinking that you're the best sex partner they've ever had is probably unrealistic, but wouldn't it be nice if that was the case?


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think people had it easier before the naivity of the sexual revolution. I believe that those that save themselves for marriage have a deeper more meaningful, even spiritual connection. The plate spinning society that has emerged has destroyed that specialness. Maybe I'm just old fashioned...
> 
> 
> 
> I think a lot more men cheated back then, so I'm not sure how meaningful and spiritual it was. Now women cheat as often as men, or maybe it just gets reported more honestly now and maybe it has always been pretty equal. Seems to me that people have always been cheaters and have always been into sex. Also seems that people like to somehow romanticize about previous generations and think they were all "better" than current generations. Not sure why, is it self loathing?
Click to expand...

Cheating has always been around. I can't imagine more men cheated then than today. Why would that change? Probably less, due to a more religious based society and less opportunity (few women in workplace). Women cheated too, probably not to as large an extent simply because they have more opportunity today to do so.

IMO, there is nothing special being #50 as opposed to #1. But that's just my take.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Buddy400 said:


> I was just thinking about this from another angle...
> 
> My wife thinks I'm an exceptionally interesting person to talk to.
> 
> This makes me feel good but it isn't really needed for purposes of building my ego. I'm very confident in this area.
> 
> But, knowing that she finds me *the most* interesting is quite a bit different than her thinking that I'm *one of the most* interesting men she's known.
> 
> Your partner thinking that you're the best sex partner they've ever had is probably unrealistic, but wouldn't it be nice if that was the case?


I mean, I figure if their eyes are rolling back in their head and they are screaming to Jesus, I'm doing alright. Do I need them to specifically SAY I'm the best they have ever had? Nope, I know all I need to know from their reactions to me in real time.

As for me, no, I would never say they are the best I've ever had, even if it was true. I've had it pretty good so - - that kind of evaluation is nearly meaningless. Again, it is all about what is happening in the moment. If they ask me to SAY they are the best, then they are literally asking me to go back in my mind and re-live other lovers in order to make a comparison. Do you really want to ask your partner to re-live that stuff?

Also, if they needed me to say it that would just turn me off anyway and most likely ruin the fun we were capable of having before they brought it up.


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Cheating has always been around. I can't imagine more men cheated then than today. Why would that change? Probably less, due to a more religious based society and less opportunity (few women in workplace). Women cheated too, probably not to as large an extent simply because they have more opportunity today to do so.
> .


So what exactly is/was more magical about previous generations again? They simply were better at hiding their cheating. Other than that, there's no reason to assume they were any better, any more in love, or any more committed than people are now. Unless like I said, maybe you have self loathing for your own generation?


----------



## attheend02

Faithful Wife said:


> So what exactly is/was more magical about previous generations again? They simply were better at hiding their cheating. Other than that, there's no reason to assume they were any better, any more in love, or any more committed than people are now. Unless like I said, maybe you have self loathing for your own generation?


Don't you watch Mad Men ???


----------



## Faithful Wife

attheend02 said:


> Don't you watch Mad Men ???


No but I'm aware that the men are a bunch of cheating jackholes. Which just makes my point.

I can see why *some* men may think that was some kind of holy period in time and wish they could go back to when they could have a loving wife and bang their secretaries and then laugh all the way to the strip club with the dudebros. So men who do feel like that was a *better* time for love and relationships are suspect in my eyes.


----------



## attheend02

Faithful Wife said:


> No but I'm aware that the men are a bunch of cheating jackholes. Which just makes my point.
> 
> I can see why *some* men may think that was some kind of holy period in time and wish they could go back to when they could have a loving wife and bang their secretaries and then laugh all the way to the strip club with the dudebros. So men who do feel like that was a *better* time for love and relationships are suspect in my eyes.


I guess the smiley wasn't enough to get across my humor/sarcasm...


----------



## Faithful Wife

attheend02 said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> No but I'm aware that the men are a bunch of cheating jackholes. Which just makes my point.
> 
> I can see why *some* men may think that was some kind of holy period in time and wish they could go back to when they could have a loving wife and bang their secretaries and then laugh all the way to the strip club with the dudebros. So men who do feel like that was a *better* time for love and relationships are suspect in my eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the smiley wasn't enough to get across my humor/sarcasm...
Click to expand...

I did get that you were being sarcastic, sorry I should have also made that clear.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Faithful Wife said:


> I mean, I figure if their eyes are rolling back in their head and they are screaming to Jesus, I'm doing alright. Do I need them to specifically SAY I'm the best they have ever had? Nope, I know all I need to know from their reactions to me in real time.
> 
> As for me, no, I would never say they are the best I've ever had, even if it was true. I've had it pretty good so - - that kind of evaluation is nearly meaningless. Again, it is all about what is happening in the moment. If they ask me to SAY they are the best, then they are literally asking me to go back in my mind and re-live other lovers in order to make a comparison. Do you really want to ask your partner to re-live that stuff?
> 
> Also, if they needed me to say it that would just turn me off anyway and most likely ruin the fun we were capable of having before they brought it up.


I'm with @faithfulwife , having to decide who was "my" best, which is certainly modified by "when, environment, circumstances, best in regards to what, etc" is wasted time to spend dwelling on. Too many greats.

Once an "experience" crossed above the threshold of damn this is outstanding, that's a 3D window. Many hit the window, and present encounters with DW are right there.

And why dredge up to a new partner that he/she was "good" but not the best?

To bring that up willy nilly is just an attempt to keep the upper hand and feed one's own ego to no real or permanent benefit. 


There was a nurse, who came to the apt in scrubs, multiple bar waitresses in shirt skirt uniforms, fast food outfits, professional business women dressed to kill after a day at the office, beach get togethers in bikinis, daisy dukes, women who answered their door naked, women who brought girlfriends, college girls, and so on.

It's easier to highlight those that were not good. But anyway.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> attheend02 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you watch Mad Men ???
> 
> 
> 
> No but I'm aware that the men are a bunch of cheating jackholes. Which just makes my point.
> 
> I can see why *some* men may think that was some kind of holy period in time and wish they could go back to when they could have a loving wife and bang their secretaries and then laugh all the way to the strip club with the dudebros. So men who do feel like that was a *better* time for love and relationships are suspect in my eyes.
Click to expand...

What reasons do you suspect that more men cheated back then? I'm sure some were banging their secretaries or whatever but only a small percent would have secretaries, so how are they cheating so easily? No tinder, social media, less access to women in workplace...

Is it just better now because equality and such... women are just as much of scumbags in the cheating department?


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Ahhh, there are examples from Little House on the Prairie to the Kennedy era, a person could pick what suits them.


----------



## ReformedHubby

Buddy400 said:


> I was just thinking about this from another angle...
> 
> My wife thinks I'm an exceptionally interesting person to talk to.
> 
> This makes me feel good but it isn't really needed for purposes of building my ego. I'm very confident in this area.
> 
> But, knowing that she finds me *the most* interesting is quite a bit different than her thinking that I'm *one of the most* interesting men she's known.
> 
> Your partner thinking that you're the best sex partner they've ever had is probably unrealistic, but wouldn't it be nice if that was the case?


LoL, its funny you took this angle. When it comes to my girlfriend, I truly could care less about past sex stuff, well unless she picked up some cool things she wants to try with me. But I do get jealous when she says she finds someone "interesting". I'm all like, "What do you mean he is interesting?" :scratchhead: At this point we laugh about it, but yes that is the one button she can push that makes me jealous. I guess we all have our thing. Before your post I was thinking to myself I had no issues in this department at all. But knowing my woman finds another man "interesting" or "intriguing" makes me jealous. Its always some artsy type too, which is the opposite of me. I am intriguing in my own way, and I know that is one of the things she found very attractive about me. Grrrrr..... LoL, sign me up on the list of insecure men I guess. I still don't consider myself fragile though. I do feel for guys that have this issue though. I feel like its one of those things that if you focus on it too much, it can become a self fulfilling prophecy.


----------



## Cletus

Buddy400 said:


> But, knowing that she finds me *the most* interesting is quite a bit different than her thinking that I'm *one of the most* interesting men she's known.


And if I lock her in the basement and never let her meet another man, I can guarantee it 'til death do us part!

Either I'm the most interesting man in the world, or I'm not. That my wife thinks I am is then just a matter of her sample size and my position within the distribution. The next guy she meets on the subway might be more interesting than me - am I going to spend my life worrying about that? I hope not. Especially since I already know that I am in fact the most interesting man in the world (TM Dos Equis). 



> Your partner thinking that you're the best sex partner they've ever had is probably unrealistic, but wouldn't it be nice if that was the case?


Would it be nice? Ok, I can't say that's not true.

I put this at the more realistic of the two. My wife certainly knows fewer men sexually than she does casually, so my odds immediately rise. Couple with the fact that I get to practice on a live laboratory subject x times a month for y decades, and hell, I'm in the running for a medal if I only try just a little. 

But if I'm not, there's nothing I can do save invent a time machine to change the past. As long as "the best" doesn't come through the front door swinging pipe, worrying excessively about something I cannot change has to be one of the definitions of mental illness.


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> What reasons do you suspect that more men cheated back then? I'm sure some were banging their secretaries or whatever but only a small percent would have secretaries, so how are they cheating so easily? No tinder, social media, less access to women in workplace...
> 
> Is it just better now because equality and such... women are just as much of scumbags in the cheating department?


I did not say it is better now. You said it was better back then and something about all magical warm and fuzzy feelings back then which aren't present now. I said well they were cheaters back then too and I don't believe they had more magic in the sack or out of it than people do now.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What reasons do you suspect that more men cheated back then? I'm sure some were banging their secretaries or whatever but only a small percent would have secretaries, so how are they cheating so easily? No tinder, social media, less access to women in workplace...
> 
> Is it just better now because equality and such... women are just as much of scumbags in the cheating department?
> 
> 
> 
> I did not say it is better now. You said it was better back then and something about all magical warm and fuzzy feelings back then which aren't present now. I said well they were cheaters back then too and I don't believe they had more magic in the sack or out of it than people do now.
Click to expand...

Cheating aside, I think it was more meaningful. I blame the boomers.


----------



## Blondilocks

@Faithful Wife,

*"I mean, I figure if their eyes are rolling back in their head and they are screaming to Jesus, I'm doing alright."*

Imma gonna call you on this.:grin2: I think we need to hear from some men as to how many of them scream to Jesus or have their eyes roll back in their head.

Come on fellas, fess up. We won't tell.>


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Cheating aside, *I think* it was more meaningful. *I blame* the boomers.


I guess you are entitled to make up things to believe and who to blame them on.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Blondilocks said:


> @Faithful Wife,
> 
> *"I mean, I figure if their eyes are rolling back in their head and they are screaming to Jesus, I'm doing alright."*
> 
> Imma gonna call you on this.:grin2: I think we need to hear from some men as to how many of them scream to Jesus or have their eyes roll back in their head.
> 
> Come on fellas, fess up. We won't tell.>


More commonly known as O face, and the "screaming" all depends on the guy. Some make crazy LOUD noises, in some cases more like a bear than screaming....but I figured people would understand the description I used.

The ones who make no noise at all kind of freak me out.


----------



## Cletus

Blondilocks said:


> @Faithful Wife,
> 
> *"I mean, I figure if their eyes are rolling back in their head and they are screaming to Jesus, I'm doing alright."*
> 
> Imma gonna call you on this.:grin2: I think we need to hear from some men as to how many of them scream to Jesus or have their eyes roll back in their head.
> 
> Come on fellas, fess up. We won't tell.>


Does Cthulhu count? Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?


----------



## justlistening

I honestly don't think men are fragile. I think men have had to run to keep up with some confusing changes. Everything from technology, to online dating to changing norms about gender stuff in dating.

I am not saying any changes are bad. Just that things have changed.

I think there are several reasons that the idea of retroactive jealousy seems more prominent that have nothing to do with men being babies.

When I dated the first time around and married, people -especially women - didn't have these discussions with their partners about sexual pasts. People older than me also tended to marry younger, so there was less "past." You couldn't google or social media stalk people.

Yes, we could talk about things, but I just don't think this whole idea of "how many has she had" or "did she like one of them better" was a focus.

I also fully believe that some of the reactionary "movements" against newer wave feminism still these ideas into men's heads as a way to instill negativity. Understand, I'm not a fan of the new, misandry-laden brand of feminism. However, I consider these Reddit type morpheus, women-as-bedpost notch junk is any better.

Honestly, I think theres a whole segment of mostly online men in particular who feed each other's insecurities and outrage in a vicious cycle.


----------



## Blondilocks

RJ reminds me of people who view their partner as a possession. I don't think it's even jealousy as it being more pissy because someone else played with their toy first. Now, this would not apply if both partners were supposed to be one and onlys.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus said:


> Does Cthulhu count? Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?


Absolutely, I'm a non-denominational lover.

Truthfully, sometimes bits and pieces of words come out and could sound something like "bah.....gah....urughhh....GAHH.....IIIIiiiiyeee...uhhhhhhhnnnnnnn".

Possible translation: By god you really got me hun!


----------



## Numb26

Faithful Wife said:


> Blondilocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Faithful Wife,
> 
> *"I mean, I figure if their eyes are rolling back in their head and they are screaming to Jesus, I'm doing alright."*
> 
> Imma gonna call you on this.<a href="http://talkaboutmarriage.com/images/TAMarriage_2015/smilies/tango_face_grin.png" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" ></a> I think we need to hear from some men as to how many of them scream to Jesus or have their eyes roll back in their head.
> 
> Come on fellas, fess up. We won't tell.<a href="http://talkaboutmarriage.com/images/TAMarriage_2015/smilies/tango_face_devil.png" border="0" alt="" title="Devil" ></a>
> 
> 
> 
> More commonly known as O face, and the "screaming" all depends on the guy. Some make crazy LOUD noises, in some cases more like a bear than screaming....but I figured people would understand the description I used.
> 
> The ones who make no noise at all kind of freak me out.
Click to expand...

Guess this isn't a good time to mention that I am as quiet as a mouse, then?


----------



## Cletus

Numb26 said:


> Guess this isn't a good time to mention that I am as quiet as a mouse, then?


Oh, stuff a sock in it.


----------



## Blondilocks

Faithful Wife said:


> Absolutely, I'm a non-denominational lover.
> 
> Truthfully, sometimes bits and pieces of words come out and could sound something like "bah.....gah....urughhh....GAHH.....IIIIiiiiyeee...uhhhhhhhnnnnnnn".
> 
> Possible translation: By god you really got me hun!


Do the men do this in porn? Or, is it only the women who act like that?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Blondilocks said:


> Do the men do this in porn? Or, is it only the women who act like that?


Porn varies a lot. Generally though yeah the money shot will include a lot of noises and/or words.


----------



## Numb26

Cletus said:


> Numb26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guess this isn't a good time to mention that I am as quiet as a mouse, then?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, stuff a sock in it.
Click to expand...

It sounds like there is one in there already! Haha


----------



## Holdingontoit

I know the discussion has moved on, but I would like to turn back to the original question. I think there are legitimate reasons why the RJ dynamic seems to be a bigger issue for men than for women. I think it arises from the typical dynamic in heterosexual couples. 

For heteros, the wife is often the gatekeeper of sex. She more often determines whether, when and how sex occurs. So it is more often the case that husband says "can we try ___" and gets told no. And then later hears that she did ____ with someone else. And then man feels insecure and worries either that she loved the other guy more than she loves him or that she enjoyed sex with the other guy more than she enjoys sex with him. I am guessing it happens less frequently that a wife says "can we try ____"? And gets turned down. And then finds out the guy did it with someone else. And then the woman gets bent out of shape.

On the other hand, I think for most hetero men, he would not care at all if his wife got him a pair of work boots for his birthday, and he later found out that she bought her ex-bf a gold ring. But reverse the genders and I think that many wives who receive a vase of flowers and a box of chocolates for Valentine's day are going to get quite bent out of shape if they found out that their husband bought his ex-gf a diamond tennis bracelet for V-Day.

Each gender tends to take more offense at being denied something that is high on the list of what they were hoping to get from their partner.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Holdingontoit said:


> I know the discussion has moved on, but I would like to turn back to the original question. I think there are legitimate reasons why the RJ dynamic seems to be a bigger issue for men than for women. I think it arises from the typical dynamic in heterosexual couples.
> 
> For heteros, the wife is often the gatekeeper of sex. She more often determines whether, when and how sex occurs. So it is more often the case that husband says "can we try ___" and gets told no. And then later hears that she did ____ with someone else. And then man feels insecure and worries either that she loved the other guy more than she loves him or that she enjoyed sex with the other guy more than she enjoys sex with him. I am guessing it happens less frequently that a wife says "can we try ____"? And gets turned down. And then finds out the guy did it with someone else. And then the woman gets bent out of shape.
> 
> On the other hand, I think for most hetero men, he would not care at all if his wife got him a pair of work boots for his birthday, and he later found out that she bought her ex-bf a gold ring. But reverse the genders and I think that many wives who receive a vase of flowers and a box of chocolates for Valentine's day are going to get quite bent out of shape if they found out that their husband bought his ex-gf a diamond tennis bracelet for V-Day.
> 
> Each gender tends to take more offense at being denied something that is high on the list of what they were hoping to get from their partner.


I’ve just known a lot of ladies in my life who were the ones who asked for some sexual thing and were turned down. A LOT of them. I think you have read Spicy’s recent thread, right? So while it may be true that more men than women ask for sexual things and get turned down, I think the percentage of how many more is not as high as most people think it is.

And Spicy is of course now being told that all the women in his past, or simply the fact that they provided variety, have something she doesn’t have. 

The first sex starved wives I ever knew about were in my childhood, as my friends and I caught clues about our parents and other adult relationships. I learned right away that grown women will cry over lack of sex in their marriage, and also that some of them will eventually cheat or leave.


----------



## Blondilocks

An old movie, The Naked Jungle 1954, starring Charlton Heston is an example of RJ. Basically, he built a cocoa plantation in South America and when he was established sent for a bride. His brother picked out the lady. Come to find out she was more than he thought he would be getting (he was 34 and a virgin). His #1 requirement for any purchase for his grand home was that it be *new* to justify the trouble and expense of getting it down the river.

When she told him she was widowed (used) he tried to get her to disparage her late husband. She wouldn't. What she did do was inform him that a piano needs to be played to be good and his piano was not a good piano. lol


----------



## lifeistooshort

Faithful Wife said:


> More commonly known as O face, and the "screaming" all depends on the guy. Some make crazy LOUD noises, in some cases more like a bear than screaming....but I figured people would understand the description I used.
> 
> The ones who make no noise at all kind of freak me out.


I don't know....mine is kind of quiet but I can see it on his face, though he does breathe heavy.

When I get a little grunt out of him it's pretty hot partly because he's so quiet.

I think it would freak me out more if his face was stoic.

In fairness I'm not very loud either....most of the time >


----------



## She'sStillGotIt

Cletus said:


> This is just one man's opinion, but I believe the cause for most women lying about their past is because of this male fragility, not the cause.


I am LIVING proof of that theory. When I realized what I was dealing with, I was no longer willing to share anything with him.

Dealing with someone with RJ is a sleighride to Hell.


----------



## Holdingontoit

Faithful Wife said:


> I’ve just known a lot of ladies in my life who were the ones who asked for some sexual thing and were turned down. A LOT of them.


No argument from me. I never said it doesn't happen in the other direction. In fact, I thought while I was drafting of inserting a parenthetical to that effect. And I think many wives would react the same way to finding out that their husband was willing to do things with previous partners that he won't do with her.

Let us go back to my comparison to buying expensive presents. Suppose your spouse is a public elementary school teacher. Very respectable career and does much to benefit society. But not incredibly lucrative. If you are married to an elementary school teacher, and they get you flowers and a box of candy on Valentine's Day, the recipient may be quite pleased that they thought to mark the occassion at all. It is the thought that counts.

Now imagine that the recipient finds out that their spouse has a trust fund from when their wealthy aunt died. And that the trust fund spouse often bought expensive jewelry for previous SO's, or took them to expensive hotels and ordered room service. Would we immediately label the recipient "fragile" if they complained "hey, wait a minute, you said flowers is all you can afford. How come I don't get what the previous SO's got?"

In marriage, we vow to give our spouse all that we have to give. If someone spends years telling you "this is everything I have" and then you find out that they actually have more that they are not willing to share with you, that hurts. Even if you are not particularly fragile.


----------



## Girl_power

I also wonder if it’s a tool to use to manipulate your partner by making them feel bad? For example, my boyfriend who is more vanilla asked if I ever did X with my ex, and I said yes. Then I proceeded to tell him that my ex was a freak and likes x,y,z. All of these things that I would never deny my boyfriend with. However my boyfriend isn’t into these things. But it was also kind of a nudge from me like hey... there is more things out there to do...

So maybe he is thinking that my sex Life was more exciting with my ex. However I don’t feel bad because the person with the “lowest” drive, and the one that is the gatekeeper to trying new things controls the sex life and in this case it’s him.


----------



## justlistening

Girl_power said:


> I also wonder if it’s a tool to use to manipulate your partner by making them feel bad? For example, my boyfriend who is more vanilla asked if I ever did X with my ex, and I said yes. Then I proceeded to tell him that my ex was a freak and likes x,y,z. All of these things that I would never deny my boyfriend with. However my boyfriend isn’t into these things. But it was also kind of a nudge from me like hey... there is more things out there to do...
> 
> So maybe he is thinking that my sex Life was more exciting with my ex. However I don’t feel bad because the person with the “lowest” drive, and the one that is the gatekeeper to trying new things controls the sex life and in this case it’s him.


So you not only answered his specific question, you piled on and tried to manipulate him into stepping up.

Yeah, I can't imagine WHY that bothered him....


----------



## Cletus

Holdingontoit said:


> In marriage, we vow to give our spouse all that we have to give. If someone spends years telling you "this is everything I have" and then you find out that they actually have more that they are not willing to share with you, that hurts. Even if you are not particularly fragile.


My wife is particularly conservative when it comes to sex. 

There is something I've always wanted in our sex life that she will not do. She did it once or twice with a previous boyfriend. She didn't much like it then, and refuses to even consider it now.

Do I have a right to be jealous of that boyfriend? 

Even if she enjoyed it then, are we not allowed to determine who are in the here and now? Are we locked into the behaviors we practiced in the past, or are we allowed to change? 

That's just one end of the RJ spectrum, of course, because we also have the guys who are jealous of any past lover, even if you're a complete freak in the bedroom. Or the past lover with the bigger schlong. Or the squarer jaw. Or whatever. Maybe this is just the male equivalent of female body image issues that we don't seem to suffer from as much. It's about as healthy.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Holdingontoit said:


> No argument from me. I never said it doesn't happen in the other direction. In fact, I thought while I was drafting of inserting a parenthetical to that effect. And I think many wives would react the same way to finding out that their husband was willing to do things with previous partners that he won't do with her.
> 
> Let us go back to my comparison to buying expensive presents. Suppose your spouse is a public elementary school teacher. Very respectable career and does much to benefit society. But not incredibly lucrative. If you are married to an elementary school teacher, and they get you flowers and a box of candy on Valentine's Day, the recipient may be quite pleased that they thought to mark the occassion at all. It is the thought that counts.
> 
> Now imagine that the recipient finds out that their spouse has a trust fund from when their wealthy aunt died. And that the trust fund spouse often bought expensive jewelry for previous SO's, or took them to expensive hotels and ordered room service. Would we immediately label the recipient "fragile" if they complained "hey, wait a minute, you said flowers is all you can afford. How come I don't get what the previous SO's got?"
> 
> In marriage, we vow to give our spouse all that we have to give. If someone spends years telling you "this is everything I have" and then you find out that they actually have more that they are not willing to share with you, that hurts. Even if you are not particularly fragile.


I have read quite a lot of attempts to make a comparison but it never really works for me.

If we are talking about a specific guy who found out specific things his wife did for others but won’t do for him, then in that specific case I might feel bad for the guy depending on what happened.

But when people are making hypothetical scenarios or hypothetical comparisons, I’m just not sympathetic or even curious. I think one persons story may be understandable but I’m not going to just say oh yeah any and every guy has the right to keep trying to police his wife’s mind and her past.


----------



## Holdingontoit

Cletus said:


> are we not allowed to determine who are in the here and now? Are we locked into the behaviors we practiced in the past, or are we allowed to change?


Again, no argument form me. I think it is crazy for either gender to ask questions about what kind of sex life your partner had before they met you. The only thing that matters is what your partner is willing to do with you in the here and now.

This behavior occurs in so many contexts. When someone is not getting what they want in some area, they often ask "why not?" Clearly with the hope that if their partner admits to the obstacle, the frustrated person will be able to overcome it. It so rarely works out that way. In many many cases, ignorance is bliss. You already know everything you need to know. The answer to your question "can we" is "no". Trying to interrogate them or analyze them to get them to change their mind is unhelpful to the relationship.

Either step up your game and entice them into doing what you want by their own choice. Or leave the relationship and go seek your objective with someone else. Otherwise you are engaging in Schnarch's normal marital sadism. And you are overwhelmingly likely to get dismal results from that.


----------



## Benbutton

Cletus said:


> Casual Observer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fragile? It's too easy to dismiss the issue by saying that. Most of the threads where RJ has come on really strong were based more on the lies that went on beforehand than the comparisons that the conversations led to.
> 
> 
> 
> This is just one man's opinion, but I believe the cause for most women lying about their past is because of this male fragility, not the cause.
Click to expand...

Most women lie about their past because they fear the guy they are with will no longer want to be with them. Its lying based on a preconceived notion. Not a good relationship builder.


----------



## Casual Observer

Is it possible there are distinctions regarding "need to know" and "fragility" based upon the number of partners we are talking about? If both parties in a relationship have had, say, 4+ prior partners, they may be less sensitive to such issues than scenarios in which there had been just 1, 2 or 3 prior sexual partners. Theory being that the greater number of experiences might put sex on a more logical and less emotional level. Less attachment to any one person or thing.

Another way of looking at it is this- as the number of significant others becomes smaller, each one takes on increasing importance.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Casual Observer said:


> Is it possible there are distinctions regarding "need to know" and "fragility" based upon the number of partners we are talking about? If both parties in a relationship have had, say, 4+ prior partners, they may be less sensitive to such issues than scenarios in which there had been just 1, 2 or 3 prior sexual partners. Theory being that the greater number of experiences might put sex on a more logical and less emotional level. Less attachment to any one person or thing.
> 
> Another way of looking at it is this- as the number of significant others becomes smaller, each one takes on increasing importance.


I think it’s an individual thing. Some men aren’t worried about any previous partners even if she had 1 or 2 or 15. And other men will worry about it whether she had 1 or 2 or 15.

Which is shown by this thread, where we have some men who don’t worry about it and some who do.


----------



## arbitrator

Marduk said:


> Women are doing this too, in my experience. Differently, but also.
> 
> I think there’s a lot of deep seated insecurity going on with our generation, possibly because everybody is replaceable. Or upgradable.
> 
> I think the marriage-industrial complex has a lot to do with it. Also tinder, ****** *******, normalization of cheating, and people marrying later.
> 
> Consumer culture as applied to relationships has to be a factor.
> 
> As does the rampant job insecurity. I mean, the gig economy essentially means lots of people have high levels of job insecurity. Tinder and LinkedIn are essentially the same thing in two different markets.
> 
> The men I talk to are primarily worried about physique and performance. The women about connection and compatibility. But the opposite also happens.
> 
> Hell, my wife just asked me a few weeks ago what my ex’s body felt like, and if I can tell the difference. And she is hyper secure in that department.


*Late to the party, as usual, but this malady is far from being gender specific! With rare exception, women, IMHO, are just as fragile as their guy counterparts are!

Just saying!*


----------



## Mr The Other

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.
> 
> When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy".
> 
> It seems so transparently counter-productive.


Part of our species is that the two sexes are so similar, that differences are highly valued. Men are meant to be stoic and action, women emotional and passive experience. But, we are pretty much identical.

Women are often full of BS, when it comes to how they are high status passive victims. Men are often full of BS about how brave, decisive and respected they are. The BS smells the same.


----------



## Blondilocks

@Marduk,

*"Hell, my wife just asked me a few weeks ago what my ex’s body felt like, and if I can tell the difference. And she is hyper secure in that department."*

I don't know how I missed this. It's just one of those :scratchhead::scratchhead: You have been married for years and she is just now asking this? Are y'all in the habit of talking about past lovers?

It just seems like such a strange (I really want to say 'stupid' but, I'm trying to be nice) question. It has the same pitfall as "Do these pants make my butt look big". You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.


----------



## TJW

Casual Observer said:


> Is it possible there are distinctions regarding "need to know" and "fragility" based upon the number of partners we are talking about?
> 
> Another way of looking at it is this- as the number of significant others becomes smaller, each one takes on increasing importance.


I think you're right. That's why marriages between experienced and inexperienced become so hurtful for the inexperienced. She was "the one"... I was "one more"....

I was a neophyte being compared to an eclectic composite of the selected best qualities of many.


----------



## Casual Observer

TJW said:


> I think you're right. That's why marriages between experienced and inexperienced become so hurtful for the inexperienced. She was "the one"... I was "one more"....
> 
> I was a neophyte being compared to an eclectic composite of the selected best qualities of many.


I don't think "neophytes" are well-represented here. And when us "neophytes" speak up, I don't think we command quite the same respect as those more experienced. Which, I guess, kinda makes sense, given that we're less experienced?


----------



## Casual Observer

Holdingontoit said:


> Again, no argument form me. I think it is crazy for either gender to ask questions about what kind of sex life your partner had before they met you. The only thing that matters is what your partner is willing to do with you in the here and now.
> 
> This behavior occurs in so many contexts. When someone is not getting what they want in some area, they often ask "why not?" Clearly with the hope that if their partner admits to the obstacle, the frustrated person will be able to overcome it. It so rarely works out that way. In many many cases, ignorance is bliss. You already know everything you need to know. The answer to your question "can we" is "no". Trying to interrogate them or analyze them to get them to change their mind is unhelpful to the relationship.
> 
> Either step up your game and entice them into doing what you want by their own choice. Or leave the relationship and go seek your objective with someone else. Otherwise you are engaging in Schnarch's normal marital sadism. And you are overwhelmingly likely to get dismal results from that.


I think the biggest issue remains the intentionally lied-about past, not the past per-se. Because if your significant other misled you (and perhaps outright lied), you're likely to have more serious RJ issues because you don't necessarily trust what she's saying in the "here and now" that we're supposed to be living in. You may be doing just fine, no "RJ" (which I think is too broad a term to be reflexively dismissed as a bad thing) to speak of, until a past comes up that challenges what you'd been previously told. 

The extreme example would be a partner who maintained they were a virgin prior to your relationship, and something in the back of your mind didn't quite add up, but you didn't want to tell your partner you didn't believe them. Things go along for years until something comes up that says oh, wow, he or she most definitely was not a virgin prior to meeting you, that she or he had doubled-down on that a number of times since, and now this. Oh, and the doubling-down continues after the discovery, until it finally becomes clear the false narrative can't work anymore. Is that really RJ, or something else?


----------



## Blondilocks

Casual Observer said:


> I think the biggest issue remains the intentionally lied-about past, not the past per-se. Because if your significant other misled you (and perhaps outright lied), you're likely to have more serious RJ issues because you don't necessarily trust what she's saying in the "here and now" that we're supposed to be living in. You may be doing just fine, no "RJ" (which I think is too broad a term to be reflexively dismissed as a bad thing) to speak of, until a past comes up that challenges what you'd been previously told.
> 
> The extreme example would be a partner who maintained they were a virgin prior to your relationship, and something in the back of your mind didn't quite add up, but you didn't want to tell your partner you didn't believe them. Things go along for years until something comes up that says oh, wow, he or she most definitely was not a virgin prior to meeting you, that she or he had doubled-down on that a number of times since, and now this. Oh, and the doubling-down continues after the discovery, until it finally becomes clear the false narrative can't work anymore. Is that really RJ, or something else?


That does not look like RJ. It looks like a person is pissed off (confused if you want to continue to claim to be naive) because the person they bent over backwards to believe was in fact, gaslighting them.


----------



## JustTheWife

I've been reading a lot about RJ since it's one of the reasons that I don't open up about my past to my husband. Actually I just recently found out that RJ is a "thing" but just thought that the truth could devastate him and ruin our marriage. RJ seems to sum up my fears about what sometimes happens when the real truth is shared. Could happen immediately or take years to develop.

First, I think the truth causes RJ, not lies. More accurately, some men's inability to handle the truth of their wives or girlfriends. The truth can be brutal. I know that it would be devastating to my husband and make him think of me differently.

Many men want their wives and GFs to be their sweethearts. Only for them. Their one and only as someone said above. Making them feel good. Adoring, cherishing and treasuring her. Making him feel strong and manly. Maybe that sounds old fashioned but I think that's often how it works or partially at least. For my man I also want to be his little sweetheart. His honey. I want to be everything to him. I don't want my husband thinking about me with other men. It would ruin things for him. I don't want him thinking about men "finishing" in my mouth when he kisses me. Or all kinds of other things that would send shivers up his spine. Sorry to be graphic but I think it's stuff like that which can kill a guy. Eat away at him as RJ describes in the stuff that I read.

I think that many posts and the thread title is unfair to men. Both men and women are complex and want all kinds of different things. Men can fantasize about women being sl***y and many like to watch women getting used in porn. But I think that many are understandably very uncomfortable thinking about their wives like that. And maybe porn is making RJ more common. I mean, men can see how sex is for women in the most graphic detail. In their heads maybe some men have a pornographic representation of every act that they know their wives did with other men. Including with men with very large penises and the woman just being the sex object, degraded and going through all kinds of rough treatment. Just wondering if porn has created or made RJ worse in some men. Who knows.

Anyway, I just want to be my husband's "one and only" (he deserves that) and that doesn't must mean sex. But the sexual history part can easily destroy the feeling that I'm his "one and only". I'm probably not explaining this in the best way but what I'm trying to say is that just because i've had sex with a lot of other guys, it doesn't mean that I'm not his "one and only". I'm shy and look very innocent so I think that plays into it all - like the perfect wife or girlfriend type (as i've been told) and not someone who's been with a lot of guys. So why would I ruin that for him. He's my protector and I just want him to keep cherishing me. 

Everyone says that i need to tell all to my husband and that might be right for some relationships but not all. Although they might not think of it as lying, I think that most women hold back and try to protect their husbands from the truth that could be painful for him. I mean, many don't talk about penis size of their partners and other things that could be particularly painful. So if the reason you are not opening up fully to your husband is to save his feelings then we are in the same place. If I start to open up then I need to be prepared to tell the WHOLE truth. I don't see the point of opening up for the sake of stopping the lies and then giving him more lies and half truths like many women do. I don't mean to insult anyone, just that I think that's often the case - "underestimate" number of partners, "forget" about things you did, etc. It seems that penis size is very important to men - how does he compare or whatever. But women usually hide the truth about that too.

Anyway, RJ is interesting and I think it sums up my fears for my husband very well. Why would I want to subject him to that?


----------



## notmyjamie

JustTheWife said:


> Anyway, RJ is interesting and I think it sums up my fears for my husband very well. Why would I want to subject him to that?


I understand your reasoning and I don't think it's an out there theory that some men want to think of their wife/girlfriend as "just theirs" I know my boyfriend says that I'm "his" a lot. He says it with a sense of pride (makes me feel good actually!!) He feels that what came before is not important, right now I'm only his and he likes that. He knows I've been with other men and even how many so I'm not hiding anything but I certainly do not go into details about my sexual escapades with other men. I know how many women he's been with but I also don't ask for further details than that. 

So I guess my question is, has your husband asked you for details? Has he asked you how many other men you've been with and did you lie? Because that could be a problem later on if the truth comes out...and in my experience, the truth has a pesky way of coming out whether we want it to or not? I'd be worried about how he'll feel if/when that day comes to pass.


----------



## JustTheWife

notmyjamie said:


> I understand your reasoning and I don't think it's an out there theory that some men want to think of their wife/girlfriend as "just theirs" I know my boyfriend says that I'm "his" a lot. He says it with a sense of pride (makes me feel good actually!!) He feels that what came before is not important, right now I'm only his and he likes that. He knows I've been with other men and even how many so I'm not hiding anything but I certainly do not go into details about my sexual escapades with other men. I know how many women he's been with but I also don't ask for further details than that.
> 
> So I guess my question is, has your husband asked you for details? Has he asked you how many other men you've been with and did you lie? Because that could be a problem later on if the truth comes out...and in my experience, the truth has a pesky way of coming out whether we want it to or not? I'd be worried about how he'll feel if/when that day comes to pass.


Yes! I also think it sounds awesome to hear my husband say that I'm "his". And "just his". I don't care if that sounds old fashioned. I love how he cherishes me. That's why I'm afraid of what RJ could do to our relationship.

To answer your questions, no my husband never asked for details. Before we even started dating or anything (we were just acquaintances and then friends and then dating) we were in a church group together. We both come from very religious backgrounds. In the group I would agree with things like that I thought saving yourself for your husband or wife is very important. That wasn't a lie. I did believe that and I still do. There would be nothing more beautiful than if he was my "one and only" and if I saved it all for him. I just didn't live it. Like there were two sides to me and part of me wanted to rebel against religion and my strict upbringing. So the truth is that i was very promiscuous in high school and college before we got together.

I'm just telling like it is and not trying to say that I'm not a liar for letting him continue to believe I was a virgin. I never thought we'd become serious, never mind getting married so at first when we were just friends and then dating I didn't think it was a big deal. I didn't want my church group and friends to know the truth about me and I was ashamed. Then we started dating and got serious and I should have told him then and i hate myself for not having the courage.


----------



## Sfort

Are men really any more fragile than women? They're fragile about different things, for sure. Granted, women can't related to many of men's insecurities, but the opposite is true, as well.


----------



## Marduk

Blondilocks said:


> @Marduk,
> 
> *"Hell, my wife just asked me a few weeks ago what my ex’s body felt like, and if I can tell the difference. And she is hyper secure in that department."*
> 
> I don't know how I missed this. It's just one of those :scratchhead::scratchhead: You have been married for years and she is just now asking this? Are y'all in the habit of talking about past lovers?
> 
> It just seems like such a strange (I really want to say 'stupid' but, I'm trying to be nice) question. It has the same pitfall as "Do these pants make my butt look big". You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.


Yup, been together a couple decades, and once in a while (like every few years) she'll spontaneously ask me things like this.

I think she isn't really seeking information, I think she's seeking reassurance. So I give her reassurance instead of factual answers - which I don't remember, anyway.


----------



## notmyjamie

JustTheWife said:


> I'm just telling like it is and not trying to say that I'm not a liar for letting him continue to believe I was a virgin. I never thought we'd become serious, never mind getting married so at first when we were just friends and then dating I didn't think it was a big deal. I didn't want my church group and friends to know the truth about me and I was ashamed. Then we started dating and got serious and I should have told him then and i hate myself for not having the courage.


I can totally see how your situation came to be. I was not trying to call you a liar, I'm so sorry if it came off that way. I was mostly trying to say it's a precarious situation and I feel for you having to worry that the truth will come out someday. 




Marduk said:


> Yup, been together a couple decades, and once in a while (like every few years) she'll spontaneously ask me things like this.
> 
> I think she isn't really seeking information, I think she's seeking reassurance. So I give her reassurance instead of factual answers - which I don't remember, anyway.


I recently asked my boyfriend a similar question. I was not seeking reassurance, I was genuinely interested. As I've never had sex with a woman and don't have a penis I was wondering if it feels different with different women. Granted, I think I was on my second glass of wine and I get stupid curious about stuff when I've had that much to drink. He gave me his answer and so now I don't wonder anymore. It really had nothing to do with me, I was just curious about the physical aspect of sex for men. 

We were recently answering a list of silly questions and one was "what's the first thing you'd do if you woke up to find you had switched bodies with your partner?" and my answer was immediately, "I'd have an orgasm" and he knew it was because I'd love to know exactly how it feels for him/men. His answer was pretty much the same..we said it at almost the same time. LOL


----------



## Blondilocks

When men make comments like "with one girl it felt like I was throwing a hot dog down a bowling alley", I just assume that women being individuals and men being individuals that there will be different sensations.*

*Notice how I managed to avoid the dreaded penis size convo.


----------



## In Absentia

Blondilocks said:


> *Notice how I managed to avoid the dreaded penis size convo.


Shame... I was lucky... my wife had only one previous boyfriend and he had a small one (her words)... :laugh:

Why are men fragile? I don't know. Personally, I grew up in a family where women were very strong. This made me rather beta. In fact, I don't particularly like the company of men. I also grew up with very strong women as friends, even at school. I liked the equality but I think I also acquired some feminine fragility in a kind of weird osmosis process. If I'm fragile it's because I'm not man enough, some would say. But I like my fragility.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Blondilocks said:


> When men make comments like "with one girl it felt like I was throwing a hot dog down a bowling alley", I just assume that women being individuals and men being individuals that there will be different sensations.*
> 
> *Notice how *I managed to avoid the dreaded penis size convo*.


I'm confused. The hot dog IS the penis. :laugh:


----------



## Casual Observer

In Absentia said:


> Shame... I was lucky... my wife had only one previous boyfriend and he had a small one (her words)... :laugh:
> 
> Why are men fragile? I don't know. Personally, I grew up in a family where women were very strong. This made me rather beta. In fact, I don't particularly like the company of men. I also grew up with very strong women as friends, even at school. I liked the equality but I think I also acquired some feminine fragility in a kind of weird osmosis process. If I'm fragile it's because I'm not man enough, some would say. But I like my fragility.


If fragility = vulnerability and empathy, I'm all-in. 

Where we get into trouble is when our partner doesn't appreciate our qualities, or worse, takes advantage of them. I think in some cases it's learned. If we're vulnerable & empathetic, we also likely put up with a lot more than someone who isn't.


----------



## Marduk

notmyjamie said:


> I recently asked my boyfriend a similar question. I was not seeking reassurance, I was genuinely interested. As I've never had sex with a woman and don't have a penis I was wondering if it feels different with different women. Granted, I think I was on my second glass of wine and I get stupid curious about stuff when I've had that much to drink. He gave me his answer and so now I don't wonder anymore. It really had nothing to do with me, I was just curious about the physical aspect of sex for men.


That's _exactly_ the kinds of things she's been asking... I wonder if she's really looking for what you're really looking for?



> We were recently answering a list of silly questions and one was "what's the first thing you'd do if you woke up to find you had switched bodies with your partner?" and my answer was immediately, "I'd have an orgasm" and he knew it was because I'd love to know exactly how it feels for him/men. His answer was pretty much the same..we said it at almost the same time. LOL


I'd probably spend a week locked in a room with a bunch of mirrors.


----------



## notmyjamie

Blondilocks said:


> When men make comments like "with one girl it felt like I was throwing a hot dog down a bowling alley", I just assume that women being individuals and men being individuals that there will be different sensations.*
> 
> *Notice how I managed to avoid the dreaded penis size convo.


LOL...well I was aware of that particular difference, I was just curious if there were any other differences. Again...wine = stupid curiosity for me. 



Marduk said:


> That's _exactly_ the kinds of things she's been asking... I wonder if she's really looking for what you're really looking for?
> 
> 
> I'd probably spend a week locked in a room with a bunch of mirrors.


Maybe?? Just tell her the truth...then finish up with...and you feel awesome to me. I was happy with his answer and was pretty much that. And my BF said he'd have trouble leaving his new boobs alone.


----------



## Elizabeth001

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm confused. The hot dog IS the penis. :laugh:




Yes and evidently a very skinny one. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JustTheWife

notmyjamie said:


> I can totally see how your situation came to be. I was not trying to call you a liar, I'm so sorry if it came off that way. I was mostly trying to say it's a precarious situation and I feel for you having to worry that the truth will come out someday.


Please don't worry. I know you weren't calling me a liar - that's not what i meant. I was not taking offense at all.


----------



## ConanHub

Blondilocks said:


> When men make comments like "with one girl it felt like I was throwing a hot dog down a bowling alley", I just assume that women being individuals and men being individuals that there will be different sensations.*
> 
> *Notice how I managed to avoid the dreaded penis size convo.


Throwing a hotdog down a bowling alley?????:laugh:

I've heard some weird ones but that was a first.:smile2:

I think it is super insecure and juvenile to disparage a woman you have been intimate with especially regarding the intimacy.

That's private.


----------



## In Absentia

Casual Observer said:


> If fragility = vulnerability and empathy, I'm all-in.
> 
> *Where we get into trouble is when our partner doesn't appreciate our qualities, or worse, takes advantage of them.* I think in some cases it's learned. If we're vulnerable & empathetic, we also likely put up with a lot more than someone who isn't.


I've had a weird one with my wife. Of course she liked me being a tad beta, otherwise she wouldn't have married me. But when it came to family matters, kids, financial support, etc I think she would have liked a more alpha man. Who wouldn't? Maybe this is the reason, together with her mental illness, that she detached from me. I guess I will never know. BTW, she denies it.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

ConanHub said:


> Blondilocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> When men make comments like "with one girl it felt like I was throwing a hot dog down a bowling alley", I just assume that women being individuals and men being individuals that there will be different sensations.*
> 
> *Notice how I managed to avoid the dreaded penis size convo.
> 
> 
> 
> Throwing a hotdog down a bowling alley?????<a href="http://talkaboutmarriage.com/images/TAMarriage_2015/smilies/tango_face_smile_big.png" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" ></a>
> 
> I've heard some weird ones but that was a first.<a href="http://talkaboutmarriage.com/images/TAMarriage_2015/smilies/tango_face_smile.png" border="0" alt="" title="Smile" ></a>
> 
> I think it is super insecure and juvenile to disparage a woman you have been intimate with especially regarding the intimacy.
> 
> That's private.
Click to expand...

Yes, please don't speak about my ex in such a way ! 😉


----------



## oldtruck

notmyjamie said:


> He'd be an absolute fool to get jealous of that guy now, start hounding me with questions and ****ing the whole thing up. Just like he is very good at a few things that I enjoy immensely. I always say "I don't want to know who taught that to you, but I'm grateful they did!!!" and he always follows up with "self taught!!" LOL


that statement screams how about we start some RJ.

one thing to say oh I like that a lot.

another thing to include: who taught you, because the I do not want to know disclaimer,
runs the risk of not fully believed and planting the seeds of RJ.


----------



## Tilted 1

I think that some men wanting and willing want to be their spouses best friend in the incorrect way. And the things that make me... (me) my true caveman disposition, and what society has said what men must be to get and retain a wife/woman certain guidelines must be followed. Or if not followed then they are seen as misfits of sorts. 

I don't want or need to share my each and every failure or weakness, to be me, but if I do share then as in most helpful ways my spouse, believes that I am being standoffish or worse. So because I am already dealing with my issues, and don't share that there must be something wrong with her. 

But that is not the case, but is the reason I choose not to share is because l must be true to myself, in the way of dealing with my insecurities makes me who l am and I don't need to be defined as a jackhole nor a insensitive bast***, just because I don't share everything that's on my plate.

I see it like this if l share everything, it removes some of my mystery and quiet strength, that attracted her to me in the first place. I am the warrior type and will go where any normal person would not. Does this make me different? Yes it does but it is the quality I choose to portray as her man. 

And l may not be her everything but I am hers and if she needs to believe I must expose myself openly and naked, thats when the boot meets the pavement, and resistance will be front and center. Either I am what she wants or l am not. 

I am who l am if this isn't enough for her so be it. I have short comings, but if l can barely hang on with what I seen or what l had to do in my life, their is nothing she or any phycologist can change or remove from my mind, I have coping skills that work most of the times. But their are time they do not. But again when is everyone equipped to handle everything 100%, to appease everyone.


----------



## ConanHub

I don't really comprehend RJ though I'm sympathetic to those suffering from it.

Doesn't it just spring from insecurities mostly?


----------



## Sfort

ConanHub said:


> I don't really comprehend RJ though I'm sympathetic to those suffering from it.
> 
> Doesn't it just spring from insecurities mostly?


It is MUCH more complicated than that. It's not particularly logical.


----------



## Tilted 1

ConanHub said:


> I don't really comprehend RJ though I'm sympathetic to those suffering from it.
> 
> Doesn't it just spring from insecurities mostly?


Not poking at you Conan, but you are really in love with your self, l believe this is a good thing. I am also secure and though I fall short on giving myself full self love doesn't mean I'm less but different. We all play on our strengths, so we are more like each other than you realize but our strengths create a persona of fortitude and assuredness. Which makes us what we are as individuals. And that attracts women of a certain type.


----------



## Tilted 1

My woman isn't needy nor weak, but because of her character I am a good match for her because she is able to shoulder more because if she needs more to get her through l am there, but also she is there if and when I need her. If this makes sense.


----------



## ConanHub

Tilted 1 said:


> Not poking at you Conan, but you are really in love with your self, l believe this is a good thing. I am also secure and though I fall short on giving myself full self love doesn't mean I'm less but different. We all play on our strengths, so we are more like each other than you realize but our strengths create a persona of fortitude and assuredness. Which makes us what we are as individuals. And that attracts women of a certain type.


So do you believe RJ comes into play more with those that have self-loathing than those that have self-love? 

If so that kind of makes sense.


----------



## Tilted 1

ConanHub said:


> So do you believe RJ comes into play more with those that have self-loathing than those that have self-love?
> 
> If so that kind of makes sense.


In a way, it could look like this. But possibly those who suffer from this it's possible that they, think they know themselves but really don't, or are maybe are taken back because they just want to show more well rounded with less flaws than another. I speak like I am comfortable within my own skin. I am, And knowing that I really don't give a hoot what another man/woman thinks.

I will not be what it takes for them to be perfectly content, but rather I am content with who l am. As you and others have said, and why is this so wrong for another, not to accept the imperfections along with the good. But I am saying it really doesn't matter what my spouse would like from me, because I'm only able to give her what I am.


----------



## Marduk

ConanHub said:


> I don't really comprehend RJ though I'm sympathetic to those suffering from it.
> 
> Doesn't it just spring from insecurities mostly?


I wrote a big post on all the different versions of RJ I've seen somewhere. If I dig it out, I'll link to it.

From what I remember, it boils down to two things: insecurity and dishonesty.

For example, there was a poster here that was very upset with his wife because she wouldn't do some things in the sack... after he found out she willingly and happily did it with other guys, she just wouldn't do them with him. He didn't seem to be jealous as much as felt betrayed because she always said she would never do those things and he settled with her sexually. Only to find out she liked them, just not with him. He wasn't mad about her doing it with other guys, he was mad about being lied to about it, and he was mad that her answer as to why not with him was "I don't know."

Then you have other people that are just straight up insecure about someone having a sex life before they met you. 

And of course you can have a mixture of both.

On top of that, I've also seen people find out their sexually conservative spouse used to engage in "out there" things like group sex, swinging, making porn, etc... that seems to be as much about a collision of values as anything.


----------



## In Absentia

Marduk said:


> For example, there was a poster here that was very upset with his wife because she wouldn't do some things in the sack... after he found out she willingly and happily did it with other guys, she just wouldn't do them with him. He didn't seem to be jealous as much as felt betrayed because she always said she would never do those things and he settled with her sexually. Only to find out she liked them, just not with him. He wasn't mad about her doing it with other guys, he was mad about being lied to about it, and he was mad that her answer as to why not with him was "I don't know."
> 
> Then you have other people that are just straight up insecure about someone having a sex life before they met you.



If I remember correctly, she never lied to him. She just wasn't interested it in doing that stuff anymore. With nobody.


----------



## Marduk

In Absentia said:


> If I remember correctly, she never lied to him. She just wasn't interested it in doing that stuff anymore. With nobody.


My memory seems to indicate that she had lied to him, and let him to believe that she would never do things like BDSM, ever - before him or after.

Turns out she had, and liked it. He wasn't upset that she did it with other guys, he was upset she wouldn't do it with him, and was upset that she had lied to him all those years. And that she wouldn't explain why she wouldn't engage in it with him.

I could be wrong though.


----------



## In Absentia

Marduk said:


> My memory seems to indicate that she had lied to him, and let him to believe that she would never do things like BDSM, ever - before him or after.
> 
> Turns out she had, and liked it. He wasn't upset that she did it with other guys, he was upset she wouldn't do it with him, and was upset that she had lied to him all those years. And that she wouldn't explain why she wouldn't engage in it with him.
> 
> I could be wrong though.


She didn't tell him she liked that stuff and yes, maybe she was economical with the truth, but that wouldn't have changed the situation. She did it in the past, she didn't like anymore and it didn't have anything to do with her partner. It was her decision. He could not accept the fact that she was a changed person, not into kinky stuff anymore. She never lied to him. Maybe she didn't tell him. Because there was no reason. 

And this is a typical example of RJ... isn't it? I don't understand it though.


----------



## Marduk

In Absentia said:


> She didn't tell him she liked that stuff and yes, maybe she was economical with the truth, but that wouldn't have changed the situation. She did it in the past, she didn't like anymore and it didn't have anything to do with her partner. It was her decision. He could not accept the fact that she was a changed person, not into kinky stuff anymore. She never lied to him. Maybe she didn't tell him. Because there was no reason.
> 
> And this is a typical example of RJ... isn't it? I don't understand it though.


Actually, I’m fairly certain she never said she didn’t like it anymore, just that she wouldn’t do it with him, and that she didn’t know why. 

We should really go pull out that thread. It was a lot of glasses of scotch ago.


----------



## Middle of Everything

In Absentia said:


> She didn't tell him she liked that stuff and yes, *maybe she was economical with the truth, *but that wouldn't have changed the situation. She did it in the past, she didn't like anymore and it didn't have anything to do with her partner. It was her decision. He could not accept the fact that she was a changed person, not into kinky stuff anymore. She never lied to him. Maybe she didn't tell him. Because there was no reason.
> 
> And this is a typical example of RJ... isn't it? I don't understand it though.


I dont remember the case you guys are talking about, but Im going to use that in the future with my wife if needed.

I didnt lie to you Honey, I may nave been economical with the the truth.............. but no lie.


----------



## In Absentia

Middle of Everything said:


> I dont remember the case you guys are talking about, but Im going to use that in the future with my wife if needed.
> 
> I didnt lie to you Honey, I may nave been economical with the the truth.............. but no lie.



She didn't lie. She didn't tell him because there was no need. It came out by chance (that she used to like it) and he was upset.


----------



## Casual Observer

Marduk said:


> Actually, I’m fairly certain she never said she didn’t like it anymore, just that she wouldn’t do it with him, and that she didn’t know why.
> 
> We should really go pull out that thread. It was a lot of glasses of scotch ago.


I'm OK with the idea my wife tried something with someone else and didn't like it, so that's just not her thing. I'm not OK with the idea that something was a normal part of her sex life (I'm thinking for some reason "normal part of her sexuality" almost makes more sense?) before and isn't now. What caused the change of heart? I think that's an OK discussion to have.


----------



## BruceBanner

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.
> 
> When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy".
> 
> It seems so transparently counter-productive.


The past is important and paves the way for the future. Jealousy has its benefits otherwise we wouldn't have evolved it.


----------



## Cletus

BruceBanner said:


> The past is important and paves the way for the future. Jealousy has its benefits otherwise we wouldn't have evolved it.


It doesn't seem to me in the context of a world without time machines that jealousy of the past serves any useful propose whatsoever, even if I concede the idea of jealousy as an evolved trait.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## *Deidre*

We all have insecurities to a degree, but insecurities that destroy marriages usually stem from internal feelings of one's own inadequacy. If you are happy in your own skin, and fulfilled...you won't be looking to your partner to validate you. Obsessing over a partner's past (even though your partner shouldn't have shared all of those details - that's weird unto itself) means you don't feel adequate and you need your partner to affirm you, fulfill you, etc. Truth is, if you are always seeking validation from your partner, you'll never be happy...because you'll always be raising the bar.

Marriage is about edifying one another, supporting one another, building each other up, and self sacrifice. But, when people look to their spouses for their identity, to give them self worth, that's going to lead to disaster. Now, there are cases when spouses can purposely make their partners feel insecure, and what I'm saying isn't to downplay that reality.


----------



## Buddy400

In Absentia said:


> She didn't lie. She didn't tell him because there was no need. It came out by chance (that she used to like it) and he was upset.


My recollection agrees with @Marduk. She said that she didn't do them and never had. And this was in a relationship that took place just prior to them getting together. 

Maybe we're thinking of different threads?

Anyway, we should probably actually dig up the thread we're referring to before continuing


----------



## Buddy400

Cletus said:


> It doesn't seem to me in the context of a world without time machines that jealousy of the past serves any useful propose whatsoever, even if I concede the idea of jealousy as an evolved trait.


It's my observation that there are many things people do and think that serve no useful purpose.

Actually, there are many things people do or think which work in direct opposition to their purpose.


----------



## Casual Observer

*Deidre* said:


> We all have insecurities to a degree, but insecurities that destroy marriages usually stem from internal feelings of one's own inadequacy. If you are happy in your own skin, and fulfilled...you won't be looking to your partner to validate you. Obsessing over a partner's past (even though your partner shouldn't have shared all of those details - that's weird unto itself) means you don't feel adequate and you need your partner to affirm you, fulfill you, etc. Truth is, if you are always seeking validation from your partner, you'll never be happy...because you'll always be raising the bar.
> 
> Marriage is about edifying one another, supporting one another, building each other up, and self sacrifice. But, when people look to their spouses for their identity, to give them self worth, that's going to lead to disaster. Now, there are cases when spouses can purposely make their partners feel insecure, and what I'm saying isn't to downplay that reality.


So I think you might, for some of us, have it exactly backward. It's the partner that is looking for validation & self-worth that creates the false narrative. That, for some of us, is the foundation for the previously-undisclosed and lied-about past causing the problems down the road.

I'm not saying this is universal. But there are some who very deliberately leave out things that they believe will cause problems for their partner down the road. If you know that's the case, if you believe the only way your relationship will work is by falsifying your narrative, then you shouldn't proceed with that relationship. You should find a different person, a different type of relationship, where that wouldn't be the case. OR. You could have a discussion where you disclose the things you believe could cause trouble for your partner, and see where it goes. It could be that your partner is rather impressed with your candor and loves you all the more. But if not, well, then it shouldn't be in the first place.


----------



## notmyjamie

oldtruck said:


> that statement screams how about we start some RJ.
> 
> one thing to say oh I like that a lot.
> 
> another thing to include: who taught you, because the I do not want to know disclaimer,
> runs the risk of not fully believed and planting the seeds of RJ.


I’m not sure if you’re saying I did something I shouldn’t have done or not??? I’m confused. Granted I’ve had a long day but...


----------



## Middle of Everything

In Absentia said:


> She didn't lie. She didn't tell him because there was no need. It came out by chance (that she used to like it) and he was upset.


Like I said, I dont remember the case you are talking about and to a degree dont care.

My point was that i found the phrase "maybe she was economical with the truth" funny. I found it a funny way to say someone was lying. Maybe its another way of saying "lying by omission"? Maybe you don't believe lying by omission is really a thing? I don't know. 

Anyway, seems to just be another way of dancing around telling the truth.


----------



## ConanHub

Marduk said:


> I wrote a big post on all the different versions of RJ I've seen somewhere. If I dig it out, I'll link to it.
> 
> 
> 
> For example, there was a poster here that was very upset with his wife because she wouldn't do some things in the sack... after he found out she willingly and happily did it with other guys, she just wouldn't do them with him. He didn't seem to be jealous as much as felt betrayed because she always said she would never do those things and he settled with her sexually. Only to find out she liked them, just not with him. He wasn't mad about her doing it with other guys, he was mad about being lied to about it, and he was mad that her answer as to why not with him was "I don't know..


This, by itself, doesn't seem to be RJ at all though it could easily go hand in hand with it and often probably does. Like you referred to.

I would be a bit hacked off if I found out my mate wouldn't do something, I would really like, and I found out she just wouldn't do it with me but did it with everyone else.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> I would be a bit hacked off if I found out my mate wouldn't do something, I would really like, and I found out she just wouldn't do it with me but did it with everyone else.


This is reason #1 why I keep the details of my sexual history to myself. I don't want to have to defend my current preferences and boundaries to a potential partner. I find it easiest to just state what I am into or open to trying now and do not dwell on what I may have done in the past.


----------



## JustTheWife

Lila said:


> This is reason #1 why I keep the details of my sexual history to myself. I don't want to have to defend my current preferences and boundaries to a potential partner. I find it easiest to just state what I am into or open to trying now and do not dwell on what I may have done in the past.


Amen. There are reasons why we keep our dirty little secrets from our husbands. For ages this is just how it works. We downplay our number of lovers. I don't even want to imagine how many abortions are kept secret with current partners blissfully unaware. Size? "Oh sweetie, I can't really remember but you're the biggest". Orgasms? "No, can't really remember but I never came like I do with you!" Protection? "Of course I always used protection". Anal? "No...that's disgusting...of course I never did that". "You're the best". "I don't even know why I did it. I regret it"


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> This is reason #1 why I keep the details of my sexual history to myself. I don't want to have to defend my current preferences and boundaries to a potential partner. I find it easiest to just state what I am into or open to trying now and do not dwell on what I may have done in the past.


That's a good policy with the caveat that if it gets serious, what do you do if your mate asks you straight up about it?

A lot of this is hypothetical for most of us anyway I hope.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> That's a good policy with the caveat that if it gets serious, what do you do if your mate asks you straight up about it?
> 
> A lot of this is hypothetical for most of us anyway I hope.


You mean if he asks about my past? I guess at that point I would ask why they want to know the details of my sexual history? And isn't it more important to know what I am interested in doing WITH HIM than what I may or may not have done in the past with someone else?

Eta,:. I would do my darndest to find out what his sexual preferences and boundaries are and if we're compatible. If there are any incompatibilities then it would be just a question of can you live without this period. No more explanation or justification needed.


----------



## oldtruck

notmyjamie said:


> I’m not sure if you’re saying I did something I shouldn’t have done or not??? I’m confused. Granted I’ve had a long day but...


one thing to say I like the way you do that is good. paying compliments always good.

another to say who taught you is opening a can of worms and is bad for it can lead
to retro active jealousy. Which then that would be bad.

past relationships need to stay in the past.


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> This is reason #1 why I keep the details of my sexual history to myself. I don't want to have to defend my current preferences and boundaries to a potential partner. I find it easiest to just state what I am into or open to trying now and do not dwell on what I may have done in the past.


Actually, I just nailed down why I personally would not accept this.

I would be fine being given the option to pass on a partner that isn't compatible with me.

Lying to me by omission or otherwise about this would absolutely make someone incompatible with me.

I don't withhold myself from my mate. If they want to know something, I tell them.

I am willing to give them everything I have as long as I'm capable and I require a mate to do likewise.

Honesty is the best policy with me because that is what I give and what I need in return.

This issue has never affected me but maybe something in each of our natures allows or repels some of the negative situations that can occur here.

I have always been pretty fearless in my honesty and haven't really had too many issues, sexually, with my partners.


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is reason #1 why I keep the details of my sexual history to myself. I don't want to have to defend my current preferences and boundaries to a potential partner. I find it easiest to just state what I am into or open to trying now and do not dwell on what I may have done in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I just nailed down why I personally would not accept this.
> 
> I would be fine being given the option to pass on a partner that isn't compatible with me.
> 
> Lying to me by omission or otherwise about this would absolutely make someone incompatible with me.
> 
> I don't withhold myself from my mate. If they want to know something, I tell them.
> 
> I am willing to give them everything I have as long as I'm capable and I require a mate to do likewise.
> 
> Honesty is the best policy with me because that is what I give and what I need in return.
> 
> This issue has never affected me but maybe something in each of our natures allows or repels some of the negative situations that can occur here.
> 
> I have always been pretty fearless in my honesty and haven't really had too many issues, sexually, with my partners.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said!


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> This is reason #1 why I keep the details of my sexual history to myself. I don't want to have to defend my current preferences and boundaries to a potential partner. I find it easiest to just state what I am into or open to trying now and do not dwell on what I may have done in the past.


On the one hand, I agree. Everybody gets to pick what they do and shouldn't feel pressured about it.

On the other hand, if my wife really liked to do stuff but won't do it with me... well, I'd like to know why. Maybe there's something I can do about it, or maybe there isn't. But I would like to talk about it.


----------



## Cletus

ConanHub said:


> I have always been pretty fearless in my honesty and haven't really had too many issues, sexually, with my partners.


The women hiding their sexual histories aren't hiding it from you. They're hiding it from Joe Unknown who, they have learned from experience, or from mom, or from reading this forum may not be able to handle it. Once you open your mouth, you can't unring that bell. 

It's like telling a racy joke at work. Best to not test #MeToo on the woman within earshot.

Were I a woman, having been on this forum for a while now, I would probably do the same until I had a very strong sense of my partner's ability to manage the truth. Especially if my past contained anything that I was now, in retrospect, ashamed of or no longer considered prudent.


----------



## Cletus

Marduk said:


> On the one hand, I agree. Everybody gets to pick what they do and shouldn't feel pressured about it.
> 
> On the other hand, if my wife really liked to do stuff but won't do it with me... well, I'd like to know why. Maybe there's something I can do about it, or maybe there isn't. But I would like to talk about it.


Do you mean - 

"Liked to do stuff in the past but won't do it with me (or anyone else ever again)" or
"Liked to do stuff in the past and would do it again with the right lover were I gone"?


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> You mean if he asks about my past? I guess at that point I would ask why they want to know the details of my sexual history? And isn't it more important to know what I am interested in doing WITH HIM than what I may or may not have done in the past with someone else?
> 
> Eta,:. I would do my darndest to find out what his sexual preferences and boundaries are and if we're compatible. If there are any incompatibilities then it would be just a question of can you live without this period. No more explanation or justification needed.


Not buying it, sorry.

Let's use a stupid example that I'm just making up: Wife says "No, you can never go on top. I'm not going to explain it and don't pressure me about it, it's a closed door forever."

Husband says to himself "Ok, that's a bit funny but I love her... I guess I can live with never going on top."

They get married, everything is decent, he finds out in some random way that she totally loved it when her ex's were on top. So what gives?

He can take your path and just accept that she won't let him go on top, but would other guys. Maybe he lives with it, maybe it drives him mental. Maybe he brings it up and she shuts it down. 

Or maybe, they have a conversation about it, and discover that he's got a beer gut and although she's attracted to him, she doesn't want that big beer gut on top of her. Her problem is not having a theoretical man on top of her, or having other guys on top of her, or _even her husband_ on top of her... it's the beer gut attached to him that is the reason she's saying no.

At this point, he can choose to lose the beer gut to see if that changes her mind, or he can choose to not lose it and not ask to go on top. For example.

This does not cover the cases where:
1. she used to like something but now doesn't because she's changed;
2. she used to pretend to like something but doesn't really like it;
3. she tried it with someone else and never wants to do it again.

But it sure does also cover off cases where it actually is him that is the problem and she just doesn't want to tell him, or even where she's feeling like "a wife/mother shouldn't do those things," or whatever.

If you want good sex you have to communicate good too.


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> Do you mean -
> 
> "Liked to do stuff in the past but won't do it with me (or anyone else ever again)" or
> "Liked to do stuff in the past and would do it again with the right lover were I gone"?


The latter.

I will say, as a guy that did many things with women that they swore they'd never ever do... the stuff in the first bucket is always a hard no. I don't even go there. There is stuff we just don't do because she never wants to do it again. 

But often if you drop it and move on to other good stuff sometimes magically becomes not just a yes, but a "hey, remember that thing I said I never wanted to do again? Well, maybe we could try..."


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> Actually, I just nailed down why I personally would not accept this.
> 
> I would be fine being given the option to pass on a partner that isn't compatible with me.
> 
> Lying to me by omission or otherwise about this would absolutely make someone incompatible with me.
> 
> I don't withhold myself from my mate. If they want to know something, I tell them.
> 
> I am willing to give them everything I have as long as I'm capable and I require a mate to do likewise.
> 
> Honesty is the best policy with me because that is what I give and what I need in return.
> 
> This issue has never affected me but maybe something in each of our natures allows or repels some of the negative situations that can occur here.
> 
> I have always been pretty fearless in my honesty and haven't really had too many issues, sexually, with my partners.


I laugh a little whenever I see "lying by omission" used in these arguments. No, it's not lying by omission. It's having a different level of privacy. 

If 100% disclosure of every detail regarding sexual history is important, then that's a preference, one that should be communicated. I'd opt out without a backward glance but would appreciate them sharing that preference before investing too much my or his time.


----------



## Cletus

Marduk said:


> But often if you drop it and move on to other good stuff sometimes magically becomes not just a yes, but a "hey, remember that thing I said I never wanted to do again? Well, maybe we could try..."


Yeah, I'll have to take your word for it. I'm more likely to hear "Remember that thing I said there was a snowball's chance in hell of doing? Turns out no."


----------



## Lila

Marduk said:


> On the one hand, I agree. Everybody gets to pick what they do and shouldn't feel pressured about it.
> 
> *On the other hand, if my wife really liked to do stuff but won't do it with me... well, I'd like to know why. Maybe there's something I can do about it, or maybe there isn't. But I would like to talk about it.*


Based on your response to the honesty and vulnerability thread, I can see how you would want to know. It's your nature. Different strokes for different folks..


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> Yeah, I'll have to take your word for it. I'm more likely to hear "Remember that thing I said there was a snowball's chance in hell of doing? Turns out no."


I think you have to have a baseline of what Savage says "Good, Giving, and Game." 

If you're not committed to being sexually good to your partner*, you're going to have a problem.

If you're not committed to being sexually giving to your partner*, you're going to have a problem.

If you're not committed to being game for anything with your partner*, you're going to have a problem.

* = within reason, which is typically the real problem, because different people's definition of "within reason" can be very different.


----------



## Cletus

Lila said:


> Based on your response to the honesty and vulnerability thread, I can see how you would want to know. It's your nature. Different strokes for different folks..


So where did you learn to be so "economical" with the information flow, to paraphrase another thread? Was it experience, friends, a caring relative, this forum, something else?


----------



## notmyjamie

oldtruck said:


> one thing to say I like the way you do that is good. paying compliments always good.
> 
> another to say who taught you is opening a can of worms and is bad for it can lead
> to retro active jealousy. Which then that would be bad.
> 
> past relationships need to stay in the past.


Well the point I was getting at is that my BF and I *don't* discuss specific sexual things about our time with other people. He likes that I'm a certain way about certain things and I like his way too. I joke that I don't want to know who taught him certain stuff and he always jokes back "self taught!!!" 

Believe me, we don't ever get into specifics. On the rare occasion that a conversation takes a turn and we realize it's heading in a dangerous direction, we simply change the subject. He knows my number and I know his and that's the end of what we know about each others sex lives prior to us meeting except that his ex-wife did make it a point to tell me once about all the great sex she had as a teenager. I'm on the fence as to whether she knows that I know she had all that sex with my boyfriend. I'm well aware how young they were when they got together. He says she was drunk and didn't think I'd know and I say she knew I'd know and did it on purpose. Her efforts were wasted though as I just found great humor in how mortified he was when I told him about it. LOL


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> Based on your response to the honesty and vulnerability thread, I can see how you would want to know. It's your nature. Different strokes for different folks..


Ya, ok, fair. 

I just think that communication to a level is key.

Life is long and full of struggle. Almost every decision is negotiable, and almost every door you close for yourself, you may one day want to crack open again. So be careful about the locks you put on it, and at least put in a peephole or something, so you can at least see the other side of it.


----------



## Lila

Marduk said:


> Not buying it, sorry.
> 
> Let's use a stupid example that I'm just making up: Wife says "No, you can never go on top. I'm not going to explain it and don't pressure me about it, it's a closed door forever."
> 
> Husband says to himself "Ok, that's a bit funny but I love her... I guess I can live with never going on top."
> 
> They get married, everything is decent, he finds out in some random way that she totally loved it when her ex's were on top. So what gives?
> 
> He can take your path and just accept that she won't let him go on top, but would other guys. Maybe he lives with it, maybe it drives him mental. Maybe he brings it up and she shuts it down.
> 
> Or maybe, they have a conversation about it, and discover that he's got a beer gut and although she's attracted to him, she doesn't want that big beer gut on top of her. Her problem is not having a theoretical man on top of her, or having other guys on top of her, or _even her husband_ on top of her... it's the beer gut attached to him that is the reason she's saying no.
> 
> At this point, he can choose to lose the beer gut to see if that changes her mind, or he can choose to not lose it and not ask to go on top. For example.
> 
> This does not cover the cases where:
> 1. she used to like something but now doesn't because she's changed;
> 2. she used to pretend to like something but doesn't really like it;
> 3. she tried it with someone else and never wants to do it again.
> 
> But it sure does also cover off cases where it actually is him that is the problem and she just doesn't want to tell him, or even where she's feeling like "a wife/mother shouldn't do those things," or whatever.
> 
> If you want good sex you have to communicate good too.


This goes back to that honesty and vulnerability thing. My opinion, in your example above, any woman who is ready to have this discussion should have talked to her divorce attorney and gotten all of her ducks in a row. The odds of people taking criticism without feeling some resentment are few and far between. Just my opinion, but most would hold on to that information for the rest of their lives.


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> This goes back to that honesty and vulnerability thing. My opinion, in your example above, any woman who is ready to have this discussion should have talked to her divorce attorney and gotten all of her ducks in a row. The odds of people taking criticism without feeling some resentment are few and far between. Just my opinion, but most would hold on to that information for the rest of their lives.


Why be married to a guy like that?


----------



## Lila

Cletus said:


> So where did you learn to be so "economical" with the information flow, to paraphrase another thread? Was it experience, friends, a caring relative, this forum, something else?


Little bit of all of the above but it started with my mother. She drilled it into my head from a very early age that sex (sexual acts) between a man and a woman was best as long as it was consensual, pleasurable, and most importantly, kept private between the two. She encouraged us to experiment but to be smart about it. She always told us "no one needs to know your ****". I credit her with giving me a very healthy view of sex.


----------



## Lila

Marduk said:


> Why be married to a guy like that?


Not everyone is perfect like you @Marduk. Some of us humans are actually fallible.


----------



## Middle of Everything

Lila said:


> Not everyone is perfect like you @Marduk. Some of us humans are actually fallible.


Good thing Marduk liked this bull**** response and is a good sport.


----------



## Lila

Middle of Everything said:


> Good thing Marduk liked this bull**** response and is a good sport.


Bull**** bull****e. 
@Marduk and I have gone round after round for a very long time. He knows what I'm saying.


----------



## Middle of Everything

Lila said:


> Bull**** bull****e.
> @Marduk and I have gone round after round for a very long time. He knows what I'm saying.


That's cool.

Only thing I got to know then is what is with the E on the second "bullpoop"? :grin2:


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> But often if you drop it and move on to other good stuff sometimes magically becomes not just a yes, but a "hey, remember that thing I said I never wanted to do again? Well, maybe we could try..."


Before I go here, please forgive me in advance if this ruffles feathers....

You have talked before about what a thrill you got out of "getting" some woman to do something she originally didn't want to do, and then you revel in how much she loves it now that you "got" her to do it.

This doesn't sit right with me and is yucky.

Why would it be so important to you to "get" someone to do something or change their mind about something?

Do you not think that if you just let it go and respected what she stated she actually wants and doesn't want you couldn't still have good to great sex? Do you have to "get" her to do something in order to have good sex?

I know in this example you are saying SHE may eventually bring it up, but in the past you detailed how you "got" women to do things and again, reveled in it.


----------



## Faithful Wife

And PS @Marduk maybe by reading your answer I can understand a bit more about other men (some not all) as well.


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> I laugh a little whenever I see "lying by omission" used in these arguments. No, it's not lying by omission. It's having a different level of privacy.
> 
> If 100% disclosure of every detail regarding sexual history is important, then that's a preference, one that should be communicated. I'd opt out without a backward glance but would appreciate them sharing that preference before investing too much my or his time.


One important detail is that I didn't indicate that I would want 100% full disclosure about everything in a prospective mate's sexual history. I honestly don't really care as long as I'm prepped about exes I might run into or special situations that I need to be aware of, etc. Former prostitute, porn star...

Those aren't even deal breakers for me but I would need to be made aware.

What is important is honest commitment at a level I'm willing to commit to as well.

I am willing to accommodate my mate's desires to the best of my abilities and if I can't, or won't, I'm willing to talk about it because my mate is different from everyone else and has the special access card to my vulnerability.

My sticking point is if I really liked something sexual that my mate simply refused me, I would be fine with it unless she just didn't want to do it with me but liked it with everyone else.

There would need to be some discussion about it because I am willing to give her the same consideration.

I do go without some sex acts that I absolutely love because Mrs. C is wigged out by them. I'm fine with that but she would have some conversations coming if I ever found out she was lying to me about it.

She claims she never has and never will and that is good enough for me but she has to be honest with me because I am with her.

I can't see getting into a serious relationship without the commitment and trust necessary for honesty.

To be clear, I don't get wanting this knowledge without a very serious level of commitment. I actually can't fathom asking anyone about this stuff unless it has gotten to considering marriage.


----------



## VladDracul

Tilted 1 said:


> Not poking at you Conan, but you are really in love with your self, l believe this is a good thing. I am also secure and though I fall short on giving myself full self love doesn't mean I'm less but different. We all play on our strengths, so we are more like each other than you realize but our strengths create a persona of fortitude and assuredness. Which makes us what we are as individuals. And that attracts women of a certain type.


I'm 100% with Conan with this. I have never experienced even the mildest form of RJ. Some of us are not fragile men who are plagued by RJ and accordingly don't have a compulsion to constantly pester our wives and girlfriends, and in some cases a couple of the neighbor ladies, to rate us on a "lovers scale". We're more concerned about the guy who test drove or pre-owned our trucks than we do about our wives/girlfriends exs. It ain't that we think we're that great. We just figure that if one lady don't like our skills, we don't self loath over it. We just move on to someone who appreciates us better. God is the only one who can take a woman from us. To any other man, we sadly (in some cases) release her. People that don't know men like I've described probably won't like us and those that do know us seldom understand us, but it is what it is.:wink2:


----------



## In Absentia

Buddy400 said:


> My recollection agrees with @Marduk. She said that she didn't do them and never had. And this was in a relationship that took place just prior to them getting together.
> 
> *Maybe we're thinking of different threads?*
> 
> Anyway, we should probably actually dig up the thread we're referring to before continuing



I think they are different threads... :smile2:


----------



## oldtruck

Marduk said:


> On the one hand, I agree. Everybody gets to pick what they do and shouldn't feel pressured about it.
> 
> On the other hand, if my wife really liked to do stuff but won't do it with me... well, I'd like to know why. Maybe there's something I can do about it, or maybe there isn't. But I would like to talk about it.


what if it was a wife that wanted full menu sex before she knew her husband.
now she is older, been there, done that, and got the (her wearing the) T shirt
while doing those acts, now after doing and exploring sex she no longer 
wants to do the full menu.

She has her husband on the limited menu. it has nothing to do with her husband.

if she talks about it all it will do is make her husband want the full menu sex
from her.


----------



## Holdingontoit

Cletus said:


> Were I a woman, having been on this forum for a while now, I would probably do the same until I had a very strong sense of my partner's ability to manage the truth.


This is clearly the dominant strategy if the only goal is to continue the current relationship, no matter the cost. To either partner.
This is the dominant strategy if the individual is willing to manipulate their partner into staying even though the partner might prefer to leave if they knew the full truth.

The problem is (i) you have to live with your conscience, knowing that you are a manipulative lying user, and (ii) you are gambling that your partner never learns the full truth. Because if they do, the fallout is likely to be worse for both of you. One partner feeling lied to and betrayed for years and years is a big hit to the relationship. In many cases bigger than the hit from the disclosure of the underlying truth. Also, it is much harder on both to break up a relationship of many years. In hindsight, both might have been better off if the truth had been disclosed and the relationship ended closer to the start.

In the interests of full disclosure, I was a manipulative lying user for years. And it did not bother my conscience at all. I figured if my wife lied her way into getting me to marry her, she couldn't reasonably complain if I lied to her in return. As it happens, we both ended up disclosing the truth and our relationship now is better than ever before. So in the end we got pretty much the best outcome possible after starting with a relationship based on her being economical with the truth. Nevertheless, if we could rewrite the past, we might have both been better off if she had told me the truth up front, and freed us both to find more compatible partners.


----------



## Sfort

Holdingontoit said:


> we might have both been better off if she had told me the truth up front, and freed us both to find more compatible partners.


I'm not familiar with your back story. What has the big secret?


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Before I go here, please forgive me in advance if this ruffles feathers....
> 
> You have talked before about what a thrill you got out of "getting" some woman to do something she originally didn't want to do, and then you revel in how much she loves it now that you "got" her to do it.
> 
> This doesn't sit right with me and is yucky.


That wasn't in regard to stuff like this. What I discovered early on while dating (honestly I think because my mom was such an ardent feminist), was that pressure was bad. Expectations were bad. But also, women get to decide for themselves what they want and what they don't want. And when, and with who.

My first sexual experience was also with an older girl, who was quite promiscuous and willing to teach an eager student about women. One of the things she taught me was that if you don't ask for something, you're not likely going to get it.

This caused an interesting conundrum for me. On the one hand, I was very much taught to treat women gently, with respect, and with compassion. On the other hand, I was taught to treat women as empowered equals with agency. On the third hand, I also had agency in this.

My solution was to do the following: be bold, explicit, and clear with what I wanted without being pushy, controlling, or manipulative. Here's some examples:

1. university age marduk is at a party, sees hot girl, approaches hot girl. Chats with her, has a few laughs, and just says "hey listen, you're cute. How about we go back to my place..." She could say yes, in which case, a good time is hopefully had with no commitments or expectations. She could say no, in which case I would say "I totally get it, I have tickets to this thing next weekend if you'd like to go..." in which case a more standard dating kind of scenario might play out. Or she could say 'hell no,' in which case I would thank her for her time and wish her well. Interestingly, many of the women that everybody would say "she's never going to agree to go home with you" would say yes. That's what I mean. 

2. post-divorce marduk in his mid/late 20's is dating a girl, and we're sexually active. Things are good. I say "hey, how would you feel if we did X?" She says "no, sorry, not going there." To which I would immediately drop it without being passive aggressive. Just shrug my shoulders and say "no problem, totally get it, how about Y?" Where Y is something generally less 'edgy' than X. Or even something we already do. In which case, we go and have fun with all the Y's that both of us are good with. And I try to create a sexually open kind of space where she's comfortable, and she knows I'm not going to pressure her or be a **** about saying no. What I would find in those cases is if our relationship continued for a length of time... she would end up bringing up that she's now open to X. All on her own, without any pressuring or coercing from me. I think it's because I would create the safe space for it. And often, it would be exactly the stuff she would say she would never do.

What I'm getting at is that I have agency, and so do they. I get to ask for things. They get to ask for things. I get to say no to things, and so do they. 

The more I would just be brave enough to ask, the more I'd get. The more I would be the opposite of pushy, the more they'd be open. The more playful I'd be, the more playful they would be.

Now I really really struggle in all that how it's yucky. I've never once been called a creep, never once been dumped for being pushy, and the only sexually negative relationship I've been in is with my ex wife.



> Why would it be so important to you to "get" someone to do something or change their mind about something?


It's not important to me at all. It was an ego trip for me when I was younger, when I discovered the things I discovered above - that being respectful, being clear, and creating space unlocked many doors for me that didn't for other guys, I admit. But I have never sought "getting" something by coercing, manipulating, being passive aggressive or pushy. The ego trip part was always that _they asked me for it on their own._



> Do you not think that if you just let it go and respected what she stated she actually wants and doesn't want you couldn't still have good to great sex? Do you have to "get" her to do something in order to have good sex?
> 
> I know in this example you are saying SHE may eventually bring it up, but in the past you detailed how you "got" women to do things and again, reveled in it.


See the above. I believe I got those things _because I respected what she stated she actually wants._ When she said no to something, I immediately moved on to something else, because there are infinite possibilities. 

I really think you're confusing what I'm saying here, or at least what I would do (and still do do with my wife). She's in charge of her, and I'm in charge of me.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

oldtruck said:


> what if it was a wife that wanted full menu sex before she knew her husband.
> now she is older, been there, done that, and got the (her wearing the) T shirt
> while doing those acts, now after doing and exploring sex she no longer
> wants to do the full menu.
> 
> She has her husband on the limited menu. it has nothing to do with her husband.
> 
> *if she talks about it all it will do is make her husband want the full menu sex*
> from her.


Which is a great response imo.

If talked about, and why shouldn't the H want sex in that way? 

It likely has less to do with the fact she did it for others but say, let's use a BJ as an example it's much more likely he just wants a BJ for his own sake.

Because H may want some menu items that W doesn't do "now" , it's certainly OK for H to have some of what he'd like period, whether W couches her response in "I used to but not now terms" .

She may be playing a game, to make her "no" or rejection "her Hs problem".

And not her being inflexible or unimaginative, or non spontaneous, call it what you will.

So she creates in her Hs mind a scenario for him to dwell on, creating her not having to be a willing participant in Hs desires, either way she gets her way which is "no".

Just a sideways thought where a women gets her way but makes it in no way her fault for not being flexible.


----------



## Faithful Wife

@Marduk I must have misunderstood a previous post of yours on another thread. I don’t recall which thread it was so can’t go back and read it, but I will just stand corrected by the above post.


----------



## Blondilocks

Faithful Wife said:


> @Marduk I must have misunderstood a previous post of yours on another thread. I don’t recall which thread it was so can’t go back and read it, but I will just stand corrected by the above post.


 Re: Unconditional Attraction & Shaming
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marduk View Post
There is no rush quite like getting someone hot and arrogant to do whatever you want, willingly. Especially when they mostly hate you. It's a power thing, a challenge. And a giant turn on.

I'm not saying it's right, or it's healthy, or that I encourage it. But damn, it's addictive. Moth to a flame for me, and twice as destructive.

Is this the post you were thinking of?


----------



## Marduk

oldtruck said:


> what if it was a wife that wanted full menu sex before she knew her husband.
> now she is older, been there, done that, and got the (her wearing the) T shirt
> while doing those acts, now after doing and exploring sex she no longer
> wants to do the full menu.
> 
> She has her husband on the limited menu. it has nothing to do with her husband.
> 
> if she talks about it all it will do is make her husband want the full menu sex
> from her.


Not necessarily. My wife used to do stuff that she no longer wants to do, and I'm fine with it. Or even stuff we used to do, that we no longer do.

But I also do understand her reasons for it.


----------



## Marduk

Blondilocks said:


> Re: Unconditional Attraction & Shaming
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Marduk View Post
> There is no rush quite like getting someone hot and arrogant to do whatever you want, willingly. Especially when they mostly hate you. It's a power thing, a challenge. And a giant turn on.
> 
> I'm not saying it's right, or it's healthy, or that I encourage it. But damn, it's addictive. Moth to a flame for me, and twice as destructive.
> 
> Is this the post you were thinking of?


Sure, so I'll open the kimono and explain what I mean.

When I was last single, I'd have a very large group of friends - men and women. And some of those friends of friends that were women really would express frustration and anger with me. Because I'm outspoken about stuff I believe in, because I like to tease people or push people's buttons, because I'm a bit of a trickster... some people really wouldn't like it. Or, simply because I was a reasonably successful, reasonably good looking guy, they wouldn't like it, either. Especially some of the hyper-liberal artsy kind of people that would think that having a day job is conceding your soul to 'the man.' Or the kind of hyper-conservative people that would think that all non-traditional modes of society or relationships were somehow evil.

I would actually like both kinds of people because they're at least interesting. And, you know, I have personality flaws like anyone else, and sometimes do self-destructive things just to see what will happen.

Now - take one of those kinds of women. Your standard starving artist mad at the world because it doesn't value her angst, or your standard career driven woman who thinks that anyone that hangs out in small theatres is stupid. Either one, two ends of the spectrum.

Now, they're attractive. I'm decent looking. They'd say something stupid and I'd say something even more stupid, and now we are yelling and hate each other. Only I don't hate her at all. I'm kind of more interested in her for the simple fact that she's challenging - to me, to my ideas, to my assumptions. And yes, a challenge to get into some kind of relationship with. So things would happen like me getting into an argument with someone at a party, having her storm off saying she hates me, and a week later I'd call her up and say "listen, I know you are really pissed off at me but I want to engage with you more here. I don't feel like I'm done with this. Are you?" 

Because, you know, my curiosity is peaked. My attraction is peaked. I want to be challenged. I feel alive when I'm with someone like this. And as often as not... she'd say yes. Then we'd meet up, argue more, and sometimes argue ourselves right into bed and you know... have really angry-I-hate-you-but-I'm-loving-this sex. That's the 'hot and arrogant' part. Imagine getting the hot business driven woman to beg you to have sex with her. Or getting the hot but angsty artist girl to ask you to take her off to a five star hotel for the weekend. That's a rush, I'll admit. Especially when they've told everyone that they would have nothing to do with you, and hate everything you represent. And now they're taking your clothes off and pulling you into bed. Are you trying to tell me that wouldn't be sexy?

Most of the time it would end there. Whatever spark that drove us to that point would be gone. Sometimes it would continue, and in a few weeks would turn toxic, and one of us would indeed decide that we really did hate the other person. That's the unhealthy part. Well, that and wanting to engage with someone that is actively hostile to you to begin with.

How that developed is that my wife constantly challenges me. We don't have a harmonious relationship often. We're not throwing things at each other, but we don't often agree with each other on many things, either. Our base values are the same. Our perspective on the world is not. She constantly surprises and challenges me. And I think that's a big part of why I'm always drawn to her like a moth to the flame. Most guys would run from her screaming after a few weeks or months, but I'm just endlessly fascinated and engaged. Especially when we disagree.

Again, I'm not saying any of that is right or healthy or good for anyone else. I'm just trying to be honest and open here.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Because, you know, my curiosity is peaked. My attraction is peaked. I want to be challenged. I feel alive when I'm with someone like this. And as often as not... she'd say yes. Then we'd meet up, argue more, and sometimes argue ourselves right into bed and you know... have really angry-I-hate-you-but-I'm-loving-this sex. That's the 'hot and arrogant' part. Imagine getting the hot business driven woman to beg you to have sex with her. Or getting the hot but angsty artist girl to ask you to take her off to a five star hotel for the weekend. That's a rush, I'll admit. Especially when they've told everyone that they would have nothing to do with you, and hate everything you represent. And now they're taking your clothes off and pulling you into bed. *Are you trying to tell me that wouldn't be sexy?*
> 
> Most of the time it would end there. Whatever spark that drove us to that point would be gone. Sometimes it would continue, and in a few weeks would turn toxic, and one of us would indeed decide that we really did hate the other person. That's the unhealthy part. *Well, that and wanting to engage with someone that is actively hostile to you to begin with.*


Bold 1 = no.

Reason = Bold 2.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Bold 1 = no.
> 
> Reason = Bold 2.


----------



## Faithful Wife

@Marduk

It's all good. I've just never wanted to have sex with anyone I didn't actually like as a person, and definitely not anyone I've felt hostile towards or they felt hostile towards me. Where I can kind of understand that type of thing playing out in say, a Sam and Diane scenario...it just doesn't appeal to me personally.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> @Marduk
> 
> It's all good. I've just never wanted to have sex with anyone I didn't actually like as a person, and definitely not anyone I've felt hostile towards or they felt hostile towards me. Where I can kind of understand that type of thing playing out in say, a Sam and Diane scenario...it just doesn't appeal to me personally.


I can get that. 

What’s yuky in all that though?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Marduk
> 
> It's all good. I've just never wanted to have sex with anyone I didn't actually like as a person, and definitely not anyone I've felt hostile towards or they felt hostile towards me. Where I can kind of understand that type of thing playing out in say, a Sam and Diane scenario...it just doesn't appeal to me personally.
> 
> 
> 
> I can get that.
> 
> What’s yuky in all that though?
Click to expand...

I’m not sure if that was the post (blondilocks quoted) I had read. If it was I misunderstood it. So nothing is yucky in the scenario you described (because you and these women were both into it).


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I’m not sure if that was the post (blondilocks quoted) I had read. If it was I misunderstood it. So nothing is yucky in the scenario you described (because you and these women were both into it).


Have you ever been in a scenario where you're starting from a place of "nope, not gonna go there" and end up in a "hmm... actually that sounds like something I really want to try" scenario with a given dude?

If so, how did that play out?


----------



## Mr The Other

Marduk said:


> Yup, been together a couple decades, and once in a while (like every few years) she'll spontaneously ask me things like this.
> 
> I think she isn't really seeking information, I think she's seeking reassurance. So I give her reassurance instead of factual answers - which I don't remember, anyway.


Which is fair enough.

Listening involves listening to the words, the feeling behind them and the motive for saying them. Very few people are actually good at listening to all three and I suspect no one finds it easy. 

So, "Do I look OK?" is insecurity motivated by the quest for assurance.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Have you ever been in a scenario where you're starting from a place of "nope, not gonna go there" and end up in a "hmm... actually that sounds like something I really want to try" scenario with a given dude?
> 
> If so, how did that play out?


Only in a couple of cases. It happened because on first glance I wasn't that physically attracted to him. Then when I got to know him better, something about his personality made me want to hang out with him more, and then as I got to know him I became attracted to him on all levels.

In no case has this ever been a man I felt I couldn't respect or felt hostile towards.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Only in a couple of cases. It happened because on first glance I wasn't that physically attracted to him. Then when I got to know him better, something about his personality made me want to hang out with him more, and then as I got to know him I became attracted to him on all levels.
> 
> In no case has this ever been a man I felt I couldn't respect or felt hostile towards.


OK sure.

So said guy went from your "will not do" bucket to your "will do" bucket. What I'm talking about is going from "will not do certain stuff with this guy I'm already sleeping with" bucket to "want to certain stuff do with this guy I'm already sleeping with" bucket.

What did he do to move it from the 'no-no' bucket to the 'yes please' bucket? Or was it all internal to you?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only in a couple of cases. It happened because on first glance I wasn't that physically attracted to him. Then when I got to know him better, something about his personality made me want to hang out with him more, and then as I got to know him I became attracted to him on all levels.
> 
> In no case has this ever been a man I felt I couldn't respect or felt hostile towards.
> 
> 
> 
> OK sure.
> 
> So said guy went from your "will not do" bucket to your "will do" bucket. What I'm talking about is going from "will not do certain stuff with this guy I'm already sleeping with" bucket to "want to certain stuff do with this guy I'm already sleeping with" bucket.
> 
> What did he do to move it from the 'no-no' bucket to the 'yes please' bucket? Or was it all internal to you?
Click to expand...

None of that really applies to me because I’ve always been game for a large variety of things and no one has pushed for more than that. They maybe asked but the answer was still no. And no I didn’t come back later and say sure let’s try it.

But again, there isn’t much on my no list to begin with. A lot of times they have more on their no list than I do, and I don’t ask them to change their minds.

Sex acts are not something that is related to my attraction or connection to anyone. If I’m in a sexual relationship, I’m open to all the same things as I am in any other relationship. 

Once or twice there was maybe a suggestion about something I had not even considered before and therefore didn’t know what my position on it was before being asked. In those cases it was sometimes yes because it sounded like fun and sometimes no because it didn’t. 

I became self aware of what I like and don’t like fairly early in my sexual life and my preferences haven’t changed since then. Again, it’s a pretty large list of yeses anyway. 

(Yeses? Not sure if that is a word).


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> None of that really applies to me because I’ve always been game for a large variety of things and no one has pushed for more than that. They maybe asked but the answer was still no. And no I didn’t come back later and say sure let’s try it.
> 
> But again, there isn’t much on my no list to begin with. A lot of times they have more on their no list than I do, and I don’t ask them to change their minds.
> 
> Sex acts are not something that is related to my attraction or connection to anyone. If I’m in a sexual relationship, I’m open to all the same things as I am in any other relationship.
> 
> Once or twice there was maybe a suggestion about something I had not even considered before and therefore didn’t know what my position on it was before being asked. In those cases it was sometimes yes because it sounded like fun and sometimes no because it didn’t.
> 
> I became self aware of what I like and don’t like fairly early in my sexual life and my preferences haven’t changed since then. Again, it’s a pretty large list of yeses anyway.
> 
> (Yeses? Not sure if that is a word).


Lol, I'm pretty much the same way. Maybe most dudes are, I dunno.


----------



## Sfort

Faithful Wife said:


> Again, it’s a pretty large list of yeses anyway.


What's on your "no" list?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Sfort said:


> What's on your "no" list?


I'll save that for conversations with men I'm actually sleeping with. :x


----------



## Ikaika

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.
> 
> 
> 
> When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy".
> 
> 
> 
> It seems so transparently counter-productive.




You got me size, something I have not been fragile about. 

I hear what you are saying, maybe it is a generational thing. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Sfort

Ikaika said:


> You got me size, something I have not been fragile about.


Huh?


----------



## ABHale

Cletus said:


> This is just one man's opinion, but I believe the cause for most women lying about their past is because of this male fragility, not the cause.


I think they’re doing it to Portray themselves as Little Miss innocent. They don’t want the potential husband knowing how they acted prior to meeting him.


----------



## FeministInPink

ABHale said:


> I think they’re doing it to Portray themselves as Little Miss innocent. They don’t want the potential husband knowing how they acted prior to meeting him.


That's a very jaded way of looking at it. Perhaps it's because of the double standard applied to women who are sexually experienced.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Marduk

ABHale said:


> I think they’re doing it to Portray themselves as Little Miss innocent. They don’t want the potential husband knowing how they acted prior to meeting him.


Like there's no social stigma on women acting just like men...?


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

FeministInPink said:


> ABHale said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think they’re doing it to Portray themselves as Little Miss innocent. They don’t want the potential husband knowing how they acted prior to meeting him.
> 
> 
> 
> That's a very jaded way of looking at it. Perhaps it's because of the double standard applied to women who are sexually experienced.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Sounds like you both are saying the same thing.


----------



## Buddy400

FeministInPink said:


> That's a very jaded way of looking at it. Perhaps it's because of the double standard applied to women who are sexually experienced.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


Double standard or not, it's not okay to lie because someone may not like hearing the truth.

If a woman asked a man if he just pumped and dumped women and he replied that he didn't (he had, but he knew she wouldn't like to hear that). 

Would that be okay?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Buddy400 said:


> FeministInPink said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a very jaded way of looking at it. Perhaps it's because of the double standard applied to women who are sexually experienced.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Double standard or not, it's not okay to lie because someone may not like hearing the truth.
> 
> If a woman asked a man if he just pumped and dumped women and he replied that he didn't (he had, but he knew she wouldn't like to hear that).
> 
> Would that be okay?
Click to expand...

No it wouldn’t be ok, but men do lie about this specific question all the time. Very few who actually did this will tell the truth.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> Buddy400 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FeministInPink said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a very jaded way of looking at it. Perhaps it's because of the double standard applied to women who are sexually experienced.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Double standard or not, it's not okay to lie because someone may not like hearing the truth.
> 
> If a woman asked a man if he just pumped and dumped women and he replied that he didn't (he had, but he knew she wouldn't like to hear that).
> 
> Would that be okay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it wouldn’t be ok, but men do lie about this specific question all the time. Very few who actually did this will tell the truth.
Click to expand...

How do women find out if a man does this or not? Do you ask him directly?


----------



## Cletus

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> How do women find out if a man does this or not? Do you ask him directly?


Yes. Usually about the time the pumping has completed and the dumping has commenced.


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> How do women find out if a man does this or not? Do you ask him directly?


We don't find out because those of you who do it do not admit it. You don't admit it to the ones you do it to nor to later women who you hope will respect you. Yes we ask, but no, men who did/do this don't tell the truth. Because you know we won't get with you because of it.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do women find out if a man does this or not? Do you ask him directly?
> 
> 
> 
> We don't find out because those of you who do it do not admit it. You don't admit it to the ones you do it to nor to later women who you hope will respect you. Yes we ask, but no, men who did/do this don't tell the truth. Because you know we won't get with you because of it.
Click to expand...

Well, here is a riddle...if pumping precedes the committment, then was there ever any dumping?


----------



## Lila

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Well, here is a riddle...if pumping precedes the committment, then was there ever any dumping?


Unfortunately, the problem starts when they claim they are committed then "change their minds", i.e. pump and dump.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Lila said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, here is a riddle...if pumping precedes the committment, then was there ever any dumping?
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, the problem starts when they claim they are committed then "change their minds", i.e. pump and dump.
Click to expand...

So they are long term pumper and dumpers. I figured it was more short term, like maybe within 2 or 3 weeks.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Lila said:


> Unfortunately, the problem starts when they claim they are committed then "change their minds", i.e. pump and dump.


Or when they push a woman for sex on the first date, then label her a **** if she says yes, then have sex with her, then leave and never return because she is a ****.

Then brag to others that this is the way to figure out which women are "worth" sticking around with. Only the ones who said "no".

Of course, these men would not be honest with any woman about this practice. The one he is pushing for sex but will ultimately label her an unworthy **** if she says yes but he has sex with her anyway, of course he won't tell her this. He just pushes for sex to see what happens. He will not say one way or the other if he is planning to stick around, he just pushes for sex. It doesn't matter to him what she thinks, or that he acts interested in her as a person as simply a test to see if she is ****ty enough to sleep with him. Then he tells himself he is such a genius to have figured out this **** test, and also tells himself he did actually pick the "right" one, the one who said "no". Then comes the bragging.

And the same men will say that women who don't tell all their history to a new potential partner are wrong and liars and ****s.


----------



## Lila

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> So they are long term pumper and dumpers. I figured it was more short term, like maybe within 2 or 3 weeks.


I've seen guys play the long game just to turn around and ghost afterwards but I was thinking more of the guy who claims he's looking for a long term relationship then disappears after getting laid.


----------



## Tilted 1

So then it's not just men who are fragile but women as well?


----------



## Buddy400

Faithful Wife said:


> No it wouldn’t be ok, but men do lie about this specific question all the time. Very few who actually did this will tell the truth.


Of course.

So there being a chance that a woman might respond badly to the truth isn't a valid reason to lie to her.

There being a chance that a man might respond badly to the truth isn't a valid reason to lie to him either.


----------



## Buddy400

Faithful Wife said:


> Or when they push a woman for sex on the first date, then label her a **** if she says yes, then have sex with her, then leave and never return because she is a ****.
> 
> Then brag to others that this is the way to figure out which women are "worth" sticking around with. Only the ones who said "no".
> 
> Of course, these men would not be honest with any woman about this practice. The one he is pushing for sex but will ultimately label her an unworthy **** if she says yes but he has sex with her anyway, of course he won't tell her this. He just pushes for sex to see what happens. He will not say one way or the other if he is planning to stick around, he just pushes for sex. It doesn't matter to him what she thinks, or that he acts interested in her as a person as simply a test to see if she is ****ty enough to sleep with him. Then he tells himself he is such a genius to have figured out this **** test, and also tells himself he did actually pick the "right" one, the one who said "no". Then comes the bragging.
> 
> And the same men will say that women who don't tell all their history to a new potential partner are wrong and liars and ****s.


So, if a man told a woman he wasn't interested in commitment, she might not get with him. That's fine by me.

If a woman told a man she'd had 50 partners, he might not get with her. That's fine by me.

If men shouldn't care about number of a woman's former partners, should woman not care about a man's willingness to commit? 

The fact that someone may not want to hear your answer doesn't make it okay to mislead them. 

Either tell the truth or refuse to answer. In both cases.

* Personally, my wife was promiscuous before she met me. I was not. It wasn't a problem for me then and it still isn't.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Buddy400 said:


> Of course.
> 
> So there being a chance that a woman might respond badly to the truth isn't a valid reason to lie to her.
> 
> There being a chance that a man might respond badly to the truth isn't a valid reason to lie to him either.


Let's say a woman has no interest in a man but definitely she wants him to spend money on her. She wants to dupe him into doing that, without giving him anything in return other than some of her time on dates (ie: she's not going to have sex with him or ever actually like him). So she behaves as if she likes him and wants to date him and flirts as if she wants to have sex with him. Given these cues, the man dates her and spends money on her. Then when he gets to the point that he is asking for more from her after many dates where he has spent a lot of money and she has flirted but nothing has gone further, she finally ghosts him because that was her plan all along. She got as much as she could out of him, dinners, experiences, gifts, whatever, then she split.

Now she comes to TAM and brags about how stupid this dude was and he deserved to get duped because if he doesn't know better than to trust a woman, he should be parted with his money. She also brags that she does this every chance she gets so she can get the dates/dinners/gifts from as many men as she can dupe. All of them deserve it, of course, she tells us.

How would this woman be received here at TAM?

Honest question.

The answer to your post I quoted is no, there's no valid reason for man or woman to lie about certain things a prospective new partner should know about.

However, we do have a man who has bragged here at TAM about the **** test, how women who were pumped and dumped by him deserved it because they are ****s, and he's right here on this thread. How has his reception been here? Basically his bragging has been overlooked and forgotten by many, and most people interact with him as if he didn't come here bragging about this horrible thing he has done to women.

Just wondering what people would say to a woman who did what I said above and then came here bragging about it. Especially if that same woman came on threads and said men who don't tell the truth are liars and are wrong.


----------



## Tilted 1

Isn't that most Cheaters? Basically?


----------



## Lila

Buddy400 said:


> So, if a man told a woman he wasn't interested in commitment, she might not get with him. That's fine by me.
> 
> If a woman told a man she'd had 50 partners, he might not get with her. That's fine by me.
> 
> If men shouldn't care about number of a woman's former partners, should woman not care about a man's willingness to commit?
> 
> The fact that someone may not want to hear your answer doesn't make it okay to mislead them.
> 
> Either tell the truth or refuse to answer. In both cases.
> 
> * Personally, my wife was promiscuous before she met me. I was not. It wasn't a problem for me then and it still isn't.


Your analogies don't work because they are comparing apples to oranges. 

A man telling a woman that he's not interested in a long term relationship but would enjoy sex would be similar to a woman telling a man she's not interested in having sex with him but would enjoy having him take her out on dates.


----------



## Buddy400

Lila said:


> Your analogies don't work because they are comparing apples to oranges.
> 
> A man telling a woman that he's not interested in a long term relationship but would enjoy sex would be similar to a woman telling a man she's not interested in having sex with him but would enjoy having him take her out on dates.


I'm OK with that. Substitute your analogy for mine.

Now, Is the following statement true? Or not?

"The fact that someone may not want to hear your answer doesn't make it okay to mislead them"


----------



## ABHale

Marduk said:


> Like there's no social stigma on women acting just like men...?


I didn’t ***** around when I was younger and I didn’t want a wife that had been. There have been too many threads here and on other sites about this ruining relationships. Not the fact that one partner is more experienced but the lies that partner told before marriage. 

If a man or woman want to have sex with who ever that is their business. When it is intentionally hidden, don’t act so surprised when the spouse that is blindsided with the true gets pissed.


----------



## ABHale

FeministInPink said:


> That's a very jaded way of looking at it. Perhaps it's because of the double standard applied to women who are sexually experienced.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


Not really jaded at all. If your ok sleeping around then be honest about it. If your not ok with sleeping around that is ok too. The problems happen when lies are told to hide the truth. Be honest with someone that you plan on marrying.


----------



## ABHale

FeministInPink said:


> That's a very jaded way of looking at it. Perhaps it's because of the double standard applied to women who are sexually experienced.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


There is a thread on SI I think where the wife cheated because she wouldn’t let on to her husband that she wanted wild sex. She acted all prim and proper when they meet and never let on how experienced she was. The husband tried to do different things but felt she wasn’t wanting to so he backed off. Then she goes and cheats with a coworker. This happened because the wife couldn’t be honest with her husband.


----------



## Lila

Buddy400 said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your analogies don't work because they are comparing apples to oranges.
> 
> A man telling a woman that he's not interested in a long term relationship but would enjoy sex would be similar to a woman telling a man she's not interested in having sex with him but would enjoy having him take her out on dates.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm OK with that. Substitute your analogy for mine.
> 
> Now, Is the following statement true? Or not?
> 
> "The fact that someone may not want to hear your answer doesn't make it okay to mislead them"
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is endorsing lying, myself included. 

What I personally endorse is due diligence. Never assume. If I have a boundary or preference that's a deal breaker, then it's my responsibility to relay those to a potential partner and do so early on. I do not expect them (nor will I ever) divulge personal information unless specifically asked about it. 

Unfortunately there will always be people who lie. It's part of life. It's how we handle the lying that's more important IME.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Lila said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So they are long term pumper and dumpers. I figured it was more short term, like maybe within 2 or 3 weeks.
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen guys play the long game just to turn around and ghost afterwards but I was thinking more of the guy who claims he's looking for a long term relationship then disappears after getting laid.
Click to expand...

I don't think they are necessarily mutually exclusive. Maybe he didn't see any connection aside from sex.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, the problem starts when they claim they are committed then "change their minds", i.e. pump and dump.
> 
> 
> 
> Or when they push a woman for sex on the first date, then label her a **** if she says yes, then have sex with her, then leave and never return because she is a ****.
> 
> Then brag to others that this is the way to figure out which women are "worth" sticking around with. Only the ones who said "no".
> 
> Of course, these men would not be honest with any woman about this practice. The one he is pushing for sex but will ultimately label her an unworthy **** if she says yes but he has sex with her anyway, of course he won't tell her this. He just pushes for sex to see what happens. He will not say one way or the other if he is planning to stick around, he just pushes for sex. It doesn't matter to him what she thinks, or that he acts interested in her as a person as simply a test to see if she is ****ty enough to sleep with him. Then he tells himself he is such a genius to have figured out this **** test, and also tells himself he did actually pick the "right" one, the one who said "no". Then comes the bragging.
> 
> And the same men will say that women who don't tell all their history to a new potential partner are wrong and liars and ****s.
Click to expand...

I wasn't bragging, nor did I call anyone ****s. It was a dating strategy I had for awhile. Never did I use anyone anymore than they used me or lie to them. My wife asked me if I would have called her back if I had slept with her on the first date and I told her probably not. Sorry, just not interested unless a connection has been built first. Just me.


----------



## oldtruck

Buddy400 said:


> Double standard or not, it's not okay to lie because someone may not like hearing the truth.
> 
> If a woman asked a man if he just pumped and dumped women and he replied that he didn't (he had, but he knew she wouldn't like to hear that).
> 
> Would that be okay?


yes, but they were not special like you: insert woman's name


----------



## Marduk

ABHale said:


> I didn’t ***** around when I was younger and I didn’t want a wife that had been. There have been too many threads here and on other sites about this ruining relationships. Not the fact that one partner is more experienced but the lies that partner told before marriage.
> 
> If a man or woman want to have sex with who ever that is their business. When it is intentionally hidden, don’t act so surprised when the spouse that is blindsided with the true gets pissed.


I'm not advocating for lying.

What I'm saying is that the social pressures are not the same.


----------



## Buddy400

Lila said:


> I don't think anyone is endorsing lying, myself included.
> 
> What I personally endorse is due diligence. Never assume. If I have a boundary or preference that's a deal breaker, then it's my responsibility to relay those to a potential partner and do so early on. I do not expect them (nor will I ever) divulge personal information unless specifically asked about it.
> 
> Unfortunately there will always be people who lie. It's part of life. It's how we handle the lying that's more important IME.


What I'm responding to is what I see as people saying "Well, women have no choice but to lie, since men are concerned about something they are wrong to be concerned about; double standard, etc."

My point is that, just because you think someone else is wrong to respond to the truth the way you think they *should*, some seem to think that means you aren't required to tell the truth.


----------



## Cletus

Lila said:


> Unfortunately there will always be people who lie. It's part of life. It's how we handle the lying that's more important IME.


Yes, pretty much all of us. 

How we handle it is important. How we manage to not set ourselves up as somehow superior because this wasn't the particular thing we lied about doesn't hurt either.


----------



## Cletus

Buddy400 said:


> My point is that, just because you think someone else is wrong to respond to the truth the way you think they *should*, some seem to think that means you aren't required to tell the truth.


I have always found the golden rule completely lacking. It substitutes my desires for yours. Much better is the platinum rule - "Do unto others as they would have you do unto them".

Maybe you start the conversation with "If I was promiscuous before we met, would you want to know?" Perhaps not very practical, since it really, really leads the question, but the man who really would rather be lied to, you get your absolution.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Cletus said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately there will always be people who lie. It's part of life. It's how we handle the lying that's more important IME.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, pretty much all of us.
> 
> How we handle it is important. How we manage to not set ourselves up as somehow superior because this wasn't the particular thing we lied about doesn't hurt either.
Click to expand...

Guess it depends if it was an outright lie. "I'm a virgin". 5 years later, "Ok, there were those other 10 guys but I don't like to count them".

Or a lie of omission. "You never asked so I assumed you didn't care if it was 5 or 40".

Lying about who you are is going to get major blowback.


----------



## Cletus

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Lying about who you are is going to get major blowback.


Perhaps. 

This place is weighted about 90-10 towards the God of the Old Testament approach to relationships. I'm old enough now to have figured out the real secret to success is in the forgiveness and accommodation. 

The reason women lie in this situation is at least understandable. Maybe when we're 100 more years removed from the sexual revolution, when the social pressures on women to remain chaste are not so much stronger than they are for men, this will be a non-issue.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Cletus said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lying about who you are is going to get major blowback.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps.
> 
> This place is weighted about 90-10 towards the God of the Old Testament approach to relationships. I'm old enough now to have figured out the real secret to success is in the forgiveness and accommodation.
> 
> The reason women lie in this situation is at least understandable. Maybe when we're 100 more years removed from the sexual revolution, when the social pressures on women to remain chaste are not so much stronger than they are for men, this will be a non-issue.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about that? Where did the view of women being chaste originate from? Is it because of rubbers and pills?Not sure if casual sex just being more common is going to make it more acceptable for women. I think it's just a case of men and women valuing things differently. But I could be wrong.


----------



## Cletus

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> I'm not sure about that? Where did the view of women being chaste originate from? Is it because of rubbers and pills?Not sure if casual sex just being more common is going to make it more acceptable for women. I think it's just a case of men and women valuing things differently. But I could be wrong.


Man and women MUST value sex differently, but only because one of them winds up with an 18 year commitment if they don't. 

In the era of modern contraception, that is no longer the necessity. Attitudes have already changed a bunch. They will continue to change. Resistance is futile.


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> Perhaps.
> 
> This place is weighted about 90-10 towards the God of the Old Testament approach to relationships. I'm old enough now to have figured out the real secret to success is in the forgiveness and accommodation.


Ya, seriously, this place gets creepy and feels like this sometimes.










I have a sneaking suspicion that we drive people away with this whole wrath of god kind/hyper conservative kind of approach. I don't even think people realize that TAM is really only open to one kind of thinking, and seems to be becoming more and more so over time.

I have to say, I was shocked when I returned after my multi-year hiatus to see how conservative it's become. I find it sad, really. Far from the place where we used to debate things like BDSM or swinging as lifestyles, and when things became cheating, and that kind of "live and let live" kind of approach. 



> The reason women lie in this situation is at least understandable. Maybe when we're 100 more years removed from the sexual revolution, when the social pressures on women to remain chaste are not so much stronger than they are for men, this will be a non-issue.


Honestly, I think they are. I think the relationships my son is having are very, very different than the ones I had at his age. He's far from having sex (unlike me) but he's also developed deep friendships with girls in a very mature way, including his ex that broke his heart. They are best friends and she's over all the time... just as friends. 

And my sense is from people in their 20's and 30's that they basically think half the stuff we sweat about here is just stupid. Everybody's had the occasional hookup, nobody counts numbers, people seem far more focused on the quality of the relationships they are in than policing someone's past. People that do pretty much seem to get segregated to their own conservative tribe. But maybe that's just me. 

But they also seem very free to drop a relationship at the drop of a hat if it's not working, or they are bored, or if they have a career aspiration that misaligns with it. I'm not sure if that's good or bad.

I just don't think we seem much of that kind of stuff here, because people that think like that probably run away screaming. I've nearly done so on a number of occasions, and I'm a grumpy old man that's considered conservative by many.


----------



## Marduk

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> I'm not sure about that? Where did the view of women being chaste originate from? Is it because of rubbers and pills?Not sure if casual sex just being more common is going to make it more acceptable for women. I think it's just a case of men and women valuing things differently. But I could be wrong.


Dig into it, man. Women like the same porn men do, and for the same reasons. Women like sex in similar ways as men do, for the similar reasons. Women are now cheating just as much as men. Starting to make just as much as men. Have as many sexual partners as men. Women are exactly like men, except that we find the subtle differences very interesting.

Not every woman is like every other woman, of course - but the more society becomes egalitarian, the more we discover that men and women are more the same when we compare them en masse. The variance between individual men is greater than the variance between men in general and women in general. 

For example, we watched the new baby docuseries on netflix - and one of the surprising findings discovered recently is that the exact same parts of the brain engage in almost the exact same ways between men and women when they have kids. The small variation that does exist goes away if the woman leaves the picture, or if the couple is gay. My wife was shocked. I wasn't. I love my kids in exactly the same way she does, and have bonded with them the same way. Turns out where there is a difference (like who wakes up first when baby cries) is not a sex thing, it's a social thing.


----------



## Casual Observer

Marduk said:


> Ya, seriously, this place gets creepy and feels like this sometimes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a sneaking suspicion that we drive people away with this whole wrath of god kind/hyper conservative kind of approach. I don't even think people realize that TAM is really only open to one kind of thinking, and seems to be becoming more and more so over time.
> 
> I have to say, I was shocked when I returned after my multi-year hiatus to see how conservative it's become. I find it sad, really. Far from the place where we used to debate things like BDSM or swinging as lifestyles, and when things became cheating, and that kind of "live and let live" kind of approach.
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, I think they are. I think the relationships my son is having are very, very different than the ones I had at his age. He's far from having sex (unlike me) but he's also developed deep friendships with girls in a very mature way, including his ex that broke his heart. They are best friends and she's over all the time... just as friends.
> 
> And my sense is from people in their 20's and 30's that they basically think half the stuff we sweat about here is just stupid. Everybody's had the occasional hookup, nobody counts numbers, people seem far more focused on the quality of the relationships they are in than policing someone's past. People that do pretty much seem to get segregated to their own conservative tribe. But maybe that's just me.
> 
> *But they also seem very free to drop a relationship at the drop of a hat if it's not working, or they are bored, or if they have a career aspiration that misaligns with it. I'm not sure if that's good or bad.*
> 
> I just don't think we seem much of that kind of stuff here, because people that think like that probably run away screaming. I've nearly done so on a number of occasions, and I'm a grumpy old man that's considered conservative by many.


If people are treating relationships the same way they treat which news channel gives them what they want to hear, they will never learn what they need to hear. They will never become a complete person capable of evolving as the relationship progresses, because they're used to the idea of changing channels or searching the 'net to prove what they believe is right. And they WILL find that proof.

What's happening is that people are scared to learn of anything that might challenge their beliefs. When thinking about that in terms of relationships, it means you're not going to have the deeper discussions that might provoke interesting conversations and perhaps provide an early warning to issues down the road.


----------



## Buddy400

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Guess it depends if it was an outright lie. "I'm a virgin". 5 years later, "Ok, there were those other 10 guys but I don't like to count them".
> 
> Or a lie of omission. "You never asked so I assumed you didn't care if it was 5 or 40".
> 
> Lying about who you are is going to get major blowback.


"I am not willing to answer that question" is, to me, perfectly acceptable.

If it mattered that much to the potential partner, they can decide to move forward or not as they please.

It's only outright lying because you think your partner couldn't "handle the truth" that I'm opposed to.


----------



## Cletus

Buddy400 said:


> "I am not willing to answer that question" is, to me, perfectly acceptable.
> 
> If it mattered that much to the potential partner, they can decide to move forward or not as they please.
> 
> It's only outright lying because you think your partner couldn't "handle the truth" that I'm opposed to.


----------



## Casual Observer

Lila said:


> I don't think anyone is endorsing lying, myself included.
> 
> What I personally endorse is due diligence. Never assume. If I have a boundary or preference that's a deal breaker, then it's my responsibility to relay those to a potential partner and do so early on. I do not expect them (nor will I ever) divulge personal information unless specifically asked about it.
> 
> Unfortunately there will always be people who lie. It's part of life. It's how we handle the lying that's more important IME.


Again, this is why it is so important that the more open, vulnerable person in a relationship understand what's at stake. Some potential partners are attracted to that open, vulnerable person because they have an opportunity to re-write their narrative, taking advantage of their ability to deceive someone who doesn't think in those terms. As you say, it's about boundaries and preferences, but it is imperative that anyone on the more-honest, more-vulnerable side do their due diligence. I thought I had. But I didn't think in terms of someone manipulating their story to achieve a long-term relationship goal (marriage). 



UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Guess it depends if it was an outright lie. "I'm a virgin". 5 years later, "Ok, there were those other 10 guys but I don't like to count them".
> 
> Or a lie of omission. "You never asked so I assumed you didn't care if it was 5 or 40".
> 
> Lying about who you are is going to get major blowback.


This is hitting closer to home than I'd ever thought it would. The worst thing about lies is the need to double-down to keep them going. And if you can double-down and get away with it, two things happen. First, it becomes ever-less-likely you will ever have an epiphany where you recognize the damage and turn things around, because you do have recognition of the damage increasing as you go. Second, it, being dishonest, can become a lifestyle. Because, after all, if you got away with a life THAT big...

I'll also add that the "lie of omission" example is a bit weak. Lying about having had sex with anyone (virginity) is a big deal. Not disclosing whether it was 5 or 40? Not. At some point it's the responsibility of the person "needing to know" to make sure he or she... knows. There is little difference between being too afraid of the answer to ask the question vs not divulging because someone might not like the answer.



Buddy400 said:


> "I am not willing to answer that question" is, to me, perfectly acceptable.
> 
> If it mattered that much to the potential partner, they can decide to move forward or not as they please.
> 
> It's only outright lying because you think your partner couldn't "handle the truth" that I'm opposed to.


The "I am not willing to answer that question" requires the person saying so to understand it may be the end of the relationship. What if they haven't quite decided that they want that sort of a litmus test at that (possibly early) point in the relationship? I think that's what keeps that answer off the table. And thus begins the process of undermining integrity in a relationship. In some cases.


----------



## Buddy400

Cletus said:


> Man and women MUST value sex differently, but only because one of them winds up with an 18 year commitment if they don't.
> 
> In the era of modern contraception, that is no longer the necessity. Attitudes have already changed a bunch. They will continue to change. Resistance is futile.


In the past it was always riskier for the woman to have sex. Not only did she have the kid to take care of by herself, but if she wasn't married, the financial responsibility fell completely on her as well. I think the social stigma came from the fact that this was a difficult position for a woman to be in so it became a cultural value (because cultural values are really just informal rules for what works best).

These days, it's probably riskier to have sex for the man. With DNA testing a guy can be on the financial hook for 18 years for something he never wanted. A woman, on the other hand, is only on the hook for 18 years if she doesn't terminate the pregnancy.

But, our biology doesn't move that fast so, in many cases our unconscious is still running on yesterday's rules. 

I agree that resistance is futile. Even if we wanted to go back in time (which I don't), it can't be done.


----------



## Casual Observer

Cletus said:


> You can't handle the truth.


No, it's not "You can't handle the truth." It's "You may not be able to handle MY truth." It may be a fear that I (the person spinning the false narrative) don't have what it takes so you're going to go elsewhere, searching for a truth you can handle. Why is that a bad thing?


----------



## Buddy400

Marduk said:


> Dig into it, man. Women like the same porn men do, and for the same reasons. Women like sex in similar ways as men do, for the similar reasons. Women are now cheating just as much as men. Starting to make just as much as men. Have as many sexual partners as men. Women are exactly like men, except that we find the subtle differences very interesting.
> 
> Not every woman is like every other woman, of course - but the more society becomes egalitarian, the more we discover that men and women are more the same when we compare them en masse. The variance between individual men is greater than the variance between men in general and women in general.


I believe the case is that while many women watch porn, less women watch porn than men.

I believe that women largely watch different porn than men do. PornHub (I think) has lists of favorite genre's by gender and they're quite a bit different.

Women like sex, but women probably have more issues with casual sex than men. After engaging in a hook-up, men generally feel better about themselves and women worse.

Men are far more likely to orgasm in a casual hookup than women. The rate of women having orgasms increases with the length of the relationship.

Women complain about getting "pumped and dumped", I don't know if I've ever heard a man complain about that.

In open relationships, women have a much easier time finding men who are only interested in sex than the other way around.

Sure the variance in height between individual men is greater than the variance between men in general and women in general. But that doesn't mean that there aren't significant differences in height between men and women as groups.


----------



## LisaDiane

Marduk said:


> Ya, seriously, *this place gets creepy* and feels like this sometimes.
> 
> 
> I have to say, I was shocked when I returned after my multi-year hiatus to see how conservative it's become. *I find it sad, really.* Far from the place where we used to debate things like BDSM or swinging as lifestyles, and when things became cheating, and that kind of "live and let live" kind of approach.



Are you saying you don't respect the opinions of people on here who think differently than you?

I am not being facetious, I'm really asking...


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Guess it depends if it was an outright lie. "I'm a virgin". 5 years later, "Ok, there were those other 10 guys but I don't like to count them".
> 
> Or a lie of omission. "You never asked so I assumed you didn't care if it was 5 or 40".
> 
> Lying about who you are is going to get major blowback.


So “you never asked if I would never call you again if you sleep with me on a first date” is a fair way to lie by omission and it’s her fault if she is such a **** anyway. Got it.


----------



## Marduk

Buddy400 said:


> I believe the case is that while many women watch porn, less women watch porn than men.


The fastest growing demographic is women. And let's not forget the very large romance (mommy porn) industry.



> I believe that women largely watch different porn than men do. PornHub (I think) has lists of favorite genre's by gender and they're quite a bit different.


Have you ever checked it out? It has an extremely wide variation. It might surprise you.



> Women like sex, but women probably have more issues with casual sex than men. After engaging in a hook-up, men generally feel better about themselves and women worse.


I'm not so sure a 25 year old woman would agree with you. Maybe, maybe not.



> Men are far more likely to orgasm in a casual hookup than women. The rate of women having orgasms increases with the length of the relationship.


Sure, and there's a whole movement afoot to close the "orgasm gap."



> Women complain about getting "pumped and dumped", I don't know if I've ever heard a man complain about that.


Well, it's happened to me, and I'm a dude. Meaning, I hooked up with a girl wanting more, and she wasn't interested.



> In open relationships, women have a much easier time finding men who are only interested in sex than the other way around.


Still very true. I do wonder if demographics are changing here, though. I know a guy that's quite a bit younger than me, and he would do things like go on Tinder, and say "come over, and bring food." And presto, a girl would show up with sushi or pizza or whatever and they'd just eat and have sex, and she would leave. 



> Sure the variance in height between individual men is greater than the variance between men in general and women in general. But that doesn't mean that there aren't significant differences in height between men and women as groups.


I'm not saying women and men are exactly the same. But hell, we were all women at one time, until our DNA signaled to change into men. The biggest insight I ever had as a teenager was the revelation that girls like sex as much as boys did. I tried to explain it to my friends, and they all thought I was crazy. Even when I was getting laid, and they weren't.

We are so much more the same than we are different. And much of the differences seem to be more the result of society and social pressures than they do 'evolutionary biology.' At the end of the day, a lot of this stuff is right edging close to red pill stuff if we as men think women are profoundly different, an 'other.' We're just 'we.'


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> So “you never asked if I would never call you again if you sleep with me on a first date” is a fair way to lie by omission and it’s her fault if she is such a **** anyway. Got it.


Lol, after my divorce, I once told a girl that I don't think I could date her if she'd lower herself to sleeping with me. I was in quite the funk.

She smacked me in the head. And then slept with me.

I know that's not what you're talking about, it just occurred to me.


----------



## Marduk

LisaDiane said:


> Are you saying you don't respect the opinions of people on here who think differently than you?
> 
> I am not being facetious, I'm really asking...


I love it when people think differently with me. When they're willing to honestly engage with me. Hell, look at @Faithful Wife and I going back and forth because she thought I was being yukky.

What I don't like is when people aren't willing to have their ideas be challenged, and when the whole thing becomes a conservative echo chamber. 

And I really wonder how many younger folks, or more liberal folks, get scared away from being here at all.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guess it depends if it was an outright lie. "I'm a virgin". 5 years later, "Ok, there were those other 10 guys but I don't like to count them".
> 
> Or a lie of omission. "You never asked so I assumed you didn't care if it was 5 or 40".
> 
> Lying about who you are is going to get major blowback.
> 
> 
> 
> So “you never asked if I would never call you again if you sleep with me on a first date” is a fair way to lie by omission and it’s her fault if she is such a **** anyway. Got it.
Click to expand...

"You never said if I eat Spaghetti with my toes, you wouldn't call me back."

We all have our preferences and you don't really have much of anything on the line after one date. What lines you cross is up to you, but there are no guarantees. Once a committment is made, its different.


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> "You never said if I eat Spaghetti with my toes, you wouldn't call me back."
> 
> We all have our preferences and you don't really have much of anything on the line after one date. What lines you cross is up to you, but there are no guarantees. Once a committment is made, its different.


Sure it’s fine to treat people like crap if you aren’t going to ever see them again anyway.

Just like the woman in my example who wants to dupe men into spending money on her so misrepresents herself to do it. Who cares about those guys, she will never see them again so it doesn’t matter.

Yeah, that’s the mark of a good person, for sure. Riiiiiiiiiggghhhttt. 

And somehow that person is going to be a decent human being but only if a commitment is made. If there is no commitment, there’s no reason to be a decent human being.

Got it.


----------



## LisaDiane

Marduk said:


> I love it when people think differently with me. When they're willing to honestly engage with me. Hell, look at @Faithful Wife and I going back and forth because she thought I was being yukky.
> 
> What I don't like is when people aren't willing to have their ideas be challenged, and when the whole thing becomes a conservative echo chamber.
> 
> And I really wonder how many younger folks, or more liberal folks, get scared away from being here at all.



I didn't ask if you liked when people challenged you...I asked if you RESPECTED those conservative opinions, because what you said about them (which I bolded) sounded disparaging. 

And granted, I haven't read much on here in the past 6 months or so since getting hurt, but I've never read threads and posts on here that make this site sound like a "conservative echo chamber"...not to ME anyway.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

You are trying to make it seems the woman is the victim even when they have consensual sex. I don't know why you think that.

Yes, there is a different standard when you are in a committed monogamous relationship. Far greater a standard than a roll in the hay with a stranger.


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> You are trying to make it seems the woman is the victim even when they have consensual sex. I don't know why you think that.
> 
> Yes, there is a different standard when you are in a committed monogamous relationship. Far greater a standard than a roll in the hay with a stranger.


If you said to her “hey I’d love to have sex with you but if you say yes, I will consider you a **** and never call you again” and she said “cool no problem I actually never want to hear from you again anyway” then it would be fully informed consent.

But you know you did not say that and you can tell yourself whatever you want to justify your actions. But the truth of what you did is still true no matter what you tell yourself. You acted like a creep and you don’t care if she had any feelings about it or not because she’s a **** anyway.

You have spent a lot of time in the past telling us all about doing this so it’s not like I’m just pulling stuff out of nowhere. 

You were proud of your **** test system and you did in fact brag about it. Nothing you say now will ever make it any different. You acted poorly and did not have concern for the feelings of others, and you still don’t.


----------



## Marduk

LisaDiane said:


> I didn't ask if you liked when people challenged you...I asked if you RESPECTED those conservative opinions, because what you said about them (which I bolded) sounded disparaging.


Some I do. I mean, I describe myself as a social liberal, fiscal conservative. The things that worked in the past are likely to continue working in the future. And wasting money is bad. Hell, I like the monarchy - how's that for being conservative?

On the other hand, I believe conservatism has lost it's way when it comes to the social stuff. I mean, wasn't it supposed to be "don't tell people how to live?" So why do people care if someone decides to change genders and wants to be respected for it? Why do people care if adults want to live in different relationship modes? Why do people try to control women's bodies the way they do, like with restricting abortions and access to birth control? All of that smacks me as the exact opposite of "liberty."

What I have very much less than zero respect for - and I'll be honest:

1. anti-vaxxers. No place in civilized society if you're purposefully refusing to get vaccinated for serious diseases. The risks you're inflicting aren't your choice to make. If you're going to do that, stay out of public. Herd immunity is critical, and there are zero rational choices for not getting vaccinated, unless medically you cannot (and those are some of the people you're not protecting).

2. people that insist on packing around guns in public (that aren't police or something). I believe you live in a cartoon reality where you've cast yourself as the superhero. Sure, tell me your stories about how you've saved a church full of innocent people. The odds of your firearm's mere existence hurting someone far outweighs the odds of it hurting people by not existing. This is like saying seatbelts are bad, because very rarely you can get thrown out of a car in an accident and live. Again, the risks you're taking are not yours to consent to, they're everybody else's. If you want to have a gun for hunting or something, go ahead, but keep it securely stowed.

3. people that insist that "there are only two genders." I mean, open a dictionary or an encyclopedia. Gender does not necessarily mean sex. Many, many cultures have more than two genders - including north american ones. And where does anyone get off telling someone else what gender they are? What is it to them?

4. people that insist on telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies. I'm very sensitive about this after what happened with my wife's sexual assault. She gets to decide what she does with her body, not me or the courts or the government or anybody else. She does. Period.

5. people that question or equivocate when someone comes forward with sexual assault claims, or protect people that commit these acts. This is a deep and profound evil as far as I'm concerned. We need to support these victims especially because our society, police, and legal system largely ignores them. Probably because it's such a gendered crime (men against women), and probably because the stigmas are so large. So what, get over it. We need to tackle this issue. People that have had claims made against them - particularly several claims, and particularly when they are public figures - should be subject to the "cancel culture" that is otherwise so problematic. I'm not saying false claims don't exist, but I am saying that we question these in a deeply different way than we do other violent crimes, and the questioning is so very traumatic. No time for these kinds of people.

So there's some of my biases.



> And granted, I haven't read much on here in the past 6 months or so since getting hurt, but I've never read threads and posts on here that make this site sound like a "conservative echo chamber"...not to ME anyway.


I'm sorry you got hurt, and hope you're OK.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are trying to make it seems the woman is the victim even when they have consensual sex. I don't know why you think that.
> 
> Yes, there is a different standard when you are in a committed monogamous relationship. Far greater a standard than a roll in the hay with a stranger.
> 
> 
> 
> If you said to her “hey I’d love to have sex with you but if you say yes, I will consider you a **** and never call you again” and she said “cool no problem I actually never want to hear from you again anyway” then it would be fully informed consent.
> 
> But you know you did not say that and you can tell yourself whatever you want to justify your actions. But the truth of what you did is still true no matter what you tell yourself. You acted like a creep and you don’t care if she had any feelings about it or not because she’s a **** anyway.
> 
> You have spent a lot of time in the past telling us all about doing this so it’s not like I’m just pulling stuff out of nowhere.
> 
> You were proud of your **** test system and you did in fact brag about it. Nothing you say now will ever make it any different. You acted poorly and did not have concern for the feelings of others, and you still don’t.
Click to expand...

'Not fully informed consent'. This is why I think it's probably not a good idea for men to have sex with women they don't know these days. Consent isn't good enough, even though you may have never lied, you also need to consider intent (or what you didn't say) to be innocent or else you might be rapey.... These are good lessons for young men.


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are trying to make it seems the woman is the victim even when they have consensual sex. I don't know why you think that.
> 
> Yes, there is a different standard when you are in a committed monogamous relationship. Far greater a standard than a roll in the hay with a stranger.
> 
> 
> 
> If you said to her “hey I’d love to have sex with you but if you say yes, I will consider you a **** and never call you again” and she said “cool no problem I actually never want to hear from you again anyway” then it would be fully informed consent.
> 
> But you know you did not say that and you can tell yourself whatever you want to justify your actions. But the truth of what you did is still true no matter what you tell yourself. You acted like a creep and you don’t care if she had any feelings about it or not because she’s a **** anyway.
> 
> You have spent a lot of time in the past telling us all about doing this so it’s not like I’m just pulling stuff out of nowhere.
> 
> You were proud of your **** test system and you did in fact brag about it. Nothing you say now will ever make it any different. You acted poorly and did not have concern for the feelings of others, and you still don’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 'Not fully informed consent'. This is why I think it's probably not a good idea for men to have sex with women they don't know these days. Consent isn't good enough, even though you may have never lied, you also need to consider intent (or what you didn't say) to be innocent or else you might be rapey.... These are good lessons for young men.
Click to expand...

As always, you still take no responsibility for your actions nor do you give a crap about how anyone you have harmed feels. And you have more and more words to spew to make your justifications. 

None of your words change what you have done or how you have behaved or change the fact that it was reprehensible.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> As always, you still take no responsibility for your actions nor do you give a crap about how anyone you have harmed feels. And you have more and more words to spew to make your justifications.
> 
> None of your words change what you have done or how you have behaved or change the fact that it was reprehensible.


LOL, I didn't harm anyone! It was consensual, it was enjoyable, I wish them (the very few) well!

I agree though, sex should be reserved for a committed relationship. But you know, younger and dumber...


----------



## ConanHub

Jack Nicholson "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!"
This brings to mind extremely humorous scenarios in regards to women and previous sex partners.:grin2:


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> As always, you still take no responsibility for your actions nor do you give a crap about how anyone you have harmed feels. And you have more and more words to spew to make your justifications.
> 
> None of your words change what you have done or how you have behaved or change the fact that it was reprehensible.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, I didn't harm anyone! It was consensual, it was enjoyable, I wish them well!
> 
> I agree though, sex should be reserved for a committed relationship. But you know, younger and dumber...
Click to expand...

Yeah you wish them well and you came to TAM calling them ****s. Nice try, all your words don’t change what you have done.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> Yeah you wish them well and you came to TAM calling them ****s. Nice try, all your words don’t change what you have done.


I don't remember ever calling them ****s on this forum. But there may be some truth in you statement. I did think those things. And that's on me.


----------



## Casual Observer

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> 'Not fully informed consent'. This is why I think it's probably not a good idea for men to have sex with women they don't know these days. Consent isn't good enough, even though you may have never lied, you also need to consider intent (or what you didn't say) to be innocent or else you might be rapey.... These are good lessons for young men.


The problem is that "consent" was never quite good enough, outside of a committed relationship where people truly understood each other. Is it consent if you allow a guy to put a condom on, express that you're freaked out, but allow things to happen anyway? From the guy's perspective, it was essentially "consent" when the woman didn't demand that he remove it. Because after all, what's it there for anyway?

There's a huge difference between casual encounters and committed relationships. Not to suggest that consent is a lesser issue in a committed relationship, but at least there's likely an opportunity for understanding and longer-term consequences. The whole thing about "casual" sex is that there appears to be an assumption that different rules are in play simply because it's "casual."


----------



## Sfort

Some of the most memorable times of my youth were spent with ****s. I think about every one of them on occasion and hope they are doing as well now as they were doing then.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Casual Observer said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 'Not fully informed consent'. This is why I think it's probably not a good idea for men to have sex with women they don't know these days. Consent isn't good enough, even though you may have never lied, you also need to consider intent (or what you didn't say) to be innocent or else you might be rapey.... These are good lessons for young men.
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that "consent" was never quite good enough, outside of a committed relationship where people truly understood each other. Is it consent if you allow a guy to put a condom on, express that you're freaked out, but allow things to happen anyway? From the guy's perspective, it was essentially "consent" when the woman didn't demand that he remove it. Because after all, what's it there for anyway?
> 
> There's a huge difference between casual encounters and committed relationships. Not to suggest that consent is a lesser issue in a committed relationship, but at least there's likely an opportunity for understanding and longer-term consequences. The whole thing about "casual" sex is that there appears to be an assumption that different rules are in play simply because it's "casual."
Click to expand...

The problem is that if you present yourself as interested in someone but your actual goal is to test them to see if they are ****ty enough to have sex with you on the first date, then she absolutely has not consented to what you are doing and the man doing this knows that full well. 

To be clear, there is only one man here who has bragged about doing this so I don’t actually think most men are doing this.

Most men who want a strictly casual thing have no problem saying so because they are decent men.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Sfort said:


> Some of the most memorable times of my youth were spent with ****s. I think about every one of them on occasion and hope they are doing as well now as they were doing then.


And I think those women probably think of you fondly as well. Unless you actually pretended to like them then never spoke to them again once they had sex with you. There is a difference.


----------



## LisaDiane

Marduk said:


> Some I do. I mean, I describe myself as a social liberal, fiscal conservative. The things that worked in the past are likely to continue working in the future. And wasting money is bad. Hell, I like the monarchy - how's that for being conservative?
> 
> On the other hand, I believe conservatism has lost it's way when it comes to the social stuff. I mean, wasn't it supposed to be "don't tell people how to live?" So why do people care if someone decides to change genders and wants to be respected for it? Why do people care if adults want to live in different relationship modes? Why do people try to control women's bodies the way they do, like with restricting abortions and access to birth control? All of that smacks me as the exact opposite of "liberty."
> 
> What I have very much less than zero respect for - and I'll be honest:
> 
> 1. anti-vaxxers. No place in civilized society if you're purposefully refusing to get vaccinated for serious diseases. The risks you're inflicting aren't your choice to make. If you're going to do that, stay out of public. Herd immunity is critical, and there are zero rational choices for not getting vaccinated, unless medically you cannot (and those are some of the people you're not protecting).
> 
> 2. people that insist on packing around guns in public (that aren't police or something). I believe you live in a cartoon reality where you've cast yourself as the superhero. Sure, tell me your stories about how you've saved a church full of innocent people. The odds of your firearm's mere existence hurting someone far outweighs the odds of it hurting people by not existing. This is like saying seatbelts are bad, because very rarely you can get thrown out of a car in an accident and live. Again, the risks you're taking are not yours to consent to, they're everybody else's. If you want to have a gun for hunting or something, go ahead, but keep it securely stowed.
> 
> 3. people that insist that "there are only two genders." I mean, open a dictionary or an encyclopedia. Gender does not necessarily mean sex. Many, many cultures have more than two genders - including north american ones. And where does anyone get off telling someone else what gender they are? What is it to them?
> 
> 4. people that insist on telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies. I'm very sensitive about this after what happened with my wife's sexual assault. She gets to decide what she does with her body, not me or the courts or the government or anybody else. She does. Period.
> 
> 5. people that question or equivocate when someone comes forward with sexual assault claims, or protect people that commit these acts. This is a deep and profound evil as far as I'm concerned. We need to support these victims especially because our society, police, and legal system largely ignores them. Probably because it's such a gendered crime (men against women), and probably because the stigmas are so large. So what, get over it. We need to tackle this issue. People that have had claims made against them - particularly several claims, and particularly when they are public figures - should be subject to the "cancel culture" that is otherwise so problematic. I'm not saying false claims don't exist, but I am saying that we question these in a deeply different way than we do other violent crimes, and the questioning is so very traumatic. No time for these kinds of people.
> 
> So there's some of my biases.



NOT that what I think about your opinions matters, but...

I understand your biases...well, I mean, I can understand WHY you hold those, but except for #4, I can equally understand the people who are on the opposite side from what you have stated, and I accept their right to hold their own beliefs (whether I agree with them or not). Some of your beliefs are based on personal experiences, but the same can be said for people who hold opposite beliefs. If I had the energy, I'd love to put opposing opinions that I've heard up to you and hear how you respond to a different angle...

I have my own personal beliefs, as well, but I always try to remember they are MINE...and that I have NO right to expect that others ought to see things my way and share my views. I have found that engaging with true respect and understanding is the best way to challenge others and influence them (IF that's what they are looking for from me). Also, my opinions tend to be fluid - if I can see that I'm wrong about something, I'm always willing to modify my beliefs and embrace a new way of thinking. However my principles of tolerance and open-mindedness are rock solid.




Marduk said:


> I'm sorry you got hurt, and hope you're OK.


Thanks...I've had a rough winter -- I slipped off my front porch just before Thanksgiving and seriously bruised my back and hip...and then my hip joint got infected, like, toxic shock infected (who knew that could even happen in a joint??)...I almost had to be hospitalized, but they sent a visiting nurse to my house every day for two weeks to give me the IV antibiotics.
THEN...just after Christmas, I got a little cold, and it turned into pneumonia from all the sitting around I was doing...and almost had to be hospitalized again...but I only needed pill antibiotics that time (and a breathing machine thingy), and LOTS of sleeping.
I'm finally feeling better, although I still don't have much energy...I'm ready to take a nap from typing your responses...UGH!!

Of course, the first thing I wanted to do here was pick on YOU...Lol! I didn't mean anything by it, I was just compelled by my curiosity to hear your response...thank you.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Faithful Wife said:


> The problem is that if you present yourself as interested in someone but your actual goal is to test them to see if they are ****ty enough to have sex with you on the first date, then she absolutely has not consented to what you are doing and the man doing this knows that full well.
> 
> To be clear, there is only one man here who has bragged about doing this so I don’t actually think most men are doing this.
> 
> Most men who want a strictly casual thing have no problem saying so because they are decent men.


I think it's interesting you presume that these women were interested in more than a casual thing as well. Not everyone has that conversation. Or a person might be interested in either or. Maybe we both used one another. Why am I the ass in this situation? First dates are fairly useless to get to know someone, so there is no way you know anything about them and should assume nothing at that point. Assuming you should get a call back just because you opened your legs, is not something to endorse.


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that if you present yourself as interested in someone but your actual goal is to test them to see if they are ****ty enough to have sex with you on the first date, then she absolutely has not consented to what you are doing and the man doing this knows that full well.
> 
> To be clear, there is only one man here who has bragged about doing this so I don’t actually think most men are doing this.
> 
> Most men who want a strictly casual thing have no problem saying so because they are decent men.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's interesting you presume that these women were interested in more than a casual thing as well. Not everyone has that conversation. Or a person might be interested in either or. Maybe we both used one another. Why am I the ass in this situation? First dates are fairly useless to get to know someone, so there is no way you know anything about them and should assume nothing at that point. Assuming you should get a call back just because you opened your legs, is not something to endorse.
Click to expand...

I’m not assuming anything. I remember what you bragged about and the circumstances you described. You apparently don’t remember those things you wrote before and want to re-write history now.


----------



## oldtruck

Cletus said:


> I have always found the golden rule completely lacking. It substitutes my desires for yours. Much better is the platinum rule - "Do unto others as they would have you do unto them".
> 
> Maybe you start the conversation with "If I was promiscuous before we met, would you want to know?" Perhaps not very practical, since it really, really leads the question, but the man who really would rather be lied to, you get your absolution.


there is no way to lead off a talk with that question because there is no way that
for a man will know that this woman was easy without another word being said by
either one of them.

best to not talk about past relationships. such knowledge can prevent a 
relationship becoming a great marriage. once the seed of retroactive jealousy
is planted that garden will be overtaken by that weed.


----------



## oldtruck

Buddy400 said:


> What I'm responding to is what I see as people saying "Well, women have no choice but to lie, since men are concerned about something they are wrong to be concerned about; double standard, etc."
> 
> My point is that, just because you think someone else is wrong to respond to the truth the way you think they *should*, some seem to think that means you aren't required to tell the truth.


preferences are not wrong.
preferring a brunette or a blonde is a preference.
preferring a woman a low number is a preference.
for some there is no preference placed on a woman's number.

for success the lid and the pot must fit.

when making out we do not say wow you are a great kisser,
who taught you to kiss,
how many people have you kissed,
wno was your best kisser?

that sounds ridiculous. same for asking about previous sexual
experiences.


----------



## Sfort

Faithful Wife said:


> And I think those women probably think of you fondly as well. Unless you actually pretended to like them then never spoke to them again once they had sex with you. There is a difference.


It's complicated. There was one that might be in that category, but I really don't think she was mislead. We were there for one reason. In between, she asked me why I wanted to be there with her, and I told the truth. She wasn't offended. What she did after that was a high point of my sexual life.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Sfort said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I think those women probably think of you fondly as well. Unless you actually pretended to like them then never spoke to them again once they had sex with you. There is a difference.
> 
> 
> 
> It's complicated. There was one that might be in that category, but I really don't think she was mislead. We were there for one reason. In between, she asked me why I wanted to be there with here, and I told the truth. She wasn't offended. What she did after that was a high point of my sexual life.
Click to expand...

Cool that you told the truth. There are plenty of women who want some unattached fun. There is no reason to dupe people into having sex with you (the general you).

But it was recently brought up that if a man lies about pumping and dumping women, that’s wrong. And I agree if using the correct description of pump and dump. If a man did this in his past and a new woman asks him about it, I think he should be honest and let her decide if she wants to be with that kind of man.

But of course men who have done this know better and do not tell other women because she won’t want to be with him. 

I definitely think plenty of men have lied about this or lied by omission.


----------



## Casual Observer

oldtruck said:


> when making out we do not say wow you are a great kisser,
> who taught you to kiss,
> how many people have you kissed,
> wno was your best kisser?
> 
> that sounds ridiculous. same for asking about previous sexual
> experiences.


What makes you think this? Why does the actual PIV thing fit into an entirely different category? 

When we met, my wife asked me pretty much exactly what you said. It was a big thing to her. She described others as having kissed like a fish, a mole, and a few other things. She knew what she liked and for some reason, felt it important to talk about her past bad kissers. And one or two that knew how. 

It wasn't a big deal. Not at all, at the time. A curiosity thing, sure, but I didn't have a problem with it. I had been 100% transparent about my past. She knew I'd had just one prior gf. She was just into comparisons and, for some reason, felt a need to mention it.

This ended up causing issues later as it became clear the was creating a faux transparency, making it appear she was divulging all when in fact it was far from that.


----------



## Buddy400

Marduk said:


> We are so much more the same than we are different. And much of the differences seem to be more the result of society and social pressures than they do 'evolutionary biology.' At the end of the day, a lot of this stuff is right edging close to red pill stuff if we as men think women are profoundly different, an 'other.' We're just 'we.'


The question of "Nature vs Nurture" is very much an open question. According to Steven Pinker, it's pretty much been resolved in the scientific community that it's mostly all nature (obviously, other people with a great deal of experience in the field disagree) but it's hardly obvious that it's more societal than genetic.

I know that a lot of people are counting on it being Nuture but even if were true, we have to deal with people as they actually are NOW, not how they might me in a more perfect world.

If it turns out to be Nature and we're implementing "solutions" based on the wrong premise, it isn't going to result in anything good.

As a random example, let's say that we require 50% of programmers to be women and it turns out that, for the most part, not that many women want to be programmers. You'll end up with a bunch of unhappy women programmers (not to mention the men who might have been happy programmers).


----------



## Buddy400

Marduk said:


> 4. people that insist on telling women what they can or can't do with their bodies.


I assume that you're talking about abortion here.

I've never understood this interpretation of the pro-life position being motivated by a desire to tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies.

It seems to me that their position is primarily motivated by the belief that a fetus is a human life (or very nearly so).

On the other side, I've never understood how you can say that abortion is "killing babies" but support abortion in the case of rape or incest. 

I mean, if the fetus is a human life...? This can make me doubt that they truly believe what they say they believe (or, they're pragmatists who realize that if they don't allow these exceptions, they won't get what they want). 

Personally, I'm in the middle (pro-choice in the first 20 weeks? pro-life in the 3rd trimester?).


----------



## Mr The Other

FeministInPink said:


> That's a very jaded way of looking at it. Perhaps it's because of the double standard applied to women who are sexually experienced.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk





Marduk said:


> Like there's no social stigma on women acting just like men...?


Obviously, western Europe mucks up plenty of other things. But, I have not known this be an issue in western Europe in my experience. I think it is the association of purity and moral worth that muddies the water for men and women perhaps. I will say, I suspect it would affect both men and women, rather than one sex being the cause in particular.


----------



## JustTheWife

Back to the topic of the thread:

I think it should be understood why some women like to keep their dirty secrets from their husbands.

All this jealousy ("well you did it with him - why won't you do it with me?") and men getting haunted with RJ, etc. Getting all self conscious about their penis size just because bigger ones have been in there.

Trying to be honest but then being dragged into lying anyway. "Yes, honey, some were bigger than you". (visibly upset and hurt hubby). "Don't worry honey, yours is the best ever and size doesn't matter at all. Really". (giving him something to cling to but still hurt anyway).

"Sorry honey I don't really feel like anal and I don't really like it". "oh but you did it with so and so and so and so. I guess you liked them better than me". 

Then the death by a thousand cuts. You are honest that you've had sex with a lot of other guys and the questions come. Then it stops and you think it's back to normal. Then he starts thinking....and thinking....and obsessing. And he has to know. How many came in you? Did you ever do this? Or that? Endless questions. Endless obsession.

Then deep down he resents you. Tries to love you like always. But it's always there. Haunted by all those other penises that have been there first. You can't unring that bell.

No thank you.

It's no surprise that many women just keep their secrets, never to be known by their husbands.

My husband wants an innocent wife. I look very innocent. I act very innocent. Was my innocence lost by having sex with a lot of guys? I don't know. Sometimes I think yes and sometimes I think it doesn't matter and I still am who I am. Sometimes things are an illusion. Many things aren't exactly as they appear. Your reality is what you think.

For example, I love and cherished my grandfather who is now in heaven. He was a very gentle man with a huge heart. He was deployed in a war zone and I'm sure there are some things that I just don't want to know about. Things that he may have done that I don't want to think of him doing. I simply don't want to know. I've never asked him about anything like that and he's never talked about anything like that. I don't mean like if he were totally evil or had some huge secret or was a completely different person than who I thought I knew. I mean more some things that, well...you don't really want to know about. Doesn't change who he is. I just don't want images like that in my head. I want to think of him when he taught me how to play catch. Or when he used to make cookies with me.

I'm not an evil person just because I had sex with a lot of other guys. I'm not a different girl from who he married. He wants me to be his "honey bunny" and that's what I want too. The other penises should not change any of that and they shouldn't change how he sees me. But inevitably they would. It shouldn't matter but the reality is that it does for many men.


----------



## ConanHub

JustTheWife said:


> Back to the topic of the thread:
> 
> I think it should be understood why some women like to keep their dirty secrets from their husbands.
> 
> All this jealousy ("well you did it with him - why won't you do it with me?") and men getting haunted with RJ, etc. Getting all self conscious about their penis size just because bigger ones have been in there.
> 
> Trying to be honest but then being dragged into lying anyway. "Yes, honey, some were bigger than you". (visibly upset and hurt hubby). "Don't worry honey, yours is the best ever and size doesn't matter at all. Really". (giving him something to cling to but still hurt anyway).
> 
> "Sorry honey I don't really feel like anal and I don't really like it". "oh but you did it with so and so and so and so. I guess you liked them better than me".
> 
> Then the death by a thousand cuts. You are honest that you've had sex with a lot of other guys and the questions come. Then it stops and you think it's back to normal. Then he starts thinking....and thinking....and obsessing. And he has to know. How many came in you? Did you ever do this? Or that? Endless questions. Endless obsession.
> 
> Then deep down he resents you. Tries to love you like always. But it's always there. Haunted by all those other penises that have been there first. You can't unring that bell.
> 
> No thank you.
> 
> It's no surprise that many women just keep their secrets, never to be known by their husbands.
> 
> My husband wants an innocent wife. I look very innocent. I act very innocent. Was my innocence lost by having sex with a lot of guys? I don't know. Sometimes I think yes and sometimes I think it doesn't matter and I still am who I am. Sometimes things are an illusion. Many things aren't exactly as they appear. Your reality is what you think.
> 
> For example, I love and cherished my grandfather who is now in heaven. He was a very gentle man with a huge heart. He was deployed in a war zone and I'm sure there are some things that I just don't want to know about. Things that he may have done that I don't want to think of him doing. I simply don't want to know. I've never asked him about anything like that and he's never talked about anything like that. I don't mean like if he were totally evil or had some huge secret or was a completely different person than who I thought I knew. I mean more some things that, well...you don't really want to know about. Doesn't change who he is. I just don't want images like that in my head. I want to think of him when he taught me how to play catch. Or when he used to make cookies with me.
> 
> I'm not an evil person just because I had sex with a lot of other guys. I'm not a different girl from who he married. He wants me to be his "honey bunny" and that's what I want too. The other penises should not change any of that and they shouldn't change how he sees me. But inevitably they would. It shouldn't matter but the reality is that it does for many men.


You are laying it on pretty thick here. Is it speculation or real experience?

I know it is speculation with your husband.

Regardless, don't paint this particular issue with too broad a brush.

I don't know how many men are this insecure or suffer from RJ but it is doubtful that it is a very large portion of society.

I think penis size is a sensitive topic for a lot of men but it doesn't mean they are overly insecure or suffer from RJ either.

Past partners affecting men by making them feel uncertain or insecure , is probably not as wide spread (probably not even close) as penis size insecurities.

Not saying it doesn't happen a lot but it doesn't indicate that it is a male issue.

Insecurities are genderless. If you felt more secure in what you just said, you wouldn't feel the need to hide it.

I'm not picking on you at all, just pointing out your own insecurities.

I've been very upfront and blunt with my past and even current practices when talking to potential mates and current ones.

It hasn't really slowed down my love life though Mrs. C and I came to mutual agreement about many things as we developed and decided to get more serious.


----------



## JustTheWife

ConanHub said:


> You are laying it on pretty thick here. Is it speculation or real experience?
> 
> I know it is speculation with your husband.
> 
> Regardless, don't paint this particular issue with too broad a brush.
> 
> I don't know how many men are this insecure or suffer from RJ but it is doubtful that it is a very large portion of society.
> 
> I think penis size is a sensitive topic for a lot of men but it doesn't mean they are overly insecure or suffer from RJ either.
> 
> Past partners affecting men by making them feel uncertain or insecure , is probably not as wide spread (probably not even close) as penis size insecurities.
> 
> Not saying it doesn't happen a lot but it doesn't indicate that it is a male issue.
> 
> Insecurities are genderless. If you felt more secure in what you just said, you wouldn't feel the need to hide it.
> 
> I'm not picking on you at all, just pointing out your own insecurities.
> 
> I've been very upfront and blunt with my past and even current practices when talking to potential mates and current ones.
> 
> It hasn't really slowed down my love life though Mrs. C and I came to mutual agreement about many things as we developed and decided to get more serious.


I was trying to summarize a lot of the reading that I've been doing on this topic. I was mainly talking generally, not for my own situation except for where that was clear in my post.

I'm not trying to say that ALL men react with ALL of these things all at once. It's a amalgamated view of what can happen if you tell your husband all of your secrets, especially if you've had a past like I've had. To your comment on penis size, I can see that related to RJ a lot....as in being jealous that she's had bigger.

Yes, I have my own insecurities like everyone. And I am insecure about my promiscuous past.


----------



## LisaDiane

JustTheWife said:


> Back to the topic of the thread:
> 
> I think it should be understood why some women like to keep their dirty secrets from their husbands.
> 
> All this jealousy ("well you did it with him - why won't you do it with me?") and men getting haunted with RJ, etc. Getting all self conscious about their penis size just because bigger ones have been in there.
> 
> Trying to be honest but then being dragged into lying anyway. "Yes, honey, some were bigger than you". (visibly upset and hurt hubby). "Don't worry honey, yours is the best ever and size doesn't matter at all. Really". (giving him something to cling to but still hurt anyway).
> 
> "Sorry honey I don't really feel like anal and I don't really like it". "oh but you did it with so and so and so and so. I guess you liked them better than me".
> 
> Then the death by a thousand cuts. You are honest that you've had sex with a lot of other guys and the questions come. Then it stops and you think it's back to normal. Then he starts thinking....and thinking....and obsessing. And he has to know. How many came in you? Did you ever do this? Or that? Endless questions. Endless obsession.
> 
> Then deep down he resents you. Tries to love you like always. But it's always there. Haunted by all those other penises that have been there first. You can't unring that bell.
> 
> No thank you.
> 
> It's no surprise that many women just keep their secrets, never to be known by their husbands.
> 
> My husband wants an innocent wife. I look very innocent. I act very innocent. Was my innocence lost by having sex with a lot of guys? I don't know. Sometimes I think yes and sometimes I think it doesn't matter and I still am who I am. Sometimes things are an illusion. Many things aren't exactly as they appear. Your reality is what you think.
> 
> For example, I love and cherished my grandfather who is now in heaven. He was a very gentle man with a huge heart. He was deployed in a war zone and I'm sure there are some things that I just don't want to know about. Things that he may have done that I don't want to think of him doing. I simply don't want to know. I've never asked him about anything like that and he's never talked about anything like that. I don't mean like if he were totally evil or had some huge secret or was a completely different person than who I thought I knew. I mean more some things that, well...you don't really want to know about. Doesn't change who he is. I just don't want images like that in my head. I want to think of him when he taught me how to play catch. Or when he used to make cookies with me.
> 
> I'm not an evil person just because I had sex with a lot of other guys. I'm not a different girl from who he married. He wants me to be his "honey bunny" and that's what I want too. The other penises should not change any of that and they shouldn't change how he sees me. But inevitably they would. It shouldn't matter but the reality is that it does for many men.


I don't think you need to justify how you've chosen to relate to your husband with this issue, nor do I think you need to feel bad for it -- you are trying to protect him, and yourself, by maintaining an IMAGE...everyone in relationships does that to some degree! Besides, it's not like it's harming him (or you) to believe something different than your actual experiences - some people cannot handle "truths" that trigger them, some people don't actually want to know the truth in some situations. You have made a choice for yourself and your relationship that works for you both - it doesn't matter what other people think, morality is a non-issue with this, in my opinion.

Lying, to me, isn't that big a deal -- it's basically a way for people to _control information_, which I can understand. If someone deceives me, I'm much more interested in WHY, and whether the reason is a threat to me or my relationship with them. I am a pretty honest, direct person, and I always want the TRUTH (whether I like it or not), so I know the reality of what I'm dealing with, and I know how to understand what is happening. I'll save any specifics for a dedicated thread about the topic of lying! 

As to this particular thread, I haven't read most of it so I don't know if someone else said this, but I don't think it's really fair to blanket "MEN" as being "so fragile"...most of the posts I've read on here and other threads about feeling insecure seem to show men are no more insecure and fragile than women are -- is it because people are uncomfortable with men showing emotional weakness that they are even being viewed this way...? The things I've seen men expressing on TAM and in real life are only examples of men being HUMAN and having normal, non-gender-specific feelings...sure, there are exceptions going either way, but to say that men are weak because a few posted honest feelings specifically asked for in another thread, or because "I knew a guy who said blah blah", is pretty inaccurate and narrow-minded (and kind of judgemental)...it's also not helpful if you are trying to make a positive impact on anyone.

Frankly, I can't understand being "jealous" of a partner having many past sexual partners - what is the difference if they had sex with ONE person or with MANY...? If it's not about STDs, than why does the number matter...? I've only had 2 sexual partners in my whole life...but I've done many different things with them, and had GREAT sex with them - is that less threatening to an insecure man than if I had lots of guys and mediocre sex...?? I don't believe that's the true issue at the root of the insecurities discussed on these threads (if they actually exist), AND I don't think it's fair to label someone "fragile" if they do feel that way.


----------



## Casual Observer

JustTheWife said:


> To your comment on penis size, I can see that related to RJ a lot....as in being jealous that she's had bigger.


 Why isn't this like Frank Zappas' comment on breast size? Anything over a mountful is wasted.



JustTheWife said:


> Back to the topic of the thread:
> 
> I think it should be understood why some women like to keep their dirty secrets from their husbands.
> 
> All this jealousy ("well you did it with him - why won't you do it with me?") and men getting haunted with RJ, etc. Getting all self conscious about their penis size just because bigger ones have been in there.
> 
> Trying to be honest but then being dragged into lying anyway. "Yes, honey, some were bigger than you". (visibly upset and hurt hubby). "Don't worry honey, yours is the best ever and size doesn't matter at all. Really". (giving him something to cling to but still hurt anyway).
> 
> "Sorry honey I don't really feel like anal and I don't really like it". "oh but you did it with so and so and so and so. I guess you liked them better than me".
> 
> Then the death by a thousand cuts. You are honest that you've had sex with a lot of other guys and the questions come. Then it stops and you think it's back to normal. Then he starts thinking....and thinking....and obsessing. And he has to know. How many came in you? Did you ever do this? Or that? Endless questions. Endless obsession.
> 
> Then deep down he resents you. Tries to love you like always. But it's always there. Haunted by all those other penises that have been there first. You can't unring that bell.
> 
> No thank you.
> 
> It's no surprise that many women just keep their secrets, never to be known by their husbands.
> 
> My husband wants an innocent wife. I look very innocent. I act very innocent. Was my innocence lost by having sex with a lot of guys? I don't know. Sometimes I think yes and sometimes I think it doesn't matter and I still am who I am. Sometimes things are an illusion. Many things aren't exactly as they appear. Your reality is what you think.
> 
> For example, I love and cherished my grandfather who is now in heaven. He was a very gentle man with a huge heart. * He was deployed in a war zone and I'm sure there are some things that I just don't want to know about.* Things that he may have done that I don't want to think of him doing. I simply don't want to know. I've never asked him about anything like that and he's never talked about anything like that. I don't mean like if he were totally evil or had some huge secret or was a completely different person than who I thought I knew. I mean more some things that, well...you don't really want to know about. Doesn't change who he is. I just don't want images like that in my head. I want to think of him when he taught me how to play catch. Or when he used to make cookies with me.
> 
> I'm not an evil person just because I had sex with a lot of other guys. I'm not a different girl from who he married. He wants me to be his "honey bunny" and that's what I want too. The other penises should not change any of that and they shouldn't change how he sees me. But inevitably they would. It shouldn't matter but the reality is that it does for many men.


Note the bolded part. That is hugely different from one's partner believing their past is something entirely different from reality. You had context for your Grandfather. You could have asked relevant questions about things that might have bothered you. Your Grandfather may have actually had a huge need to talk about this stuff. Not to a young child, of course, but you weren't always a young child.


----------



## LisaDiane

JustTheWife said:


> Yes, I have my own insecurities like everyone. And I am insecure about my promiscuous past.


But WHY...? How does that make you any less of a person or a woman? You are YOU - a whole combination of your past experiences, sexual and otherwise!! You need to let that go and embrace and make peace with your whole self, whether you choose to share that part of you with your husband and others or not. You made choices (sexual and non-sexual) and had experiences, good and bad, and that's perfectly, wonderfully ok!!! It's part of being a full human being, and there is NOTHING "dirty" about it!


----------



## oldtruck

Casual Observer said:


> What makes you think this? Why does the actual PIV thing fit into an entirely different category?
> 
> When we met, my wife asked me pretty much exactly what you said. It was a big thing to her. She described others as having kissed like a fish, a mole, and a few other things. She knew what she liked and for some reason, felt it important to talk about her past bad kissers. And one or two that knew how.
> 
> It wasn't a big deal. Not at all, at the time. A curiosity thing, sure, but I didn't have a problem with it. I had been 100% transparent about my past. She knew I'd had just one prior gf. She was just into comparisons and, for some reason, felt a need to mention it.
> 
> This ended up causing issues later as it became clear the was creating a faux transparency, making it appear she was divulging all when in fact it was far from that.


what two categories?

they're the same.

See. no good game from your wife bringing up the past.


----------



## Casual Observer

There are two really different issues being discussed in this thread, and perhaps the key to understanding is the way they are, and are not, related to each other.

-Jealousy about capabilities, anatomy & other aspects of prior relationships in general

-Deception

One does not automatically create the other. Jealousy may be created by knowledge of a partner's past, but some people are just plain jealous and on edge all the time, always suspecting the worse, always feeling diminished. There will be cases in which this feeling is made worse, not better, due to lies & omissions because, hard as it may be to believe, those who lie and omit don't always do a good job of it. There are very few people living a "new" life with someone who don't shed clues from time to time, and the tiniest of clues, often found as inconsistencies in a discussion of something vs their narrative, can trigger a partner's insecurities. 

Pure unadulterated jealousy is a terrible thing but I think it likely there would be few cases where there weren't huge warning flags while dating. 

Deception. I just don't get the support for this one. If you have to make yourself, your history, out to be something different than it is, in order to move forward with a partner... isn't that kind of nuts? "If she knew this about me, she'd probably dump me." O.M.G. If you know the person well enough to believe that would be the case... and keep going... what the heck are you thinking? It borders on being manipulative. It's self-destructive too to your own sense of self-esteem as well. You're saying I'm not good enough for this person unless I change my past.

Why is it so difficult to show you're not that person anymore (assuming you don't want to be that person anymore)? That this new partner... either you wish they'd shown up earlier and spared you what you went through, or that you had to go through that period to get to where you are today, and where you are today stands tall with this partner, looking forward to making a new life together.

It's 100% OK to think someone is totally childish if they can't get past your past. You can see it as a character flaw. That they're incredibly shallow & stupid. But that is who they are. Get over it and move on, if you can't live with it, or if you have to construct a false narrative for the sake of the relationship.

What to do if you've been living that false narrative for years? Ask me a year or two down the road. Hopefully I'll be out the other end of the process by then. Living a false narrative decade after decade isn't a pretty thing. Most can't pull it off very well. Cracks in the story pop up and your false memory might not be anywhere near as accurate as your partner's memory of little changes in your story, things that don't add up. You may get so wrapped up in the false narrative that the story you believe about how happy your marriage is might be miles from reality. It messes with your mind. And as the true story slowly unfolds, the deceived partner may re-write his or her own history in the worst-possible manner, blaming everything bad that ever happened on the original deception. Which might not be the case at all.

If you're entering into a partnership where both are clear in their heads about the past being the past, that's just simply awesome & great & everyone I'm sure wishes they could be in that same place. But, one more time, if you believe that deception and in some cases outright lies are required or else the partner is going to feel bad and/or leave, then what the heck are you doing? Don't even test the waters. Just find a way to bring it up and, if you have to go through therapy early on to see if the relationship is workable, that's a whole lot better than risking 10 or 20 or even 40 years with someone and maybe years of IC & MC and a whole lot of moments where you wonder whom you married. It can, and does, happen.


----------



## oldtruck

Buddy400 said:


> I assume that you're talking about abortion here.
> 
> I've never understood this interpretation of the pro-life position being motivated by a desire to tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies.
> 
> It seems to me that their position is primarily motivated by the belief that a fetus is a human life (or very nearly so).
> 
> On the other side, I've never understood how you can say that abortion is "killing babies" but support abortion in the case of rape or incest.
> 
> I mean, if the fetus is a human life...? This can make me doubt that they truly believe what they say they believe (or, they're pragmatists who realize that if they don't allow these exceptions, they won't get what they want).
> 
> Personally, I'm in the middle (pro-choice in the first 20 weeks? pro-life in the 3rd trimester?).


how can one say it is not alive once the egg is fertilized.

people that say it is the woman's body, are conveniently ignoring the live body in the
womb, and the father. that is three bodies /life's/involved.

sex is an adult activity. be an adult with all of the possible consequences, if not then
do not have sex because you will not just endanger your own life but the lives of others.


----------



## oldtruck

JustTheWife said:


> I'm not an evil person just because I had sex with a lot of other guys. I'm not a different girl from who he married. He wants me to be his "honey bunny" and that's what I want too. The other penises should not change any of that and they shouldn't change how he sees me. But inevitably they would. It shouldn't matter but the reality is that it does for many men.


no though having a boring sex life is your fault, if I remember your story.
sex can be fun and exciting.

How?

husband I read an article in a magazine, cosmopolitan as an example, the author
gave a suggestion on fun things for couples to do, let's try it.


----------



## FeministInPink

Mr The Other said:


> Obviously, western Europe mucks up plenty of other things. But, I have not known this be an issue in western Europe in my experience. I think it is the association of purity and moral worth that muddies the water for men and women perhaps. I will say, I suspect it would affect both men and women, rather than one sex being the cause in particular.


My apologies... I'm American, and many of my opinions are influenced by my experiences here, and my be tinted in that respect.

Puritanical "Christian" values is the overwhelming undercurrent in the US, which accounts for much of that double standard. For a country in which the separation of church and state is coded into the constitution, there are a helluva lot of evangelical Christians who think that their religious views should dictate everything about this country, and that their theological views should be the law of the land.

There are a number of things that western Europe does better than the US.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr The Other

FeministInPink said:


> My apologies... I'm American, and many of my opinions are influenced by my experiences here, and my be tinted in that respect.
> 
> Puritanical "Christian" values is the overwhelming undercurrent in the US, which accounts for much of that double standard. For a country in which the separation of church and state is coded into the constitution, there are a helluva lot of evangelical Christians who think that their religious views should dictate everything about this country, and that their theological views should be the law of the land.
> 
> There are a number of things that western Europe does better than the US.


While in the USA, I did get the impression that educated white women were the most casual about unprotected sex (I was not). My impression was that venereal disease etc was something thought of as moral and social more than biological and so not something that could happen to them.


----------



## FeministInPink

Mr The Other said:


> While in the USA, I did get the impression that educated white women were the most casual about unprotected sex (I was not). My impression was that venereal disease etc was something thought of as moral and social more than biological and so not something that could happen to them.


Your impression is correct... "STDs are something that white trash and ghetto people have; people with money are too classy to get STDs" does tend to be a prevailing attitude.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife

FeministInPink said:


> Mr The Other said:
> 
> 
> 
> While in the USA, I did get the impression that educated white women were the most casual about unprotected sex (I was not). My impression was that venereal disease etc was something thought of as moral and social more than biological and so not something that could happen to them.
> 
> 
> 
> Your impression is correct... "STDs are something that white trash and ghetto people have; people with money are too classy to get STDs" does tend to be a prevailing attitude.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I’ve met white American men who feel the same way. They seem to think they are immune to STI’s on the basis of “who they are” and “who they date”. Like diseases and infections are some kind of moral compass and since they are all high and mighty (in their own minds) they can’t possibly be infected.

Thankfully, some white American men I’ve known are not that stupid and arrogant and wear condoms because they are educated and aware and care about their health and the health of their partners.


----------



## oldtruck

FeministInPink said:


> My apologies... I'm American, and many of my opinions are influenced by my experiences here, and my be tinted in that respect.
> 
> Puritanical "Christian" values is the overwhelming undercurrent in the US, which accounts for much of that double standard. For a country in which the separation of church and state is coded into the constitution, there are a helluva lot of evangelical Christians who think that their religious views should dictate everything about this country, and that their theological views should be the law of the land.
> 
> There are a number of things that western Europe does better than the US.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


that amendment to the constitution was not to keep religious beliefs out of everyday life.
it was to prevent the government imposing one religion over another, allow the freedom of
choice of what religion one wanted, and to be free to not have a religion.


----------



## Marduk

Buddy400 said:


> I assume that you're talking about abortion here.
> 
> I've never understood this interpretation of the pro-life position being motivated by a desire to tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies.
> 
> It seems to me that their position is primarily motivated by the belief that a fetus is a human life (or very nearly so).
> 
> On the other side, I've never understood how you can say that abortion is "killing babies" but support abortion in the case of rape or incest.
> 
> I mean, if the fetus is a human life...? This can make me doubt that they truly believe what they say they believe (or, they're pragmatists who realize that if they don't allow these exceptions, they won't get what they want).
> 
> Personally, I'm in the middle (pro-choice in the first 20 weeks? pro-life in the 3rd trimester?).


Don’t want to derail... but the whole abortion debate is essentially telling women what they can and can’t do with their bodies. 

No issue with pro-life, as long as the pro-life people accept that doesn’t extend to what someone else can and can’t do. 

There’s also birth control access, and a bunch of other stuff there as well.


----------



## Marduk

oldtruck said:


> how can one say it is not alive once the egg is fertilized.
> 
> people that say it is the woman's body, are conveniently ignoring the live body in the
> womb, and the father. that is three bodies /life's/involved.
> 
> sex is an adult activity. be an adult with all of the possible consequences, if not then
> do not have sex because you will not just endanger your own life but the lives of others.


Nope, it isn’t. It’s a fertilized cell. 

Do you feel the same way about the tens of thousands of fertilized cells frozen across your country?


----------



## FeministInPink

oldtruck said:


> how can one say it is not alive once the egg is fertilized.
> 
> 
> 
> people that say it is the woman's body, are conveniently ignoring the live body in the
> 
> womb, and the father. that is three bodies /life's/involved.
> 
> 
> 
> sex is an adult activity. be an adult with all of the possible consequences, if not then
> 
> do not have sex because you will not just endanger your own life but the lives of others.


It's not alive. Can it exist on its own without using the woman's womb as a life support system? No, it cannot. It is a collection of cells, nothing more. Therefore, it is not alive.

I am an autonomous individual. I am not an incubator. 

HOW DARE YOU say that a clump of cells is more important than my bodily autonomy and my choice to not carry a child? HOW DARE YOU try to impose your will on the independent, autonomous lives of other people?

Women are not children who need to be told by men, men like you, how to live OUR lives with OUR bodies. We have had to put up with your bull**** for far too long. We are capable of deciding what to do with our bodies and our lives without your input. Believe it or not, I actually know what's better for me than you do.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr The Other

FeministInPink said:


> Your impression is correct... "STDs are something that white trash and ghetto people have; people with money are too classy to get STDs" does tend to be a prevailing attitude.


Ah! Right. I do not actually blame them, we are bound to pick up and perspective and judgements of the society we live in. I suspect men find it easier to diet and weight control than women (on average as a vast generalisation), as they are judged less (generalisation 2). It becomes a physiological issue rather than a biological issue. It is not about penence or morality, just practical.


----------



## Mr The Other

FeministInPink said:


> It's not alive. Can it exist on its own without using the woman's womb as a life support system? No, it cannot. It is a collection of cells, nothing more. Therefore, it is not alive.
> 
> I am an autonomous individual. I am not an incubator.
> 
> HOW DARE YOU say that a clump of cells is more important than my bodily autonomy and my choice to not carry a child? HOW DARE YOU try to impose your will on the independent, autonomous lives of other people?
> 
> Women are not children who need to be told by men, men like you, how to live OUR lives with OUR bodies. We have had to put up with your bull**** for far too long. We are capable of deciding what to do with our bodies and our lives without your input. Believe it or not, I actually know what's better for me than you do.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


I do not see this debate going anywhere good.


----------



## LisaDiane

Marduk said:


> Don’t want to derail... but the whole abortion debate is essentially telling women what they can and can’t do with their bodies.
> 
> No issue with pro-life, as long as the pro-life people accept that doesn’t extend to what someone else can and can’t do.
> 
> There’s also birth control access, and a bunch of other stuff there as well.



This is exactly the point to me -- I am vehemently against abortion...for ME. I believe I have a moral obligation to nurture and cherish any life that takes hold in MY body. Therefore, *I* would never have an abortion.

But there is NO way that I can apply MY ideas of morality to other people! In a way, that is negating their "right" to their lives, which I believe is wrong. I had two friends who chose to have abortions, and while I was sad for them that they were in such difficult positions, I was glad that they were able to make the choices that THEY believed were best for them.
I am against abortion, but Pro-Choice.

And abortion is hardly the most horrible act perpetrated upon children -- if the Pro-Lifers spent half their energy helping abused children who's rights are being terribly violated, imagine the good they could do!


----------



## Marduk

LisaDiane said:


> This is exactly the point to me -- I am vehemently against abortion...for ME. I believe I have a moral obligation to nurture and cherish any life that takes hold in MY body. Therefore, *I* would never have an abortion.
> 
> But there is NO way that I can apply MY ideas of morality to other people! In a way, that is negating their "right" to their lives, which I believe is wrong. I had two friends who chose to have abortions, and while I was sad for them that they were in such difficult positions, I was glad that they were able to make the choices that THEY believed were best for them.
> I am against abortion, but Pro-Choice.
> 
> And abortion is hardly the most horrible act perpetrated upon children -- if the Pro-Lifers spent half their energy helping abused children who's rights are being terribly violated, imagine the good they could do!


Word. I respect your opinion and approach to the issue.


----------



## Casual Observer

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.


 So are you screaming yet?


----------



## LisaDiane

Casual Observer said:


> So are you screaming yet?


Hahahaha!!!!!


----------



## Marduk

FeministInPink said:


> It's not alive. Can it exist on its own without using the woman's womb as a life support system? No, it cannot. It is a collection of cells, nothing more. Therefore, it is not alive.
> 
> I am an autonomous individual. I am not an incubator.
> 
> HOW DARE YOU say that a clump of cells is more important than my bodily autonomy and my choice to not carry a child? HOW DARE YOU try to impose your will on the independent, autonomous lives of other people?
> 
> Women are not children who need to be told by men, men like you, how to live OUR lives with OUR bodies. We have had to put up with your bull**** for far too long. We are capable of deciding what to do with our bodies and our lives without your input. Believe it or not, I actually know what's better for me than you do.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


Bingo. 

I get to have all the opinions I want about it, but it’s not my body, therefore I’m not part of the decision. 

Your body, your rules.


----------



## LisaDiane

Marduk said:


> Bingo.
> 
> I get to have all the opinions I want about it, but it’s not my body, therefore I’m not part of the decision.
> 
> *Your body, your rules.*



Shouldn't that apply for ALL decisions...?


----------



## Marduk

LisaDiane said:


> Shouldn't that apply for ALL decisions...?


Of course. 

Except where your choices interfere or add risk to someone else’s body, hence their choice. 

For example, not vaccinating yourself or your kids for measles or polio. 

Now you’re taking away the rights of others. Unless you choose to segregate yourself on an island or something of course.


----------



## LisaDiane

Marduk said:


> Of course.
> 
> Except where your choices interfere or add risk to someone else’s body, hence their choice.
> 
> For example, not vaccinating yourself or your kids for measles or polio.
> 
> Now you’re taking away the rights of others. Unless you choose to segregate yourself on an island or something of course.



Hmmm....


----------



## Sfort

Marduk said:


> Of course.
> 
> Except where your choices interfere or add risk to someone else’s body, hence their choice.
> 
> For example, not vaccinating yourself or your kids for measles or polio.
> 
> Now you’re taking away the rights of others. Unless you choose to segregate yourself on an island or something of course.


At the risk of a thread hijack, if you're vaccinated, why do you care if I am? It's none of your business.


----------



## Mr The Other

Sfort said:


> At the risk of a thread hijack, if you're vaccinated, why do you care if I am? It's none of your business.


Because, vaccines have limited effectiveness. 

It really does rely on everyone likely to get the pathogen to take the vaccine so it does not get a hold. 

I have some sympthy with anti-vaxxers. I had a neighbour whose son was autistic and I am sure it was consoling for her to think that it was the vaccine rather than some horribly random thing we do not understand.

But, and this is key, the anti-vaxxers science arguments are complete bollocks.


----------



## JustTheWife

totally hijacked.


----------



## LisaDiane

JustTheWife said:


> totally hijacked.


Did you see my posts to you...? 

I was hoping you would respond...


----------



## Marduk

Sfort said:


> At the risk of a thread hijack, if you're vaccinated, why do you care if I am? It's none of your business.


Because many people, including infants, cannot be. And even if I am, you still put me at risk, because nothing is 100%. 

Society depends on herd mentality. If you’re not vaccinated and kill babies out of “freedom” that is a profoundly selfish act. 

Again, I was in Costa Rica around the time of the measles outbreak from the French family. This is ridiculous in this day and age.


----------



## JustTheWife

LisaDiane said:


> I don't think you need to justify how you've chosen to relate to your husband with this issue, nor do I think you need to feel bad for it -- you are trying to protect him, and yourself, by maintaining an IMAGE...everyone in relationships does that to some degree! Besides, it's not like it's harming him (or you) to believe something different than your actual experiences - some people cannot handle "truths" that trigger them, some people don't actually want to know the truth in some situations. You have made a choice for yourself and your relationship that works for you both - it doesn't matter what other people think, morality is a non-issue with this, in my opinion.
> 
> Lying, to me, isn't that big a deal -- it's basically a way for people to _control information_, which I can understand. If someone deceives me, I'm much more interested in WHY, and whether the reason is a threat to me or my relationship with them. I am a pretty honest, direct person, and I always want the TRUTH (whether I like it or not), so I know the reality of what I'm dealing with, and I know how to understand what is happening. I'll save any specifics for a dedicated thread about the topic of lying!
> 
> As to this particular thread, I haven't read most of it so I don't know if someone else said this, but I don't think it's really fair to blanket "MEN" as being "so fragile"...most of the posts I've read on here and other threads about feeling insecure seem to show men are no more insecure and fragile than women are -- is it because people are uncomfortable with men showing emotional weakness that they are even being viewed this way...? The things I've seen men expressing on TAM and in real life are only examples of men being HUMAN and having normal, non-gender-specific feelings...sure, there are exceptions going either way, but to say that men are weak because a few posted honest feelings specifically asked for in another thread, or because "I knew a guy who said blah blah", is pretty inaccurate and narrow-minded (and kind of judgemental)...it's also not helpful if you are trying to make a positive impact on anyone.
> 
> Frankly, I can't understand being "jealous" of a partner having many past sexual partners - what is the difference if they had sex with ONE person or with MANY...? If it's not about STDs, than why does the number matter...? I've only had 2 sexual partners in my whole life...but I've done many different things with them, and had GREAT sex with them - is that less threatening to an insecure man than if I had lots of guys and mediocre sex...?? I don't believe that's the true issue at the root of the insecurities discussed on these threads (if they actually exist), AND I don't think it's fair to label someone "fragile" if they do feel that way.


Thank you for your understanding. A lot of people had very strong opinions about my keeping my past from my husband but I'm happy that you understand that different things work for different people. I'm not saying that my way works perfectly even for me but I feel that I'm backed into a corner with it. Everyone says that I will be found out and that this is inevitable. Maybe it is but I've read a lot about RJ and other related things and it's just not worth it. Sure, I might feel better in a way to lift this burden from my shoulders but what will it do to him?

I have a deeply religious background so I felt a lot of guilt having sex with guys. But I didn't really think about how I could be ruining things for my future husband (again, we are religious).

I completely agree about calling men "fragile". It seems that a lot of people like to think men and women are the same. I don't think they are. Jealousy can be ugly but I do think that men instinctively want to "protect" their partner. I think part of "protecting" involves having them all to themselves and if they had a lot of partners previously, this is seen as a threat. Somehow I would think there's something wrong if my husband was totally cool that I had sex with so many guys. As I mentioned also, I think many women want to be cherished by their husbands and you don't want them thinking about you with other guys. Maybe not a women feel like this but I do think it's a "girl thing" for many.


----------



## Tilted 1

JustTheWife said:


> . Jealousy can be ugly but I do think that men instinctively want to "protect" their partner. I think part of "protecting" involves having them all to themselves and if they had a lot of partners previously, this is seen as a threat. Somehow I would think there's something wrong if my husband was totally cool that I had sex with so many guys. As I mentioned also, I think many women want to be cherished by their husbands and you don't want them thinking about you with other guys. Maybe not a women feel like this but I do think it's a "girl thing" for many.


I agree with this, because you describe both female and male sofar as emotions run.


----------



## Cletus

Casual Observer said:


> So are you screaming yet?


----------



## ABHale

JustTheWife said:


> Thank you for your understanding. A lot of people had very strong opinions about my keeping my past from my husband but I'm happy that you understand that different things work for different people. I'm not saying that my way works perfectly even for me but I feel that I'm backed into a corner with it. Everyone says that I will be found out and that this is inevitable. Maybe it is but I've read a lot about RJ and other related things and it's just not worth it. Sure, I might feel better in a way to lift this burden from my shoulders but what will it do to him?
> 
> I have a deeply religious background so I felt a lot of guilt having sex with guys. But I didn't really think about how I could be ruining things for my future husband (again, we are religious).
> 
> I completely agree about calling men "fragile". It seems that a lot of people like to think men and women are the same. I don't think they are. Jealousy can be ugly but I do think that men instinctively want to "protect" their partner. I think part of "protecting" involves having them all to themselves and if they had a lot of partners previously, this is seen as a threat. Somehow I would think there's something wrong if my husband was totally cool that I had sex with so many guys. As I mentioned also, I think many women want to be cherished by their husbands and you don't want them thinking about you with other guys. Maybe not a women feel like this but I do think it's a "girl thing" for many.


It isn’t being fragile when you find out that the person you married has been lying to you your entire relationship. It is being betrayed beyond belief.


----------



## ABHale

Men are not fragile for wanting to marry someone with the same moral values that they have. Same would go for women that wants to marry a guy with the same moral values.


----------



## Cletus

ABHale said:


> Men are not fragile for wanting to marry someone with the same moral values that they have. Same would go for women that wants to marry a guy with the same moral values.


That's not what we're discussing. This is a conversation about the guy who can't get over his spouse's previous lovers - what they did, how good they were, how big he was, etc. The guy that cannot let go of something about a previous lover over which he obsesses.


----------



## JustTheWife

ABHale said:


> Men are not fragile for wanting to marry someone with the same moral values that they have. Same would go for women that wants to marry a guy with the same moral values.





Cletus said:


> That's not what we're discussing. This is a conversation about the guy who can't get over his spouse's previous lovers - what they did, how good they were, how big he was, etc. The guy that cannot let go of something about a previous lover over which he obsesses.


Maybe some men will talk about moral values, etc but they are really deeply uncomfortable that their wives had sex with guys with bigger penises? Or who rocked their world? Or they become obsessed with porn movies of their wives with other men running constantly in their heads? I think "moral values" is a different thing.


----------



## Marduk

JustTheWife said:


> Maybe some men will talk about moral values, etc but they are really deeply uncomfortable that their wives had sex with guys with bigger penises? Or who rocked their world? Or they become obsessed with porn movies of their wives with other men running constantly in their heads? I think "moral values" is a different thing.


I think you're right to point out that appeals to morality might be simply a rationalization or justification for feeling insecure. 

This is not to say that people haven't discovered that their spouse had previously engaged in things like sex work or something before they got married, and have moral issues with it.


----------



## ABHale

Cletus said:


> That's not what we're discussing. This is a conversation about the guy who can't get over his spouse's previous lovers - what they did, how good they were, how big he was, etc. The guy that cannot let go of something about a previous lover over which he obsesses.


Fair enough.


----------



## LisaDiane

ABHale said:


> It isn’t being fragile when you find out that the person you married has been lying to you your entire relationship. It is being betrayed beyond belief.


But surely the level of perceived betrayal would depend on what was withheld, and the reason...


----------



## ABHale

JustTheWife said:


> Maybe some men will talk about moral values, etc but they are really deeply uncomfortable that their wives had sex with guys with bigger penises? Or who rocked their world? Or they become obsessed with porn movies of their wives with other men running constantly in their heads? I think "moral values" is a different thing.


This wouldn’t matter at all if they were able to marry a wife with the same moral values. 

If a man marries a woman knowing her past then has a problem with it, it is his problem to deal with. 

Anyway how would he know if her past lovers were bigger or not? Is she going around bragging about it?


----------



## LisaDiane

ABHale said:


> This wouldn’t matter at all if they were able to marry a wife with the same moral values.
> 
> If a man marries a woman knowing her past then has a problem with it, it is his problem to deal with.
> 
> Anyway how would he know if her past lovers were bigger or not? Is she going around bragging about it?


What if her moral values changed - they didn't match his before he met her, but they match his now...??


----------



## ABHale

LisaDiane said:


> What if her moral values changed - they didn't match his before he met her, but they match his now...??


Then she should at least talk with him about it. Give him the chance to continue the relationship or not. Especially if she knows he’s waiting until marriage. When I started dating my wife she told me straight up she’s waiting till her wedding night. I date three girls prior to that and I told her about my past which wasn’t much. We’ve been married for over 31 years now.

I actually know a girl who changed her life around. She was honest with her boyfriend at the time they ended up getting married. They are happily married with three beautiful kids.


----------



## LisaDiane

ABHale said:


> Then she should at least talk with him about it. Give him the chance to continue the relationship or not. Especially if she knows he’s waiting until marriage. When I started dating my wife she told me straight up she’s waiting till her wedding night. I date three girls prior to that and I told her about my past which wasn’t much. We’ve been married for over 31 years now.
> 
> I actually know a girl who changed her life around. She was honest with her boyfriend at the time they ended up getting married. They are happily married with three beautiful kids.


I see what you are saying. But I'm trying to understand WHY it would matter to you (or anyone) how she lived her life before, when her values were different...?? Why would that even be an issue, if her values matched now, and she was being honest about that?
How is it your business what she did before she met you, and why does that affect you, or your opinion, at all?

I'm not being facetious, either, I'm really asking you...


----------



## ABHale

LisaDiane said:


> I see what you are saying. But I'm trying to understand WHY it would matter to you (or anyone) how she lived her life before, when her values were different...?? Why would that even be an issue, if her values matched now, and she was being honest about that?
> How is it your business what she did before she met you, and why does that affect you, or your opinion, at all?
> 
> I'm not being facetious, either, I'm really asking you...


She was in a gang where drugs and alcohol were involved. So yes she turned her life around.

Why would you not want to be completely honest with the person you’re going to marry? I couldn’t imagine not being honest.


----------



## Cletus

ABHale said:


> She was in a gang where drugs and alcohol were involved. So yes she turned her life around.
> 
> Why would you not want to be completely honest with the person you’re going to marry? I couldn’t imagine not being honest.


Probably because you were never in a gang with drugs and alcohol. 

For someone to "turn their life around", they typically feel some shame in their past - else why the change? I suspect that people forget to realize how strong they appear now because of their ability to change their stars, but instead get hung up on how weak they believe they appear for back then. 

Fear and shame are powerful motivators, especially when the person you are now is no longer the person you were then, and you look back with some disgust on what you once were. And I'll be quite frank - those with the loudest voices on morals are often not the most forgiving of the failings of others. 

I have no problem understanding the mindset of the bell that can't be unrung with a partner. You validated your partner's trust by not dumping her over her past. Good on you. If this behavior was universal, no one would need hide anything.


----------



## Faithful Wife

ABHale said:


> LisaDiane said:
> 
> 
> 
> What if her moral values changed - they didn't match his before he met her, but they match his now...??
> 
> 
> 
> Then she should at least talk with him about it. Give him the chance to continue the relationship or not. Especially if she knows he’s waiting until marriage. When I started dating my wife she told me straight up she’s waiting till her wedding night. I date three girls prior to that and I told her about my past which wasn’t much. We’ve been married for over 31 years now.
> 
> I actually know a girl who changed her life around. She was honest with her boyfriend at the time they ended up getting married. They are happily married with three beautiful kids.
Click to expand...

I think this should apply to men too, but how likely is it for a man to tell a woman he’s newly dating and she is considering a relationship with him, that he has pumped and dumped women, that he has used porn which she no doubt would find offensive, or that he has regular sexual fantasies about her hot sister?

Seems there is an unequal expectation of honesty between men and women.


----------



## ABHale

Cletus said:


> Probably because you were never in a gang with drugs and alcohol.
> 
> For someone to "turn their life around", they typically feel some shame in their past - else why the change? I suspect that people forget to realize how strong they appear now because of their ability to change their stars, but instead get hung up on how weak they believe they appear for back then.
> 
> Fear and shame are powerful motivators, especially when the person you are now is no longer the person you were then, and you look back with some disgust on what you once were. And I'll be quite frank - those with the loudest voices on morals are often not the most forgiving of the failings of others.
> 
> I have no problem understanding the mindset of the bell that can't be unrung with a partner. You validated your partner's trust by not dumping her over her past. Good on you. If this behavior was universal, no one would need hide anything.


So being in a gang doing drugs and alcohol and everything else is OK?

And just so you know I grew up in Southern California


----------



## ABHale

Faithful Wife said:


> I think this should apply to men too, but how likely is it for a man to tell a woman he’s newly dating and she is considering a relationship with him, that he has pumped and dumped women, that he has used porn which she no doubt would find offensive, or that he has regular sexual fantasies about her hot sister?
> 
> Seems there is an unequal expectation of honesty between men and women.


I agree it should apply to everybody. But if you can’t be honest with the person you’re plan on spending the rest of your life with, why are you planning on spending the rest your life with them?


----------



## ABHale

Faithful Wife said:


> I think this should apply to men too, but how likely is it for a man to tell a woman he’s newly dating and she is considering a relationship with him, that he has pumped and dumped women, that he has used porn which she no doubt would find offensive, or that he has regular sexual fantasies about her hot sister?
> 
> Seems there is an unequal expectation of honesty between men and women.


I think there’s dishonesty on both sides. It’s a shame actually. If you can’t be honest and open with the person you plan on spending the rest of your life with, why be with them.


----------



## ABHale

The problem I have is the way it’s phrased. Why are men so fragile.

I know there are men out there that are fragile their insecurities keep them that way.

I think on a whole nobody likes being lied to and deceived. I know I take it personally when somebody lies to me or deceives me. I’ve ended a few friendships because of this. What some may see as a guy being fragile is actually the result of being lied to and deceived.


----------



## Faithful Wife

ABHale said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think this should apply to men too, but how likely is it for a man to tell a woman he’s newly dating and she is considering a relationship with him, that he has pumped and dumped women, that he has used porn which she no doubt would find offensive, or that he has regular sexual fantasies about her hot sister?
> 
> Seems there is an unequal expectation of honesty between men and women.
> 
> 
> 
> I think there’s dishonesty on both sides. It’s a shame actually. If you can’t be honest and open with the person you plan on spending the rest of your life with, why be with them.
Click to expand...

Because some people really don’t care what their potential partner got up to before they met. So there is no need for that honesty in some cases.

I just feel that there are some men who experience RJ who actually have things in their own past which they have not disclosed and never will, but who spend a lot of mental energy worrying about what their wife did previously.


----------



## oldtruck

FeministInPink said:


> It's not alive. Can it exist on its own without using the woman's womb as a life support system? No, it cannot. It is a collection of cells, nothing more. Therefore, it is not alive.
> 
> I am an autonomous individual. I am not an incubator.
> 
> HOW DARE YOU say that a clump of cells is more important than my bodily autonomy and my choice to not carry a child? HOW DARE YOU try to impose your will on the independent, autonomous lives of other people?
> 
> Women are not children who need to be told by men, men like you, how to live OUR lives with OUR bodies. We have had to put up with your bull**** for far too long. We are capable of deciding what to do with our bodies and our lives without your input. Believe it or not, I actually know what's better for me than you do.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


I am not outraged only sad. your logic then makes it ok to kill a baby at 9 months.

same logic supports those that want to lower costs and raise profits for the insurance
companies to deny medical care for seniors based on their opinion of the cost benefit.


----------



## Casual Observer

Marduk said:


> I think you're right to point out that appeals to morality might be simply a rationalization or justification for feeling insecure.
> 
> This is not to say that people haven't discovered that their spouse had previously engaged in things like sex work or something before they got married, and have moral issues with it.


I think it's simpler than that. You can leave "morality" out of it completely. It's about sales. Selling your partner on something that isn't true, because you're concerned that they wouldn't stick around if they knew. And then little discoveries are made, tiny discoveries sometime, that erode at the confidence in believing your narrative.

So what I'm saying is that RJ is often created, or the groundwork laid, by the partner pretending to be something he or she isn't, or wasn't. It doesn't matter that it's "all in the past, that was before I met you." What matters is the extent you went to sell your partner on your current narrative.

Again. If you believe there is something in your past which, if your partner found out, things could be really bad... then you are selling your partner on a false vision. If you don't have that fear, great, no problem!

RJ is not all black and white. Except when it is. And, again, as I've said before, I think you can spot someone who's going to have a straight-out RJ issue pretty quickly. Don't stick around to see the results. Go find somebody else.


----------



## oldtruck

Marduk said:


> Of course.
> 
> Except where your choices interfere or add risk to someone else’s body, hence their choice.
> 
> For example, not vaccinating yourself or your kids for measles or polio.
> 
> Now you’re taking away the rights of others. Unless you choose to segregate yourself on an island or something of course.


taking away the rights of the child and the father.


----------



## Sfort

Casual Observer said:


> I think you can spot someone who's going to have a straight-out RJ issue pretty quickly. Don't stick around to see the results. Go find somebody else.


What if the RJ doesn't present itself until 10, 20, 30, or 40 years into the marriage?


----------



## ConanHub

ABHale said:


> The problem I have is the way it’s phrased. Why are men so fragile.


It is eye catching and great to start a discussion. It also applies to real insecurities and obsessing.

You are not in favor of lying which isn't so much what this thread is about though it could be included.

I'm for honesty all around myself but I respect the boundaries many have in place about how intricate they get with details.

Mostly women get hurt by this.

As far as RJ goes, it would appear to affect more men than women so the title sort of fits.

A lot of men aren't fragile but it seems more men suffer from RJ which does appear to be an emotional fragility or instability.

It definitely hinders healthy relationships.


----------



## Sfort

ABHale said:


> The problem I have is the way it’s phrased. Why are men so fragile.


Well, if the truth be told, I'm quite fragile. No one who knows me would ever believe it since they know what I do for a living. However, like a lot of people, I'm apparently pretty good at hiding my weaknesses. I wish I didn't have those weaknesses.


----------



## Marduk

oldtruck said:


> taking away the rights of the child and the father.


Sorry, not following.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Sorry, not following.


If the assumption is made that a fetus has rights, then when a woman makes a choice about her body, the rights of the fetus and the father are not taken into account.


----------



## ABHale

Faithful Wife said:


> Because some people really don’t care what their potential partner got up to before they met. So there is no need for that honesty in some cases.
> 
> I just feel that there are some men who experience RJ who actually have things in their own past which they have not disclosed and never will, but who spend a lot of mental energy worrying about what their wife did previously.


I agree there are men like this. Not all of us are. 

I would still ask, what got that mental energy started.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> If the assumption is made that a fetus has rights, then when a woman makes a choice about her body, the rights of the fetus and the father are not taken into account.


Again, we’re talking about a fertilized cell having more rights than actual conscious human beings?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Again, we’re talking about a fertilized cell having more rights than actual conscious human beings?


From the standpoint of people who believe life begins at conception, then the baby/fetus has the same rights as any other human being and is a conscious human being as soon as conception occurs.

Although this is not my position, I can understand it from that other position.


----------



## JustTheWife

ABHale said:


> Then she should at least talk with him about it. Give him the chance to continue the relationship or not. Especially if she knows he’s waiting until marriage. When I started dating my wife she told me straight up she’s waiting till her wedding night. I date three girls prior to that and I told her about my past which wasn’t much. We’ve been married for over 31 years now.
> 
> I actually know a girl who changed her life around. She was honest with her boyfriend at the time they ended up getting married. They are happily married with three beautiful kids.


As I've said in other posts, I have mixed feelings about my past. My "traditional" and religious side is ashamed and my "modern" side is not. I'm a very confused person LOL.

My modern side is repulsed by your view that a woman having sex and then getting married has "turned her life around". Men "play the field" and then "settle down". Not sure that very many would use the phrase "turn their life around". 

Likewise, a man sitting down and "talking to her about it" to "give her the chance to continue the relationship or not" --- with regard to his use of porn, his sexual past (including any questionable consent issues - pressuring women, using women, drunk women, etc), strip club history, any misogyny such as comments to or about women in his younger years, etc. would sound pretty odd. But if a woman has had sex, she's supposed to sit him down and confess and give him the opportunity to "continue the relationship or not".

That's OK, we all have different ways of looking at things. I'm far from the only very innocent looking wife who has her secrets behind innocent eyes. Many men here seem to get comfort from saying that my secrets will be somehow inevitably revealed. Well maybe they're right but they might want to worry about their own secrets and hope those aren't revealed. Except for bragging in their youth, men generally keep pretty well quiet about things. Not so today with women. Every time I see the news, more women are coming out of the woodwork revealing the behavior of men.

Perhaps "me too" is causing some men to think about having that "little talk" with their wives?


----------



## Cletus

ABHale said:


> So being in a gang doing drugs and alcohol and everything else is OK?


Um, no?


----------



## Casual Observer

Sfort said:


> What if the RJ doesn't present itself until 10, 20, 30, or 40 years into the marriage?


I have a feeling that doesn't happen too often on its own; there may be something the partner said or did that lead up to it. Or perhaps some traumatic change that lead to a severe drop in self-esteem. Do you recall reading incidents where RJ just came up out of the blue?


----------



## Sfort

Casual Observer said:


> Do you recall reading incidents where RJ just came up out of the blue?


I can only go by what I've seen and experienced.


----------



## LisaDiane

Sfort said:


> Well, if the truth be told, I'm quite fragile. No one who knows me would ever believe it since they know what I do for a living. However, like a lot of people, I'm apparently pretty good at hiding my weaknesses. I wish I didn't have those weaknesses.


Do you realize that what can seem like a "fragile" weakness can actually be a strength...??


----------



## Bluesclues

Many RJ threads started by men are not about someone saying their wives lied about being virgins or said they had one or two lovers before them and they find out it was fifty and they “loved” anal with them all but not their spouse. They are usually someone why says their wife claimed eight guys but really it is nine. And that “missing ninth” becomes an obsession. Obviously that guy must have had a massive **** and rocked her world and she thinks of him while her poor beta husband disappoints her sexually and pays the bills. What?!?! We read that here over and over. I must be the unluckiest women out there because I never found one of those magic *****. But I have forgotten about someone that should be on “the list”. The relationship and sex was so meh that it was literally forgettable. Like eating plain oatmeal, not yummy, not awful, just forgettable. (It isn’t a dig on the guy btw, I know he forgot me on his list too.) It is the instant jump to thinking missing #9 must have been a Denny’s Grand Slam instead of plain oatmeal that I don’t understand. Being incorrect in recollection isn’t always “deception”. 

I happen to be female (am not saying all females do this) and if I feel jealousy towards a past partner of my SO I tend to play up that “competitors” weaknesses and highlight my strengths. Men who display RJ seem to dwell on their own weakness or highlight (or invent) faults in their SO. I realize I am being catty but thinking “of course she needs to have a nice ass with a face like that” is where I go, not a depressive state about the deficiencies of my own ass nor anger at my partner for having been with someone with a “better” ass. 

I have never in my life wondered if another women’s vagina smelled better or tasted better than mine. When my husband cheated with a single coworker it did cross my mind for a moment that maybe she was tighter since she never had kids. It took two seconds to flip that to the thought that if she was tighter it was because not one person in forty years wanted her as their wife or mother of their children. If my husband wanted to pick up trash nobody else ever considered a treasure that was on him, not me or my vagina. 

I have lots of faults and lots of insecurities, but my whole package is pretty awesome and I know it. Even now, knowing my husband has the ability to lie and deceive me in the worst way, if he were to change his number I would not think it was because he was hiding the true love of his life from the past that happened to be a total smoke show that could suck a golf ball through a garden hose. I would think the women was forgettable plain oatmeal.


----------



## LisaDiane

ABHale said:


> Why would you not want to be completely honest with the person you’re going to marry? I couldn’t imagine not being honest.



I think you cannot image that because you haven't live my life, nor experienced the things I've gone through and the feelings I have about those experiences. So from your disconnected, objective viewpoint, it seems purely deceitful...which it's not.

I can understand what you are against with this, but I am talking about hiding parts of myself that have NO bearing on my husband or my relationship -- they are PAST things, that I am choosing to NOT share, because they are personal and because like most dishonesty, I want to control the information about ME. And I believe I have the right to control this information any way I want to.

Like I said in an earlier post - I originally didn't share because I didn't want to relive what happened...now I don't want to because I don't want my husband to HURT from it - to have strong, angry feelings that he cannot resolve. I don't want to create pain and overwhelm my relationship. But ultimately, it is MY personal life, it belongs to ME, and it's only my business to share or not.

Can you understand a little bit about why this could be ok for me and my relationship?


----------



## Sfort

LisaDiane said:


> Do you realize that what can seem like a "fragile" weakness can actually be a strength...??


How so?


----------



## LisaDiane

Cletus said:


> Probably because you were never in a gang with drugs and alcohol.
> 
> For someone to "turn their life around", they typically feel some shame in their past - else why the change? I suspect that people forget to realize how strong they appear now because of their ability to change their stars, but instead get hung up on how weak they believe they appear for back then.
> 
> Fear and shame are powerful motivators, especially when the person you are now is no longer the person you were then, and you look back with some disgust on what you once were. *And I'll be quite frank - those with the loudest voices on morals are often not the most forgiving of the failings of others.*
> 
> I have no problem understanding the mindset of the bell that can't be unrung with a partner. *You validated your partner's trust by not dumping her over her past. Good on you. If this behavior was universal, no one would need hide anything.*


Thank you for these EXCELLENT points!!


----------



## ConanHub

JustTheWife said:


> As I've said in other posts, I have mixed feelings about my past. My "traditional" and religious side is ashamed and my "modern" side is not. I'm a very confused person LOL.
> 
> My modern side is repulsed by your view that a woman having sex and then getting married has "turned her life around". Men "play the field" and then "settle down". Not sure that very many would use the phrase "turn their life around".
> 
> Likewise, a man sitting down and "talking to her about it" to "give her the chance to continue the relationship or not" --- with regard to his use of porn, his sexual past (including any questionable consent issues - pressuring women, using women, drunk women, etc), strip club history, any misogyny such as comments to or about women in his younger years, etc. would sound pretty odd. But if a woman has had sex, she's supposed to sit him down and confess and give him the opportunity to "continue the relationship or not".
> 
> That's OK, we all have different ways of looking at things. I'm far from the only very innocent looking wife who has her secrets behind innocent eyes. Many men here seem to get comfort from saying that my secrets will be somehow inevitably revealed. Well maybe they're right but they might want to worry about their own secrets and hope those aren't revealed. Except for bragging in their youth, men generally keep pretty well quiet about things. Not so today with women. Every time I see the news, more women are coming out of the woodwork revealing the behavior of men.
> 
> Perhaps "me too" is causing some men to think about having that "little talk" with their wives?


You have a disconnect between the "modern" definition and "religious".

If you are a Christian, you don't like your past because it was blatantly sinful. End of story. Mine was as well but I became a Christian at about 26 and repented.

Modern definitions don't come into play.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander so I'm with you on that point.

Plus, you are getting a little too tickled about your innocent looks and deceiving your husband.

You might fool a guy like him but you couldn't put it past someone with a past like mine.

Hopefully your posts aren't relaying what it looks like and you aren't adopting an attitude that it is cool or good to pull one over on the Mr. Gullible you married.


----------



## Casual Observer

JustTheWife said:


> Many men here seem to get comfort from saying that my secrets will be somehow inevitably revealed. Well maybe they're right but they might want to worry about their own secrets and hope those aren't revealed. Except for bragging in their youth, men generally keep pretty well quiet about things. Not so today with women. Every time I see the news, more women are coming out of the woodwork revealing the behavior of men.
> 
> Perhaps "me too" is causing some men to think about having that "little talk" with their wives?


There are times when I seriously wish that were the case; that there was some balancing nasty thing in my past that I wouldn't want my wife to discover. But that's just not who I am. Transparency and honesty define me, and those are the same two things that created the scenario that trapped my wife into... whatever the mess was and what it came to be.

Not all men keep quiet about such things. Not all men were questionable ethically until it was no longer PC. Some of us were at least pretty much OK from the start and haven't had much need to change with the times. 

And please don't confuse those of us who are really concerned for not just your marriage but you, with those who would let to see you get what you don't deserve. I've already dealt with one post like that, and I will deal with others as I find them. There is nothing wrong with your past. Or my wife's. Nor, for that matter, is there anything at all wrong with you, or my wife, deciding that that wasn't how you wanted to live in the long run. That that was a part of your life that served a purpose but it's over now. That's OK too.

If everyone's OK, if OK is going around, when does it get to be my turn? These threads are not fun for me. Or you.


----------



## Casual Observer

ConanHub said:


> You have a disconnect between the "modern" definition and "religious".
> 
> If you are a Christian, you don't like your past because it was blatantly sinful. End of story. Mine was as well but I became a Christian at about 26 and repented.
> 
> Modern definitions don't come into play.
> 
> What's good for the goose is good for the gander so I'm with you on that point.
> 
> *Plus, you are getting a little too tickled about your innocent looks and deceiving your husband.
> 
> You might fool a guy like him but you couldn't put it past someone with a past like mine.*
> 
> Hopefully your posts aren't relaying what it looks like and you aren't adopting an attitude that it is cool or good to pull one over on the Mr. Gullible you married.


But, and this is the real point, she didn't marry you. She married her husband. She might have made a very different decision, had it been you.

Relationships are both unique and dynamic. Unique means there's no one-size-fits-all answer. Dynamic means the answer is subject to change. 

All we know is how we would be affected if we were on the other end, and she can look at each of us, knowing us a bit through our posts, and consider whether any of it is relevant to her own situation. I know I've been a bit too strident at times, as if I know exactly how her husband might feel, as if I know exactly how much he might have guess or been curious about because some sort of clue dropped his way. But I really don't.


----------



## LisaDiane

Sfort said:


> How so?


Well, I don't know your issue specifically, but for ME...I am extremely emotional and connect with people very easily...it can seem like it makes me weak, and maybe in a way it can at times cause me pain or keep me from being detached and logical.

To everyone around me, even my children, I seem weakened by having those feelings...but I disagree! I think my deep feelings for others, and how much I care makes me one of the strongest people that I know -- I never need to shy away from difficult feelings, with myself or others...I am not afraid when people share their feelings with me, even if they are uncomfortable...I can handle almost anything emotional that people want to throw at me, and I can help them (and/or myself) through it. 

My parents are stoic and controlled.  They LOOK strong, but they deflect every emotional expression that comes their way because they can't handle it! They want to hide and avoid feeling too much about things. That's a weakness, for sure.

Maybe what you are going through makes you think you are fragile because you don't like the feelings, but then maybe you will gain empathy for others (a strength!) that you wouldn't have without that "fragility"...can you see what I mean?


----------



## ConanHub

Casual Observer said:


> But, and this is the real point, she didn't marry you. She married her husband. She might have made a very different decision, had it been you.
> 
> Relationships are both unique and dynamic. Unique means there's no one-size-fits-all answer. Dynamic means the answer is subject to change.
> 
> All we know is how we would be affected if we were on the other end, and she can look at each of us, knowing us a bit through our posts, and consider whether any of it is relevant to her own situation. I know I've been a bit too strident at times, as if I know exactly how her husband might feel, as if I know exactly how much he might have guess or been curious about because some sort of clue dropped his way. But I really don't.


I have no idea how her husband might feel and I trust her assessment of him.

It appears she might be starting to adopt a view that her deception is cute or good. I hope I'm misreading her posts because thinking that deceiving your spouse is cute or good isn't ok regardless of beliefs but especially as a Christian.

Sliding something past a novice doesn't make you that cunning or sly.


----------



## Sfort

LisaDiane said:


> Maybe what you are going through makes you think you are fragile because you don't like the feelings, but then maybe you will gain empathy for others (a strength!) that you wouldn't have without that "fragility"...can you see what I mean?


I'm sure there's a lot of truth to that. Today has just been a really bad day.


----------



## LisaDiane

ConanHub said:


> I have no idea how her husband might feel and I trust her assessment of him.
> 
> It appears she might be starting to adopt a view that her deception is cute or good. I hope I'm misreading her posts because thinking that deceiving your spouse is cute or good isn't ok regardless of beliefs but especially as a Christian.
> 
> Sliding something past a novice doesn't make you that cunning or sly.


I think you are misreading her posts...I think what you are hearing is a little exasperation leaking in, not feeling cute.


----------



## ConanHub

LisaDiane said:


> I think you are misreading her posts...I think what you are hearing is a little exasperation leaking in, not feeling cute.


I hope so. Adopting an attitude that deception in a marriage is a good and beneficial thing isn't so good.


----------



## Casual Observer

LisaDiane said:


> I think you are misreading her posts...I think what you are hearing is a little exasperation leaking in, not feeling cute.


Not just exasperation but it's normal to have just a bit of defensiveness as well. And when you see someone getting defensive, you're not going to get anywhere making the same point over and over. You've got to find a different angle or, heaven forbid, consider that maybe the other person's position has validity.

As always, do as I say, not as I do.


----------



## LisaDiane

Casual Observer said:


> Not just exasperation but it's normal to have just a bit of defensiveness as well. And when you see someone getting defensive, you're not going to get anywhere making the same point over and over. You've got to find a different angle or, heaven forbid, consider that maybe the other person's position has validity.
> 
> As always, do as I say, not as I do.


Your post is TERRIFIC!!!! :smile2:


----------



## LisaDiane

ConanHub said:


> I hope so. Adopting an attitude that deception in a marriage is a good and beneficial thing isn't so good.


I agree...and I hope you understand that's not what I meant (if you are referring to anything I posted about it as well...), nor would I ever advocate such a thing.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Sfort said:


> LisaDiane said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe what you are going through makes you think you are fragile because you don't like the feelings, but then maybe you will gain empathy for others (a strength!) that you wouldn't have without that "fragility"...can you see what I mean?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure there's a lot of truth to that. Today has just been a really bad day.
Click to expand...

I’m sorry you are having a bad day.

As far as your comment about being fragile, my exh is and was a picture of high confidence to the point of cockiness. However, he was also fragile in the sense that his sensibilities as a person could definitely cause him to be emotionally crushed in certain circumstances. To me, this made him all the more human and I took that ability to be crushed very importantly.

We did not deal with RJ, as we both remained private about our pasts, at least as far as specific details that the other simply didn’t need to know. But we loved each other in a way that expressed to the other how we truly cherished each other.

If I had not cherished him, he would have been crushed (and he would have ended our relationship over it). His need to be cherished made him fragile in that sense.

But this made him even more cherished to me, not less. If he had been the type of person who didn’t need to feel cherished, he also would not have cherished me. The way he cherished me definitely melted me on a daily basis, and made me extend myself to cherish him all the more. 

Even now that we are just friends, I know I could crush him emotionally. Therefore I take great care in how I treat him and I enjoy raising my awareness to a high level of care and empathy when dealing with him. 

He has always done the same for me, and I have taken his lead in this.

He is fragile in a way that makes me want to treat him with extra care. I did not know how to do this before I met him. 

Again, to the outside world, he is a rock. To those who actually know him deeply, he is a beautiful unique piece of artwork. Very fragile, but has a huge impact on those who can appreciate art. Like an ancient statue that is protected and revered.


----------



## ConanHub

LisaDiane said:


> I agree...and I hope you understand that's not what I meant (if you are referring to anything I posted about it as well...), nor would I ever advocate such a thing.


I gleaned that your situation was a little bit different.


----------



## ConanHub

Well..... That was beautiful @Faithful Wife


----------



## ConanHub

Well..... That was beautiful @Faithful Wife


----------



## LisaDiane

ConanHub said:


> I gleaned that your situation was a little bit different.


Well, I meant how my support for her hiding her past from her husband isn't the same as adopting an attitude that deception in a marriage is a good or beneficial.

My situation may be slightly different, but it's similar in principle.


----------



## ConanHub

LisaDiane said:


> Well, I meant how my support for her hiding her past from her husband isn't the same as adopting an attitude that deception in a marriage is a good or beneficial.
> 
> My situation may be slightly different, but it's similar in principle.


I'm tracking.:smile2:


----------



## Sfort

Faithful Wife said:


> I’m sorry you are having a bad day.


Thank you, and thank you for your amazing response!

People who know me would probably refer to me as a "rock", but it's all an act, really. I have feelings and emotions like many/most people do. Sometimes I get really tired of the crap that life throws at me. And I really shouldn't complain. My health is good, my finances are good, a lot of things are good, but there's the damn dark cloud that just follows me around. Some days are worse than others. I hope it's not Karma. I've been a straight shooter my whole life.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Sfort said:


> Thank you, and thank you for your amazing response!
> 
> People who know me would probably refer to me as a "rock", but it's all an act, really. I have feelings and emotions like many/most people do. Sometimes I get really tired of the crap that life throws at me. And I really shouldn't complain. My health is good, my finances are good, a lot of things are good, but there's the damn dark cloud that just follows me around. Some days are worse than others. I hope it's not Karma. I've been a straight shooter my whole life.


I think people are very complex, and in some ways men are more complex than women. Men are conditioned to be a rock, but women are more allowed to be fragile. 

So I doubt it is karma knocking on your door. It is more likely to be the disconnect between how men are conditioned, and how they have the deep emotional lives that women also have, but they are less able to express or live in that emotional space.


----------



## Buddy400

Faithful Wife said:


> From the standpoint of people who believe life begins at conception, then the baby/fetus has the same rights as any other human being and is a conscious human being as soon as conception occurs.
> 
> Although this is not my position, I can understand it from that other position.


I've always been impressed by your desire to see the other side.

This isn't my position either, but I understand it.

A good start is assuming that the person with opposing views has good intentions and comes from an honest place. 

And on the other side, I hear people who are pro-life talking about pro-choice being in favor of "killing babies". 

I can't see why they can't understand that, if abortion supporters actually thought it was "killing babies", they wouldn't support it.

Drives me crazy.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Buddy400 said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> From the standpoint of people who believe life begins at conception, then the baby/fetus has the same rights as any other human being and is a conscious human being as soon as conception occurs.
> 
> Although this is not my position, I can understand it from that other position.
> 
> 
> 
> I've always been impressed by your desire to see the other side.
> 
> This isn't my position either, but I understand it.
> 
> A good start is assuming that the person with opposing views has good intentions and comes from an honest place.
> 
> And on the other side, I hear people who are pro-life talking about pro-choice being in favor of "killing babies".
> 
> I can't see why they can't understand that, if abortion supporters actually thought it was "killing babies", they wouldn't support it.
> 
> Drives me crazy.
Click to expand...

I think it’s because pro lifers consider that first fertilized cell to be a baby. I think they believe that abortion supporters don’t believe a fertilized egg is a baby, and they wish they could convince us that it is.

When I put myself in those shoes and think wow, what if people are killing babies every day, I can see why they would want to educate us.

Their conviction is absolute. I can imagine having that conviction, even though I don’t.


----------



## Buddy400

... Deleted


----------



## Casual Observer

Sfort said:


> Thank you, and thank you for your amazing response!
> 
> People who know me would probably refer to me as a "rock", but it's all an act, really. I have feelings and emotions like many/most people do. Sometimes I get really tired of the crap that life throws at me. And I really shouldn't complain. My health is good, my finances are good, a lot of things are good, but there's the damn dark cloud that just follows me around. Some days are worse than others. I hope it's not Karma. I've been a straight shooter my whole life.


I feel your pain. And for years, I felt I needed that pain. I was driven by pain. Until about two years ago, and something changed, somehow that dark cloud no longer seemed like something to challenge, but something I no longer had the fight for. And now, all of a sudden, it seems I'm no longer able to be that rock, that thing people always depended upon for stability and reason. It's really awful to go through your life wondering how somebody could feel "that" way, and then experience it yourself.


----------



## JustTheWife

LisaDiane said:


> I think you cannot image that because you haven't live my life, nor experienced the things I've gone through and the feelings I have about those experiences. So from your disconnected, objective viewpoint, it seems purely deceitful...which it's not.
> 
> I can understand what you are against with this, but I am talking about hiding parts of myself that have NO bearing on my husband or my relationship -- they are PAST things, that I am choosing to NOT share, because they are personal and because like most dishonesty, I want to control the information about ME. And I believe I have the right to control this information any way I want to.
> 
> Like I said in an earlier post - I originally didn't share because I didn't want to relive what happened...now I don't want to because I don't want my husband to HURT from it - to have strong, angry feelings that he cannot resolve. I don't want to create pain and overwhelm my relationship. But ultimately, it is MY personal life, it belongs to ME, and it's only my business to share or not.
> 
> Can you understand a little bit about why this could be ok for me and my relationship?


Very well said. You own your past. It's all yours. You do what you want with it. I also had some very difficult experiences with it all. Some of it robbed me of my control over myself. This is not an excuse but giving yourself the power to share or not to share gives you some of that control back (even if only in a very small way - maybe just a symbol or token). Maybe a small way of getting back control over it. The idea that you're obligated to tell your partner everything in your past sentences you to reliving it all over again with him. Bringing it into your marriage. You should not be sentenced to bringing this into every relationship or your marriage. Once you bring it into your marriage, it's in it FOREVER. you can't close that door.

I gave away my body to men that I shouldn't have. I did not respect myself. They took everything. Now I should let them take my marriage too? I don't mean to be rude but to make the point, that would feel like they are F'ing me forever....over and over for the rest of my life. Like i'm forever shamed and tarnished by those acts. Why would anyone say that I can't put it behind me? Why should I have to feel like I'm giving even more of myself away to these guys? i don't want to give them any more of myself. They had enough of me. I'm not going to give my marriage away to them now. That's all mine. They can't have it.

EVen though I was promiscuous, sex was always a big deal for me. It felt like I was giving away my body, my dignity, my innocence, my soul, my religion, and it was always very emotional for me. They don't deserve to "mark" me for life. They've already taken far too much of me. it's over. I'm not going to let them into my marriage. I'm not going to let them keep taking from me over and over forever. That's what it would feel like for me.

It's wonderful if a couple can be 100% open about everything. Like you, I'm in no way saying that lying or hiding things is a good thing! Part of me is disturbed by aspects of my past -- it should not be a life sentence. I deserve to have control over it now. I'm not asking for everyone to agree with me but I hope people can understand.


----------



## NalaLyla

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.
> 
> When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy".
> 
> It seems so transparently counter-productive.


Sometimes they are less emotionally mature, however people around require them to be fearless and strong. That is why they try to control everything, tho they are really scared inside.


----------



## JustTheWife

ConanHub said:


> You have a disconnect between the "modern" definition and "religious".
> 
> If you are a Christian, you don't like your past because it was blatantly sinful. End of story. Mine was as well but I became a Christian at about 26 and repented.
> 
> Modern definitions don't come into play.
> 
> What's good for the goose is good for the gander so I'm with you on that point.
> 
> Plus, you are getting a little too tickled about your innocent looks and deceiving your husband.
> 
> You might fool a guy like him but you couldn't put it past someone with a past like mine.
> 
> Hopefully your posts aren't relaying what it looks like and you aren't adopting an attitude that it is cool or good to pull one over on the Mr. Gullible you married.





ConanHub said:


> I have no idea how her husband might feel and I trust her assessment of him.
> 
> It appears she might be starting to adopt a view that her deception is cute or good. I hope I'm misreading her posts because thinking that deceiving your spouse is cute or good isn't ok regardless of beliefs but especially as a Christian.
> 
> Sliding something past a novice doesn't make you that cunning or sly.


After I reread my post, I understand why you think I'm trying to be cute or sly. That's not what i intended and I don't think it's cool at all. As someone else said, I was just a little frustrated trying to express how I feel and it came out wrong. 

If you have real openness in your relationship and neither of you are keeping anything from each other than that's really great and I'm truly happy for you both. But I think it's wrong for you to assume that my husband is gullible just because he's not sexually experienced. He's experienced in the ways of the world.

I also find your bravado that you'd be able to tell any woman's sexual history a little funny. I think you'd be surprised by the sexual secrets that many women have from their husbands and boyfriends. Either by lying or hiding the truth or just because he doesn't really want to know and he blissfully just assumes his wife is much more angelic than she really is.


----------



## ConanHub

JustTheWife said:


> After I reread my post, I understand why you think I'm trying to be cute or sly. That's not what i intended and I don't think it's cool at all. As someone else said, I was just a little frustrated trying to express how I feel and it came out wrong.
> 
> If you have real openness in your relationship and neither of you are keeping anything from each other than that's really great and I'm truly happy for you both. But I think it's wrong for you to assume that my husband is gullible just because he's not sexually experienced. He's experienced in the ways of the world.
> 
> I also find your bravado that you'd be able to tell any woman's sexual history a little funny. I think you'd be surprised by the sexual secrets that many women have from their husbands and boyfriends. Either by lying or hiding the truth or just because he doesn't really want to know and he blissfully just assumes his wife is much more angelic than she really is.


Your husband is gullible in regards to your secrets but that isn't a bad trait for an honest man that went to his marriage bed a virgin. I'm glad you reread your posts because it did look like you were feeling sly for pulling one over on your husband and that isn't a great accomplishment.

My bravado is pure confidence earned through years of rough experience. I have also done some pretty extensive research into real cases that involved women and sex. I'm not put off by a woman's sexuality or history but I stopped being surprised about it by my mid teens.

No. I have never been caught off guard or surprised by a woman's sexuality or history since roughly age 16.

I know a lot of the blissfully ignorant men you are referring to and just shake my head because much of the religious community in this country promotes the falsehood that women aren't sexual beings or even sin sexually. Poor teaching.


----------



## JustTheWife

ConanHub said:


> Your husband is gullible in regards to your secrets but that isn't a bad trait for an honest man that went to his marriage bed a virgin. I'm glad you reread your posts because it did look like you were feeling sly for pulling one over on your husband and that isn't a great accomplishment.
> 
> My bravado is pure confidence earned through years of rough experience. I have also done some pretty extensive research into real cases that involved women and sex. I'm not put off by a woman's sexuality or history but I stopped being surprised about it by my mid teens.
> 
> No. I have never been caught off guard or surprised by a woman's sexuality or history since roughly age 16.
> 
> I know a lot of the blissfully ignorant men you are referring to and just shake my head because much of the religious community in this country promotes the falsehood that women aren't sexual beings or even sin sexually. Poor teaching.


Just curious how you tell what kind of sexual history a woman has? Not sure what kind of research helps you tell what kind of sexual history a woman has.

If you met me or we were on a date (very hypothetical!!!), how long would it take for you to figure out the general nature of my sexual history? You certainly couldn't tell by how i dress (outdoorsy kind of clothing) and my nature (sweet and shy and a little awkward/introverted, bookworm). So how could you tell?


----------



## ConanHub

JustTheWife said:


> Just curious how you tell what kind of sexual history a woman has? Not sure what kind of research helps you tell what kind of sexual history a woman has.
> 
> If you met me or we were on a date (very hypothetical!!!), how long would it take for you to figure out the general nature of my sexual history? You certainly couldn't tell by how i dress (outdoorsy kind of clothing) and my nature (sweet and shy and a little awkward/introverted, bookworm). So how could you tell?


That question would take it's own thread to answer and you would probably have to take my word for it on a few details.

There are plenty of people that can discern some things by interactions with others as well as paying attention to the details and what isn't readily said.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> That question would take it's own thread to answer and you would probably have to take my word for it on a few details.
> 
> There are plenty of people that can discern some things by interactions with others as well as paying attention to the details and what isn't readily said.


 @ConanHub, I am going to start a thread to discuss this. I'm interested to hear what you have to say.


----------



## Cletus

NalaLyla said:


> Sometimes they are less emotionally mature, however people around require them to be fearless and strong. That is why they try to control everything, tho they are really scared inside.


Do most people require the men around them to be fearless, or do men project this upon themselves?

I know my wife wishes I had more fear in my life.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus said:


> Do most people require the men around them to be fearless, or do men project this upon themselves?
> 
> I know my wife wishes I had more fear in my life.


She wishes you had more fear in your life? Huh?


----------



## Cletus

Faithful Wife said:


> She wishes you had more fear in your life? Huh?


She wishes I was more afraid of my motorcycle, so that I would stop riding. She wishes I was more afraid of heights so that I wouldn't get so close to the edge of a cliff on a hike. She wishes that unexpected noises around the house caused a greater sense of panic than the nonchalant opening of the front door in my bathrobe to take a peek. She wishes that my having been held up at gunpoint 3 times in my life made me more afraid of guns. For example.


----------



## Buddy400

Cletus said:


> Do most people require the men around them to be fearless, or do men project this upon themselves?
> 
> I know my wife wishes I had more fear in my life.


I believe that women generally require the men they are sexually involved with to be fearless (stoic).

They say they want their men to show emotion, but when they do, the result is often 'VA-CLANG' (hope I got that right this time).

This was discussed in detail in @faithfulwife's 'Empathy for Men' thread.

Brene Brown reported that a group of women were surveyed and said that they wanted their men to show more emotion. The they were asked to list some examples of this. When the specific behaviors were repeated back to them (as in, what would you think if your husband did....), they weren't impressed.

"What Brown also discovered in the course of her research is that, contrary to her early assumptions, men's shame is not primarily inflicted by other men. Instead, it is the women in their lives who tend to be repelled when men show the ****** in their armor.

'Most women pledge allegiance to this idea that women can explore their emotions, break down, fall apart—and it's healthy,' Brown said. 'But guys are not allowed to fall apart.' Ironically, she explained, men are often pressured to open up and talk about their feelings, and they are criticized for being emotionally walled-off; but if they get too real, they are met with revulsion. She recalled the first time she realized that she had been complicit in the shaming: "Holy ****!" she said. "I am the patriarchy!'"


----------



## Faithful Wife

Buddy400 said:


> I believe that women generally require the men they are sexually involved with to be fearless (stoic).
> 
> They say they want their men to show emotion, but when they do, the result is often 'VA-CLANG' (hope I got that right this time).
> 
> This was discussed in detail in @faithfulwife's 'Empathy for Men' thread.
> 
> Brene Brown reported that a group of women were surveyed and said that they wanted their men to show more emotion. The they were asked to list some examples of this. When the specific behaviors were repeated back to them (as in, what would you think if your husband did....), they weren't impressed.
> 
> "What Brown also discovered in the course of her research is that, contrary to her early assumptions, men's shame is not primarily inflicted by other men. Instead, it is the women in their lives who tend to be repelled when men show the ****** in their armor.
> 
> 'Most women pledge allegiance to this idea that women can explore their emotions, break down, fall apart—and it's healthy,' Brown said. 'But guys are not allowed to fall apart.' Ironically, she explained, men are often pressured to open up and talk about their feelings, and they are criticized for being emotionally walled-off; but if they get too real, they are met with revulsion. She recalled the first time she realized that she had been complicit in the shaming: "Holy ****!" she said. "I am the patriarchy!'"


I looked all over for whatever Ted talk or other video Brene discussed specifically empathy (or lack of) for men and never found it. This was back when we were posting on my empathy thread. I really did want to find it so if you remember where that video was, please let me know.


----------



## ConanHub

Cletus said:


> Do most people require the men around them to be fearless, or do men project this upon themselves?
> 
> I know my wife wishes I had more fear in my life.


Same but when I hit the wall, she didn't like it.

She understands herself better now.


----------



## Cletus

ConanHub said:


> Same but when I hit the wall, she didn't like it.
> 
> She understands herself better now.


So you're saying what she thought she wanted and what she really wanted were not the same?


----------



## ConanHub

Cletus said:


> So you're saying what she thought she wanted and what she really wanted were not the same?


Yup.


----------



## Buddy400

JustTheWife said:


> I gave away my body to men that I shouldn't have. I did not respect myself. They took everything. Now I should let them take my marriage too? I don't mean to be rude but to make the point, that would feel like they are F'ing me forever....over and over for the rest of my life. Like i'm forever shamed and tarnished by those acts. Why would anyone say that I can't put it behind me? Why should I have to feel like I'm giving even more of myself away to these guys? i don't want to give them any more of myself. They had enough of me. I'm not going to give my marriage away to them now. That's all mine. They can't have it.
> 
> EVen though I was promiscuous, sex was always a big deal for me. It felt like I was giving away my body, my dignity, my innocence, my soul, my religion, and it was always very emotional for me. They don't deserve to "mark" me for life. They've already taken far too much of me. it's over. I'm not going to let them into my marriage. I'm not going to let them keep taking from me over and over forever. That's what it would feel like for me.


It seemed earlier as if you were saying that you were perfectly happy with the sexual choices you made earlier in your life.

The above makes it seem like that wasn't the case. Which is fine. My wife was promiscuous before she met me and she has regrets as well (not for my benefit, I never said anything negative to her about this). 

It often seems as if it's a rule in modern life that women are never supposed to regret any sexual choices they ever made and that seems unrealistic. That's weird. Who hasn't made choices in the past that they now wish they hadn't? In no way am I saying that women* should* have regrets about past sexual behavior, just that it's not unheard of that some do.

Having done things in the past that you regret is different from doing things in the past that you don't regret. Neither one is RIGHT, but there is a difference. 

If you'd had the opportunity early on to tell your husband that you'd done things previously that you regret and skipped the details, I suspect everything would have been okay. But the moment passed and now it's too late to come clean.

It does seem as if you blame some men for "taking" things from you that you freely "gave". This seems to imply a lack of agency on your part.

Personally, I never wanted to hear any details of my wife's sexual past and never asked. I know the general but have no need to know the particulars. Some things one is just better off not knowing. My wife was friendly with my ex-wife up until the moment that the ex mentioned an intimate detail from our past. While my wife obviously knew that the ex and I had had sex, she didn't need to hear that.


----------



## Buddy400

Faithful Wife said:


> I looked all over for whatever Ted talk or other video Brene discussed specifically empathy (or lack of) for men and never found it. This was back when we were posting on my empathy thread. I really did want to find it so if you remember where that video was, please let me know.


I don't know that it was necessarily in a TED talk.

The quote I referenced above is from this Atlantic article

https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/a...-of-shame-are-organized-around-gender/275322/


----------



## JustTheWife

Buddy400 said:


> It seemed earlier as if you were saying that you were perfectly happy with the sexual choices you made earlier in your life.
> 
> The above makes it seem like that wasn't the case. Which is fine. My wife was promiscuous before she met me and she has regrets as well (not for my benefit, I never said anything negative to her about this).
> 
> It often seems as if it's a rule in modern life that women are never supposed to regret any sexual choices they ever made and that seems unrealistic. That's weird. Who hasn't made choices in the past that they now wish they hadn't? In no way am I saying that women* should* have regrets about past sexual behavior, just that it's not unheard of that some do.
> 
> Having done things in the past that you regret is different from doing things in the past that you don't regret. Neither one is RIGHT, but there is a difference.
> 
> If you'd had the opportunity early on to tell your husband that you'd done things previously that you regret and skipped the details, I suspect everything would have been okay. But the moment passed and now it's too late to come clean.
> 
> It does seem as if you blame some men for "taking" things from you that you freely "gave". This seems to imply a lack of agency on your part.
> 
> Personally, I never wanted to hear any details of my wife's sexual past and never asked. I know the general but have no need to know the particulars. Some things one is just better off not knowing. My wife was friendly with my ex-wife up until the moment that the ex mentioned an intimate detail from our past. While my wife obviously knew that the ex and I had had sex, she didn't need to hear that.


I just want to clarify that I have very mixed feelings about it. Contradictory feelings. Please refer to a recent post on this thread where I describe the two sides of me that feel different about it. LIkewise, when i was doing it, it was like there were two sides of me. Double life in a way. And that wasn't just about the actions but the feelings about them too.


----------



## Casual Observer

JustTheWife said:


> I just want to clarify that I have very mixed feelings about it. Contradictory feelings. Please refer to a recent post on this thread where I describe the two sides of me that feel different about it. LIkewise, when i was doing it, it was like there were two sides of me. Double life in a way. And that wasn't just about the actions but the feelings about them too.


The double-life thing doesn't get anywhere near the attention it should, particularly as it applies to those from a religious background. Our MC just can't get a handle AT ALL around my wife's double-life as she was in her discovering-herself phase, nor does the MC understand AT ALL how she has continued that double-life since. 

In our case, that "double life" currently presents itself as my wife seeing the marriage only from her side, which allows her to believe we've had a good if not great marriage. Anything suggesting otherwise gets completely thrown out. Creates a huge chasm between what is "our" marriage and "hers." 

I think reconciling the two lives, whether past or present, may be an essential part of becoming a whole person.

This double-life thing doesn't apply just to women. It's found in men just as often, and perhaps more often, but possibly has a greater acceptance for men than women. Which of course is wrong.


----------



## JustTheWife

Casual Observer said:


> The double-life thing doesn't get anywhere near the attention it should, particularly as it applies to those from a religious background. Our MC just can't get a handle AT ALL around my wife's double-life as she was in her discovering-herself phase, nor does the MC understand AT ALL how she has continued that double-life since.
> 
> In our case, that "double life" currently presents itself as my wife seeing the marriage only from her side, which allows her to believe we've had a good if not great marriage. Anything suggesting otherwise gets completely thrown out. Creates a huge chasm between what is "our" marriage and "hers."
> 
> I think reconciling the two lives, whether past or present, may be an essential part of becoming a whole person.
> 
> This double-life thing doesn't apply just to women. It's found in men just as often, and perhaps more often, but possibly has a greater acceptance for men than women. Which of course is wrong.


Thank you. Those are wise words. Reconciling is important but at the same time, I also believe that people are complex and mixed feelings about things is not necessarily unhealthy but there's a difference between two disconnected parts and two unified parts that represent different views of the same thing.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Casual Observer said:


> JustTheWife said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just want to clarify that I have very mixed feelings about it. Contradictory feelings. Please refer to a recent post on this thread where I describe the two sides of me that feel different about it. LIkewise, when i was doing it, it was like there were two sides of me. Double life in a way. And that wasn't just about the actions but the feelings about them too.
> 
> 
> 
> The double-life thing doesn't get anywhere near the attention it should, particularly as it applies to those from a religious background. Our MC just can't get a handle AT ALL around my wife's double-life as she was in her discovering-herself phase, nor does the MC understand AT ALL how she has continued that double-life since.
> 
> In our case, that "double life" currently presents itself as my wife seeing the marriage only from her side, which allows her to believe we've had a good if not great marriage. Anything suggesting otherwise gets completely thrown out. Creates a huge chasm between what is "our" marriage and "hers."
> 
> I think reconciling the two lives, whether past or present, may be an essential part of becoming a whole person.
> 
> This double-life thing doesn't apply just to women. It's found in men just as often, and perhaps more often, but possibly has a greater acceptance for men than women. Which of course is wrong.
Click to expand...

What you are describing sounds more like self delusion than a double life.

A double life usually indicates that the person having one does realize they are doing it and they are deliberately hiding the double life from others.

I think your wife is and was confused by her younger sexual feelings and stuffed them into a mental box. With regard to your marriage and how she sees it one way and you don’t see it that way, that is what I would call self delusion. Because there are ways she could or can become aware that there is a difference in the way you see your marriage but she refuses to focus on those ways or that other view (yours).


----------



## Affaircare

Cletus said:


> Do most people require the men around them to be fearless, or do men project this upon themselves?
> 
> I know my wife wishes I had more fear in my life.


 @Cletus,

Oddly enough I think a portion of this is also involved in why some men are so fragile. Fear. 

Speaking as a lady of a certain age, I do not require my man to be fearless. In fact, I know that @Emerging Buddhist has some fears (as do I) because we've spoken about them. But his fears don't involved speed, height, health or physical calamity! LOL 

What I do know is that as a lady, I have concern for his safety and health, and I think something like "I hope he stays healthy" "I hope he doesn't get hurt" "I hope he is safe" etc. And thus if he went fast, some females might think he is pushing the envelope of staying safe and unharmed...and call that "fearless". 

Here's the thing I've learned: whatever it is you are doing, SHE is the one who is afraid! And I've learned to overcome my fear by jumping in and doing it with him. Because it's not scary to ride a motorcycle--it is scary to ride with someone who doesn't have experience and is untrained and doesn't wear safety gear. It's not scary to go to the edge of a cliff and take in the view of the entire valley--it is scary to see someone being reckless such as "fake tripping" at a cliff's edge. It's not scary to go investigate a noise if you do so with skill and training--it is scary if you've never been in dange and don't know how to handle it. Being informed and trained often takes away the fear. 

So long story short, no I don't expect EB to be fearless. I do expect him to ride with experience and keep us both safe. I expect him to check all the gear and then jump off the zipline platform or off the cliff to paraglide. I do expect him to use his training and weaponry knowledge to defend us if there is a bump in the night. And I expect myself to be scared and do it anyway. That's what courage is.


----------



## Casual Observer

JustTheWife said:


> Thank you. Those are wise words. Reconciling is important but at the same time, I also believe that people are complex and mixed feelings about things is not necessarily unhealthy but there's a difference between two disconnected parts and two unified parts that represent different views of the same thing.


One of the better original Star Trek episodes, Balance of Terror, had a meeting of two captains at war, Captain Kirk and a Romulan. As the Romulan prepared for self-destruction after his unexpected defeat, he said "Captain, you and I are of a kind. In a different reality, I could have called you friend." Sometimes I feel that way about you. Not that I'd have any issue having you as a friend, but the parallel worlds thing gets almost a bit creepy. In a good way.



Faithful Wife said:


> What you are describing sounds more like self delusion than a double life.
> 
> A double life usually indicates that the person having one does realize they are doing it and they are deliberately hiding the double life from others.
> 
> I think your wife is and was confused by her younger sexual feelings and stuffed them into a mental box. With regard to your marriage and how she sees it one way and you don’t see it that way, that is what I would call self delusion. Because there are ways she could or can become aware that there is a difference in the way you see your marriage but she refuses to focus on those ways or that other view (yours).


The double life indicating a person realizes what they are doing and deliberately hiding the double life from others... that is EXACTLY 100% what my wife was doing early on. She had two entirely different sets of friends. Two entirely different sets of standards portrayed, depending upon the audience. There was no, zero, nada, self delusion. It was deliberate.

Looking at later life, self-delusion might come into play, but the practice she had earlier at pretending one thing to one set of people and another to others is definitely relevant. Overall, the word that comes to mind is dissociative. 


Dissociation is any of a wide array of experiences from mild detachment from immediate surroundings to more severe detachment from physical and emotional experiences. The major characteristic of all dissociative phenomena involves a detachment from reality, rather than a loss of reality as in psychosis.​


----------



## Marduk

Casual Observer said:


> One of the better original Star Trek episodes, Balance of Terror, had a meeting of two captains at war, Captain Kirk and a Romulan. As the Romulan prepared for self-destruction after his unexpected defeat, he said "Captain, you and I are of a kind. In a different reality, I could have called you friend." Sometimes I feel that way about you. Not that I'd have any issue having you as a friend, but the parallel worlds thing gets almost a bit creepy. In a good way.


We reach.


----------



## oldtruck

Buddy400 said:


> I've always been impressed by your desire to see the other side.
> 
> This isn't my position either, but I understand it.
> 
> A good start is assuming that the person with opposing views has good intentions and comes from an honest place.
> 
> And on the other side, I hear people who are pro-life talking about pro-choice being in favor of "killing babies".
> 
> I can't see why they can't understand that, if abortion supporters actually thought it was "killing babies", they wouldn't support it.
> 
> Drives me crazy.


using language to make one self feel better and enable them to justify ending a life
before it's time.

easier to save I believe it is ok to terminate, abort a pregnancy.
not so easy to say I believe it is ok kill a baby in the womb.

easy to say it is a woman's right while ignoring the rights of the baby and the father.


----------



## sokillme

Everyone's fragile, men just used to hide it better. They certainly get shamed for being fragile more though.


----------



## Elizabeth001

oldtruck said:


> using language to make one self feel better and enable them to justify ending a life
> 
> before it's time.
> 
> 
> 
> easier to save I believe it is ok to terminate, abort a pregnancy.
> 
> not so easy to say I believe it is ok kill a baby in the womb.
> 
> 
> 
> easy to say it is a woman's right while ignoring the rights of the baby and the father.




I’m pulling the TITAT card. lol 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Marduk

oldtruck said:


> using language to make one self feel better and enable them to justify ending a life
> before it's time.
> 
> easier to save I believe it is ok to terminate, abort a pregnancy.
> not so easy to say I believe it is ok kill a baby in the womb.
> 
> easy to say it is a woman's right while ignoring the rights of the baby and the father.


But it’s not a baby when it’s a cluster of cells with zero consciousness.


----------



## LisaDiane

oldtruck said:


> using language to make one self feel better and enable them to justify ending a life
> before it's time.
> 
> easier to save I believe it is ok to terminate, abort a pregnancy.
> not so easy to say I believe it is ok kill a baby in the womb.
> 
> easy to say it is a woman's right while ignoring the rights of the baby and the father.



Would you be ok if the government made a law that forced YOU (and everyone) to donate your blood and unneeded body parts (like skin or a kidney, etc) to other people who donor-matched you and had serious, life-threatening illnesses, and needed YOUR body to live...because they have a "right to life"...?

Or would you feel violated by a law like that, and feel that only YOU had the right to decide what you were allowed to do with YOUR body, over and above the rights of another?


----------



## oldtruck

Marduk said:


> But it’s not a baby when it’s a cluster of cells with zero consciousness.


4 cells, 4 days, 4 weeks, 4 months, 4 years, it still has not growing.
at conception it has a soul.
babies can feel pain when being killed in the womb.

sex is fun.
everyone should try to get as much sex as they would like.
safe sex is a must.
sex should only be a person that you would think would make a good parent with
you for accidents can happen.
killing a baby in the womb is not the proper response for not being sexually
responsible and mature.


----------



## oldtruck

LisaDiane said:


> Would you be ok if the government made a law that forced YOU (and everyone) to donate your blood and unneeded body parts (like skin or a kidney, etc) to other people who donor-matched you and had serious, life-threatening illnesses, and needed YOUR body to live...because they have a "right to life"...?
> 
> Or would you feel violated by a law like that, and feel that only YOU had the right to decide what you were allowed to do with YOUR body, over and above the rights of another?


you are not comparing an apple to an orange. you are not even comparing an
apple to a rock.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Here...I'll go start a new thread for y'all....I'll even join it myself. See politics forum.


----------



## Faithful Wife

https://talkaboutmarriage.com/politics/439611-pro-life-pro-choice.html#post20098893


----------



## Blondilocks

oldtruck said:


> you are not comparing an apple to an orange. you are not even comparing an
> apple to a rock.


You're not even on the right thread. Didn't you mean to post on the Rational Suicide thread?


----------



## wilson

wrong thread ...


----------



## LisaDiane

oldtruck said:


> you are not comparing an apple to an orange. you are not even comparing an
> apple to a rock.


I completely disagree, but I'm taking to to the Pro-Choice/Life thread that FW started...

(Thank you, FW, btw!)


----------



## FeministInPink

Elizabeth001 said:


> I’m pulling the TITAT card. lol
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


What's the TITAT card? Feel free to PM me if the answer is off-topic or continues the abortion thread jack.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife

FeministInPink said:


> What's the TITAT card? Feel free to PM me if the answer is off-topic or continues the abortion thread jack.


Take it to another thread. :smile2:


----------



## Rubix Cubed

Marduk said:


> But it’s not a baby when it’s a cluster of cells with zero consciousness.


 Then why does a person who murders a pregnant woman get charged with two counts of murder?


----------



## Marduk

Rubix Cubed said:


> Then why does a person who murders a pregnant woman get charged with two counts of murder?


I don’t know. I didn’t even know that was a thing.

Interesting question.


----------



## oldtruck

I was not the first one to bring up legal killing of babies in the womb on this
thread.

the way others have responded and disagreed.
I have responded and disagreed without being disagreeable.
forums are for the exchanging of ideas.

some people say never recover, divorce is the way, others give advice
on how to recovery after an affair.

people do not agree on exposure.

and yet with all this disagreement here people expect that there should
not be any disagreement on killing babies in the womb.


----------



## FrazzledSadHusband

Marduk said:


> I don’t know. I didn’t even know that was a thing.
> 
> Interesting question.


Where I live, if a drunk hits & kills a pregnant woman in a car wreck, it's 2 charges.
Not disagreeing with it, it is a thing.


----------



## FeministInPink

Rubix Cubed said:


> Then why does a person who murders a pregnant woman get charged with two counts of murder?





Marduk said:


> I don’t know. I didn’t even know that was a thing.
> 
> Interesting question.





oldtruck said:


> I was not the first one to bring up legal killing of babies in the womb on this
> thread.
> 
> the way others have responded and disagreed.
> I have responded and disagreed without being disagreeable.
> forums are for the exchanging of ideas.
> 
> some people say never recover, divorce is the way, others give advice
> on how to recovery after an affair.
> 
> people do not agree on exposure.
> 
> and yet with all this disagreement here people expect that there should
> not be any disagreement on killing babies in the womb.





FrazzledSadHusband said:


> Where I live, if a drunk hits & kills a pregnant woman in a car wreck, it's 2 charges.
> Not disagreeing with it, it is a thing.


There has been a new thread created for this topic of discussion, folks. 

TITAT.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Marduk

FeministInPink said:


> TITAT.


I still don't know what TITAT means, but I think I want one.


----------



## Sfort

Marduk said:


> I still don't know what TITAT means, but I think I want one.


https://talkaboutmarriage.com/mens-clubhouse/439395-why-men-so-fragile-13.html#post20100207


----------



## Elizabeth001

Marduk said:


> I still don't know what TITAT means, but I think I want one.




TITAT= Take It To Another Thread


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Marduk

Elizabeth001 said:


> TITAT= Take It To Another Thread
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That is a lot less fun than I was hoping.


----------



## FeministInPink

Marduk said:


> That is a lot less fun than I was hoping.


I just learned it!

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


----------



## Elizabeth001

It was my idea...I want credit!



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife

Elizabeth001 said:


> It was my idea...I want credit!
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Yes it was yours and it was an excellent one. 100 internet bonus points to you!


----------



## FeministInPink

Elizabeth001 said:


> It was my idea...I want credit!
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


You came up with it? It's excellent!

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


----------



## Holdingontoit

Casual Observer said:


> But, one more time, if you believe that deception and in some cases outright lies are required or else the partner is going to feel bad and/or leave, then what the heck are you doing? Don't even test the waters. Just find a way to bring it up and, if you have to go through therapy early on to see if the relationship is workable, that's a whole lot better than risking 10 or 20 or even 40 years with someone and maybe years of IC & MC and a whole lot of moments where you wonder whom you married. It can, and does, happen.


And remember, you really have no idea what your partner will do if they find out you have been lying to them after 10 or 20 or even 40 years. In some cases, they will kill you. Which, as awful as that is, might not be the worst option. And neither is divorce, although it might seem to be while you are going through it. No, if you are married to a special kind of sadistic bastard, after they find out you lied to them for 10 or 20 or even 40 years, they won't do anything about it. Except maybe stay married to you and remind you every time you disagree that you were a manipulative liar and there is no space for negotiation or compromise because you can't be trusted. And you will know they are correct. And you have trapped yourself within your own lies.

Walter Scott was correct: "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"


----------



## Imjustaslostasyou

Yeswecan said:


> Maybe add in the porn industry that molds impressionable minds to what they think sex is? How large Johnny is but the viewer does not measure up?


Thats true but not every man is born with 12 inches of meat which she would leave you for if she experienced it.


----------



## ConanHub

Elizabeth001 said:


> TITAT= Take It To Another Thread
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You are a fun lady!


----------



## Yeswecan

Imjustaslostasyou said:


> Thats true but not every man is born with 12 inches of meat which she would leave you for if she experienced it.


That's the point.


----------



## ConanHub

Yeswecan said:


> That's the point.


I'm a little behind the eight ball on this one.

Is it being inferred that a woman would leave a man that is average size if she had sex with a man who was very large in that department?


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> I'm a little behind the eight ball on this one.
> 
> Is it being inferred that a woman would leave a man that is average size if she had sex with a man who was very large in that department?


That's is the myth apparently. Nothing like generalizing all women


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> That's is the myth apparently. Nothing like generalizing all women


I'm hoping for a response and maybe clarification?

I've seen the reverse happen a few times and I can't actually recall an instance of woman leaving a man who was average for king Wang.


----------



## Yeswecan

ConanHub said:


> I'm a little behind the eight ball on this one.
> 
> Is it being inferred that a woman would leave a man that is average size if she had sex with a man who was very large in that department?


No sir. The point is porn generally has men with large members. This leaves possible impressions on males that large members can only satisfy a woman. It then generates insecurities and unrealistic idea of sex.


----------



## Yeswecan

Numb26 said:


> That's is the myth apparently. Nothing like generalizing all women


Yes, it is a myth but to the impressionable mind is it can be seen as reality.


----------



## ConanHub

Yeswecan said:


> No sir. The point is porn generally has men with large members. This leaves possible impressions on males that large members can only satisfy a woman. It then generates insecurities and unrealistic idea of sex.


Thank you. I can agree with that effect.


----------



## Numb26

Yeswecan said:


> Yes, it is a myth but to the impressionable mind is it can be seen as reality.



I think the truth is that there can be problems with both ends of the spectrum, too small or too big. Most men fall somewhere in between and if they do have insecurities about their size, it is from their own making.


----------



## Yeswecan

Numb26 said:


> if they do have insecurities about their size, it is from their own making.


The insecurities can come from porn. Johnny Wade. Long Dong Silver. Never see Little Toot much.


----------



## Numb26

Yeswecan said:


> The insecurities can come from porn. Johnny Wade. Long Dong Silver. Never see Little Toot much.


Don't forget Dirk Diggler


----------



## Yeswecan

Numb26 said:


> Don't forget Dirk Diggler


And the classic Log Jamm'in and Rambone. It is ingrained into our society via porn of what a male should be in that department.


----------



## Cletus

Yeswecan said:


> And the classic Log Jamm'in and Rambone. It is ingrained into our society via porn of what a male should be in that department.


Is it?

I guess I don't know anyone who doesn't understand that these guys are 3 sigma specimens, that 99% of use don't have that kind of equipment, and that no one really needs it to be a satisfactory lover.


----------



## Yeswecan

Cletus said:


> Is it?
> 
> I guess I don't know anyone who doesn't understand that these guys are 3 sigma specimens, that 99% of use don't have that kind of equipment, and that no one really needs it to be a satisfactory lover.


 Of course they don't. Yet porn would have you think otherwise.


----------



## Numb26

Yeswecan said:


> Of course they don't. Yet porn would have you think otherwise.


I know that some men have this insecurity but I have never understood it. I mean, I get the fact that there are some women out there that will use size as a way to put down men and attack their "manhood" but unless you let it they would just be words.


----------



## Numb26

Besides, it has been my experience that most women prefer width to length anyway.


----------



## Yeswecan

Numb26 said:


> I know that some men have this insecurity but I have never understood it. I mean, I get the fact that there are some women out there that will use size as a way to put down men and attack their "manhood" but unless you let it they would just be words.


It is not just women who put men down using the size of the willy. Men do it too, mostly in a joking manner. It is like a stature thing. I don't understand why cause those that die with the most toys wins. Nothing said about penis size.


----------



## Numb26

Yeswecan said:


> It is not just women who put men down using the size of the willy. Men do it too, mostly in a joking manner. It is like a stature thing. I don't understand why cause those that die with the most toys wins. Nothing said about penis size.


Well, some people would consider it a "toy" hahaha


----------



## Cletus

Yeswecan said:


> It is not just women who put men down using the size of the willy. Men do it too, mostly in a joking manner. It is like a stature thing. I don't understand why cause those that die with the most toys wins. Nothing said about penis size.


Probably because, with a few notable and very lucky exceptions, we all die flaccid.


----------



## Blondilocks

Yeswecan said:


> No sir. The point is porn generally has men with large members. This leaves possible impressions on males that large members can only satisfy a woman. *It then generates insecurities and unrealistic idea of sex.*


If watching porn generates insecurities, wouldn't stop watching porn be the wise decision? 

It's like the old joke: Patient: Doctor, it hurts when I do this.
Doctor: Well, then don't do that.


----------



## oldtruck

when i watched porn i ignored the male actors. relegated them to the peripheral vision.
never compared myself to the male actors.
also prefer women acting solo.


----------



## Cletus

oldtruck said:


> when i watched porn i ignored the male actors. relegated them to the peripheral vision.
> never compared myself to the male actors.
> also prefer women acting solo.


There's men in porn? Who knew.


----------



## oldtruck

Cletus said:


> There's men in porn? Who knew.


not only do great men think a like, they see pretty much the same things.


----------



## hinterdir

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.
> 
> When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy".
> 
> It seems so transparently counter-productive.


It is strength for me.
I go after what will make me happy and I will not settle.
I wouldn't have married a woman with a shady past and will not stay married if my wife starts to fall in love with partying or doing stuff I do not like.
If you fo not like her past....DO NOT MARRY HER!!!!


----------



## hinterdir

Faithful Wife said:


> I’ve just known a lot of ladies in my life who were the ones who asked for some sexual thing and were turned down. A LOT of them. I think you have read Spicy’s recent thread, right? So while it may be true that more men than women ask for sexual things and get turned down, I think the percentage of how many more is not as high as most people think it is.
> 
> And Spicy is of course now being told that all the women in his past, or simply the fact that they provided variety, have something she doesn’t have.
> 
> The first sex starved wives I ever knew about were in my childhood, as my friends and I caught clues about our parents and other adult relationships. I learned right away that grown women will cry over lack of sex in their marriage, and also that some of them will eventually cheat or leave.


I think you are using the micro to try and negate the macro. Exceptions are different from the rule. 
There will always be exceptions. 
This is neither here nor there but using exceptions to try and negate norms and trends isn't accurate. Nothing in life is 100%


----------



## hinterdir

JustTheWife said:


> I've been reading a lot about RJ since it's one of the reasons that I don't open up about my past to my husband. Actually I just recently found out that RJ is a "thing" but just thought that the truth could devastate him and ruin our marriage. RJ seems to sum up my fears about what sometimes happens when the real truth is shared. Could happen immediately or take years to develop.
> 
> First, I think the truth causes RJ, not lies. More accurately, some men's inability to handle the truth of their wives or girlfriends. The truth can be brutal. I know that it would be devastating to my husband and make him think of me differently.
> 
> Many men want their wives and GFs to be their sweethearts. Only for them. Their one and only as someone said above. Making them feel good. Adoring, cherishing and treasuring her. Making him feel strong and manly. Maybe that sounds old fashioned but I think that's often how it works or partially at least. For my man I also want to be his little sweetheart. His honey. I want to be everything to him. I don't want my husband thinking about me with other men. It would ruin things for him. I don't want him thinking about men "finishing" in my mouth when he kisses me. Or all kinds of other things that would send shivers up his spine. Sorry to be graphic but I think it's stuff like that which can kill a guy. Eat away at him as RJ describes in the stuff that I read.
> 
> I think that many posts and the thread title is unfair to men. Both men and women are complex and want all kinds of different things. Men can fantasize about women being sl***y and many like to watch women getting used in porn. But I think that many are understandably very uncomfortable thinking about their wives like that. And maybe porn is making RJ more common. I mean, men can see how sex is for women in the most graphic detail. In their heads maybe some men have a pornographic representation of every act that they know their wives did with other men. Including with men with very large penises and the woman just being the sex object, degraded and going through all kinds of rough treatment. Just wondering if porn has created or made RJ worse in some men. Who knows.
> 
> Anyway, I just want to be my husband's "one and only" (he deserves that) and that doesn't must mean sex. But the sexual history part can easily destroy the feeling that I'm his "one and only". I'm probably not explaining this in the best way but what I'm trying to say is that just because i've had sex with a lot of other guys, it doesn't mean that I'm not his "one and only". I'm shy and look very innocent so I think that plays into it all - like the perfect wife or girlfriend type (as i've been told) and not someone who's been with a lot of guys. So why would I ruin that for him. He's my protector and I just want him to keep cherishing me.
> 
> Everyone says that i need to tell all to my husband and that might be right for some relationships but not all. Although they might not think of it as lying, I think that most women hold back and try to protect their husbands from the truth that could be painful for him. I mean, many don't talk about penis size of their partners and other things that could be particularly painful. So if the reason you are not opening up fully to your husband is to save his feelings then we are in the same place. If I start to open up then I need to be prepared to tell the WHOLE truth. I don't see the point of opening up for the sake of stopping the lies and then giving him more lies and half truths like many women do. I don't mean to insult anyone, just that I think that's often the case - "underestimate" number of partners, "forget" about things you did, etc. It seems that penis size is very important to men - how does he compare or whatever. But women usually hide the truth about that too.
> 
> Anyway, RJ is interesting and I think it sums up my fears for my husband very well. Why would I want to subject him to that?


 You always post about this. 
Going on 2-3 years now. 
What are we talking about exactly (if you are even willing to share)?
How many guys have you been with? I mean is this a 7-8 kind of thing or 25-35 kind of thing?
Were they boyfriends only or were there one night stands with pretty much strangers?
Were there any threesomes or even more men simultaneously?
Lastly, I think you've stated before but I can't quite recall...is or was your husband a virgin when you married?
Did you ever tell him you were a virgin dating or in the friendship before dating? Did he just never ask you or didn't you say you implied or something that you had saved yourself for future husband?
So if your husband does end up asking your something someday....something makes him suspicious that you've lied to him about some of this...you are going to tell him and then answer what is I'm sure would be a ton of follow up questions?


----------



## hinterdir

Lila said:


> I laugh a little whenever I see "lying by omission" used in these arguments. No, it's not lying by omission. It's having a different level of privacy.
> 
> If 100% disclosure of every detail regarding sexual history is important, then that's a preference, one that should be communicated. I'd opt out without a backward glance but would appreciate them sharing that preference before investing too much my or his time.


Let's see where your keep it to myself or tell lines are at. 
Let's say they asked if you've ever had a threesome? If you have had them would you say yes or lie?
If they asked if you'd ever been sex work, cam model, stripper....etc. would you be in favor if disclosing that or lie?
If they asked if you'd had one night stands and casual sex....lie or disclose it? 
Anal? Lie or disclose it?

I'm just trying to gauge how far you are willing to keep stuff. 
I agree mostly with the nitty gritty of size and positions and every little detail but I'm curious to see where you stand on the bigger things to where a mate would have the opportunity to make an informed decision and think I don't think our value systems really line up, I'll pass.


----------



## Lila

hinterdir said:


> Let's see where your keep it to myself or tell lines are at.
> Let's say they asked if you've ever had a threesome? If you have had them would you say yes or lie?
> If they asked if you'd ever been sex work, cam model, stripper....etc. would you be in favor if disclosing that or lie?
> If they asked if you'd had one night stands and casual sex....lie or disclose it?
> Anal? Lie or disclose it?
> 
> I'm just trying to gauge how far you are willing to keep stuff.
> I agree mostly with the nitty gritty of size and positions and every little detail but I'm curious to see where you stand on the bigger things to where a mate would have the opportunity to make an informed decision and think I don't think our value systems really line up, I'll pass.


As I said in my post, I'd opt of any relationship with someone who required 100% disclosure of every detail regarding sexual history beyond anything that would have a direct impact on the other person (existing STD). 

Being a single woman in her 40s, it's more important to me to find someone who shares sexual compatibility with me based on my CURRENT likes and boundaries than on my sexual history. 

In reference to your questions, I would not answer any of them beyond expressing whether or not that activity is something that I'm interested in doing with a partner. Simple.


----------



## hinterdir

JustTheWife said:


> Just curious how you tell what kind of sexual history a woman has? Not sure what kind of research helps you tell what kind of sexual history a woman has.
> 
> If you met me or we were on a date (very hypothetical!!!), how long would it take for you to figure out the general nature of my sexual history? You certainly couldn't tell by how i dress (outdoorsy kind of clothing) and my nature (sweet and shy and a little awkward/introverted, bookworm). So how could you tell?


I would say a woman with a promiscuous, sleep around past, wouldn't go after a guy who is saving himself for marriage and wanting to find such a wife as well.
I would kind of


JustTheWife said:


> Just curious how you tell what kind of sexual history a woman has? Not sure what kind of research helps you tell what kind of sexual history a woman has.
> 
> If you met me or we were on a date (very hypothetical!!!), how long would it take for you to figure out the general nature of my sexual history? You certainly couldn't tell by how i dress (outdoorsy kind of clothing) and my nature (sweet and shy and a little awkward/introverted, bookworm). So how could you tell?


I wouldn't expect a woman who has slept around a ton to try to marry some guy who is a virgin, saving himself for marriage and specifically looking for a woman who is the same.
I would call that quite insane. 
Hey, if you married some guy who was trying to screw any girl he could starting at the age of 15 and has been chasing all the sex he could get his entire life who is now settling down with you....you kind of seem like birds of a feather. 
It seems kind of evil to go after the guy you did and to hang on to that big elephant in the room. 
Why did you pick this guy? 
It just doesn't make sense. 
You knew what he was all about and still you do this


----------



## hinterdir

Lila said:


> As I said in my post, I'd opt of any relationship with someone who required 100% disclosure of every detail regarding sexual history beyond anything that would have a direct impact on the other person (existing STD).
> 
> Being a single woman in her 40s, it's more important to me to find someone who shares sexual compatibility with me based on my CURRENT likes and boundaries than on my sexual history.
> 
> In reference to your questions, I would not answer any of them beyond expressing whether or not that activity is something that I'm interested in doing with a partner. Simple.


lol.....it sounds like you've done ALLLLL that stuff!
Anyway.....saying I won't answer is an answer so any guy who didn't want a promiscuous woman (or "former" one), if he were wise would just walk away at that exact moment.
Anyway......back to the actual jealousy talk directly.
I'd say a lot of these guys are weak. There is no reason to be jealous.....maybe initially, for a bit but where the main issues lay is that they STICK AROUND.
That "just the wife" poster. Finding out her past would hurt a lot. Would it cause long term marital issues? No.
The marriage would end.
If you hate the wife's past and how pornish and promiscuous it was.
Just LEAVE.
No reason at all to "deal with" pain and emotions for years.
Just have your "YIKES" initial reaction and then get the hell out of there.

Anyway back to the poster I questioned.
Pretty sleazy that you even act like a guy doesn't deserve the opportunity to avoid ex-strippers by feeling like he doesn't deserve that info......IT'S PRIVATE.
A guy shouldn't even know that huh?
Anyway, your refusal to answer is the answer. He should just walk away immediately.


----------



## Cletus

hinterdir said:


> Anyway, your refusal to answer is the answer. He should just walk away immediately.


Well, you should walk away immediately. He should do whatever the hell he wants.


----------



## Lila

hinterdir said:


> lol.....it sounds like you've done ALLLLL that stuff!
> Anyway.....saying I won't answer is an answer so any guy who didn't want a promiscuous woman (or "former" one), if he were wise would just walk away at that exact moment.
> 
> Anyway back to the poster I questioned.
> Pretty sleazy that you even act like a guy doesn't deserve the opportunity to avoid ex-strippers by feeling like he doesn't deserve that info......IT'S PRIVATE.
> A guy shouldn't even know that huh?
> Anyway, your refusal to answer is the answer. He should just walk away immediately.


You are welcome to make all of the assumptions about me as you like but they are just assumptions. 

I do find it interesting that you think it's sleezy for a person to enforce their own boundaries by not answering questions they feel are counter to their relationship goals but it's completely acceptable to ask questions, get answers you don't like, and dump the person. 

Calling someone sleezy because they won't answer particular questions (understanding full well it could mean the end of a potential relationship) is just as bad as calling someone sleezy because they asked a question, got an answer they didn't like, and walked away. Neither is sleazy. They are boundaries. "Nice guys" are the ones that seem to have issues with this the most. Ymmv.


----------



## hinterdir

Lila said:


> You are welcome to make all of the assumptions about me as you like but they are just assumptions.
> 
> I do find it interesting that you think it's sleezy for a person to enforce their own boundaries by not answering questions they feel are counter to their relationship goals but it's completely acceptable to ask questions, get answers you don't like, and dump the person.
> 
> Calling someone sleezy because they won't answer particular questions (understanding full well it could mean the end of a potential relationship) is just as bad as calling someone sleezy because they asked a question, got an answer they didn't like, and walked away. Neither is sleazy. They are boundaries. "Nice guys" are the ones that seem to have issues with this the most. Ymmv.


Sure.
Anyone should be able to avoid ex sex workers if they want...or avoid those who have done threesomes.
It is very resonable to gravitate to those with similar values and to avoid those with opposite values.
Nice?
Ain't nobody nice.


----------



## Cletus

At this point in my life, I would be more interested in pursuing a woman with enough of a past to feel worried about revealing it than with one with so little past that I could be privy to every intimate detail. 

To my mind, fully grown adults with nothing at all mildly eyebrow raising in their sexual past are those who don't value sex all that much. YMMV. I wasn't there then, and I'm certainly not going to lose too much sleep over it now.


----------



## FeministInPink

Cletus said:


> At this point in my life, I would be more interested in pursuing a woman with enough of a past to feel worried about revealing it than with one with so little past that I could be privy to every intimate detail.
> 
> To my mind, fully grown adults with nothing at all mildly eyebrow raising in their sexual past are those who don't value sex all that much. YMMV. I wasn't there then, and I'm certainly not going to lose too much sleep over it now.


I love this post. I'm at a point in my life where I WANT a man who is experienced... at least comparable to my experience.

I'm friends with a man who is a few years younger than I, but also old enough that he should be experienced. This man is also obviously interested in me romantically, but he hasn't done anything about it because he has social anxiety. I know I could make a move myself and move this relationship forward, but I also know he has very little experience. I like this man, but at this point in my life, I don't want a man who is lacking in experience and will have to be taught/led.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


----------



## Lila

Cletus said:


> At this point in my life, I would be more interested in pursuing a woman with enough of a past to feel worried about revealing it than with one with so little past that I could be privy to every intimate detail.
> 
> To my mind, fully grown adults with nothing at all mildly eyebrow raising in their sexual past are those who don't value sex all that much. YMMV. I wasn't there then, and I'm certainly not going to lose too much sleep over it now.


That's an interesting take on the debate. 

In my experience, at this point in my life, sexual history really doesn't say much either way. I seem to be a magnet for men who married young, with limited sexual experience, and now that they're free, want to push sexual boundaries and experiment. So trying to gauge sexual compatibility based on their sexual histories is misleading. They may not have had a sexually adventurous life before but want to make up for it now.


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> At this point in my life, I would be more interested in pursuing a woman with enough of a past to feel worried about revealing it than with one with so little past that I could be privy to every intimate detail.
> 
> To my mind, fully grown adults with nothing at all mildly eyebrow raising in their sexual past are those who don't value sex all that much. YMMV. I wasn't there then, and I'm certainly not going to lose too much sleep over it now.


That was pretty much my logic after my first marriage ended. It was sexless by the end of it, and included both infidelity and abuse on her part. But the sexlessness drove me to ensure that I only got serious with someone that liked sex.

And I knew and was OK with the fact that meant she also had a past. I have no problem with that, certainly after living in a sexless marriage.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

FeministInPink said:


> I love this post. I'm at a point in my life where I WANT a man who is experienced... at least comparable to my experience.
> 
> I'm friends with a man who is a few years younger than I, but also old enough that he should be experienced. This man is also obviously interested in me romantically, but he hasn't done anything about it because he has social anxiety. I know I could make a move myself and move this relationship forward, but I also know he has very little experience. I like this man, but at this point in my life, I don't want a man who is lacking in experience and will have to be taught/led.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


Is social anxiety still valid when at present we've got to stay away from each other ? 

Just kidding. 

I'm with you.


----------



## FeministInPink

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Is social anxiety still valid when at present we've got to stay away from each other ?
> 
> Just kidding.
> 
> I'm with you.


Ha ha! It's funny, because this guy is a math teacher... he has to get up and talk in front of a group of belligerent teenagers multiple times a day, and that doesn't phase him at all.

But even what @Lila is talking about, men who are divorced who were in sexually repressed marriages (and only had a few partners), and who are looking to experiment and try some kinky stuff... I wouldn't necessarily classify that as inexperienced. I think I would be ok with that, except that a lot of those men aren't looking for a relationship, or because of their prior experience are only OK with either an open or poly relationship... because they want to try EVERYTHING, or they're not willing to commit to just one person again.

ETA: And @Ragnar Ragnasson he's not anxious around me, at least not that I can tell. Before all this, he would come out for karaoke and hang and talk with me, and he texts me regularly now that there's no in-person karaoke. I just don't think he'll ever work up the nerve to actually ask me out.


----------



## Cletus

Lila said:


> That's an interesting take on the debate.
> 
> In my experience, at this point in my life, sexual history really doesn't say much either way. I seem to be a magnet for men who married young, with limited sexual experience, and now that they're free, want to push sexual boundaries and experiment. So trying to gauge sexual compatibility based on their sexual histories is misleading. They may not have had a sexually adventurous life before but want to make up for it now.


Fascinating. I never thought of myself as "damaged goods" before.


----------



## Lila

Cletus said:


> Fascinating. I never thought of myself as "damaged goods" before.


Why do you think you're "damaged goods"?


----------



## oldtruck

FeministInPink said:


> Ha ha! It's funny, because this guy is a math teacher... he has to get up and talk in front of a group of belligerent teenagers multiple times a day, and that doesn't phase him at all.
> 
> But even what @Lila is talking about, men who are divorced who were in sexually repressed marriages (and only had a few partners), and who are looking to experiment and try some kinky stuff... I wouldn't necessarily classify that as inexperienced. I think I would be ok with that, except that a lot of those men aren't looking for a relationship, or because of their prior experience are only OK with either an open or poly relationship... because they want to try EVERYTHING, or they're not willing to commit to just one person again.
> 
> ETA: And @Ragnar Ragnasson he's not anxious around me, at least not that I can tell. Before all this, he would come out for karaoke and hang and talk with me, and he texts me regularly now that there's no in-person karaoke. I just don't think he'll ever work up the nerve to actually ask me out.


so does being a feministà make it against the law to ask him out?


----------



## FeministInPink

oldtruck said:


> so does being a feministà make it against the law to ask him out?


No, but if he doesn't have the balls to ask me out, I don't think he's a good fit relationship-wise.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


----------



## Hiner112

I would only say that having a limited number of sexual partners doesn't necessarily mean that you haven't had a lot of sex or that you aren't either good at it or conscientious and open enough to learn someone else's preferences. It probably means that you haven't had a polyamorous relationship or group sex (unless it was always the same partners). The variety, quality, and frequency of the sex could have been exceptional within the bounds of one relationship that ended for unrelated reasons after a long period.

Having a bunch of partners doesn't necessarily mean that you are good at it either. As an analogy, someone who has had a bunch of jobs is good at getting jobs, not necessarily working.

I've not put a ton of thought into what sexual history I would look for in someone I dated but I do know that my ex and I were each other's first and that was kind of a fun experience. It was also awkward and frustrating. As someone in their 40s, if I ran across a virgin in my age range, there would probably be a long interesting story behind it full of red flags. On the other side of the coin, if I was going to be in a committed relationship with someone, I probably wouldn't be interested in someone that was polyamorous. It would probably feel like cheating and a destabilizing influence. A cheater and / or someone that hasn't maintained at least a long-ish term relationship at least once also raises some questions. Probably any number of partners between 1 and 100 is probably not worth worrying about.


----------



## JustTheWife

hinterdir said:


> You always post about this.
> Going on 2-3 years now.
> What are we talking about exactly (if you are even willing to share)?
> How many guys have you been with? I mean is this a 7-8 kind of thing or 25-35 kind of thing?
> Were they boyfriends only or were there one night stands with pretty much strangers?
> Were there any threesomes or even more men simultaneously?
> Lastly, I think you've stated before but I can't quite recall...is or was your husband a virgin when you married?
> Did you ever tell him you were a virgin dating or in the friendship before dating? Did he just never ask you or didn't you say you implied or something that you had saved yourself for future husband?
> So if your husband does end up asking your something someday....something makes him suspicious that you've lied to him about some of this...you are going to tell him and then answer what is I'm sure would be a ton of follow up questions?


I was honest that I was very promiscuous. You can use your imagination as to what that means. Sounds like you want to know the details so you can use it against me. Typical guy. LOL.

Yes, my husband was a virgin. I was friends with him for a long time in college before we started dating. We met in a religious group and we had similar teachings about sex growing up with religion (very strict religious views on virginity and general modesty and chaste, especially for girls).

Who knows what will happen in the future but I doubt very much he's going to come out and ask me if I have had sex with other guys. He's a gentleman and I'm sure that he would consider that question deeply offensive to be asking his wife. I don't expect everyone to understand this but a devout Christian man like my husband isn't going to be asking a question of his wife like that. Christianity takes different forms but in our case, we don't talk to each other like that. With our religious teaching, that would be like calling me a wh*** and "good" husbands don't do that. It just doesn't work like that. If he were to be asking me that, I'd know right away that it's all over.


----------



## Cletus

FeministInPink said:


> I like this man, but at this point in my life, I don't want a man who is lacking in experience and will have to be taught/led.





Lila said:


> That's an interesting take on the debate.
> 
> In my experience, at this point in my life, sexual history really doesn't say much either way. I seem to be a magnet for men who married young, with limited sexual experience, and now that they're free, want to push sexual boundaries and experiment. So trying to gauge sexual compatibility based on their sexual histories is misleading. They may not have had a sexually adventurous life before but want to make up for it now.





FeministInPink said:


> But even what @Lila is talking about, men who are divorced who were in sexually repressed marriages (and only had a few partners), and who are looking to experiment and try some kinky stuff... I wouldn't necessarily classify that as inexperienced. I think I would be ok with that, except that a lot of those men aren't looking for a relationship, or because of their prior experience are only OK with either an open or poly relationship... because they want to try EVERYTHING, or they're not willing to commit to just one person again.





Lila said:


> Why do you think you're "damaged goods"?


Well, I'm "that guy" who married young with limited sexual experience beforehand to someone with no desire to broaden her narrow definition of sex. What I read here, and no one is being cruel or insensitive, but that's a guy who is going to enter a new relationship with a certain amount of unwanted baggage, both from lack of skills and too much eagerness. 

It's all true, too.


----------



## davepaul

I think age and time can play a part in being hung up on a partner's past. I was more insecure about a woman's past when I was younger. When my wife and I were dating I would wonder how many men she had been with, who gave her the best sex, where did I rate, how big has she had, do I give her enough orgasms, etc.. Not that it was to the point of being obsessive over it. I figured she married me for a reason and that thinking dwindled over time.

Eventually after marriage, those concerns went away to the point where one day I realized I wasn't thinking any more about who she had been with or how many. But one day out of curiosity I decided to ask her how many men she had slept with. My wife asked if I really wanted to know and she thought it over and told me she probably had sex with over 30 men, maybe closer to 40. 

I could see she was racking her brain thinking it over some more and I told her it really didn't matter and I was just curious. Her number was much higher than I thought it would be (and FAR higher than my number) and that's totally fine and it didn't change how I felt about her. I actually have a very positive outlook on it. Hearing a number that high though in my younger, insecure days would have probably scared me away, and I'm ashamed to say I probably would have thought of her as a sl*t back then.

We talked some about her past and she opened up and told me about some of her boyfriends and how she had a lot of one-night stands and casual sex. She never cheated on a boyfriend and to me that said way more about her character than any amount of penises that have been inside her body. 

Not that a high number of partners is going to necessarily equate to performance, but in my case she is definitely the best and most compatible sex partner I've had. I think it's great that my wife explored her sexuality so much before we got together. Her confidence and assertiveness is so sexy and her experience has definitely made our sex life together amazing. 

I definitely feel like a better man and a better husband now that I'm confident and secure in my marriage and sexuality. It's a great feeling to let go and not be hung up on my wife's past sex life. And she definitely would have been very irritated if I was constantly insecure about all the men she'd been with.


----------



## notmyjamie

I think instead of looking at someone's partner count as a way to gauge their sexuality you should talk to them about it. Because I've known women that have slept with MANY men and hate sex. And I myself, have a very low number compared to a lot of women my age, and yet my BF says I'm the most sensual and sexual woman he's been with in his life. I haven't shared that part of me with very many people as I'm a serial monogamist but once we're in a relationship I give my all to you if you'll take it. So number counts aren't going to be a good way to make sure you're getting what you want from a partner, communication is really the answer.


----------



## Openminded

I agree. A high count for women doesn’t mean they necessarily like sex. Often it’s part of being a people pleaser and they actually feel nothing besides boredom.


----------



## davepaul

notmyjamie said:


> I think instead of looking at someone's partner count as a way to gauge their sexuality you should talk to them about it. Because I've known women that have slept with MANY men and hate sex. And I myself, have a very low number compared to a lot of women my age, and yet my BF says I'm the most sensual and sexual woman he's been with in his life. I haven't shared that part of me with very many people as I'm a serial monogamist but once we're in a relationship I give my all to you if you'll take it. So number counts aren't going to be a good way to make sure you're getting what you want from a partner, communication is really the answer.



I agree that a number count itself is not an indicator of compatibility and getting what you need from a partner. Like you, I also have been a serial monogamist. I've never had any casual sex and have a very low partner count. Nothing against that sort of thing, but I need to be in love with someone to have sex. But once I fall in love with someone and things get to that point, I like to explore things with someone I love and trust and give in to them completely. My wife has told me I'm much more giving and a more skilled lover than most men and the most sensual lover she's had. She's been with men with high partner counts who had nothing much to offer her sexually.

Before my wife, I generally went for women who had dating and sexual histories closer to my own. I figured I would be more compatible with them. I honestly wouldn't have thought I could be so compatible with a woman with a high number of sex partners. My wife and I have total opposite sexual histories and experience, but we have great communication together and can talk about everything openly without fear of judgment, which has given us a really strong bind in and out of the bedroom.


----------



## notmyjamie

davepaul said:


> Before my wife, I generally went for women who had dating and sexual histories closer to my own. I figured I would be more compatible with them. I honestly wouldn't have thought I could be so compatible with a woman with a high number of sex partners. My wife and I have total opposite sexual histories and experience, but we have great communication together and can talk about everything openly without fear of judgment, which has given us a really strong bind in and out of the bedroom.


It all comes down to communication. BF and I were talking just the other day about a certain sex position I told him it didn't really float my boat and he stopped and said "you have no idea how awesome it is that we can talk about this" and I never really thought about it until then but he's right. My exH never would have talked about sex the way that BF and I do, even if he were straight. We communicate well about what we like and don't like about things which makes our sex life much more enjoyable and exciting.

I do see a lot of guys make mistakes in trying to find someone who is more compatible when it comes to sex. I belong to an over 40's divorced women's group on Facebook. I see the same complaints over and over again. "Why do guys rush to talk about sex??? We JUST started talking online and he's already making sex jokes and asking about sexual things and what I like. He's just a pig just like every other guy out there. Men suck." 

There has to be a better time somewhere between 2 minutes into meeting and 15 years of marriage for prospective couples to figure this stuff out. I get that a guy coming out of a sexless marriage wants to make sure that's not going to happen to him again. I came out of one too so I more than understand. But that's probably not a first date or even before the first date conversation. Just an observation.


----------



## davepaul

That's great that you and your boyfriend can talk so openly like that. it is a great feeling. I'll have situations like that with my wife sometimes and it will suddenly hit me that with other girls I dated, they would sometimes be too shy or embarrassed to talk about certain things with me. 

I agree that there has to be some time in between just meeting and knowing someone for years to get comfortable talking about that stuff. My wife experienced that with a lot of other men who would make sex jokes or ask personal things right away. She had quite a few one-night stands in her single days. She enjoyed the chase and the rush of casual sex at the time but most of the time those men didn't have much to offer. She likes a lot of foreplay and a lot of guys would just want to get right down to it.

It was nice when her and I started dating. We took things slow. We didn't even discuss sex at all for that first month. We fell in love and once we did discuss sex, it was awesome how we were both able to communicate with each other about our sexual likes and dislikes right away. it definitely made our sex life and our relationship much better.


----------



## TJW

JustTheWife said:


> I don't expect everyone to understand this but a devout Christian man like my husband isn't going to be asking a question of his wife like that.


I understand perfectly. And, I agree with your form of Christianity in this respect. I have never asked any of my wives any such question. Two of them never "volunteered" information like that, either.
Because of it, "RJ" has remained a non-issue between us, in both cases.

RJ was the destruction of my first marriage. I was not a complete virgin (to my shame) but I was not at all experienced, I was 33 at our wedding. She had multiple affairs, but they are not what destroyed our marriage. It was her "openness" about her past and about her affair partner which did it. The RJ was too much, I shunned her and avoided her bed like the plague.

Some might call me "fragile", I suppose, all I know is that I was sure as hell broken, and failed to recover from it.


----------



## FeministInPink

notmyjamie said:


> It all comes down to communication. BF and I were talking just the other day about a certain sex position I told him it didn't really float my boat and he stopped and said "you have no idea how awesome it is that we can talk about this" and I never really thought about it until then but he's right. My exH never would have talked about sex the way that BF and I do, even if he were straight. We communicate well about what we like and don't like about things which makes our sex life much more enjoyable and exciting.
> 
> I do see a lot of guys make mistakes in trying to find someone who is more compatible when it comes to sex. I belong to an over 40's divorced women's group on Facebook. I see the same complaints over and over again. "Why do guys rush to talk about sex??? We JUST started talking online and he's already making sex jokes and asking about sexual things and what I like. He's just a pig just like every other guy out there. Men suck."
> 
> There has to be a better time somewhere between 2 minutes into meeting and 15 years of marriage for prospective couples to figure this stuff out. I get that a guy coming out of a sexless marriage wants to make sure that's not going to happen to him again. I came out of one too so I more than understand. But that's probably not a first date or even before the first date conversation. Just an observation.


I absolutely  agree with you on communication. My XH turned into a child when I tried to talk to him about sex, which at the time was already an incredible challenge for me, because of the way I was raised. It had taken me months to figure out what I needed to communicate and how to say it, and another couple months to screw up the courage to say it, only to have him refuse to listen and engage. 

And I also agree with all these women! Listen, I have a high drive and, especially after a sexless marriage, making sure I am sexually compatible with a guy is really important before I get too attached. But at the same time, I don't want to talk about it right away! I want to know we're compatible in other ways first. That is just as important as the sex stuff.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


----------



## notmyjamie

FeministInPink said:


> I absolutely  agree with you on communication. My XH turned into a child when I tried to talk to him about sex, which at the time was already an incredible challenge for me, because of the way I was raised. It had taken me months to figure out what I needed to communicate and how to say it, and another couple months to screw up the courage to say it, only to have him refuse to listen and engage.
> 
> And I also agree with all these women! Listen, I have a high drive and, especially after a sexless marriage, making sure I am sexually compatible with a guy is really important before I get too attached. But at the same time, I don't want to talk about it right away! I want to know we're compatible in other ways first. That is just as important as the sex stuff.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


That must have been tough. I wasn't always this way. But after everything that happened with my exH I said "I want what I want and the only way to get it is to speak up." So now I do and it's worked out really well for me thankfully. 

And as my BF says "yup...sex is great but what about those other 23 hours a day?" You need to be compatible during those hours as well.


----------



## ConanHub

I'm pretty weirded out by the experiences people have but I guess different people have different paths.

The only women I talked about sex to were friends that I never had sex with. Made out with a couple of them but it was mostly just horsing around.

It seems strange that men are asking women almost immediately about sexual experience and preferences.


----------



## ConanHub

I meant, with relationships before Mrs. C. We had sex a lot initially, talked a little about it and then did it some more. We have talked over the years but I never had the initial experience about talking about it before even getting to know someone and every woman I had sex with was within a very short time of meeting her including Mrs. C.


----------



## Cletus

FeministInPink said:


> And I also agree with all these women! Listen, I have a high drive and, especially after a sexless marriage, making sure I am sexually compatible with a guy is really important before I get too attached. But at the same time, I don't want to talk about it right away! I want to know we're compatible in other ways first. That is just as important as the sex stuff.


People will bring to the table what they find most important early on, right?

What the women here seem to be saying is that "I want to talk about the things in a relationship that are most important to me before the topic of sex is brought up".

Perhaps what you are hearing from the men is "Sex is one of the most important things for me in a relationship. I want to talk about that before those other topics are brought up".

Both parties I would guess are trying to do exactly the same thing.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Cletus said:


> People will bring to the table what they find most important early on, right?
> 
> What the women here seem to be saying is that "I want to talk about the things in a relationship that are most important to me before the topic of sex is brought up".
> 
> Perhaps what you are hearing from the men is "Sex is one of the most important things for me in a relationship. I want to talk about that before those other topics are brought up".
> 
> Both parties I would guess are trying to do exactly the same thing.


I agree with this in essence. Also I think people should just stop talking to anyone who says things that put them off.

It’s a delicate line for me, because I love sex and also love talking about sex. So I’m not immediately put off by a guy talking about sex in the abstract. Like what are you into, what are you looking for, what expectations do you have. For me it gets weird when then there is some assumptions about the timing of sex. In early conversations, most men I’ve dated can understand that a discussion about our preferences is just a way to see if we may be compatible and it doesn’t mean either of us have committed to actually having sex with each other.

But some may get weird about it and think it means you are DTF on a first date or other assumptions. So I make it clear upfront that a discussion doesn’t mean anything in itself.

On the flip side, if a guy doesn’t discuss anything sexual at all after a few conversations I do get a little leery that he isn’t as passionate as I am.

Then there are guys who want to actually have text sex immediately. Talking about preferences can quickly turn to them thinking you’re going to talk dirty to them while they get themselves off. Yuck.

Phone or text sex is only something I do with someone I’m already dating and having sex with.

My current guy is the only one who never brought up sex at all until I did. But he’s a special case. It took 3 dates for him to even hold my hand. He’s just different in that he doesn’t want to pursue a sexual relationship until he knows he really likes and respects the person. I was a little worried at first, does this guy even like me or are we friends? But when we finally passed his threshold of knowing each other, he was definitely passionate enough. Yay!

It’s hard to gauge where people are at about sex at first. Sometimes you are completely wrong about someone who ends up being nothing like you thought they would be. But like I said, it’s easy to just ghost anyone who starts going down a road you don’t want to go down.


----------



## notmyjamie

Cletus said:


> People will bring to the table what they find most important early on, right?
> 
> What the women here seem to be saying is that "I want to talk about the things in a relationship that are most important to me before the topic of sex is brought up".
> 
> Perhaps what you are hearing from the men is "Sex is one of the most important things for me in a relationship. I want to talk about that before those other topics are brought up".
> 
> Both parties I would guess are trying to do exactly the same thing.


I think you are correct. However, there are ways to talk about it respectfully and then there are not. Sending a woman you started talking to yesterday a text that simply says “anal?”is not going to get you a date even if that’s something she actually loves.

My BF has a very high libido. Sex is very important to him. He never once mentioned sex to me until we’d been on about 10 dates. He didn’t even kiss me until date 8. I was thinking he only wanted a friend. LOL He was very respectful. When we hit a point that sex was a possibility then we discussed it. And it worked. He gets all he needs without being disrespectful about it. Others could learn from his example.


----------



## ConanHub

notmyjamie said:


> I think you are correct. However, there are ways to talk about it respectfully and then there are not. Sending a woman you started talking to yesterday a text that simply says “anal?”is not going to get you a date even if that’s something she actually loves.
> 
> My BF has a very high libido. Sex is very important to him. He never once mentioned sex to me until we’d been on about 10 dates. He didn’t even kiss me until date 8. I was thinking he only wanted a friend. LOL He was very respectful. When we hit a point that sex was a possibility then we discussed it. And it worked. He gets all he needs without being disrespectful about it. Others could learn from his example.


That's a sweet story.


----------



## Cletus

notmyjamie said:


> My BF has a very high libido. Sex is very important to him. He never once mentioned sex to me until we’d been on about 10 dates. He didn’t even kiss me until date 8. I was thinking he only wanted a friend. LOL He was very respectful. When we hit a point that sex was a possibility then we discussed it. And it worked. He gets all he needs without being disrespectful about it. Others could learn from his example.


I too was respectful. Too much so, it turned out. But I get your point, this is not disagreement.


----------



## notmyjamie

Cletus said:


> I too was respectful. Too much so, it turned out. But I get your point, this is not disagreement.


I agree, it’s a fine line. As I said I thought he wasn’t interested in that way. He could have sped up his timeline by a few dates. But he’s awesome in the sack so I forgive him. LOL


----------



## FeministInPink

Cletus said:


> People will bring to the table what they find most important early on, right?
> 
> What the women here seem to be saying is that "I want to talk about the things in a relationship that are most important to me before the topic of sex is brought up".
> 
> Perhaps what you are hearing from the men is "Sex is one of the most important things for me in a relationship. I want to talk about that before those other topics are brought up".
> 
> Both parties I would guess are trying to do exactly the same thing.


I was going to write out a whole response, but @Faithful Wife and @notmyjamie pretty much said everything I wanted to say.

I'm not against an abstract discussion about sex early on, because I'm kinky and compatible kink is something I NEED in a partner, and I don't want to waste my time on someone who is vanilla, or someone who is incompatible kinky. But SO. MANY. MEN. think that an abstract discussion of sex is an invitation to sext, to the exclusion of all non-sexual conversation. 

While it's a nice thought, that they are bringing sex up right away because it's something that's really important to them, that's wishful thinking. None of the men who do this are looking for a relationship--they are looking for a virtual sex doll who will give them enough of a reaction so they can get off.

There are a few men who bring it up early on for the reasons you mention but they are few and far between. And they're not the ones that women complain about, because they treat us with respect--they don't treat us like virtual blow-up dolls.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk


----------



## JustTheWife

notmyjamie said:


> I think instead of looking at someone's partner count as a way to gauge their sexuality you should talk to them about it. Because I've known women that have slept with MANY men and hate sex. And I myself, have a very low number compared to a lot of women my age, and yet my BF says I'm the most sensual and sexual woman he's been with in his life. I haven't shared that part of me with very many people as I'm a serial monogamist but once we're in a relationship I give my all to you if you'll take it. So number counts aren't going to be a good way to make sure you're getting what you want from a partner, communication is really the answer.


Completely agree. I think these are coping mantras.

A lot of one night stands (for example) does not necessarily develop one's sexuality or skill or lead to a lot of experimentation to see what you like and don't like. Nor does it necessarily make someone more "confident". At the other end of the spectrum, sex for years with one partner (for example) can allow you to get comfortable and experiment more. Likewise, I think that many women are very sexual and explore sex with just their own bodies, possibly learning much more about their own bodies and exploring their sexuality much than someone who just has a lot of one night stands for whatever reason. Or women who have been intimate with guys but saved intercourse for one or two others or no others. Having sexual intercourse with a lot of guys does not necessarily translate into being "more sexual" and in touch with your sexuality, and more skilled than someone with few intercourse partners.

Maybe someone's wife cooked over 50,000 meals before you met so she must be a great cook, right? Maybe she worked at McDonalds and it was all just flipping burgers.

Perhaps the assumption that a high count equates to a woman being a better lover, more sexually confident, and generally more sexy, sexual, etc has evolved as a coping mechanism for men to feel better about their partners' high number of other partners. E.g. "I'm happy my wife has explored her sexuality with a lot of other men because she's such a good lover and so confident in her sexuality". I guess there's nothing wrong with that kind of thinking if it makes you feel better but it isn't very logical as the idea that this is a trade-off is nonsense. I think some women do this too - in their minds making their one night stands into some kind of positive sexual expression and exploration. I've done that too at times. Like some drunk guy you just met on top of you in the back seat of his car is some kind of positive sexual exploration! Not saying it can't be but there should be no assumption that it is.

Similar perhaps to the idea that a man with a big penis is not a good lover. Evolved as a coping mantra for smaller men and for women with smaller men E.g. "he's not that big but i'd rather be with a smaller guy who knows how to use it than with a big guy who doesn't!". These are two different attributes and aren't mutually exclusive.

Another one of these is for people who aren't well educated. Like saying educated people lack common sense. "I'd rather have common sense than a lot of education". Like you can't have both (or neither).

Like it's always a trade-off between number of partners and sexual skill, confidence and sexuality. Just my opinion that I don't think it works like that in reality.


----------



## JustTheWife

TJW said:


> I understand perfectly. And, I agree with your form of Christianity in this respect. I have never asked any of my wives any such question. Two of them never "volunteered" information like that, either.
> Because of it, "RJ" has remained a non-issue between us, in both cases.
> 
> RJ was the destruction of my first marriage. I was not a complete virgin (to my shame) but I was not at all experienced, I was 33 at our wedding. She had multiple affairs, but they are not what destroyed our marriage. It was her "openness" about her past and about her affair partner which did it. The RJ was too much, I shunned her and avoided her bed like the plague.
> 
> Some might call me "fragile", I suppose, all I know is that I was sure as hell broken, and failed to recover from it.


People can put whatever label on you like "fragile" or whatever. It doesn't matter. I think that your willingness to admit to yourself and to us how you felt makes you pretty courageous and not fragile at all. All men (and women) have fragilities and the strong ones can be honest about them.

Men are "supposed to" say that the sexual history of their wife or girlfriend doesn't matter one bit. But I think that many who repeat this mantra don't really feel it 100%. Anyway, sexual history is a pretty important part of one's sexuality so how can that "not matter" at all. Doesn't mean you like or not like it but it's an important part of a person.

Anyway, good for you for being honest with yourself and with us.


----------



## TJW

JustTheWife said:


> many who repeat this mantra don't really feel it 100%.


Again, my form of Christianity dictates this "doesn't matter" stance. I fully believe that God is, and was, able to make a successful and happy marriage for both of us. I tried. She didn't.


----------



## davepaul

JustTheWife said:


> Completely agree. I think these are coping mantras.
> 
> A lot of one night stands (for example) does not necessarily develop one's sexuality or skill or lead to a lot of experimentation to see what you like and don't like. Nor does it necessarily make someone more "confident". At the other end of the spectrum, sex for years with one partner (for example) can allow you to get comfortable and experiment more. Likewise, I think that many women are very sexual and explore sex with just their own bodies, possibly learning much more about their own bodies and exploring their sexuality much than someone who just has a lot of one night stands for whatever reason. Or women who have been intimate with guys but saved intercourse for one or two others or no others. Having sexual intercourse with a lot of guys does not necessarily translate into being "more sexual" and in touch with your sexuality, and more skilled than someone with few intercourse partners.
> 
> Maybe someone's wife cooked over 50,000 meals before you met so she must be a great cook, right? Maybe she worked at McDonalds and it was all just flipping burgers.
> 
> Perhaps the assumption that a high count equates to a woman being a better lover, more sexually confident, and generally more sexy, sexual, etc has evolved as a coping mechanism for men to feel better about their partners' high number of other partners. E.g. "I'm happy my wife has explored her sexuality with a lot of other men because she's such a good lover and so confident in her sexuality". I guess there's nothing wrong with that kind of thinking if it makes you feel better but it isn't very logical as the idea that this is a trade-off is nonsense. I think some women do this too - in their minds making their one night stands into some kind of positive sexual expression and exploration. I've done that too at times. Like some drunk guy you just met on top of you in the back seat of his car is some kind of positive sexual exploration! Not saying it can't be but there should be no assumption that it is.
> 
> Similar perhaps to the idea that a man with a big penis is not a good lover. Evolved as a coping mantra for smaller men and for women with smaller men E.g. "he's not that big but i'd rather be with a smaller guy who knows how to use it than with a big guy who doesn't!". These are two different attributes and aren't mutually exclusive.
> 
> Another one of these is for people who aren't well educated. Like saying educated people lack common sense. "I'd rather have common sense than a lot of education". Like you can't have both (or neither).
> 
> Like it's always a trade-off between number of partners and sexual skill, confidence and sexuality. Just my opinion that I don't think it works like that in reality.



You make excellent points. The assumption that there is always a trade off between experience and skill is not always so, and in fact many times is probably not. A high number of partners and experience does not necessarily equate with being a great lover, nor does a low number equate with being sexually inept. Though my wife slept with a lot of men, I don't necessarily feel that alone is why she is a great lover. I'm sure she would be amazing even if she had only slept with a few boyfriends, but I also have no issue with the fact that she had one-night stands, too.


----------



## Marduk

What I usually did when dating and before (or soon thereafter) having sex was to have a fairly upfront conversation about general themes.

After living sexless with someone that wasn’t into me, or wasn’t into sex while in a relationship, it was fairly top of mind.

I’d ask things like “how important is sex to you?” or “what does it mean to have a sexual connection or chemistry?” Things like that. Not “I’m into X, are you?” but more like where it fits in the relationship.

It helped me understand a few things. Like with one woman I was dating, a day or two after we had just started fooling around, I asked her stuff like that and she actually told me that she didn’t think sex was important in long term relationships. Which was weird, because she was the sexually aggressive one. But I ended it right away after hearing that.

Another one told me that she refused to do certain things. I ended things right away then as well, not because of those particular things, but because it was very much a sense of closed thinking about sex.

Another one told me that sex should be a priority, and something that needs to be fostered and flourish throughout long relationships, amongst other things. I married that one.


----------



## Talker67

Why?
its a frigin jungle out there. A man usually has a larger portion of the responsibility to provide for the family thrust onto his shoulders. He has to APPEAR to be handling it at work and in public. In the privacy of his own home, he probably needs to let the defensive facade down


----------



## VibrantWings

Talker67 said:


> Why?
> its a frigin jungle out there. A man usually has a larger portion of the responsibility to provide for the family thrust onto his shoulders. He has to APPEAR to be handling it at work and in public. In the privacy of his own home, he probably needs to let the defensive facade down


Single mom here laughing her ass off....that is all.


----------



## Livvie

VibrantWings said:


> Single mom here laughing her ass off....that is all.


Haaa same here!


----------



## plastow

Cletus said:


> If I have to read another retroactive jealousy thread I'm going to scream.
> 
> When did men become so fragile? Why is the male ego apparently so obsessed with our standing in our lover's past, or with our size and performance? For someone trying to be the "best" his partner has ever had, I cannot think of anything much more irritating to an SO than having to support this constant insecurity. It is the precise opposite of "sexy".
> 
> It seems so transparently counter-productive.


in a word emancipation of women, women have become aggressive which in turn has made men less confident.


----------



## MattMatt

Zombie thread identified by Zombie Cat and closed.


----------

