# Can anybody find me somebody to love?



## misslonelyheart

Please ignore the corny music references it's just something I do.:grin2:

Found this site googling relationship advice. Been lurking here for a while but here goes with my first post.

I'm 28 years old. Never been married. Can't seem to make it to the altar. My relationship history over the past decade:

1. High school boyfriend from age 15 to 19. This guy was my brother's best friend. 3 years older than me. We got engaged when I was 18 and were planning on getting married as soon as I finished college. Everyone thought we were the perfect couple including me. Then he 'found' his dream when he got scouted by a minor league baseball team. Got sent out of state for a few weeks. Met a girl who was a real life Sports Illustrated Swimsuit model and hooked up with her. Came home and dumped me. After 4 years together, I'm suddenly not exciting enough, not attractive enough, not sexy enough. He's now married to a red-headed bombshell and they have 2 year old twins. (In case anyone is wondering he never did make it to the majors.)

2. Second boyfriend met about a year later. He was almost 5 years older than me. We were together for 2 years. I was CRAZY about him and really thought he felt the same way. Once again, we got engaged and made plans to marry as soon as we graduated. He went home to Texas for Christmas, called and told me he had met someone else and on the flight home no less. He actually said he loved me more but she "fit his lifestyle" better. Apparently I was 'too independent' for him - I wanted a career and she was happy to be a stay at home wife/mom. Well he had never told me that was what he wanted. Hell I didn't think any men wanted that anymore. He married her only 3 months later. It just about killed me. Now they're expecting their first child and it still hurts. I keep thinking that should have been me.

3 and 4 - co-workers at the job where I worked to put myself through college. Chefs in the restaurant where I was a server. Both relationships lasted about a year. Second one started about 3 months after the first one ended - in fact the first guy introduced me to the second guy. Both left me for the same reason - they got better jobs out of state. Neither of them invited me to go with them. It was pretty obvious I cared more about them than either one of them cared about me.

5th - another co-worker (another restaurant). Dated for about 4 months. Was really starting to care A LOT about this guy we had a ton in common and he just made me feel really really good just being with him. One day our boss took me aside and asked me what my involvement was with him. Proceeded to tell me the guy had 3 kids with 3 different women and that he was still living with the mother of the youngest kid. Apparently I being groomed to be his next in line. Broke up with him and quit working there on the same day. Couldn't believe I had been so foolish/naive as to have been the 'other woman' and not even suspected it.

Finished my Master's degree last spring. Got a "real" job working as a librarian/computer teacher in my local elementary school. My niece and nephew go to school there so it's pretty cool working there. There's this one teacher there, he's 32, single, really nice, good looking. He made it pretty obvious he was interested in me right from the beginning. Then after we had gone out a few times, he basically friend-zoned me. Said it wasn't working for him on a romantic level so he wanted to just be friends. Now I have to work with the guy on a daily basis and I was really starting to like him so it hurts. Not to mention I thought we had some serious chemistry kissing him was absolutely amazing. He's now dating the divorced mother of one of our students.

The only other guy I ever dated 3+ times was from my church and he got back together with his ex and that was the end of that.

I feel like the girl who is nothing more than a placeholder until a guy finds another person (or place) in his life where he would rather be. I'm actually still Facebook friends with all these guys except the married one and the cheating ***. What's wrong with me that I can't seem to be the one who wins the guy for good?

I'm attractive enough - at least I think I am - 5'4", about 110 pounds, dark blonde, pixie-ish hair and face, been told I look kind of like a cross between Shailene Woody and a young Meg Ryan. I don't think I come across as desperate. I have plenty of friends of both sexes and my guy friends flirt with me a lot. I have a BA and an MLIS degree, I'm something of a geek, I love doing active things outdoors and going to concerts. I think I have a good sense of humor. My self-esteem is pretty good except, nowadays, where guys are concerned. I date fairly regularly, mostly guys I meet through church, work, or volunteering. I won't do casual sex, and refuse to get physical until a relationship seems to be getting serious, and that's the only thing I can figure is keeping my relationships from lasting. If that's the case, I guess I'm destined to be alone, because it's not something I'm willing to compromise on.

I'm reaching a point where I've been burned and hurt so much I'm almost afraid to try again now anyway. I never imagined I'd be pushing 30 and still single. I can't help but be depressed. I know I'm still fairly young but I feel like such a failure when it comes to relationships. I can't help but think this is the way the rest of my life is going to be. Girlfriend material but apparently not wife material. I just wish I knew why.


----------



## SunCMars

I am old enough to be your Grandfather and I am baffled, also.

This is odd....I do the baffling.

The waiting on the sex thing is part of it. Don't change.

Ask some of your close friends, both male and female. Get their opinion on what it is "about you" that is not conducive to LTR's. You will have to swallow your pride to do this...so what.

If I may, can I guess, are you intense? Clingy? You mentioned nerdy.

***When you get together with men do you only talk about you? You may be so into your own self and problems, that you bore these guys.... you drive men away. 

The fix: Talk about them, their feelings, their needs, thoughts. Sneak yours in quietly and not often. 

Be aloof and mysterious. 

Friendly is good.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Intense? I suppose when I'm talking about the things I consider my "issues" (education and the environment) I probably can get intense sometimes. 

Clingy? Just the opposite I would say. I'm extremely independent.

As far as dating, I prefer active dates involving "adventures" - hiking on rough terrain, rock climbing, white water rafting- or sports events - either as spectator or participant - or music - concerts or musical dramas. I don't enjoy things like movies or dinners that are the entire date. I pretty much only get involved with guys I already know are as physically active as I am. I don't tend to talk a lot on my dates but neither do they. The guy I talked to the most was my 2nd fiancé we were so incredibly compatible in every way I thought so it was a shock when he left me for a more traditional stay at home wife type girl. We used to have these ridiculously long conversations about anything and everything. We joked that they were our "philosophical discussions."

A lot of my interests could be considered more masculine than feminine I suppose - sports, cars, computers, rock concerts. Sometimes I do wonder if over the long term my lack of femininity is a turn off. I mean, I'm the kind of girl who won't wear a dress unless I have absolutely no choice. My favorite outfit is ripped jeans, a sports logo shirt, and actual Army issue combat boots. Almost my entire wardrobe comes from the men's department or the Army Navy store. I'm still a tomboy at 28 and proud of it. I can throw a perfect 50 yard spiral pass and a 60 mph fast ball and I've driven my car at 130 mph on the local race track during open driving day.

Unfortunately I know there are people who think I'm gay because of it but I can assure you I have no sexual or romantic interest in other women. In fact I don't even have a lot of female friends because I don't have much in common with other women. I don't care about fashion or celebrity gossip and honestly if I'm going to go out with friends for the night it's probably going to be with a group of guys. Maybe that's it I suppose. Maybe I keep getting friend zoned because I act too much like just another one of the guys. But that's who I am and I don't want to have to pretend to be something I'm not (or deny who I am) to succeed in a relationship.


----------



## Evinrude58

My suggestion. Don't change a darn thing about yourself and wait until a man comes along that loves you as much as you deserve. He will.
You sound awesome to me. Really a cool lady.
You've just been lucky and found out these guys are jerks BEFORE you got married to them.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Nomorebeans

Were we separated at birth?

I've always been a tomboy, but one who is only into guys. I grew up with two older brothers and no sisters. My brothers all but raised me from the age of 5 to 13, because our Mom was an alcoholic, and not a functioning one during those years.

I've always related better to boys and men than to girls and women. I frankly don't get women most of the time.

At 23, I'd had a similar experience to yours - serially monogamous with boys/men who'd ultimately marry the next girl they dated after me. Had that happen three times in a row, and thought that's all I was, too - a stepping stone to the right girl. Practice.

Then, I met my now ex-husband. He was handsome and charming, and recently divorced from a woman who cheated on him. I was married to him for 25 years, and we have a 14-year-old son. He left me for another woman last May. 

Two things I'm trying to say, here:

Don't define your worth by whether you're with someone or not. You can be with someone for more than half your life and come to find that you would have been better off alone.

Don't blame yourself for others' lack of judgment. It's truly not you - it's them. There are hetero guys out there who can appreciate a woman just as she is and be true to her. I didn't have one like that, it turns out, but I still believe they're out there.


----------



## Evinrude58

Btw, I'm a biologist and a believer in nature vs nurture, so I'm hearing about these 50 yd passes and 60 mph fastballs and I'm thinking, gee whiz, this lady would be dynamite mother material. There will be a guy that comes along that appreciates those things like I do--- I'm not that rare.😋
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SunCMars

You answered your own post and handily I might add. 

You scare them off...emasculate them. Not feminine enough. Oh well.Tough sh*t.

You are Red Sonya. Find Conan the Barbarian. 

Ditch the suit and tie guys. Look in the military footlocker.

You are a one-per-center for sure!

Show or invent a soft side. A Janus head, a Chimera; Amelia Earhart prima fascia, Florence Nightingale flip side. 

Good luck!


----------



## EleGirl

misslonelyheart said:


> Unfortunately I know there are people who think I'm gay because of it but I can assure you I have no sexual or romantic interest in other women. In fact I don't even have a lot of female friends because I don't have much in common with other women. I don't care about fashion or celebrity gossip and honestly if I'm going to go out with friends for the night it's probably going to be with a group of guys. Maybe that's it I suppose. Maybe I keep getting friend zoned because I act too much like just another one of the guys. But that's who I am and I don't want to have to pretend to be something I'm not (or deny who I am) to succeed in a relationship.


There's your answer right there. You are one of the guys.. maybe even competing with them to see who is more of a guy. As long as you are one of the guys, you are less likely to find a guy who sees you as a romantic interest.

Your description of yourself will be a turn off (romantically) to a lot of guys since most men seem to prefer women who look feminine, who act feminine, etc.

I'm not saying that you need to change. But you need to find a way to differentiate yourself more as a desireable woman and as one of the guys.

.


----------



## MattMatt

I would suggest a life coach and counselling.

Learn about you before you learn about men. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## misslonelyheart

Being feminine is really hard for me. I am the only girl in a household of 6 boys, and we had 5 more boys (my cousins) in the house next door. In fact on my dad's side I am the first girl in 4 generations. I learned very quickly that I had to do boy things if I wanted to have playmates since I had no female cousins. I don't recall playing with other girls until I started school. And my brothers are what you would call manly men - 5 out of 6 of them are in the military (like my dad was, I'm a Navy brat) and the 6th is a missionary in the Australian outback. I never really learned how to be a girl although my mother certainly tried she gave up by the time I was about 10. I would have gone in the Navy myself but I failed the physical due to childhood asthma I have since outgrown.

Don't understand the recommendation for a life coach? I know who I am and what I want, more than a lot of people my age I think. I have a great job I love, lots of activities outside of work, plenty of friends. But I want love, and I want children. I love kids which is why I went into the world of elementary education. I babysit, I work in the church nursery, and every time I hold somebody else's baby I dream of having one of my own. And I watch all my friends, both male and female, pair off, get married, buy houses, have babies. While I get left behind. It's starting to really get to me. Our pastor told me maybe God is calling me to be single and all I could think was how cruel would that be to give me this huge desire for a family if I'm never going to have one.


----------



## joannacroc

Oh honey. You're 28. You have time. You need a mug of cocoa and a hug.

I love that you don't conform to traditional gender stereotypes. The right guy will appreciate that about you. This is totally anecdotal, but I have noticed that wearing heels or a dress on a first date generally gets me a second date more often. If you don't want to wear a dress or heels, though, I totally respect that. It's your choice. You shouldn't pretend to be someone you're not.

I would focus more on finding someone who shares the same VALUES as you, rather than all the same INTERESTS. Another poster on TAM made this distinction. It means maybe finding someone who likes one or two of the same hobbies (hiking OR concerts for example), but more importantly is looking for the same things in life as you - kids, a family, but who will respect that you want to keep your career. When you have conversations about the women in his life, his mother, sister, boss, whatever, pay attention to how he talks about them. A lot of guys will give you clues that what they really want is a SAHM as their wife. That's not what you want. Move on. Plenty of folks on TAM thought they wanted a SAHM as a wife when they married and now are unhappy at the dynamic it creates. Stick to your guns. 

In the end, you dodged a bullet, because none of those guys wanted the same things as you. Have you been upfront about what you want early on? I know it's really uncomfortable, but sometimes it's best to know early on that the guy you're dating doesn't want kids, or wants a woman who is all about the home life and doesn't want to work.


----------



## misslonelyheart

SunCMars I had to laugh at your comment about the military footlocker, considering my family background. And actually, my first ex from high school ended up in the National Guard after his short lived baseball career ended. My 2nd ex is now a pastor so I can definitely see where that would never have worked out. Followed by 3 chefs (there's something about a chef's uniform that I find really sexy), a teacher, and 3 dates with a small engine mechanic who did nothing but talk about the ex wife he finally hooked back up with.

So I have to wonder if I am an alpha female should I be looking for "super" alpha guys who won't be intimidated by me, or obviously beta guys who prefer stronger women? I kind of think I would end up having trouble respecting the latter.

I'm thinking of applying for a summer job at some kind of adventure camp. I would think the guys at a place like that might be a good match. Or maybe volunteering on a mission trip someplace not quite "safe", like my cousin who went to Kenya a few years back. Maybe I could spend the summer with my brother in Australia or in Hawaii with my brother who is stationed at Pearl Harbor. It's becoming pretty clear that I'm probably not going to find the right type of guy for me here at home. Of course if I meet the right guy in one of those places, I might very well end up not coming home.


----------



## arbitrator

*If I weren't two years older than "King Tut," I'd ask you out!

Just keep on being yourself and who you are, @misslonelyheart ~ don't change a thing! And never compromise your principles just to attract somebody! That would be counterproductive for both you and them! 

You will eventually find Mr. Right!*
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SimplyAmorous

joannacroc said:


> Oh honey. You're 28. You have time. You need a mug of cocoa and a hug.
> 
> I love that you don't conform *to traditional gender stereotypes*. The right guy will appreciate that about you. This is totally anecdotal, but I have noticed that wearing heels or a dress on a first date generally gets me a second date more often. If you don't want to wear a dress or heels, though, I totally respect that. It's your choice. You shouldn't pretend to be someone you're not.


 BUt BUT BUT... consider this... it's more the Traditional type males who still hold on to these gender stereotypes.. they prefer them !... Also, these men are more likely to still care about Marriage & having kids... where many men just DON'T.. that's the world we live in...

Such men are slowly dying in our society...just as marriage is.. it makes sense to me that they would more so be seeking out the "feminine types"..


----------



## Big Tree

arbitrator said:


> *If I weren't two years older than "King Tut," I'd ask you out!
> 
> Just keep on being yourself and who you are, @misslonelyheart ~ don't change a thing! And never compromise your principles just to attract somebody! That would be counterproductive for both you and them!
> 
> You will eventually find Mr. Right!*
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



Totally agree. You have the characteristics that I find attractive in my wife. You sound like a catch. Don't change a thing. Be patient and good luck.


----------



## TX-SC

I think you should be yourself and don't worry over it. I was 27 when I got married, so not too far from where you are. Heck, if you can make it to 32 or 33, that's a good marrying age. As for why guys don't stick around, that's easy enough: you haven't found the right one yet! Just give it more time.


----------



## jorgegene

yup, don't change a thing.


----------



## SunCMars

Join the Army Reserves or the Army National Guard. The Army Reserve will likely have the position that you need. See below:

Take your time in picking the appropriate unit. Go for a combat-arms position not a support unit. The support units contain the same mix [of personality types} that you find in society at large.

The combat units will have more tigers.

Another good choice would be a Military Police unit. The only downside to this choice would be frequent deployments and slow promotions. If you have a college degree you can later go to OCS and become an officer. I would recommend this highly, in any unit that you join. Do not wait...they have age restrictions on getting in and age restrictions on getting into OCS. Officer Candidate School.

Do NOT mention that you have asthma or were rejected in the past for this. Do not say anything. They will not know. Get in top shape before enlisting. Do a lot of running, sprints and long runs, pushups and sit-ups.

Again, pick your unit carefully...combat arms is where you need to be!


----------



## Celes

Here's the thing. You can take everyone's advice and stay as you are. But also understand that you're shrinking the size of your dating pool considerably. Majority of men have a preference for feminine women. Especially the "alpha" ones that you like. You're also approaching 30, shrinking your dating pool even more. 

Or you can try and make some slight changes. Stay who you are at your core but maybe change the package so to say. Men are visual. Grow out your hair and wear better, form fitting clothes. You can still keep the same interests and look good too. I understand how you are because I'm not a typical girly girl either. I hate celebrity gossip and the Bachelor. But you don't have to dress like a boy too. You don't have to dress like a fashionista either, just pick out clothes that accentuate your figure.


----------



## Herschel

What about online? Did I miss that part? Seriously, it's better than hopefully finding someone randomly and you can get much more information from them.

Skip the sex sites like POF and match. The dudes on there are douches and the chicks are *****s (ok, obviously not all, but the effort it takes to sort them out is too much).

The best type of site, in my honest opinion, is eharmony. Nothing more than the barrier to entry. If a guy is willing to answer all those questions and work through the whole process (though they do let you skip by it I think now), you know he is at least serious. Just be open minded as not everyone is perfect, but almost everyone has something to offer.


----------



## misslonelyheart

This is the girl that I have been told numerous times that I look like ever since the Divergent movie came out. Same basic hairstyle. Even dressed a lot like I do for work. Based on what I've read about her we have personality similarities as well. Guys are crazy about this girl based on high school locker pinups where I work. Then again I have no problem finding guys - just keeping them interested long term.


----------



## Thor

misslonelyheart said:


> As far as dating, I prefer active dates involving "adventures" - hiking on rough terrain, rock climbing, white water rafting- or sports events - either as spectator or participant - or music - concerts or musical dramas.
> .
> .
> ,
> A lot of my interests could be considered more masculine than feminine I suppose - sports, cars, computers, rock concerts. Sometimes I do wonder if over the long term my lack of femininity is a turn off. I mean, I'm the kind of girl who won't wear a dress unless I have absolutely no choice. My favorite outfit is ripped jeans, a sports logo shirt, and actual Army issue combat boots. Almost my entire wardrobe comes from the men's department or the Army Navy store. I'm still a tomboy at 28 and proud of it. I can throw a perfect 50 yard spiral pass and a 60 mph fast ball and I've driven my car at 130 mph on the local race track during open driving day.


If I were half my age, you'd be perfect for me!

Ok, so here is my opinion and advice.

1) Learn to have a feminine side. All those activities really are excellent, and if you enjoy them there is no reason to change. Read "5 Love Languages". Most men are high on the Quality Time, and so they would bond and enjoy spending time with you doing those adventurous activities. But, men still want a woman who can rock a tight dress and tasteful makeup sometimes. Relationships need a polarity, with both a masculine and a feminine. Don't be afraid to be feminine. Don't be afraid to let the man lead.

2) I see some red flags in your relationship history. Dating older guys when you were in your teens, and then getting engaged young, twice. I'm not a shrink but this looks like you have some emotional issues probably from growing up. Abandonment maybe, or some other traumas. Maybe you tend towards codependent relationships. Anyhow, I think you may have something to work through. Some kind of counselor is what I would advise for you. No you don't have to be crazy to see a counselor! Your job may offer you Employee Assistance Program which is free and totally confidential. Your employer will never know you went. Or you can find a counselor/therapist on your own. Your health insurance may pay for it. 

3) When men get married they are looking for probably 3 major things. One is they want to make their girlfriend a permanent situation. So they are looking for things to stay the same. They don't want you to suddenly become matronly. They want the spark and fun to continue. Another thing they are looking for is a stable family situation. This means they have to picture you as the mother of their children. I'm presuming you want children and the men you've seriously dated or become engaged to have said they want kids too. The third thing they are looking for is presentability. Basically they want to be proud of you.

So to put it all together, I think you need to work on having that feminine side. It's already there inside you, so let it come out sometimes. Let the man lead sometimes. Expand your wardrobe to include a number of more feminine items. Even if it is still slacks and a shirt, make sure they are women's clothes that show off your feminine curves. Make friends with a Mary Kaye consultant and learn how to do makeup both subtle for casual events and more sexy for the occasional hot date. Cultivate a bit of a domestic side. Men usually have a need in a marriage for what is called "domestic support". That means the woman takes charge of the domestics. He can certainly do his share of the labors, but men tend to look to women to know how and what to do domestically. What kind of cleaner should I buy for the kitchen counter? How often should I wash the sheets? A potential husband probably had a mother who was competent at putting together a weekly meal menu or baking cupcakes. Again, this doesn't mean you are expected to do all the work, just that as a potential mother you look better if you have this domestic knowledge. Men are generally expected to know about cars, lawnmowers, and cutting branches off of trees. So, be aware of the basic cultural roles that are programmed into our brains.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
Just my thoughts / questions.

You see like a great person, and people seem attracted to you, then over a long time lose interest. (I'd date you if I weren't married and I were a lot younger) The following are just questions - I'm not accusing / blaming, just trying to learn more. 

You say you wait until a relationship is serious before having sex. Have things started to fall apart after you started sleeping with your boyfriend, or before?

Are you in any way clingy, dependent, nagging, demanding, etc? (I'm NOT saying you are, but think through your behavior and see if anything might fit).

Are you easily made jealous - based on your relationship history you might well be.



It may just be a string of bad luck, and the next person you meet might be perfect.


----------



## misslonelyheart

No, no real emotional issues. Moved a lot due to being a Navy brat but spent my high school years living with my grands because my parents wanted me to do all of high school in one place. If anything just kind of spoiled by being the youngest and only girl in a household with 6 boys.

My boyfriends weren't that much older. At 15 my BF was 18. At 21 I was dating a 25 year old. The next two guys were actually younger than me. My parents are almost 10 years apart and they've been happily married for almost 50 years. She was 19 and he was 29 when they met and married. I do realize that was another generation.

I'm actually surprisingly domestic. I've had to be to help my mom take care of 6 boys. I was helping around the house by the time I was 4. Now I live with and help care for my grandparents who are in their 80s. Actually home is the only place I really have a feminine side. My entire room is decorated with pastel roses and has a very country Victorian theme. And I love it that way. But as far as wardrobe, I can't stand looking girly. I think maybe because when I was a kid my brothers would tease me about being a princess if I dressed up. So I stopped. I feel stupid in dresses. I also feel stupid in figure hugging clothing because I have no chest or butt to speak of. Athletic girls often don't develop much of a figure. I have visibly toned arms and legs and a great six pack but almost no curves at all. I don't even need a bra except for during sports. I WON'T wear high heels - last time I did I fell, broke my ankle, and missed an entire winter's skiing. Never again. My idea of REALLY dressing up - like for a ****tail party - would be a woman's cut tuxedo - that look I definitely go for. I suppose I could "feminize" it with a black skirt instead of slacks. I literally only wear dresses for weddings. I guess I could consider letting my hair grow to my shoulders. Any longer than that and it gets in my way. But my pixie cut gets me a ton of compliments and suits my face so I'm not really sure I want to change it. I really don't WANT to change ME at all. I LIKE who I am. Very much so. I'm starting to think maybe I'm better off staying alone if guys can't accept me just the way I am. Just me and my still single youngest brother and our numerous pets. LOL.


----------



## norajane

I think your picker is broken. The men you are falling for are not right for you, and you aren't right for them - that's why the broken engagements and dead-ends. You don't break up with anybody (except the guy with 3 baby mamas, but even then, your boss had to tell you about it). All the others have broken up with you, which means you aren't seeing how they're wrong for you before that.

You aren't old, and you have plenty of time to develop a relationship with someone who is crazy about you. However, you have to start thinking about what kind of man would be right for you, and then WEED OUT THE ONES WHO AREN'T THAT. 

Don't just date whoever asks because of proximity (guys you work with), or only guys who you're crazy about right away (that's infatuation, and not a sign of forever-type compatibility). Don't date someone for years without knowing what their plans are for their own future (like, that they could move away at any moment for the right job).

Get involved with something other than work, and meet people that way. Whether that is something sporty, or a wine tasting club, or volunteer work...whatever is important to you and you enjoy is where you will meet kindred spirits. 

And while you're doing those activities, make some friends with women. You can hang with your guy friends all you like, but they won't marry you and they won't introduce you to someone who will marry you. You are in their friendzone. Women friends can give you some guidance when you do start dating someone as to whether that guy is actually a good person for you, or whether you are accommodating them more than they are enhancing your life.


----------



## EleGirl

misslonelyheart said:


> In fact I don't even have a lot of female friends because I don't have much in common with other women. I don't care about fashion or celebrity gossip and honestly if .


I agree that you would benefit from a life coach. 

The above comment shows that you have no idea what being "famine" is all about. It's NOT about fashion and celebrity gossip. That view of "famine" is sort of insulting really.

Just using myself as an example.. I have always been very 'feminine'. But I have always also liked all the things that you like. 

Growing up I hated things like Barbie dolls and the nonsense that is pushed on girls... these things are not famine, they are things that toys companies heavily market for girls to make them big money. And for some dumb reason many people seem to take the bait hook line and sinker. I hate celebrity gossip, Barbie dolls, most 'chick flicks' are boring.

I do like to dress nicely as I grew up in a time when that's what everyone did.. unlike today. 

But I am also an engineer (male career field) and was in the Army.

Liking the things you like does not have to mean that you are not feminine. 
You posted a picture of Shailene Woodley. She’s extremely feminine in appearance. It is just her features that are like yours? Do you dress like her? Do you carry yourself like she does? 

You say that most people probably think that you are gay. If most people probably think that you are gay, I get the impression that you have a more butch appearance. That might be turning guys off.

It would not be hard to make just a few minor changes to your appearance to have a feminine, but tom boyish, look. I agree with the other poster that a life coach could help you figure out what those few tweaks are that you could make.

I also agree with other posters that you sound like a very good catch… a good, strong woman who is very active and who enjoys a lot of good, healthy things in life. But you also sound like you are not really putting portraying who you really are to the men you meet. Your tom boy side is not the only side of yourself; there is also your female (feminine) side that you seem to have not even explored as of yet. But none of us are perfect. There is not one person on this earth would not benefit from a few tweaks to their appearance and the way they interact with people.

A life coach could also help you come up with a good online dating profile that would help you attract guys who would be very interested in a gal like you.

Also, you are no longer a girl. You are woman. You might want to start calling yourself what you really are now.


----------



## GuyInColorado

Grow your hair out.... *most* men don't like short hair. That's all I got for you


----------



## misslonelyheart

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> 
> You say you wait until a relationship is serious before having sex. Have things started to fall apart after you started sleeping with your boyfriend, or before?
> 
> Are you in any way clingy, dependent, nagging, demanding, etc? (I'm NOT saying you are, but think through your behavior and see if anything might fit).
> 
> Are you easily made jealous - based on your relationship history you might well be.


1. I've only ever gone "all the way" with my high school boyfriend, and that was after we were engaged, so only the last year of the relationship. And only with him a few times, because he pressured me (if you really loved me you would kind of thing). Never past 3rd base with any of the others. 2nd fiance was very religious and didn't believe in sex outside of marriage. Never had another relationship last long enough for me to be willing to go that far. Maybe if I had things might have been different. But I was raised to believe that "nice" girls didn't have sex without at least an engagement ring on their finger. Preferably a wedding ring. My family is pretty conservative. So yeah, crazy as it sounds, I'm 28 and I haven't had "home run" sex since I was 19. I kind of think that's what scared the teacher away, b/c I made the mistake of telling him after we'd been seeing each other for about 3 months.

2. I really don't think so. I think I'm more likely to be just the opposite of those things. I suppose what i would consider my most negative trait from a guy's point of view might be my competitiveness. I hate to lose, at least when it comes to sports. And I can get more than a little b*tchy when I'm really bored. I won't tend to stay somewhere or continue doing something for very long if I'm not having a good time. For example I might go to a wedding but skip the reception because there's something else I'd rather be doing. I've had a few friends call me out on that one and I do realize it's rude. I just have a hard time sitting still. It's why I like working with kids - I GET them better than a lot of adults who have completely outgrown their "figity" behavior. Right now I'm stuck at home due to a snow day and if it weren't for my computer I'd be going stir crazy about now. It's too cold even for skiing and the roads are a mess here.

3. Jealousy problems are NOT my thing. I don't feel like I "need" a man or a relationship - I'd simply like to have one. If a guy doesn't want to be with me then the heck with him. The only women I can recall ever being jealous of are the ones my 2 ex-fiances married. And that's only because they ended up with the 2 men I really truly loved. And that's not even really jealousy so much as envy. Especially of their kids.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
you sound like a wonderful person.

One thing though is that in the modern world many people expect sex much earlier in relationships than they did in the past. IMHO its fine for people to want sex. Its also find for people not to want it. But - incompatibility can be a big problem. 

I think sex needs to be discussed early in a relationship. Its so critical to happiness - my 30 year marriage is wonderful except for our sexual incompatibility - but that "one" problem has been a source of a lot of unhappiness.

You need to find partners who are happy to wait for sex. You also need people who's long term sexual interests are compatible with yours. 

If sex is not a critically important part of a relationship for you, that is fine, but you need to find someone like-minded.

For people for whom sex is important, I think its important to learn early about their partner's interests. If one person wants wine and romance, and the other likes whips and handcuffs, it won't work out well. I think some people are very reluctant to stay in a long relationship without sex - for fear that once they are committed, they will discover an insurmountable incompatibility. 


Again, you need to live your life in a way that you think is right and which makes you happy. But you also need to be realistic and understand that many people will not think the same way and that you need to be sure everyone is on the same page. 







misslonelyheart said:


> 1. I've only ever gone "all the way" with my high school boyfriend, and that was after we were engaged, so only the last year of the relationship. And only with him a few times, because he pressured me (if you really loved me you would kind of thing). Never past 3rd base with any of the others. 2nd fiance was very religious and didn't believe in sex outside of marriage. Never had another relationship last long enough for me to be willing to go that far. Maybe if I had things might have been different. But I was raised to believe that "nice" girls didn't have sex without at least an engagement ring on their finger. Preferably a wedding ring. My family is pretty conservative. So yeah, crazy as it sounds, I'm 28 and I haven't had "home run" sex since I was 19. I kind of think that's what scared the teacher away, b/c I made the mistake of telling him after we'd been seeing each other for about 3 months.
> 
> 2. I really don't think so. I think I'm more likely to be just the opposite of those things. I suppose what i would consider my most negative trait from a guy's point of view might be my competitiveness. I hate to lose, at least when it comes to sports. And I can get more than a little b*tchy when I'm really bored. I won't tend to stay somewhere or continue doing something for very long if I'm not having a good time. For example I might go to a wedding but skip the reception because there's something else I'd rather be doing. I've had a few friends call me out on that one and I do realize it's rude. I just have a hard time sitting still. It's why I like working with kids - I GET them better than a lot of adults who have completely outgrown their "figity" behavior. Right now I'm stuck at home due to a snow day and if it weren't for my computer I'd be going stir crazy about now. It's too cold even for skiing and the roads are a mess here.
> 
> 3. Jealousy problems are NOT my thing. I don't feel like I "need" a man or a relationship - I'd simply like to have one. If a guy doesn't want to be with me then the heck with him. The only women I can recall ever being jealous of are the ones my 2 ex-fiances married. And that's only because they ended up with the 2 men I really truly loved. And that's not even really jealousy so much as envy. Especially of their kids.


----------



## Luvher4life

Do you clean up nice? When I ask you this, it's because, sometimes men are a little turned off by women who can emasculate them, or who dress more like a guy. When dating, do you dress like a lady, or just one of the guys?

Can you be yourself, and still be lady-like? For the most part, men are usually more attracted to women who show at least some vulnerability, and from what you've posted it doesn't sound like you've shown that side of you to the right person.

In any case, be patient. The right person, who can appreciate you for who you are, will come along. Just don't be pushy, don't be afraid to show at least a little vulnerability, and try dressing a little more lady-like if you haven't been.

FWIW, I was 35 years old before I got married. I was definitely looking in all the wrong places. One day I just said I'm not looking anymore, and if it happens, it happens. Sure enough, a few months later I met by wife, had two daughters along the way, and I couldn't be happier, even after almost 19-1/2 years.


----------



## 2&out

OMG - join the Army... LOL. The ARMY !! LOLOL. If you like a real challenge then maybe that's the place ! Because SO MANY quality guys join the Army ! LOL. 

Sounds like you are pretty fine as is. About the only thing I'd suggest is broaden your social circle so you meet more people.


----------



## primavera

As a starting point I'd really recommend unfriending your exes on social media. How can you properly move on when you're constantly seeing pictures of their wives and kids and happy family life? Facebook only ever shows an edited, picture-perfect version, and it can be hard not to make comparisons - especially when they seem to have everything you want.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone

Bah, it always irritates me when people tell women to be more feminine, let the man lead, and chastize her for being emasculating. Blah, blah, blech.

Sorry, OP, that is not too helpful. Truth is that much of this advice is true enough, most men are very easily emasculated, and prefer women to be submissive, admiring, and "feminine".

It's a real pain when you are *not* that way, and are basically always being told to be someone else to be considered desirable. (Ask me how I know!)

But, in the end, there are actually all kinds of guys with all kinds of interests. So I would be inclined to listen to those who see you as just fine the way you are, and work on your picker. When you have smaller pool to work with, it will take longer to find the right match, but it surely can be done. 

I know plenty of tomboy, hates dresses and heels, competitive women in perfectly fine relationships.


----------



## Thor

To barge in on your reply to someone else...



misslonelyheart said:


> 1. I've only ever gone "all the way" with my high school boyfriend, and that was after we were engaged, so only the last year of the relationship. And only with him a few times, because he pressured me (if you really loved me you would kind of thing). Never past 3rd base with any of the others. 2nd fiance was very religious and didn't believe in sex outside of marriage. Never had another relationship last long enough for me to be willing to go that far. Maybe if I had things might have been different. But I was raised to believe that "nice" girls didn't have sex without at least an engagement ring on their finger. Preferably a wedding ring. My family is pretty conservative. So yeah, crazy as it sounds, I'm 28 and I haven't had "home run" sex since I was 19. I kind of think that's what scared the teacher away, b/c I made the mistake of telling him after we'd been seeing each other for about 3 months.


I promise you there are many men who would admire you for this. But here's the caveat - they would also worry about being sexually compatible. They would wonder if you really like sex much at all, and if the marriage would become sexless.

In my *opinion*, waiting until you're engaged is problematic because of those worries. The way to mitigate that may be to look on a Christian oriented dating site. Or, come to another threshold which you are comfortable with where you are willing and happy to have sex prior to engagement.




misslonelyheart said:


> 2. I really don't think so. I think I'm more likely to be just the opposite of those things. I suppose what i would consider my most negative trait from a guy's point of view might be my competitiveness. I hate to lose, at least when it comes to sports.


This is where some of the feminine may be needed. You grew up around boys and the military culture. I bet there was a definite pack hierarchy in your family, and it was based on physical and sports achievement. But not everything is "winning". When you go skiing with a guy, you can beat him to the bottom and call it a win. But to him it may feel pretty bad if you're always beating him. I taught my wife to ski. I was on the college ski team. Within a couple of years she became a better skier than me in the trees and bumps. But we never competed in those things. We just skied together and it was tons of fun. When we rock climbed it was together, not a competition to see who could do the harder line or get to the top faster. Be sure you aren't making all your together activities into competitions.

Let the man lead some. Let him choose the next ski run or the next line up the rock face. Don't control everything. Let him pick the kind of restaurant you go to. That kind of stuff.


A relationship needs polarity. You touched on it when you said you need either an alpha male or a beta one. Trust me, you don't want the beta! But you do need to be the feminine one in the relationship. You can be athletic and accomplished, but be sure you aren't frequently competing with your partner.


----------



## becareful

misslonelyheart said:


> I won't do casual sex, and refuse to get physical until a relationship seems to be getting serious, and that's the only thing I can figure is keeping my relationships from lasting. If that's the case, I guess I'm destined to be alone, because it's not something I'm willing to compromise on.


Bravo! Please don't compromise your values and who you are. :smthumbup::yay::yay::


----------



## jorgegene

always_alone said:


> Bah, it always irritates me when people tell women to be more feminine, let the man lead, and chastize her for being emasculating. *Blah, blah, blech.*
> 
> Sorry, OP, that is not too helpful. Truth is that much of this advice is true enough, most men are very easily emasculated, and prefer women to be submissive, admiring, and "feminine".
> 
> It's a real pain when you are *not* that way, and are basically always being told to be someone else to be considered desirable. (Ask me how I know!)
> 
> But, in the end, there are actually all kinds of guys with all kinds of interests. So I would be inclined to listen to those who see you as just fine the way you are, and work on your picker. When you have smaller pool to work with, it will take longer to find the right match, but it surely can be done.
> 
> I know plenty of tomboy, hates dresses and heels, competitive women in perfectly fine relationships.


i agree with your post completely, but i like the highlighted part especially.


----------



## Thor

misslonelyheart said:


> But as far as wardrobe, I can't stand looking girly. I think maybe because when I was a kid my brothers would tease me about being a princess if I dressed up. So I stopped. I feel stupid in dresses. I also feel stupid in figure hugging clothing because I have no chest or butt to speak of. Athletic girls often don't develop much of a figure. I have visibly toned arms and legs and a great six pack but almost no curves at all. I don't even need a bra except for during sports. I WON'T wear high heels - last time I did I fell, broke my ankle, and missed an entire winter's skiing. Never again. My idea of REALLY dressing up - like for a ****tail party - would be a woman's cut tuxedo - that look I definitely go for. I suppose I could "feminize" it with a black skirt instead of slacks. I literally only wear dresses for weddings.


One of the hottest young women I've seen was 30-ish. She showed up at a pistol competition wearing tan Carhartt jeans and some kind of button down shirt. She looked great in that outfit. But if she wore that on a _date_ it would be a turn off. A man wants his woman to dress up even a little bit. When a man takes you somewhere he wants people to see he brought a woman with him, not one of his buddies.

Your lack of curves is irrelevant. Are you trying to hide that you don't have curves?

You could try easing into a new or expanded wardrobe. Find some shoes which are impractical and good for a date when dressed up a bit. Low heals is fine. Buy a blouse and skirt. Nothing fancy, but nicer than what you normally would wear. Find that Mary Kaye consultant and learn some minor subtle makeup, the kind that nobody notices.


----------



## becareful

misslonelyheart said:


> I watch all my friends, both male and female, pair off, get married, buy houses, have babies. While I get left behind. It's starting to really get to me. Our pastor told me maybe God is calling me to be single and all I could think was how cruel would that be to give me this huge desire for a family if I'm never going to have one.




That was an unwise thing for your pastor to say. Maybe it's time to change pastors.


----------



## Thor

always_alone said:


> Bah, it always irritates me when people tell women to be more feminine, let the man lead, and chastize her for being emasculating. Blah, blah, blech.
> 
> Sorry, OP, that is not too helpful. Truth is that much of this advice is true enough, most men are very easily emasculated, and prefer women to be submissive, admiring, and "feminine".
> 
> It's a real pain when you are *not* that way, and are basically always being told to be someone else to be considered desirable. (Ask me how I know!)
> 
> But, in the end, there are actually all kinds of guys with all kinds of interests. So I would be inclined to listen to those who see you as just fine the way you are, and work on your picker. When you have smaller pool to work with, it will take longer to find the right match, but it surely can be done.
> 
> I know plenty of tomboy, hates dresses and heels, competitive women in perfectly fine relationships.


What I'm trying to get at is sort of the reverse and female version of some of the advice in the book "No More Mr. Nice Guy" in terms of behavior. Not changing one's values or becoming subservient to men.

For example, Nice Guys can be too deferential to women. Instead of being declarative they will ask the woman what she wants. Where does she want to go for dinner? And this becomes unattractive to women.

So the advice is to lead more. State where you want to go. Have an opinion. If she disagrees or wants something different then you discuss it and find an acceptable option.

Another problem is men can get lazy in their wardrobe. We dress up for work, so when we get home we put on old jeans and a t-shirt. We maybe let our hair get too long and shaggy before getting it cut. So the NMMNG advice is to sharpen up the wardrobe a bit, and make sure your personal grooming is not sloppy.

I'm seeing in MissLonelyHeart something similar. She doesn't need to change her personality, activities, or sexual mores. But I think she could change some of her behavior and interactions within relationships. She can bring some feminine energy and thus create that great polarity in the relationship.


----------



## Luvher4life

FWIW, back in my single days I came across a lady like the OP. She was fun to be around, good company, easy to talk to, was definitely a tomboy type, but I never saw her dress feminine. I hung out with her quite a few times, had many long talks with her about any and everything, just nothing romantic. Needless to say, I didn't feel a want or need to actually "date" her because I felt like she was kind of just "one of the guys". A couple of years later (maybe longer) I saw her with another guy, dressed up, made up (tastefully), and she was a stunning beauty. Wow! She never compromised her true self, either. She was the same person I always knew, but found that feminine side of her I never got to know. She's still a good friend, even though I haven't seen her for a long time. I can say that with the utmost confidence. We are both happily married and have families now.


----------



## kristin2349

misslonelyheart said:


> This is the girl that I have been told numerous times that I look like ever since the Divergent movie came out. Same basic hairstyle. Even dressed a lot like I do for work. Based on what I've read about her we have personality similarities as well. Guys are crazy about this girl based on high school locker pinups where I work. Then again I have no problem finding guys - just keeping them interested long term.


When the Divergent movie came out Shailene Woodly's sexuality was constantly talked about, many people speculated she was a lesbian based on her appearance. She ended up giving an interview saying she may gay but is bi-sexual. 

She was hounded about her sexuality because she isn't what most people consider feminine. First impressions and appearance still count for a lot. 

If you are a tomboy at heart and are happy with the way you look you should hold out for someone who appreciates you for you. If the competitve side of you kicks in and you get tired of "losing" boyfriends or fiances to "girly girls" tweaking a few things about your appearance and behavior might be in order. You've been given some good advice.


----------



## Herschel

This could be an amazing troll post for the horned up - recently separated/divorced guys here. If it is, just don't divulge it...sometimes going to your grave living a lie is better than knowing the truth.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Herschel said:


> This could be an amazing troll post for the horned up - recently separated/divorced guys here. If it is, just don't divulge it...sometimes going to your grave living a lie is better than knowing the truth.


Sorry but no. Although I notice reading other posts here that the "maybe the poster is a troll" seems to come up a LOT. Makes me wonder if it's a common problem here?


----------



## Herschel

misslonelyheart said:


> Sorry but no. Although I notice reading other posts here that the "maybe the poster is a troll" seems to come up a LOT. Makes me wonder if it's a common problem here?


Well, I was saying it because you seem like a "perfect woman" to the guys (and maybe some girls here). Most of us would just like to have someone who didn't **** on our souls. So, already you look great


----------



## misslonelyheart

So Thor this is the kind of outfit I would wear for a casual date that was not going to be an active or outdoorsy event. Cropped for privacy purposes.


----------



## always_alone

Thor said:


> I'm seeing in MissLonelyHeart something similar. She doesn't need to change her personality, activities, or sexual mores. But I think she could change some of her behavior and interactions within relationships. She can bring some feminine energy and thus create that great polarity in the relationship.


If it works for her to play the game, then great! I'm sure she gets it that men like women in tight dresses and high heels.

If it doesn't work for her, then, yes, the guys who like tight dresses and high heels won't go for her. But there *are* other guys.

I would give the same advice to a guy. If he wants to play alpha dude, then great. Lots of women lap that up. But if he doesn't, well so what. There are lots of women who like to be asked where they want to eat.

As you may have guessed, I am much more a part of the "be true to yourself" school, than the "play the game to play the numbers" school. It may take longer to find someone, but the odds of getting a good and compatible match are much higher. At least IMHO.

Let me put it this way: guys may fall all over themselves, tongues hanging out for the tight dress and high heels. But it doesn't at all increase the odds they will stick around for the LTR. Which is what OP is looking for.

If you bend over backwards to make other people happy, then either you have to keep doing it, or they will be disappointed and accuse you of bait and switch.


----------



## Miss Independent

misslonelyheart said:


> So Thor this is the kind of outfit I would wear for a casual date that was not going to be an active or outdoorsy event. Cropped for privacy purposes.




You've wore this on a date???


----------



## Herschel

spinsterdurga said:


> You've wore this on a date???


In her defense, the date was in 1987


----------



## misslonelyheart

I'm seriously into vintage jackets and men's sport coats especially tweeds. The jacket could very well be from the 1980s. I believe it's from JC Penney although I'm not going to pull it out to find out. I do still wear it. The picture was taken while I was in college. I believe I was getting ready to go out bar hopping with friends. Those were my favorite jeans it's hard to find button fly jeans now. They fell apart from overuse and I miss them! But yeah, I would still wear an outfit like this on a date. Maybe without the rips in the jeans. Considering most of my dates take me to the sports bar & grill where I used to work since it's the only "decent" restaurant in our little rural community...this outfit is probably overly dressy compared to a lot of people who go there.


----------



## nirvana

SunCMars said:


> You answered your own post and handily I might add.
> 
> You scare them off...emasculate them. Not feminine enough. Oh well.Tough sh*t.
> 
> You are Red Sonya. Find Conan the Barbarian.
> 
> Ditch the suit and tie guys. Look in the military footlocker.
> 
> You are a one-per-center for sure!
> 
> Show or invent a soft side. A Janus head, a Chimera; Amelia Earhart prima fascia, Florence Nightingale flip side.
> 
> Good luck!


I agree with SunCMars.
Imagining myself as one of the guys, I think I would want someone who is feminine, whom I can romance. Not be buddy-buddy with. I can do that with my male buddies, not someone I have a romantic interest in.
I have seen situations where some girls do the tomboy thing and try to be buddies with the guys and they get treated like a guy also. The guys don't fall in love with them, they might go to this tomboy to discuss how to get another girl.

I think you are in this situation where there is initial attraction, but the guys find out that they more like a girly-girl.

You have two options: Either you add a feminine side or enhance it, or find a guy who likes a tomboy. Nothing wrong in changing yourself without the limits you decide. We all do that in our lives, both at home and at work.

A badly kept secret is that men love to play hero to the women they are interested in. He wants to be her knight in shining armor. It's hard-wired in us and gives us a great thrill. When the woman conveys to a guy that she doesn't need him or worse sends out signals that she is more of a man than he is, it is highly unromantic for the man and he withdraws and looks for a woman who he can be a hero to. Male ego? Sure. Have you ever thrown hints that you are better/stronger/more capable in things that the men like to think they are better at? Do you hit a ball longer than he can or throw a ball farther? If so, don't do it if you want a man. Most 'normal' men fall into this category.


----------



## Miss Independent

misslonelyheart said:


> I'm seriously into vintage jackets and men's sport coats especially tweeds. The jacket could very well be from the 1980s. I believe it's from JC Penney although I'm not going to pull it out to find out. I do still wear it. The picture was taken while I was in college. I believe I was getting ready to go out bar hopping with friends. Those were my favorite jeans it's hard to find button fly jeans now. They fell apart from overuse and I miss them! But yeah, I would still wear an outfit like this on a date. Maybe without the rips in the jeans. Considering most of my dates take me to the sports bar & grill where I used to work since it's the only "decent" restaurant in our little rural community...this outfit is probably overly dressy compared to a lot of people who go there.




Do you wear shorts? I'm just trying to get an idea of the kind of clothes you like. 

I can totally wear the jacket, but I would wear it with a tight top and skinny jeans or same combo but with shorts.


----------



## Miss Independent

nirvana said:


> A badly kept secret is that men love to play hero to the women they are interested in. He wants to be her knight in shining armor. It's hard-wired in us and gives us a great thrill. When the woman conveys to a guy that she doesn't need him or worse sends out signals that she is more of a man than he is, it is highly unromantic for the man and he withdraws and looks for a woman who he can be a hero to. Male ego? Sure. Have you ever thrown hints that you are better/stronger/more capable in things that the men like to think they are better at? Do you hit a ball longer than he can or throw a ball farther? If so, don't do it if you want a man. Most 'normal' men fall into this category.



Who would I want a man like this? Ugh


----------



## nirvana

misslonelyheart said:


> So I have to wonder if I am an alpha female should I be looking for "super" alpha guys who won't be intimidated by me, or obviously beta guys who prefer stronger women? I kind of think I would end up having trouble respecting the latter.


I disagree with this notion that men are "intimidated" just because what they want in a woman does not match the type of woman you are. Why should men be expected to put up with situations where the woman is telling him how much better than him she is? (I am not saying you do this or did this). Men have their own tastes in women just like women do. 
That does not make them "beta" either. Just if a woman plays sports and does outdoor things, it does not automatically make her "stronger". 

I hope you think about these things more clearly because your goal is to get a husband rather than score feminist points.

Good luck to you! I hope we hear good news from you in the future!


----------



## always_alone

misslonelyheart said:


> So I have to wonder if I am an alpha female should I be looking for "super" alpha guys who won't be intimidated by me, or obviously beta guys who prefer stronger women? I kind of think I would end up having trouble respecting the latter.



I would suggest that the choices are not that stark.

A good friend of mine has never worn a dress or a stitch of make-up in her life, and she is very outdoorsy and capable. She is currently happily married and about to have her first baby.

Her husband is neither super-alpha nor "beta". He is a decent, down-to-earth, smart guy who loves her and doesn't at all care if she wears a dress or puts on make-up.


----------



## TAMAT

MLH,

Perhaps you maintain emotional connections with your guy friends when you are dating someone. When a woman has alot of men in her life it makes her "main" man feel less valuable/loved.

I can't say what I feel is accurate, but there are very desirable woman at the gym who complain about finding a suitable person. When I see how they interact with guys, touchy, talky and flirty I involuntarily make a mental note that I likely wouldn't be able to trust them in a long term relationship.

I'm not sure if this applied to you.

Tamat


----------



## misslonelyheart

TAMAT said:


> MLH,
> 
> Perhaps you maintain emotional connections with your guy friends when you are dating someone. When a woman has alot of men in her life it makes her "main" man feel less valuable/loved.
> 
> I can't say what I feel is accurate, but there are very desirable woman at the gym who complain about finding a suitable person. When I see how they interact with guys, touchy, talky and flirty I involuntarily make a mental note that I likely wouldn't be able to trust them in a long term relationship.
> 
> I'm not sure if this applied to you.
> 
> Tamat


I do have a lot of men in my life but most of them are my brothers and cousins. I would hope no one I dated would be put off by that although I must admit my brothers (and cousins) are intimidating. There are 11 of them and all of them are the approximate size and build of an NFL quarterback...not a single one is under 6'2 and they're all pretty muscular as well. But I don't see much of them these days (none of them live anywhere near me anymore) so I can't imagine they would bother any of the guys I date.

I used to interact with guys a lot more than I do now because I worked in restaurants where most of the kitchen staff was male and so were the bartenders. Now that I work in an elementary school I don't have many male co-workers - in fact I believe there are only 4 guys in the place including the principal. And 3 of them are married. The one I dated is the only one who isn't. I don't go to the gym because I coach girls softball and soccer at the school where I work and we have quite a bit of gym equipment in our basement at home. And I wouldn't consider myself flirty, unless you think asking the guys if they want to put together a pick-up basketball, football, or baseball game after church is flirting. It certainly isn't to me. I'm afraid my idea of flirting probably hasn't changed much since grade school - if I like a guy I'll probably tease him. Or else avoid him entirely to the point where he probably thinks I don't like him which I know isn't going to get me anywhere...


----------



## TAMAT

MLH,

Ok so you don't have ex BFs on facebook or that sort of thing either then.

Tamat


----------



## Luvher4life

misslonelyheart said:


> So Thor this is the kind of outfit I would wear for a casual date that was not going to be an active or outdoorsy event. Cropped for privacy purposes.


Misslonelyheart, as a man I can tell you there is absolutely nothing wrong with your body. You lied when you said you don't have the curves. You have a hot body, in my opinion.

The thing is, though, a lot of men won't feel romantically attracted to a female who doesn't act feminine. I'm just saying this from my own perspective. It's definitely not a knock on you, or who you are. I've got a friend who was a lot like you that I hung around with quite a bit. We got along great together, but it never was a romantic attraction. When she finally got in touch with her feminine side a while later (after we went our separate ways), it was only then that I saw just how attractive she was underneath the tomboy façade. She never compromised "who" she was, she just changed her look. It didn't take much, it turns out.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Sorry I somehow managed to miss this post when it first went up. Answers below in bold:



EleGirl said:


> You posted a picture of Shailene Woodley. She’s extremely feminine in appearance. It is just her features that are like yours? Do you dress like her? Do you carry yourself like she does?
> 
> *I have been told that I look enough like her to be her sister. Like if I moved to LA I might get approached by people actually thinking I was her. Personally I don't see it. I definitely think I look older than her. And she's got more of a figure than I do, although not by much. I dress like her when she's being more androgynous. Her glamour shots/red carpet outfits don't appeal to me at all.*
> 
> You say that most people probably think that you are gay. If most people probably think that you are gay, I get the impression that you have a more butch appearance. That might be turning guys off.
> 
> *Yeah I've had the butch look going in the past. Not so much anymore since I've started my professional career. More when I was waitressing to get the guys in the bar to keep their hands off.*
> 
> Also, you are no longer a girl. You are woman. You might want to start calling yourself what you really are now.
> 
> *This is what really caught my attention. Because honestly, I DON'T think of myself as a woman. I think of myself like I'm still that 18 year old girl I used to be. Outside of work I think I probably act like her a lot still as well. I know I still dress like I did at 18. I'm realizing that this may be a contributing factor to my problems. If I want to be treated as the kind of person a mature man would want to get serious about to the point of marriage/family, I may have to look at whether I still spend too much of my (non work) time acting like a teenager still. The two guys I was engaged to both used to tell me they loved me because I was so much fun. But the kind of fun we used to have (and that I still enjoy having) probably isn't appropriate for someone who's pushing 30... I don't want to change my personality, but maybe I do need to think about growing up, at least a little. Or else I'm going to be pushing 40 and still alone. Thanks for the insight.*


----------



## misslonelyheart

:grin2:


TAMAT said:


> MLH,
> 
> Ok so you don't have ex BFs on facebook or that sort of thing either then.
> 
> Tamat


Well actually I do have 3 x-bfs on FB but 2 of them live in other states now. One of them on the other side of the country in fact. They've also both developed drinking problems so I can't imagine ever wanting them back. I just like to keep in touch with them. My 1st ex lives right next door to me. I can't move, so there's not much I can do about that. But he's married to a gorgeous redhead and has adorable twin children. Plus he and his family go to my church so I kind of have to see him quite a bit. If I ever got involved with someone who wanted me to cut all ties to all my exes, I would if I could, but it would be hard since the 1st ex is also my closest brother's lifelong best friend. But after the way he dumped me, I can't imagine wanting him back either. I mean, the guy cheated on me with a Sports Illustrated swimsuit model. That's not an easy thing to forget.


----------



## kristin2349

misslonelyheart said:


> So Thor this is the kind of outfit I would wear for a casual date that was not going to be an active or outdoorsy event. Cropped for privacy purposes.


I'm seriously not trying to be rude here: 

Girl NO! You have a decent figure. But that entire outfit needs to be lit on fire, including those high tops.

You can dress casual, not "fussy", even androgynous but that outfit is just all kinds of wrong. Was this photo taken recently?

ETA:

OK, I can see where I missed that the outfit was explained. As was said, you have a body to work with. That outfit does nothing for it. Wardrobe and grooming help would be something that you should look into.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Taken in college while I was still living on campus. So at least 6 years ago. I was getting ready for a night of bar hopping. It was the only pic I could lay my hands on quickly that shows something I might wear for a night out. I don't tend to take a lot of selfies like so many people do these days. The shoes aren't high tops they're hiking boots...and most of the time I wear combat boots! And I happen to love that jacket, it's totally vintage prep. I have a whole collection of tweed jackets, both men's and women's. The jeans are long gone and the boots wore out long ago as well. Even the watch is long since broken. I do admit the sleeves being pushed up above the elbows on the jacket looks stupid. I'm guessing it was a warm day. But I definitely still have similar outfits, although I don't do stonewashed denim anymore. I remember how my boyfriend at the time loved me in button fly jeans though - can't even find THOSE anymore. Hairstyle was definitely bad - and the pic was before I got contacts - but I'm not going to show THAT part of it!


----------



## joannacroc

misslonelyheart said:


> Taken in college while I was still living on campus. So at least 6 years ago. I was getting ready for a night of bar hopping. It was the only pic I could lay my hands on quickly that shows something I might wear for a night out. I don't tend to take a lot of selfies like so many people do these days. The shoes aren't high tops they're hiking boots...and most of the time I wear combat boots! And I happen to love that jacket, it's totally vintage prep. I have a whole collection of tweed jackets, both men's and women's. The jeans are long gone and the boots wore out long ago as well. Even the watch is long since broken. I do admit the sleeves being pushed up above the elbows on the jacket looks stupid. I'm guessing it was a warm day. But I definitely still have similar outfits, although I don't do stonewashed denim anymore. I remember how my boyfriend at the time loved me in button fly jeans though - can't even find THOSE anymore. Hairstyle was definitely bad - and the pic was before I got contacts - but I'm not going to show THAT part of it!


So...having seen the photo, I get it. I used to dress like that in my twenties. I didn't have a nice figure like you. And I didn't get hit on at all. 

I think the issue is that you can barely see YOU under all those clothes. It's not that the pieces themselves are masculine, although I guess they could be seen as that, but that they are overly large and you are not a large woman, so they kind of dwarf you rather than accentuating your figure. I'm not a fashionista by any means, but I would say maybe start with some clothes that are more fitted, even if it's a fitted tee instead of a baggy one, and fitted jeans instead of baggy ones. It doesn't need to be skintight, just something a little less baggy. 

And Lord knows I love tweed, being English. But it isn't the most attractive material. Lose the tweed jacket on a date. Keep them for hanging out with your buddies, maybe? You're not on a BBC drama, you're an attractive young woman. I don't say this with malice, but when I wore a lot of clothing and loose clothing like in your photo, it was because I didn't feel good about what was underneath. Could it be that you feel comfortable in this clothing not just because your brothers teased you when you acted girly, but because you're hiding a bit?


----------



## Evinrude58

Ok, have women in the USA heard of these things called a dress?
My gf is Russian. She wears dresses. I love this. I want a woman, not a man. I want to see the curve of her hips in a nice dress. 
I like jeans, too. But not a manly she-man jacket with them. Maybe a tight shirt that fits well in the right two places. 

I would NOT be attracted to that picture you posted, though you have a nice figure. 
Yes, you seem to dress "butchy" and that is a major turnoff to men.
We want a woman to look like a woman. And yes, we have egos and we want to be seen with a woman we are proud of appearance-wise.
That's something you could consider. I like to dress comfortable. I'm toward the bad end of the well-dressed spectrum. Now when I'm out with my gf, I try to look nice so she's proud to be with me.
Stop all that un-feminine dressing. If you have a friendly personality and a feminine appearance, you will have plenty of men to choose from. You have a nice body. Use it!

Or not, but if you're looking for a man, the first step is to look like a woman.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## kristin2349

misslonelyheart said:


> Taken in college while I was still living on campus. So at least 6 years ago. I was getting ready for a night of bar hopping. It was the only pic I could lay my hands on quickly that shows something I might wear for a night out. I don't tend to take a lot of selfies like so many people do these days. The shoes aren't high tops they're hiking boots...and most of the time I wear combat boots! And I happen to love that jacket, it's totally vintage prep. I have a whole collection of tweed jackets, both men's and women's. The jeans are long gone and the boots wore out long ago as well. Even the watch is long since broken. I do admit the sleeves being pushed up above the elbows on the jacket looks stupid. I'm guessing it was a warm day. But I definitely still have similar outfits, although I don't do stonewashed denim anymore. I remember how my boyfriend at the time loved me in button fly jeans though - can't even find THOSE anymore. Hairstyle was definitely bad - and the pic was before I got contacts - but I'm not going to show THAT part of it!



There are ways to dress in those things without looking masculine. Like breaking things up with more feminine pieces. They don't have to be frilly and fussy. I'm kind of a girly girl but I dress casually. If I wear blazers, even a "boyfriend style" with the sleeves pushed up a bit (a tiny bit not like I am about to change a tire). If I wear a boyfriend blazer, I'll wear a nice tailored shirt or tank top under it with fitted skinny jeans and cute boots. I've got a collection of leather jackets. My favorite jacket is a black biker jacket, I wear it with jeans and even thrown over a dress. I wear a mans watch, but I wear other feminine jewelry. I have a very female energy, I have long hair, I wear heels, pefume, make up, always have my nails done...

If you are happy with your look, don't change it. But if you think your wardrobe or look is part of the problem get some help tweaking it.


----------



## misslonelyheart

I don't have hips. Yes I know it looks that way in the pic but it's just the way I'm leaning on the wall. I wear an XS shirt and a size 0 or 2 jeans. Not much curves there. I don't have the "two right places" upstairs either. As I said earlier, I don't even need a bra. Unless it were padded that might help me some. But guys apparently find those deceiving. I should probably actually put on some weight but it's hard when I'm always going going going all the time. Some day it will probably catch up with me but so far it hasn't. My mom says she didn't start putting on weight until she was past 30 and she had 7 kids!

And maybe I am hiding a bit. Not just the lack of curves. I also have pretty bulky leg muscles both calves and thighs. My shoulders are pretty broad as well, almost disproportionately so, as well as being very muscular. Combination of playing violin and pitching softball, there. I don't look like a female bodybuilder but if I worked out much more with free weights I could achieve that look without much trouble. Not that I want to. Look at a picture of most female Olympic swimmers or gymnasts and you'll get a pretty good idea of my body type. I was actually thinner in that pic than I am now, I've put on about 10 pounds since college so I'm only about 98-102 pounds in that pic. I think I was about 21 or 22 when it was taken. I'll see if I can find something newer where I'm not hidden by children or wearing a sports uniform.

It's funny that some of you say my clothes are too loose or not figure hugging enough. My gram is constantly telling me that everything I wear is too tight or too sexy. Generation gap I guess.


----------



## misslonelyheart

The other thing to remember, I just finished my master's degree last spring. This is my first professional job and even it doesn't pay great. Up until recently most of my clothes have been second hand, my parents were raising 7 kids on a military salary. I put myself through college working as a waitress in a sports bar where the uniform was jeans and a polo shirt with the bar's logo on it. I haven't had money to spend on clothes except in thrift shops and where I live thrift shops pretty much means the Sal Army and not much more. Or garage sales which is where I find a lot of my jeans and tshirts. Now that I'm actually "making a living" ($25 grand/year isn't bad when you're still single and have no housing payment) I can finally invest in some NEW, not just new-to-me, clothes. Maybe over spring break I'll haul out my closet and hit up the outlet mall a couple of counties over from us. I need some better work clothes anyway. I realized just the other day that I only have one pair of work pants that isn't jeans - a pair of khakis that don't even fit right anymore. It's a good thing I work in a place with a casual dress code!


----------



## Personal

nirvana said:


> A badly kept secret is that men love to play hero to the women they are interested in. He wants to be her knight in shining armor. It's hard-wired in us and gives us a great thrill. When the woman conveys to a guy that she doesn't need him or worse sends out signals that she is more of a man than he is, it is highly unromantic for the man and he withdraws and looks for a woman who he can be a hero to. Male ego? Sure. Have you ever thrown hints that you are better/stronger/more capable in things that the men like to think they are better at? Do you hit a ball longer than he can or throw a ball farther? If so, don't do it if you want a man. Most 'normal' men fall into this category.


That being the case then I am proud of the fact I am not 'normal'!

"Play hero" and all the rest! If 'normal' men are as you describe, then 'normal' men are rather insecure, needy and very weak.

If it wasn't for the fact that many women have healthy sex drives, I suspect most 'normal' men as you describe wouldn't get much if any sex at all.


----------



## Celes

misslonelyheart said:


> I don't have hips. Yes I know it looks that way in the pic but it's just the way I'm leaning on the wall. I wear an XS shirt and a size 0 or 2 jeans. Not much curves there. I don't have the "two right places" upstairs either. As I said earlier, I don't even need a bra. Unless it were padded that might help me some. But guys apparently find those deceiving. I should probably actually put on some weight but it's hard when I'm always going going going all the time. Some day it will probably catch up with me but so far it hasn't. My mom says she didn't start putting on weight until she was past 30 and she had 7 kids!
> 
> And maybe I am hiding a bit. Not just the lack of curves. I also have pretty bulky leg muscles both calves and thighs. My shoulders are pretty broad as well, almost disproportionately so, as well as being very muscular. Combination of playing violin and pitching softball, there. I don't look like a female bodybuilder but if I worked out much more with free weights I could achieve that look without much trouble. Not that I want to. Look at a picture of most female Olympic swimmers or gymnasts and you'll get a pretty good idea of my body type. I was actually thinner in that pic than I am now, I've put on about 10 pounds since college so I'm only about 98-102 pounds in that pic. I think I was about 21 or 22 when it was taken. I'll see if I can find something newer where I'm not hidden by children or wearing a sports uniform.
> 
> It's funny that some of you say my clothes are too loose or not figure hugging enough. My gram is constantly telling me that everything I wear is too tight or too sexy. Generation gap I guess.


Sounds like you have some confidence issues. Which is crazy, you have a great body! There are plenty of men who like the slim, athletic build. My husband is one of them. It seems like you're trying to "hide" your body so to speak and you really shouldn't. I bet you have great legs. 

Try buying better fitting clothes and I promise it will boost your confidence. 

I also think you need to make more of an effort to be friends with women. You seem to have a really wrong impression of them. Women will help you in improving your dress and channeling your femininity.

Don't get me wrong, I get it. I like to play video games. I hate sappy romcoms and would much prefer action or sci-fi or horror. I don't follow celebrities and I don't go on spa days. It hasn't prevented me from having amazing female friends.


----------



## norajane

kristin2349 said:


> There are ways to dress in those things without looking masculine. Like breaking things up with more feminine pieces. They don't have to be frilly and fussy. I'm kind of a girly girl but I dress casually. If I wear blazers, even a "boyfriend style" with the sleeves pushed up a bit (a tiny bit not like I am about to change a tire). If I wear a boyfriend blazer, I'll wear a nice tailored shirt or tank top under it with fitted skinny jeans and cute boots. I've got a collection of leather jackets. My favorite jacket is a black biker jacket, I wear it with jeans and even thrown over a dress. I wear a mans watch, but I wear other feminine jewelry. I have a very female energy, I have long hair, I wear heels, pefume, make up, always have my nails done...
> 
> If you are happy with your look, don't change it. But if you think your wardrobe or look is part of the problem get some help tweaking it.


Yes! She can wear all those pieces, but not _all together_ in one outfit. Evoke the era, don't replicate it.

That jacket works with a catsuit, or mini-skirt or leggings with close knit tank. Very simple and clean. Or you can go frilly top and slim skirt. That's it. Anything else and you look like you're in a bad 80's video.


----------



## Evinrude58

misslonelyheart said:


> I don't have hips. Yes I know it looks that way in the pic but it's just the way I'm leaning on the wall. I wear an XS shirt and a size 0 or 2 jeans. Not much curves there. I don't have the "two right places" upstairs either. As I said earlier, I don't even need a bra. Unless it were padded that might help me some. But guys apparently find those deceiving. I should probably actually put on some weight but it's hard when I'm always going going going all the time. Some day it will probably catch up with me but so far it hasn't. My mom says she didn't start putting on weight until she was past 30 and she had 7 kids!
> 
> And maybe I am hiding a bit. Not just the lack of curves. I also have pretty bulky leg muscles both calves and thighs. My shoulders are pretty broad as well, almost disproportionately so, as well as being very muscular. Combination of playing violin and pitching softball, there. I don't look like a female bodybuilder but if I worked out much more with free weights I could achieve that look without much trouble. Not that I want to. Look at a picture of most female Olympic swimmers or gymnasts and you'll get a pretty good idea of my body type. I was actually thinner in that pic than I am now, I've put on about 10 pounds since college so I'm only about 98-102 pounds in that pic. I think I was about 21 or 22 when it was taken. I'll see if I can find something newer where I'm not hidden by children or wearing a sports uniform.
> 
> It's funny that some of you say my clothes are too loose or not figure hugging enough. My gram is constantly telling me that everything I wear is too tight or too sexy. Generation gap I guess.


This is part of your problem!
You keep taking about how you don't have this or that....
Bull #%^*.... You are the one thinking this--- not everyone else. Men like what you describe--- even as negatively as you describe it. You have been wearing what YOU are comfortable and confident for quite a while and haven't gotten the results you're after. Know what you call a person who tries the same thing over and over again, expecting different results?

I'm saying try getting out of your comfort zone and try some feminine stuff that those new girlfriends suggest and let yourself see if you can grow to like some of it when you get accustomed to it. 
You might start attracting the marrying type. 

I know you know you can get dates, but you obviously aren't getting dates with men that want you forever.

I'm bald, and 43, and have three kids and am divorced with a very mediocre paying job-- at best. But I got out of my comfort zone and tried to find a woman I always wanted. I found one. You will, too. 
Please stop thinking men aren't attracted to you like you want. They ARE. You just need to attract the right ones. A tweed jacket is not good bait for men. A dress, right jeans, long hair, long legs.... These, men like. You have long legs. I don't know about the hair. I hate short hair on a woman.
These are all my tastes--- but I figure I'm the center of the universe and I count the most...&#55357;&#56843;
Just some ideas. I like to see people happy.

Btw, YOU have worked for what you have. You're athletic and sound fun to be around. So you're not some entitled, spoiled brat. You are guaranteed to find yourself a helluva man if you stay patient. I'm sure there are lots of guys here that would love to seriously date a woman like you. Don't settle.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## nirvana

spinsterdurga said:


> Who would I want a man like this? Ugh


99.99% of women in this planet


----------



## nirvana

Personal said:


> That being the case then I am proud of the fact I am not 'normal'!
> 
> "Play hero" and all the rest! If 'normal' men are as you describe, then 'normal' men are rather insecure, needy and very weak.
> 
> If it wasn't for the fact that many women have healthy sex drives, I suspect most 'normal' men as you describe wouldn't get much if any sex at all.


Obvious that you didn't understand what I was trying to say.


----------



## nirvana

OP, just dress feminine, enjoy being a woman, don't try to be a man and improve your self confidence and I bet you will do much better.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
looks fine to me. 



misslonelyheart said:


> So Thor this is the kind of outfit I would wear for a casual date that was not going to be an active or outdoorsy event. Cropped for privacy purposes.


----------



## tech-novelist

misslonelyheart said:


> Intense? I suppose when I'm talking about the things I consider my "issues" (education and the environment) I probably can get intense sometimes.
> 
> Clingy? Just the opposite I would say. I'm extremely independent.
> 
> As far as dating, I prefer active dates involving "adventures" - hiking on rough terrain, rock climbing, white water rafting- or sports events - either as spectator or participant - or music - concerts or musical dramas. I don't enjoy things like movies or dinners that are the entire date. I pretty much only get involved with guys I already know are as physically active as I am. I don't tend to talk a lot on my dates but neither do they. The guy I talked to the most was my 2nd fiancé we were so incredibly compatible in every way I thought so it was a shock when he left me for a more traditional stay at home wife type girl. We used to have these ridiculously long conversations about anything and everything. We joked that they were our "philosophical discussions."
> 
> A lot of my interests could be considered more masculine than feminine I suppose - sports, cars, computers, rock concerts. Sometimes I do wonder if over the long term my lack of femininity is a turn off. I mean, I'm the kind of girl who won't wear a dress unless I have absolutely no choice. My favorite outfit is ripped jeans, a sports logo shirt, and actual Army issue combat boots. Almost my entire wardrobe comes from the men's department or the Army Navy store. I'm still a tomboy at 28 and proud of it. I can throw a perfect 50 yard spiral pass and a 60 mph fast ball and I've driven my car at 130 mph on the local race track during open driving day.
> 
> Unfortunately I know there are people who think I'm gay because of it but I can assure you I have no sexual or romantic interest in other women. In fact I don't even have a lot of female friends because I don't have much in common with other women. I don't care about fashion or celebrity gossip and honestly if I'm going to go out with friends for the night it's probably going to be with a group of guys. Maybe that's it I suppose. Maybe I keep getting friend zoned because I act too much like just another one of the guys. But that's who I am and I don't want to have to pretend to be something I'm not (or deny who I am) to succeed in a relationship.


From this post you come across as extremely competitive and masculine, which is not what most men want. They want someone more feminine-appearing.

This doesn't mean your situation is hopeless, if you are willing to act more feminine. My wife isn't interested in most girly things like gossip or fashion either, and doesn't dress up all the time in a feminine way. But she certainly can, and would if she were interested in finding a husband. However, we also have long philosophical and political discussions, which we both enjoy, so that is not a problem once you get to know someone.

On the other hand, it might be that you just aren't fishing in the correct pond. I haven't caught up with your whole thread yet, but have you tried meetup or something like that where you can find men who are interested in the same things you are?


----------



## richardsharpe

good evening
I don't think clothes are the problem. The OP is meeting and dating men for a long time. Things fall apart later. 

Casual is fine with me.


----------



## Thor

misslonelyheart said:


> So Thor this is the kind of outfit I would wear for a casual date that was not going to be an active or outdoorsy event. Cropped for privacy purposes.


Nope, not quite for going out on a date. The shirt and jacket are ok perhaps. But not the shoes or the jeans. For a very casual date such as going to a friend's house for an impromptu bbq, ok. But for going out with your man to dinner, no.

First, the jeans are too casual for a _date_. A solid color, not denim. And the shoes should not be athletic.

The pic you posted is for every day activities during the day time. In the evening step it up a notch.


----------



## Thor

misslonelyheart said:


> And I happen to love that jacket, it's totally vintage prep. I have a whole collection of tweed jackets, both men's and women's.


There's nothing wrong with a signature look. Vintage is cool, too. I wouldn't suggest you change these things which you get personal pleasure out of wearing. There's no need to wear the same uniform everyone else is wearing.

But combat boots or hiking boots on a date? Not at your current age!

I'd love to go do something athletic and even competitive with a woman. But when we go out later, I want her to make a bit of an effort to look sexy _for me_. And I expect she'd want me to clean up and try to look nice for her, too. That's where you tap into your feminine side a bit. Go ahead and wear the retro jacket. But wear something other than combat boots! Wear something that says "I'm a woman and I'm staking out the feminine side of this relationship".


----------



## EleGirl

misslonelyheart said:


> My favorite outfit is ripped jeans, a sports logo shirt, and actual Army issue combat boots. Almost my entire wardrobe comes from the men's department or the Army Navy store.


From this is sounds like you dress like a guy. I do ware items of clothing made for men sometimes but I’m very careful what I do this with.. why? Men’s clothing items are cut very differently from those made for women. Why? Because the male body is much different from that of females. 

My mom taught me how to make patterns for clothing that fit a person’s body. So I’ve pretty familiar with the different between make and female cuts. When it comes to commercially made clothing, the different is even more pronounced as the clothing industry even make seams, pockets, and other details very different depending on the whether the clothing is make for males or females.

You say that you wear combat boots.. do you man real, military issued combat boots? Or fashion boots made to look like combat boots. Combat boots have to be the ugliest boot in the world for a woman to wear. I know, I wore them for years in the Army. They do nothing for a woman.

In the above quote you said that you buy most of your clothing in the men’s department and Army/Navy store. But then in another post, you say that you buy most of your clothing at garage sales.

When I was younger, especially when I was in college, I bought a lot of clothing at places like goodwill. They have plenty of very good clothing items that are made for women. Shoot, even now that I earn a very good living I still drop into second hand stores to see what bargains I can get. You might want to try this.. just look in the women’s sections instead of the men’s.


----------



## tech-novelist

I think I see the real problem here. Please forgive me if this is redundant.

There are men who are traditional and will wait until marriage or at least engagement to have sex. These men want feminine women and will marry one if she is reasonably attractive. They don't want to get involved with feminists. You sound like a feminist and dress like one, so most of these men will steer clear of you.

There are non-traditional men who don't mind dating feminists, but they won't wait until engagement to have sex.

I don't know of any men who are okay with dating a feminist but will wait for sex.


----------



## Miss Independent

tech-novelist said:


> These men want feminine women and will marry one if she is reasonably attractive. They don't want to get involved with feminists. You sound like a feminist and dress like one, so most of these men will steer clear of you.
> 
> There are non-traditional men who don't mind dating feminists, but they won't wait until engagement to have sex.
> 
> I don't know of any men who are okay with dating a feminist but will wait for sex.




LOL!!!! Op, don't change your views for a man. I'm a feminist and PLENTY of men want to date me. I've NEVER been dumped by a man. I'm always the one who walks away. 

I think your clothes are fine but they don't pair well together. I'd wear the jacket but with something short. The only things I'd ditch are the pants (looks a bit old/or you can always turn it into ripped jeans and fold them a bit) and the shoes. 


What ????? No body told me that feminists dress a certain way???


----------



## Miss Independent

nirvana said:


> 99.99% of women in this planet




Please send me the links associated with your findings. Thanks!


----------



## Big Tree

OP, I had a thought and wanted to ask you a couple of questions.

Do you find that your words or actions are often misunderstood by others?

Do you read other people's emotions and nonverbal communication well?


----------



## jld

I agree with everyone who said just keep being yourself and be patient. If anything, I would urge you not to try to change yourself in any way for a man. He can adapt to you if he wants you.

I like the idea of going for a time in Australia or Hawaii. Just focus on your own goals and let relationships take care of themselves. 

Mainly, let the man do the work. And do not take any rejection personally. View it, as someone else said, as a dodged bullet.


----------



## Personal

tech-novelist said:


> I think I see the real problem here. Please forgive me if this is redundant.
> 
> There are men who are traditional and will wait until marriage or at least engagement to have sex. These men want feminine women and will marry one if she is reasonably attractive. They don't want to get involved with feminists. You sound like a feminist and dress like one, so most of these men will steer clear of you.
> 
> There are non-traditional men who don't mind dating feminists, but they won't wait until engagement to have sex.
> 
> I don't know of any men who are okay with dating a feminist but will wait for sex.


Oh please!...

I have been married to a Feminist for just shy of 17 years, you know the kind that has actually organised rally's, spoken publicly, been invited to fancy dinners with politicians because of it, is friends with other accomplished Feminist women and also happens to have STEM graduate qualifications. Who also retains her maiden name, is ambitious and has a successful career and shock horror even has men and not just women that answer to her in the workplace.

Yet despite your claims with respect to women who are Feminists, as a man who is married to one I can relate that whenever my wife is not at work she wears lots of dresses (heaven forbid sometimes sans underwear) inclusive of wearing Lindy Bop.co.uk and Review-Australia.com dresses amongst many other pretty brands. When she's at work she dresses in smart and elegant business attire, skirts blouses, jackets and the like. She also likes antique embroidery, jewellery and vintage handbags. And has always been throughout our circa 20 year relationship, delightfully non-vanilla and always enthusiastically highly sexual.

At the end of the day, there are lots of Feminist women who make terrific dating and or marital/sexual partners for men.
@misslonelyheart

I do concur that a wardrobe update would do you well, it wouldn't hurt to have a small number of nice dresses in your collection. Lose the Army boots (I was an army NCO for many years and since I left the army I have never worn them since), unless it is specifically practical for where you are wearing them, if you like the GP styled boot you could try something like Dr Martens, RM Williams or other similarly styled boots so your not dealing with heels. which can work well with the right dress. 

That said don't give up on jeans because jeans can be done well, but avoid 80's styled jeans at all costs. By all means dress a bit boyish if you can pull it off, but do try and give it a feminine edge, making friends with more women can help with that as well.

You might also try finding men outside of your church community as well, plus it couldn't hurt to sometimes be forward. If you like a man ask him out on a date don't wait for them to chase you. My wife wanted me so she asked me out, consequently so far we've enjoyed a terrific life together.


----------



## misslonelyheart

tech-novelist said:


> I think I see the real problem here. Please forgive me if this is redundant.
> 
> There are men who are traditional and will wait until marriage or at least engagement to have sex. These men want feminine women and will marry one if she is reasonably attractive. They don't want to get involved with feminists. You sound like a feminist and dress like one, so most of these men will steer clear of you.
> 
> There are non-traditional men who don't mind dating feminists, but they won't wait until engagement to have sex.
> 
> I don't know of any men who are okay with dating a feminist but will wait for sex.


Do I really come across as sounding like a feminist? Because I'm definitely not. I'm actually a fairly conservative Christian. Yes I work in a reasonably liberal career field (teaching) but I'm at the elementary level which I've found is more conservative. I just don't want to be subservient to a man or pushed to be a SAHM because my career is important to me.

The one guy I did have sex with, my HS BF, is the one who dumped me for the SI model. So having sex with him obviously wasn't enough for him. And even though he didn't marry her he married a woman with a similar figure and look. I came to the conclusion a long time ago that I lost him because he ended up out of my league. I'm cute, but he's gorgeous. I wonder sometimes how we were ever together to begin with. He could have had the sexy blonde head cheerleader and he dated the captain of the softball team instead. 

And I totally understand that my desire for a career killed my second relationship. That wasn't about sex at all because he wouldn't have even if I would have. He wasn't exactly upfront over the course of the relationship that he wanted a SAHM rather than a career woman. He just seemed to take it for granted that I would change my mind once we were married. Then he decided he wanted a career in the ministry and it all of a sudden became really important to have a woman who would fit into the mold of a pastor's wife. It didn't take him long to decide that wasn't me!

So it would seem that maybe I need to focus on guys who I know share my religious beliefs, because they are more likely to accept not having sex until later in the relationship. It's too bad there aren't any single guys my age in my church. There are a few 30-something divorced dads but they've always been off my radar because I've figured they wouldn't want more kids.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Big Tree said:


> OP, I had a thought and wanted to ask you a couple of questions.
> 
> Do you find that your words or actions are often misunderstood by others?
> 
> Do you read other people's emotions and nonverbal communication well?


I know where you are going with this, as a teacher I had to take several psych classes in college. And I've worked with several children with high-functioning autism.

But no, I don't have communication issues. I never would have gone into teaching if I did. And I've actually been told many times that I'm too empathic for my own good. I'm one of those people who gets upset even to the point of tears just watching sad stories on the evening news.


----------



## always_alone

richardsharpe said:


> good evening
> I don't think clothes are the problem. The OP is meeting and dating men for a long time. Things fall apart later.
> 
> Casual is fine with me.


Thank you! 

I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone is so fixated on wardrobe. Sounds to me like OP has lots of men interested in her already. It is the maintenance of LTR that she's asking about.

And quite frankly dresses, heels, makeup doesn't help with this at all.
When I dress up, I can probably get more men to pay attention to me in the moment, but unless OP is looking for some casual sex, so what? Guys who are after you because you look hot in the moment are pretty much after sex, not marriage.

IME the only guys worth investing anything at all relationshipwise are those who are going to accept and love you for who you are every day, not because of what you decide to put on for date night.

And if that means you miss out on a couple who can't see what's right in front of them? Oh well. There's plenty who can.


----------



## always_alone

tech-novelist said:


> I think I see the real problem here. Please forgive me if this is redundant.
> 
> There are men who are traditional and will wait until marriage or at least engagement to have sex. These men want feminine women and will marry one if she is reasonably attractive. They don't want to get involved with feminists. You sound like a feminist and dress like one, so most of these men will steer clear of you.
> 
> There are non-traditional men who don't mind dating feminists, but they won't wait until engagement to have sex.
> 
> I don't know of any men who are okay with dating a feminist but will wait for sex.


There are two kinds of people in this world: those that insist that there are only two kinds of people in this world,.and those that know better.


----------



## 2&out

Just another "man" opinion about the "date" outfit. If I asked a lady on a date and she showed up dressed like that I would take it as a clear sign she wasn't interested in anything but a couple free beers and a burger. Its highly likely it would be the only "date". To me the first few dates should show some effort and an appearance of trying to attract me. That outfit I wouldn't expect until several months in and a last minute hey lets go have a beer and throw a few darts. 

While that may seem shallow, I'll explain the deeper signal to me. If that's all the effort she's going to put into trying to get to know me, it would seem doubtful she'd put much effort into any relationship.


----------



## jld

2&out said:


> Just another "man" opinion about the "date" outfit. If I asked a lady on a date and she showed up dressed like that I would take it as a clear sign she wasn't interested in anything but a couple free beers and a burger. Its highly likely it would be the only "date". To me the first few dates should show some effort and an appearance of trying to attract me. That outfit I wouldn't expect until several months in and a last minute hey lets go have a beer and throw a few darts.
> 
> While that may seem shallow, I'll explain the deeper signal to me. If that's all the effort she's going to put into trying to get to know me, it would seem doubtful she'd put much effort into any relationship.


It sounds like she would just not be the gal for you. And her dressing how she is inspired to lets you both know that early on, saving time for both of you.


----------



## jld

always_alone said:


> Thank you!
> 
> I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone is so fixated on wardrobe. Sounds to me like OP has lots of men interested in her already. It is the maintenance of LTR that she's asking about.
> 
> And quite frankly dresses, heels, makeup doesn't help with this at all.
> When I dress up, I can probably get more men to pay attention to me in the moment, but unless OP is looking for some casual sex, so what? Guys who are after you because you look hot in the moment are pretty much after sex, not marriage.
> 
> IME the only guys worth investing anything at all relationshipwise are those who are going to accept and love you for who you are every day, not because of what you decide to put on for date night.
> 
> And if that means you miss out on a couple who can't see what's right in front of them? Oh well. There's plenty who can.


Another brilliant post from always alone . . .


----------



## misslonelyheart

So maybe posting the pic wasn't such a great idea because now everyone is fixated on clothes. Thing is, I don't have trouble getting dates. Even second and third and fourth dates. It's keeping them long term that I can't seem to manage. I've had a 4 year relationship, a 2 year relationship, a couple of 1 year relationships, and a couple of 3-4 month relationships. All of them moved on for one reason or another. Another woman, a better job out of state. I'm always the girl left behind. Since I know the first two cases were other women I'm coming to the conclusion that the others were probably about sex. Which means I'm either going to have to compromise my values (not happening) or accept that I may be alone for a long time if not for good. Because I know from experience that the really conservative religious types who won't push for sex before marriage are probably going to want a woman who is #1 a virgin and #2 willing to be a SAHM. Maybe I WILL go to Australia as a missionary, I hear there's a shortage of women in the outback and that Aussie men like their women strong.


----------



## Thor

always_alone said:


> I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone is so fixated on wardrobe. Sounds to me like OP has lots of men interested in her already. It is the maintenance of LTR that she's asking about.


The wardrobe is the symptom, not the problem. Though I can only go by the very little she has posted, she did post a photo and asked about her wardrobe.

As someone said, guys don't want to date their buddy, they want to date a woman. When she goes out on an activity like playing a sport or going for a hike, sure there is no reason she can't wear boots and comfortable clothing. Men love _doing things_ with their woman, and I think OP enjoys the kinds of activities which will mesh well with men. If she only liked to knit and bake, well she wouldn't have much in common with most men.

I perceive an issue where she can't show her feminine side. And then this is where she becomes more one of the guys than a girlfriend. Simply adding to her wardrobe a few more feminine pieces could make a big difference in how she is perceived.

Why is it that people have no problem telling men they should embrace and cultivate more of their masculine side, but it is a problem to tell a woman to embrace and cultivate more of her feminine side?


----------



## always_alone

Thor said:


> The wardrobe is the symptom, not the problem. Though I can only go by the very little she has posted, she did post a photo and asked about her wardrobe.
> 
> As someone said, guys don't want to date their buddy, they want to date a woman. When she goes out on an activity like playing a sport or going for a hike, sure there is no reason she can't wear boots and comfortable clothing. Men love _doing things_ with their woman, and I think OP enjoys the kinds of activities which will mesh well with men. If she only liked to knit and bake, well she wouldn't have much in common with most men.
> 
> I perceive an issue where she can't show her feminine side. And then this is where she becomes more one of the guys than a girlfriend. Simply adding to her wardrobe a few more feminine pieces could make a big difference in how she is perceived.
> 
> Why is it that people have no problem telling men they should embrace and cultivate more of their masculine side, but it is a problem to tell a woman to embrace and cultivate more of her feminine side?


But OP has pointed out time and time again that she has no problem getting dates. Men *do* want to go out with her. And why not? She is attractive and fun, and has lots to offer. She has also pointed out that she has her feminine tastes too, in decor, in being domestic, in wanting to be a mom and nurturer.

And the only reason she even posted that picture was because everyone was so fixated on what she wore.

Listen, I get the most men want swimsuit models and girly girls. It's no secret to any woman who has been on even one date. It's just not all that helpful to someone who doesn't fit so well into the mold.

More to the point, the simple fact of the matter is that a dress and some make-up isn't going to bring forth the marriage proposals. Trust me on this one. All it does is attract guys who want girly girls --exactly the type who are *not* going to be interested in OP long term.

Also, if you knew me, you'd know that I also make team same sorts of comments when everyone is jumping down some poor guy's throat because they've decided he isn't "manly" enough. 

Point being, there is nothing wrong with embracing your masculine or feminine side. What's problematic is trying to push people into these little boxes as to what that means.


----------



## tech-novelist

misslonelyheart said:


> Do I really come across as sounding like a feminist? Because I'm definitely not.


Yes, you do sound like a feminist, because you are very competitive and masculine-sounding, especially in how you describe the way you dress. Note that this doesn't mean you *are *a feminist, but that is what you sound like, and if I met you in person I would assume that you were a feminist by the way you dress and the way you describe your behavior.



misslonelyheart said:


> I'm actually a fairly conservative Christian. Yes I work in a reasonably liberal career field (teaching) but I'm at the elementary level which I've found is more conservative. I just don't want to be subservient to a man or pushed to be a SAHM because my career is important to me.


While I'm not a Christian, my understanding of Christianity is that women are supposed to be the followers and men are supposed to be the leaders. However, it doesn't matter what *I* think because I'm not your target audience. If you are interested in what a lot of conservative Christians think about this, read Dalrock's blog, starting with posts tagged "Finding a Spouse" (https://dalrock.wordpress.com/category/finding-a-spouse/).


----------



## tech-novelist

Thor said:


> The wardrobe is the symptom, not the problem. Though I can only go by the very little she has posted, she did post a photo and asked about her wardrobe.
> 
> As someone said, guys don't want to date their buddy, they want to date a woman. When she goes out on an activity like playing a sport or going for a hike, sure there is no reason she can't wear boots and comfortable clothing. Men love _doing things_ with their woman, and I think OP enjoys the kinds of activities which will mesh well with men. If she only liked to knit and bake, well she wouldn't have much in common with most men.
> 
> I perceive an issue where she can't show her feminine side. And then this is where she becomes more one of the guys than a girlfriend. Simply adding to her wardrobe a few more feminine pieces could make a big difference in how she is perceived.
> 
> Why is it that people have no problem telling men they should embrace and cultivate more of their masculine side, but it is a problem to tell a woman to embrace and cultivate more of her feminine side?


I assume that is a rhetorical question...


----------



## Thor

All I'm saying is that when it comes to date night she has to show some femininity. Date night is about the chemistry and polarity. If she is more butch than her date, she upsets that polarity. If she is not coming across as feminine she isn't feeding into the chemistry. Even if she is not going to have sex with the guy for months yet, he needs to feel some kind of sexual spark with her. When she shows up in men's clothing or baggy clothing which hides her shape, he's going to think of her as un-sexy.

Men who are considering marriage are looking for a woman who they can picture being a mom. Moms are feminine.

My wife is adventurous. She was rock climbing up until about the 5th month of pregnancy. We've gone wilderness backpacking with a 1 yr old. I'm not saying that OP should give up her adventurous streak. Personally I think it makes her a bit unique, and by doing these things with her man it will definitely boost the bonding. I'm just saying she should expand her palette a little bit. Go get all muddy and sweaty on some activity, but clean up for date night and wear something that reminds her man that she is the woman in the relationship, not just another buddy. Guys don't marry their buddy, they marry their girlfriend.


----------



## always_alone

tech-novelist said:


> I assume that is a rhetorical question...


And yet I answered it. Directly. Too bad you missed it.


----------



## samyeagar

Thor said:


> All I'm saying is that when it comes to date night she has to show some femininity. Date night is about the chemistry and polarity. If she is more butch than her date, she upsets that polarity. If she is not coming across as feminine she isn't feeding into the chemistry. Even if she is not going to have sex with the guy for months yet, he needs to feel some kind of sexual spark with her. When she shows up in men's clothing or baggy clothing which hides her shape, he's going to think of her as un-sexy.
> 
> Men who are considering marriage are looking for a woman who they can picture being a mom. Moms are feminine.
> 
> My wife is adventurous. She was rock climbing up until about the 5th month of pregnancy. We've gone wilderness backpacking with a 1 yr old. I'm not saying that OP should give up her adventurous streak. Personally I think it makes her a bit unique, and by doing these things with her man it will definitely boost the bonding. I'm just saying she should expand her palette a little bit. Go get all muddy and sweaty on some activity, but clean up for date night and wear something that reminds her man that she is the woman in the relationship, not just another buddy. Guys don't marry their buddy, they marry their *girlfriend*.


With the emphasis on the girl part more than the friend part.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
I think you are right that it is not about clothes - you can get dates. While some men are picky about clothes others (like me) really like casual. 

I think though that a combination of things that you want may reduce the number of available men. 

You want a career. The is wonderful - really: my wife has had a professional career her whole life and I absolutely wouldn't want it any other way This does though tend to eliminate some very conservative men who want stay at home wives.

You manner of dress is fine (I can't of course see your face, but I bet you are really attractive dressed like that - at least to people like me). But its a bit non traditional so more likely to attract liberal men. 

You don't want sex before marriage. This is your choice and absolutely fine - but there are many liberal men who would not want a sexless relationship, but would not want to risk a marriage with sexual incompatibility. 

This leaves you in a bit of a pickle. Everything you want is completely reasonable, but taken together they reduce the number of men who would be interested in a long term relationship / marriage. This is in no sense your "fault", but I think it is the real situation.

I'm sure that there are men who will want what you want - but you are going to have to look a lot to find them because they are fairly rare.

I would date you. You sound charming and it would be very nice - for a while. Eventually though when I realized (or you told me) that you wanted to wait for sex until marriage, I would regretfully have to leave. The possibility of a lifetime of incompatibility is just too high a risk. 

Its something you need to think about as well - you also risk marrying someone who is a selfish lover, and who will never change. Given your conservative ideals of marriage, you would likely never divorce because of that. 






misslonelyheart said:


> So maybe posting the pic wasn't such a great idea because now everyone is fixated on clothes. Thing is, I don't have trouble getting dates. Even second and third and fourth dates. It's keeping them long term that I can't seem to manage. I've had a 4 year relationship, a 2 year relationship, a couple of 1 year relationships, and a couple of 3-4 month relationships. All of them moved on for one reason or another. Another woman, a better job out of state. I'm always the girl left behind. Since I know the first two cases were other women I'm coming to the conclusion that the others were probably about sex. Which means I'm either going to have to compromise my values (not happening) or accept that I may be alone for a long time if not for good. Because I know from experience that the really conservative religious types who won't push for sex before marriage are probably going to want a woman who is #1 a virgin and #2 willing to be a SAHM. Maybe I WILL go to Australia as a missionary, I hear there's a shortage of women in the outback and that Aussie men like their women strong.


----------



## Luvher4life

misslonelyheart said:


> So maybe posting the pic wasn't such a great idea because now everyone is fixated on clothes. Thing is, I don't have trouble getting dates. Even second and third and fourth dates. It's keeping them long term that I can't seem to manage. I've had a 4 year relationship, a 2 year relationship, a couple of 1 year relationships, and a couple of 3-4 month relationships. All of them moved on for one reason or another. Another woman, a better job out of state. I'm always the girl left behind. Since I know the first two cases were other women I'm coming to the conclusion that the others were probably about sex. Which means I'm either going to have to compromise my values (not happening) or accept that I may be alone for a long time if not for good. Because I know from experience that the really conservative religious types who won't push for sex before marriage are probably going to want a woman who is #1 a virgin and #2 willing to be a SAHM. Maybe I WILL go to Australia as a missionary, I hear there's a shortage of women in the outback and that Aussie men like their women strong.


Misslonelyheart, I applaud you for not compromising your values. I ABSOLUTELY agree with that. Never ever compromise your values. That is who you are, and to change your principles will change you into a person you won't like.

Don't give up! You WILL find the right man in time. Who knows? It may happen this week, or next month, or two years from now, but it WILL happen. Just keep praying about it, and know that God is in control. His clock is different from yours, but He has His reasons.

I just want to say you are the kind of woman, based on the things you've posted, that is a keeper for sure. There's nothing "wrong" with the way you are, and showing your femininity will not change "who" you are. Sometimes, getting out of your own comfort zone is a good thing. It helps you grow as a person.

Some others have suggested hanging out with other women. I concur, and hopefully these women will share the same values as you. Expand your social group by attending churches elsewhere. While you may feel more comfortable around men, doing things men do, it would help you if you got in touch with your feminine side. I know you have one.

You will make some lucky man happy one day. If I were young and single, I would date your "type" in a heartbeat. I have enough experience to know a diamond in the rough...


----------



## Thor

Misslonelyheart, I recommend you visit the website themarriagebed.com . They are a Christian based site and forum which looks at the issues of sexuality.

Fyi, I am not religious but I am socially conservative. When I was single I would have found your values and experience level very attractive. Times are probably a lot different now in general, but I think there are a lot of men out there who would still value a woman who valued sex as important within a relationship. Too many young women (and young men) have disconnected sex from the relationship. It does cheapen sex, and all the studies show reduced long term marriage success when the number of premarital sex partners increases.

On the other hand, so many times we see that especially women are poisoned about sex with conservative religious messages. Somehow the message gets confused. In the religious context, pre-marital sex is wrong. In the conservative context, pre-marital sex is ok but promiscuity is not. Then this is internalized as all sex is bad, or that it is somehow dirty to feel desire or to enjoy sex. Even within a marriage these attitudes continue.

And this is where men might feel some worry. Will you really be sexual within a marriage? Do you like sex? Do you have hangups about sex?

Those questions can't be answered until a sexual relationship has existed for a while, and even then it really can't be answered until after the wedding. Guys certainly do hear all the warnings and jokes about sex dying after marriage. "Put a marble in a jar every time you have sex before marriage. After marriage take a marble out every time you have sex. The jar will never be empty." That's what's going through your dates' minds.

I am not saying you should change your morals or values. I actually find those to be a positive. My son isn't quite in your age range (still in college), but I'd be thrilled if he found a potential bride with your values rather than some party girl who never learned to have a close emotional attachment.

What I'm getting at is I think you should think about whether you have any hangups or bad attitudes about sex or your body. The way you describe your body and the comments you make about the model your first bf left you for concerns me. I live in a religiously conservative state, and I've heard a lot of stories about how especially the girls but even the boys end up with shame about sex which spills into their marriages and causes a lot of problems and divorces. I've heard friends say they know they were taught pre-marital sex was bad but sex within marriage is a blessing, yet they weren't able to make that switch in their mind after the wedding. All that shame about sex and their bodies couldn't be dropped even though they understood intellectually what was going on.


----------



## samyeagar

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I think you are right that it is not about clothes - you can get dates. While some men are picky about clothes others (like me) really like casual.
> 
> I think though that a combination of things that you want may reduce the number of available men.
> 
> You want a career. The is wonderful - really: my wife has had a professional career her whole life and I absolutely wouldn't want it any other way This does though tend to eliminate some very conservative men who want stay at home wives.
> 
> You manner of dress is fine (I can't of course see your face, but I bet you are really attractive dressed like that - at least to people like me). But its a bit non traditional so more likely to attract liberal men.
> 
> You don't want sex before marriage. This is your choice and absolutely fine - but there are many liberal men who would not want a sexless relationship, but would not want to risk a marriage with sexual incompatibility.
> 
> This leaves you in a bit of a pickle. Everything you want is completely reasonable, but taken together they reduce the number of men who would be interested in a long term relationship / marriage. This is in no sense your "fault", but I think it is the real situation.
> 
> I'm sure that there are men who will want what you want - but you are going to have to look a lot to find them because they are fairly rare.
> 
> I would date you. You sound charming and it would be very nice - for a while. Eventually though when I realized (or you told me) that you wanted to wait for sex until marriage, I would regretfully have to leave. The possibility of a lifetime of incompatibility is just too high a risk.
> 
> Its something you need to think about as well - you also risk marrying someone who is a selfish lover, and who will never change. Given your conservative ideals of marriage, you would likely never divorce because of that.


I am quite happily married but trying to look at this objectively, as a potential mate...

The initial few posts, the OP sounded like great LTR potential. As it has progressed, the totality of this thread, the things said, the picture, I am struggling to find a way to articulate exactly why, but I have felt a transition from relationship material to friend zone. I can't point to any one thing in particular, more the sum of the parts.


----------



## always_alone

misslonelyheart said:


> So maybe posting the pic wasn't such a great idea because now everyone is fixated on clothes. Thing is, I don't have trouble getting dates. Even second and third and fourth dates. It's keeping them long term that I can't seem to manage. I've had a 4 year relationship, a 2 year relationship, a couple of 1 year relationships, and a couple of 3-4 month relationships. All of them moved on for one reason or another. Another woman, a better job out of state. I'm always the girl left behind. Since I know the first two cases were other women I'm coming to the conclusion that the others were probably about sex. Which means I'm either going to have to compromise my values (not happening) or accept that I may be alone for a long time if not for good. Because I know from experience that the really conservative religious types who won't push for sex before marriage are probably going to want a woman who is #1 a virgin and #2 willing to be a SAHM. Maybe I WILL go to Australia as a missionary, I hear there's a shortage of women in the outback and that Aussie men like their women strong.


A lot of guys have these 3-date rules, which basically means if they don't get sex in three dates, they dump you and move on to a more accommodating woman. It isn't always 3 dates, some will wait a bit longer, but the overall rule is still there.

And, as you can see from the feedback here, a lot of guys insist on "feminine." Now for some, that just means dress sexy so they think of sex more, but for others it requires a whole lot more (which I personally find a bit ironic, given that apparently having feminine interests like knitting and baking is "boring", but then failing to have these interests is a turn-off, but there you have it)

So your pool is no doubt smaller than a lot of women who more naturally fit with these things, which will make it challenging for you.

I had a similar problem, for different reasons, and totally get how you feel. But once I realized that I didn't want to live up to some image in some guy's head, and wanted to be appreciated for what I brought to the table, I was much better at discerning who was interested in *me*, and who was just looking for a place-holder. 

The hardest part --at least for me -- was not letting it destroy my self-esteem in the process. Finding a good match is actually quite difficult, IMHO. It's easy to just go after the hottest people you encounter, and try to lock them down, but it doesn't mean there is anything there that will survive long term


----------



## Personal

misslonelyheart said:


> I'm actually a fairly conservative Christian.





misslonelyheart said:


> So it would seem that maybe I need to focus on guys who I know share my religious beliefs, because they are more likely to accept not having sex until later in the relationship. It's too bad there aren't any single guys my age in my church..





misslonelyheart said:


> I'm thinking of applying for a summer job at some kind of adventure camp. I would think the guys at a place like that might be a good match. Or maybe volunteering on a mission trip someplace not quite "safe", like my cousin who went to Kenya a few years back. Maybe I could spend the summer with my brother in Australia or in Hawaii with my brother who is stationed at Pearl Harbor. It's becoming pretty clear that I'm probably not going to find the right type of guy for me here at home. Of course if I meet the right guy in one of those places, I might very well end up not coming home.


That being the case don't try Australia, because trying your luck in Australia would diminish your opportunities rather than enhance them.

Since Australians of which I am one, are as a national collective amongst the top 10 least religious countries on the planet. Australians are in majority not religious (like me) and are far more liberal than they are conservative. And as an Australian who has been resident in different states, from the coast, to the centre of metropolises plus suburban fringes and all the way through small outback towns. I can assure you church is a pursuit followed by the minority not the majority, even the members of our armed forces are less religious than our not very religious general population.



misslonelyheart said:


> And I totally understand that my desire for a career killed my second relationship. That wasn't about sex at all because he wouldn't have even if I would have. He wasn't exactly upfront over the course of the relationship that he wanted a SAHM rather than a career woman.


Although I'm sure there will be some conservative Christian men out there who would have no problem with you having a career. Having said that, the combination of conservative and Christian would no doubt ensure many of them would consider that a problem, especially if they and you want to have children.

At the end of the day though, I don't think you should have to change who you are. That said there's no point in pretending that wearing clothes from the men's aisle, while pursuing a career makes you especially appealing to many conservative Christian men.


----------



## norajane

Thor said:


> The wardrobe is the symptom, not the problem. Though I can only go by the very little she has posted, she did post a photo and asked about her wardrobe.
> 
> As someone said, guys don't want to date their buddy, they want to date a woman. When she goes out on an activity like playing a sport or going for a hike, sure there is no reason she can't wear boots and comfortable clothing. Men love _doing things_ with their woman, and I think OP enjoys the kinds of activities which will mesh well with men. If she only liked to knit and bake, well she wouldn't have much in common with most men.


I have to reluctantly agree with this. Reluctantly, because there absolutely are guys who want to date their activity buddy, and some might even marry them, but for that to happen, there needs to be some sexy flirting and chemistry. What a guy thinks is sexy and flirty varies, but it's usually not someone covered from head to toe in big, thick layers.

In his younger years, my boyfriend dated sporty women almost exclusively, with varying degrees of femininity in their day and date clothes (all of whom were pretty wonderful in their individual ways). I'm not anywhere nearly as sporty, but I am the one he wants to marry because, sexy. Among other things, lol.



> I perceive an issue where she can't show her feminine side. And then this is where she becomes more one of the guys than a girlfriend.


I'm getting this impression, too. Like it's not just "I am generally not a frilly feminine kind of woman," but "I am opposed to showing femininity and I don't like women all that much." I could be wrong about that, but I sort of get that vibe, like she thinks there is something wrong with it.


----------



## nirvana

spinsterdurga said:


> Please send me the links associated with your findings. Thanks!


This is about helping the OP, not ramming ultra-feminist views down her throat and ruining her chances of finding a man who sticks around.


----------



## nirvana

Thor said:


> The wardrobe is the symptom, not the problem. Though I can only go by the very little she has posted, she did post a photo and asked about her wardrobe.
> 
> As someone said, guys don't want to date their buddy, they want to date a woman. When she goes out on an activity like playing a sport or going for a hike, sure there is no reason she can't wear boots and comfortable clothing. Men love _doing things_ with their woman, and I think OP enjoys the kinds of activities which will mesh well with men. If she only liked to knit and bake, well she wouldn't have much in common with most men.
> 
> I perceive an issue where she can't show her feminine side. And then this is where she becomes more one of the guys than a girlfriend. Simply adding to her wardrobe a few more feminine pieces could make a big difference in how she is perceived.
> 
> *Why is it that people have no problem telling men they should embrace and cultivate more of their masculine side, but it is a problem to tell a woman to embrace and cultivate more of her feminine side?*


Brilliant post! Ultra-Feminists need to read this.

I find it hilarious that some ultra-feminists tell men how they are supposed to think. Hey, if some (most) men like feminine women, we like feminine women. End of story. It is their choice. If a woman wants to appeal to such a man, then she has a chance only if she shows her feminine side. No (straight) man wants to date another man. If I want to hang out with a masculine woman, I'd rather do the real thing and hang out with my male buddies.


----------



## nirvana

OP, my view as a man is you need to dress feminine and nicely, but you should decide if you want to have sex or not. You should not compromise on that to keep a man. A good man should be interested in YOU, not just having sex. Once he "scores", such a man will most likely leave. 

Maybe you are unlucky that you are finding such men. Why don't you talk to some female friends of yours and ask them if they had sex in 3 dates? You need to get to what is different in what you are doing. But one thing is clear, most men don't like a manly woman or someone who is an ultra feminist (the hateful types). Most men want strong confident achieving women. It's usually the non-achievers who compensate with hatred, so men steer clear.


----------



## Personal

@misslonelyheart, I missed this before! I take it you don't really have much if any interest in sex at all?

The fact that you had sex once when you were in High School, and have subsequently not had sex after that for over a decade, all the way through to now as a 28 year old woman. Ought to give all but the most naive or asexual of men religious or otherwise strong pause, lest they want to risk almost certainly facing the sharp end of a sexless marriage.


----------



## Luvher4life

I think some people confuse femininity with weakness. That is certainly not the case, in my opinion. I have absolutely no problem with a competitive, athletic woman who can outdo me at some predominantly male pastimes. I actually enjoy competing, be it with a man or a woman. A woman can be very strong, while at the same time be feminine.

Sometimes, you meet women who have a lot more male friends than female friends. Some men might feel a little threatened by this. Not me, but I'm just saying that some men can feel like they are competing with other men for her attention when the female has lots of male friends. It can be mistakenly perceived that way, and thus put some potential suitors off.

I'm not saying that is what is happening here. It's just something to think about. That's one reason I suggested befriending more females. Getting in touch with a woman's feminine side in no way changes "who" she is, nor does it make her "weak". It just makes her a well-rounded personality, who can learn a little more about what makes men tick, in my opinion.

It seems to me that she is having trouble growing out of that attitude where it's "girly (weak) to act girly", while there is absolutely nothing wrong with being "girly" if you are a woman. That's where you have to have balance, and stop worrying what the men in your life "think". 

I have no doubt the OP is worth waiting for. It'll just take the right person to come along and actually appreciate who she is, and what she has to offer. The chances for that person to come along will increase if she does the above, in my opinion.

Another thing worth mentioning, sex is definitely something that most men are looking for, but if they "think" you are not "worth" waiting for, they are NOT the kind of man you want anyway. After dating someone, and you get comfortable with them, being an adult means you can discuss sex openly. It may not be comfortable talking about it, but you need to be open with the man, and tell him your feelings and expectations for any future sexual relationship. Most of all, don't compromise your beliefs to satisfy him. Sex is NOT some dirty deed, but is God's plan to "be fruitful and multiply", and he added much pleasure to it so that two people can connect physically, emotionally, and spiritually. Inside a marriage, there is nothing "wrong" with sex at all, outside of porn, or having another person there. It's extremely important to have a healthy attitude about sex, and I believe it to not be God's plan for a spouse to hold out on their spouse (after marriage) unless there's some physical condition that prevents it.


----------



## always_alone

norajane said:


> I'm getting this impression, too. Like it's not just "I am generally not a frilly feminine kind of woman," but "I am opposed to showing femininity and I don't like women all that much." I could be wrong about that, but I sort of get that vibe, like she thinks there is something wrong with it.


I don't get that from what she's saying at all. My impression is that she doesn't feel comfortable in dresses and doesn't want to wear high heels because she's afraid she will break her ankle again.

There's a difference between not finding something comfortable and being opposed to it.

Clearly most men want sexy, and are very vocal about it. Women are constantly judged for what they wear, whether it is relevant or not.

Should OP stretch her comfort zone and cater to this popular desire? Only if it will make her happy, I say.

I know enough women who are "sporty" not sexy that are in perfectly good marriages to know that just because most people like something doesn't mean you have to play along.


----------



## norajane

> I know enough women who are "sporty" not sexy that are in perfectly good marriages to know that just because most people like something doesn't mean you have to play along.


I get that, I really do. But she's on a forum asking about this because what she's doing hasn't made her happy. And we all know around here that the only thing we can change if we aren't happy with how things are is ourselves.


----------



## misslonelyheart

So in the process of all this soul searching I have gone so far as to text my 2 work exes that I am still FB friends with and asked both of them outright why they never consulted me about moving away or going with them. I got a message back from one of them and he basically said he didn't ask because he knew I would have said no so what would have been the point in asking? He wasn't about to turn down what was a great opportunity for him, and I was in the process of getting my Masters degree so he figured (rightly) that I wouldn't have been willing to go. I told him it would have been nice to be asked nonetheless but he said no guy wants to be turned down even when he's expecting it. He also told me I talked about marriage and kids too much and he found that a turnoff since his goal was to own his own restaurant before he ever considered settling down. I asked him if he thought we would still be together if he hadn't moved away and he said no, he isn't ready yet for a committed relationship. Then he came right out and admitted to me that he had been seeing (and having sex with) other girls while we were together. And told me never to date another chef if I wanted a successful marriage because every chef he's ever worked with has been a player! 

I am curious to see if I get a similar answer from the other guy. I've always thought he just might not have been ready for a serious relationship he is 4 years younger than me and was something of a momma's boy. Doesn't change the fact that he moved away and married another girl he'd known for only a few months, less than a year after dumping me.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Personal said:


> @misslonelyheart, I missed this before! I take it you don't really have much if any interest in sex at all?
> 
> The fact that you had sex once when you were in High School, and have subsequently not had sex after that for over a decade, all the way through to now as a 28 year old woman. Ought to give all but the most naive or asexual of men religious or otherwise strong pause, lest they want to risk almost certainly facing the sharp end of a sexless marriage.


I think you misunderstood. I didn't have sex once, I had sex with only one guy - my HS BF after we got engaged. So we were sexually active together for about a year. It simply didn't transfer to very many times because we were attending different colleges and not spending much time together. I'll admit I only agreed to it because he was pressuring me but I won't say I didn't enjoy it because I did.

I would have slept with my second fiance if he had asked but because he didn't believe in sex outside of marriage it never happened. In fact it bothered him quite a bit that I wasn't a virgin because he was. I've often wondered if the woman he married was.

I never slept with any of the other guys not due to lack of interest in sex but due to the fact that I never felt confident enough in the stability of the relationships to let things go all the way. And it's not like I did nothing with BFs 3 and 4 there was plenty going on it just wasn't vaginal sex. I just don't feel right about going all the way with a guy without a certain level of commitment that IMHO only comes with an engagement. Which you must remember can be broken, after all I've had it happen twice. So there's plenty of opportunity to find out if there's no sexual compatibility, and end it. Which I believe was probably the case with my HS BF. Because I realized after subsequent relationships that he and I really hadn't had much chemistry. It's not something you realize is missing until you've actually had it with someone... Sadly enough the strongest chemistry I've ever had someone was with the cheating *** I ended up dumping after I found out about his past...


----------



## Thor

misslonelyheart said:


> Doesn't change the fact that he moved away and married another girl he'd known for only a few months, less than a year after dumping me.


Ok the regulars here are probably going to fall off their chairs when they see this coming from me ....

*Don't compare yourself to other women that your current, future, or past boyfriends end up with*.

You and an ex-bf just weren't compatible. For whatever reason there was a disconnect. It doesn't make either one of you right, wrong, better, worse, defective, appealing, or anything else. You just didn't mesh enough to make it work out.

Which means you, as yourself, don't match with him, and _he as himself doesn't match with you_.

Look at it as he was the one who missed out because you're a great catch (and I do think you will be a great catch to someone) but he was deficient in some way so it didn't work out. Too bad for him.

Be like the salesman. When a sale doesn't go through you immediately say "Next!" and look for the next opportunity.


----------



## always_alone

norajane said:


> I get that, I really do. But she's on a forum asking about this because what she's doing hasn't made her happy. And we all know around here that the only thing we can change if we aren't happy with how things are is ourselves.


Yes, to be sure. No argument there. I'm just pointing out that conforming to what most people want isn't necessarily the best route to happiness.

We can only change ourselves, but we should also take care to change in those ways that will add to our happiness, not lessen it.

All I can say is that I could've changed to meet these sorts of expectations, and married this guy who had a certain image of who I should be. And I would've been miserable with him, and felt like I was caged. Instead, I spent a number of years going through the sorts of frustrations that OP is facing, but ended up with someone who is fine with me how I am, and isn't depressed because of what I will and won't wear, or what I do and don't like. He knew all along what he was getting himself into.

I'm all for personal growth and trying new things. But we should do it because it is what *we* want, not because "most people" think you should be that way.


----------



## Wolf1974

2&out said:


> Just another "man" opinion about the "date" outfit. If I asked a lady on a date and she showed up dressed like that I would take it as a clear sign she wasn't interested in anything but a couple free beers and a burger. Its highly likely it would be the only "date". To me the first few dates should show some effort and an appearance of trying to attract me. That outfit I wouldn't expect until several months in and a last minute hey lets go have a beer and throw a few darts.
> 
> While that may seem shallow, I'll explain the deeper signal to me. If that's all the effort she's going to put into trying to get to know me, it would seem doubtful she'd put much effort into any relationship.


Not shallow at all just the way it's suppose to be. I kinda doubt many women would think a guy was taking a date seriously if they showed up in sweats, t shirt and ball cap


----------



## always_alone

Thor said:


> You and an ex-bf just weren't compatible. For whatever reason there was a disconnect. It doesn't make either one of you right, wrong, better, worse, defective, appealing, or anything else. You just didn't mesh enough to make it work out.
> 
> Which means you, as yourself, don't match with him, and _he as himself doesn't match with you_.


Yes! This. Exactly.

The hardest part is to not let rejection or frustration kill your self-esteem.

Remember that you are not just the one who was dumped, but also one who has dumped because he didn't mesh with you.

Remember that sometimes it is just life circumstance and where you are at the moment, not necessarily a commentary on you.

Remember that you have plenty of men asking you out, and are capable of LTR.

And then decide what changes you wish to make to become the person you aspire to be.


----------



## 2&out

TAM makes me smile at times - which is why I read here. Here we again have a few women telling men how they are wrong about what we are looking for and want in a long term i.e. marriage partner. It's a bit of a funny TAM pattern.

Some people like to be gentle which is great but I'm glad she sees that maybe she will never marry and have a family. "It will happen" ? Umm nope - it might not. I know two "great women" - one of which who is especially attractive/hot even at 57 - who are not and never have been married. There isn't anything really wrong with them. They are smart, strong, accomplished, determined people who aren't compromising themselves or their ways for anyone - as it is the way they are. Neither are "loose" women and have high self respect -- maybe a little too much. I like them both a lot. Would I want to be married to them ? Nope - and no one else worth a crap has either.

Anyone who says you don't have to compromise yourself and make concessions in a long term relationship/marriage IMHO has never been in one or is straight out lying. Marriage IS a compromise. I have never heard of or seen a successful one where BOTH didn't. If your not willing to compromise and make some changes in yourself frankly your not marriage material. It's my way or no way doesn't work for long in marriage.


----------



## turnera

My DD25 wouldn't date just anyone. And she was a virgin until 19 because she wouldn't put out just for anyone. And she is sure of herself so she was never the giggly feminine thing that hangs on a guy's arm. So she spent a lot of time alone. I told her not to change, that because she IS so specific and sure of herself and not willing to take just any guy, that narrowed her choices and her compatibility. She was all set to work through her masters, and maybe PhD, without a guy, when she got set up on a blind date. That will be two years ago next month and they seem perfect for each other. You just never know. Keep doing your life, and someone's going to cross your path. 

You never know though - something like match.com just might weed out all the incompatible ones.


----------



## misslonelyheart

2&out said:


> TAM makes me smile at times - which is why I read here. Here we again have a few women telling men how they are wrong about what we are looking for and want in a long term i.e. marriage partner. It's a bit of a funny TAM pattern.
> 
> Some people like to be gentle which is great but I'm glad she sees that maybe she will never marry and have a family. "It will happen" ? Umm nope - it might not. I know two "great women" - one of which who is especially attractive/hot even at 57 - who are not and never have been married. There isn't anything really wrong with them. They are smart, strong, accomplished, determined people who aren't compromising themselves or their ways for anyone - as it is the way they are. Neither are "loose" women and have high self respect -- maybe a little too much. I like them both a lot. Would I want to be married to them ? Nope - and no one else worth a crap has either.
> 
> Anyone who says you don't have to compromise yourself and make concessions in a long term relationship/marriage IMHO has never been in one or is straight out lying. Marriage IS a compromise. I have never heard of or seen a successful one where BOTH didn't. If your not willing to compromise and make some changes in yourself frankly your not marriage material.


I agree with this actually. I also don't think someone really loves you if they want you to "compromise" to the point where you have to sacrifice something you consider an important part of yourself. In my second relationship, he wanted me to give up my career goals for him. That was simply unacceptable to me. Especially since he waited until 6 months from the wedding date to tell me so. I think if he had been honest about this up front we never would have lasted 6 months together.

My oldest brother is 15 years older than me. He didn't marry until he was 40 years old. The woman he married was 35. They've both accepted they'll probably never have kids of their own and are looking into adoption. He married late because he fell in love in his early 20s, lost the girl to another man, and simply took another 15 years to find someone else he loved as much. He wasn't willing to settle for anything less than the same strong feelings he had for his ex and it just took him a long time to find that. He and his wife are both very much in love and incredibly glad they waited for each other. I would have to say I feel the same way - I'm willing to wait for the right guy. It's just that at the same time one does tend to start feeling bad about never being wanted long term.

I wonder if there's a case to be made that if I actually did find the right guy I would find myself WILLING to change - at least somewhat - for him? Would I be willing to have sex prior to engagement/marriage if not doing so would risk losing someone I couldn't bear losing? I just don't know.


----------



## jorgegene

2&out said:


> TAM makes me smile at times - which is why I read here. Here we again have a few women telling men how they are wrong about what we are looking for and want in a long term i.e. marriage partner. It's a bit of a funny TAM pattern.
> 
> Some people like to be gentle which is great but I'm glad she sees that maybe she will never marry and have a family. "It will happen" ? Umm nope - it might not. I know two "great women" - one of which who is especially attractive/hot even at 57 - who are not and never have been married. There isn't anything really wrong with them. They are smart, strong, accomplished, determined people who aren't compromising themselves or their ways for anyone - as it is the way they are. Neither are "loose" women and have high self respect -- maybe a little too much. I like them both a lot. Would I want to be married to them ? Nope - and no one else worth a crap has either.
> 
> Anyone who says you don't have to compromise yourself and make concessions in a long term relationship/marriage IMHO has never been in one or is straight out lying. Marriage IS a compromise. I have never heard of or seen a successful one where BOTH didn't. If your not willing to compromise and make some changes in yourself frankly your not marriage material. It's my way or no way doesn't work for long in marriage.


you make a very good, and valid point, but i think what some of us are trying to encourage is for her to be true to herself and don't compromise who she is. however, once she is in that serious relationship and committed, that's when the compromising starts.
not her core values, mind you, but on all the daily, negotiable things that don't change who you essentially are.

when presenting herself, i am of the opinion that she should be be who she already is and not change a thing.

btw the way, it took me 58 years to find the right person, but i did, and i hope it doesn't take her that long. some people never find the right person, so i consider myself fortunate.


----------



## misslonelyheart

always_alone said:


> And then decide what changes you wish to make to become the person you aspire to be.


Oh hell. Now you've got me questioning whether or not I really am already the person I want to be, or if I'm just stuck in a comfort zone.

Hey, never stop growing and learning, right?

It's the second snow day in a row and the sun has come out for the first time in DAYS. Time to take a computer break and go outside for a while.


----------



## Luvher4life

I like what tunera says, and it's true.

The only thing I might add is, if the OP wants advice, she is getting it, whether she heeds it or not. It's not about hearing what you "want" to hear, but hearing actual advice.

2&out is right, too, in that making compromises (not on your core beliefs and values) is something everybody absolutely HAS to do to make any relationship work for the long term. Only you know you own limitations as to what you are willing to do to make things work, and I would never advise anybody to agree to have sex with somebody just to keep them around, or to give up their career. Those are CORE beliefs that shouldn't be changed. If a man can't accept the CORE you, he is not worth it, in my opinion. You can make positive changes in the way you are perceived in order to be more attractive, however, without changing "who" you are. To me, Just what are you willing to change about yourself in order to get the desired result? That's the million dollar question.


----------



## always_alone

2&out said:


> TAM makes me smile at times - which is why I read here. Here we again have a few women telling men how they are wrong about what we are looking for and want in a long term i.e. marriage partner.


No one is telling men they are wrong for what they want. Indeed pretty much everyone has validated it.

The only thing I'm disputing is that because most men want this doesn't mean that all men want it. 

And the fact that some men here are also saying the same thing, I feel pretty confident in this observation.


----------



## Luvher4life

Are you looking for some kind of validation of your own opinions, or are you really looking for advice? There are many men who would accept you just the way you are. The apparent problem is they are just fewer and further between. You are just fine the way you are, without changing anything. If you want to attract a bigger selection of men, with better odds of finding the right man, you will have to make some changes, no matter how subtle. Just saying...


----------



## Evinrude58

Is the OP a manly dresser? Yes, admittedly she shops at army surplus and wears combat boots. 
There are men that find that attractive. Are they the marrying type? I don't know. They likely aren't the type OP wants, or she'd be married.

I say dress and act like a woman, because the OP IS A WOMAN. Her 60 mph fastball and driving skills aren't good bait for most guys. Her skinny frame that she doesn't like DOES attract plenty of men.
She is just combining the butchy look with it and it's a turn off for me, anyway.

She needs to be herself. Nobody is asking her to change herself. I actually like 99% of the things she describes herself to be. But the manly dressing and man-buddy behavior are not conducive to making men desire her. Just my opinion. She could dress a little more feminine. I think her calling up her exes and asking them about what happened is a great idea---- but I was at first thinking WTH!! when I first read that. I think the guy answered her honestly and it's something for her to think about.

The sex thing is not a problem to me. A woman who is easy and has sex in three dates is not marriage material in my book. Dating material, but not marriage material. Heck, I don't have sex with someone in three dates in most cases! That's nasty.

OP, just consider wearing some more feminine clothes. I would not go for "sexy", I'd go for "womanly". I believe a good man is just wanting a loyal, hardworking, fun woman to marry. They don't have to be models, they just have to represent themselves as a WOMAN. They don't have to be sex gurus, they just have to show their man they WANT them sexually. They don't have to be super exciting, they just need to make their man EXCITED to see them-- and that comes from fulfilling their needs for intimacy and womanly conversation and create a good nest. Not all about sex. But a man does need some sex, and a woman should need it too. 

If it wouldn't kill you to wear a dress, put on some clean shoes and a little lipstick, and smile at a man once in a while-- I think that would go a long way. We don't care how good you are at sports. But we might like knowing you'd be willing to do some things a man likes to do ( you are, and that's a great thing).

Yes, one should look nice when being taken out on a date. And one should look nice for the person they are going out with, not themselves. Show the person you care about what THEY think. Don't make everything all about showing them how YOU are. That makes a guy think if they date you, it's always going to be all about what you like and what you want to do. Women always want the man to do all the compromising and take them to do things the woman enjoys. You have the desire to enjoy things a MAN likes to do. I'm kind of shocked with that good trait alone, you haven't had a line of guys wanting you badly. 
THere's got to be more to this story. The combat boots says a lot, though.


----------



## samyeagar

Evinrude58 said:


> Is the OP a manly dresser? Yes, admittedly she shops at army surplus and wears combat boots.
> There are men that find that attractive. Are they the marrying type? I don't know. They likely aren't the type OP wants, or she'd be married.
> 
> I say dress and act like a woman, because the OP IS A WOMAN. Her 60 mph fastball and driving skills aren't good bait for most guys. Her skinny frame that she doesn't like DOES attract plenty of men.
> She is just combining the butchy look with it and it's a turn off for me, anyway.
> 
> She needs to be herself. Nobody is asking her to change herself. I actually like 99% of the things she describes herself to be. But the manly dressing and man-buddy behavior are not conducive to making men desire her. Just my opinion. She could dress a little more feminine. I think her calling up her exes and asking them about what happened is a great idea---- but I was at first thinking WTH!! when I first read that. I think the guy answered her honestly and it's something for her to think about.
> 
> The sex thing is not a problem to me. A woman who is easy and has sex in three dates is not marriage material in my book. Dating material, but not marriage material. Heck, I don't have sex with someone in three dates in most cases! That's nasty.
> 
> OP, just consider wearing some more feminine clothes. I would not go for "sexy", I'd go for "womanly". I believe a good man is just wanting a loyal, hardworking, fun woman to marry. They don't have to be models, they just have to represent themselves as a WOMAN. They don't have to be sex gurus, they just have to show their man they WANT them sexually. They don't have to be super exciting, they just need to make their man EXCITED to see them-- and that comes from fulfilling their needs for intimacy and womanly conversation and create a good nest. Not all about sex. But a man does need some sex, and a woman should need it too.
> 
> If it wouldn't kill you to wear a dress, put on some clean shoes and a little lipstick, and smile at a man once in a while-- I think that would go a long way. We don't care how good you are at sports. But we might like knowing you'd be willing to do some things a man likes to do ( you are, and that's a great thing).
> 
> Yes, one should look nice when being taken out on a date. And one should look nice for the person they are going out with, not themselves. Show the person you care about what THEY think. Don't make everything all about showing them how YOU are. That makes a guy think if they date you, it's always going to be all about what you like and what you want to do. Women always want the man to do all the compromising and take them to do things the woman enjoys. You have the desire to enjoy things a MAN likes to do. *I'm kind of shocked with that good trait alone, you haven't had a line of guys wanting you badly.*
> THere's got to be more to this story. The combat boots says a lot, though.


She has had plenty of interest, and no problems finding dates. I suspect that is because there are a lot of men who, at first glance, see her as an attractive female. After a while though, I think that through behavior, attitude, and appearance, that first impression simply doesn't stick because she inserts herself squarely into buddy territory.

I am friendly with a lot of women, but I have very few female friends because I'm not really a good girlfriend, which is probably at least part of why I have been pretty successfully romantically...not many women are attracted long term to the male versions of their girlfriends. Likewise, not many men are attracted to the female versions of their guyfriends.


----------



## turnera

misslonelyheart said:


> I wonder if there's a case to be made that if I actually did find the right guy I would find myself WILLING to change - at least somewhat - for him? Would I be willing to have sex prior to engagement/marriage if not doing so would risk losing someone I couldn't bear losing? I just don't know.


Well, that's what a marriage is, isn't it? Compromise? Otherwise you'd just be single. The thing is, the things you should be willing to change shouldn't change your core beliefs. They should be things you both agree on, where it's an equal relationship - BOTH of you should be making changes to make life together enjoyable. 

As for the sex thing, I guess I'd ask you to ask yourself WHY you believe you shouldn't have sex before then. What's your real reasoning?


----------



## turnera

Evinrude58 said:


> Is the OP a manly dresser? Yes, admittedly she shops at army surplus and wears combat boots.
> There are men that find that attractive. Are they the marrying type? I don't know. They likely aren't the type OP wants, or she'd be married.
> 
> I say dress and act like a woman, because the OP IS A WOMAN. Her 60 mph fastball and driving skills aren't good bait for most guys. Her skinny frame that she doesn't like DOES attract plenty of men.
> She is just combining the butchy look with it and it's a turn off for me, anyway.
> 
> She needs to be herself. Nobody is asking her to change herself. I actually like 99% of the things she describes herself to be. But the manly dressing and man-buddy behavior are not conducive to making men desire her. Just my opinion. She could dress a little more feminine.


I agree. If a guy wanted a manly mate, he may just as well date a man.

Question: are you sure you dress manly because it is who you are? Or do you dress manly because it gives you an 'identity?' If it's the latter, it might behoove you to do a little digging into that in therapy.


----------



## always_alone

samyeagar said:


> She has had plenty of interest, and no problems finding dates. I suspect that is because there are a lot of men who, at first glance, see her as an attractive female. After a while though, I think that through behavior, attitude, and appearance, that first impression simply doesn't stick because she inserts herself squarely into buddy territory.


Umm, but she's had two proposals. Two. Now granted they didn't work out as planned; once, it turns out because he moved away while she was doing a degree, and once because it turned out he wanted her to be a SAHM, and she wasn't up for that. 

So, it had nothing to do with the combat boots or the wardrobe, and everything to do with timing and career. Should she give that up as well to be more "feminine"? And if so, where does it stop?



samyeagar said:


> I am friendly with a lot of women, but I have very few female friends because I'm not really a good girlfriend, which is probably at least part of why I have been pretty successfully romantically...not many women are attracted long term to the male versions of their girlfriends. Likewise, not many men are attracted to the female versions of their guyfriends.


I really don't understand this at all. She decorates her room in roses, spends her time looking after people, has a career as a nurturer, and wants to be a mom. Is this what your guy friends are like? 

Who made the rule that a man cannot both be a friend to women as well as successful romantically, or that a woman cannot have male friends without being unattractive? People are a whole lot more complex than the "guys are like this", "women are like that", don't you think?


----------



## samyeagar

always_alone said:


> Umm, but she's had two proposals. Two. Now granted they didn't work out as planned; once, it turns out because he moved away while she was doing a degree, and once because it turned out he wanted her to be a SAHM, and she wasn't up for that.
> 
> So, it had nothing to do with the combat boots or the wardrobe, and everything to do with timing and career. Should she give that up as well to be more "feminine"? And if so, where does it stop?
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't understand this at all. She decorates her room in roses, spends her time looking after people, has a career as a nurturer, and wants to be a mom. Is this what your guy friends are like?
> 
> Who made the rule that a man cannot both be a friend to women as well as successful romantically, or that a woman cannot have male friends without being unattractive? People are a whole lot more complex than the "guys are like this", "women are like that", don't you think?


Of course circumstances and timing are at play, and are also part and parcel with entirety of the relationship. Those things just contribute to them not being a match, but didn't cause them not to be.

You reiterated the more traditionally female things the OP has mentioned, but I am left wondering how well those kinds of things are being communicated to the guys she has dated. The things she has focused on here are the rough and tumble, tomboy, athletic, competitive, lets hang out and be buddies kinds of things. Those are great qualities in a wife, but for myself, and I suspect a lot of men, those are just icing on the cake kinds of things. I want a whole lot more.


----------



## 2&out

I agree on core major things - those shouldn't be changed. I think your getting some good insight and advise !


----------



## always_alone

samyeagar said:


> I suspect a lot of men, those are just icing on the cake kinds of things. I want a whole lot more.


And you've said a whole mouthful here. And the underlying message is that a lot of men do not like tomboys. They might sort of like the idea of being able to do the occasional activity with them, but that this is absolutely *not* what they want in a woman. 

And, of course, I totally agree and have said as much. 

All I can say is that personally, I am very glad that "a lot" of men, even "most" men, is not *all* men. And not because I am a tomboy, because I'm not really. Heck, I'm even wearing a skirt as I type this. But apparently wearing a dress isn't enough to avoid being emasculating.

And for me this is the crux: you can change whatever about yourself so that "a lot" of men find you more desirable. But at what point does it stop? And ultimately what purpose does it serve? More dates with guys who want you to be a SAHM who wears flowered dresses?


----------



## Luvher4life

My question is, again, is she asking for advice on how to attract men, or is she just trying to validate herself to other women?

There's obviously something about her personality that is either attracting the wrong kind of man, or driving potential suitors away. That is the unknown in this equation, because she is obviously attractive enough to get plenty of attention.

Maybe the alpha female personality traits need to be toned down a bit? Maybe she needs to talk in the present more, before talking about marriage and kids too early? Maybe she needs to soften up a little, and show some vulnerability? Maybe she's just a little too opinionated, not respecting others opinions enough to let them be?

Without meeting her, or with little information, it is hard to say "exactly" why she's having trouble finding the right man. All we can do is give advice based on the little she has let us know about.


----------



## Julius Beastcavern

always_alone said:


> And you've said a whole mouthful here. And the underlying message is that a lot of men do not like tomboys. They might sort of like the idea of being able to do the occasional activity with them, but that this is absolutely *not* what they want in a woman.
> 
> And, of course, I totally agree and have said as much.
> 
> All I can say is that personally, I am very glad that "a lot" of men, even "most" men, is not *all* men. And not because I am a tomboy, because I'm not really. Heck, I'm even wearing a skirt as I type this. But apparently wearing a dress isn't enough to avoid being emasculating.
> 
> And for me this is the crux: you can change whatever about yourself so that "a lot" of men find you more desirable. But at what point does it stop? And ultimately what purpose does it serve? More dates with guys who want you to be a SAHM who wears flowered dresses?


You keep mentioning being emasculated but I don't think any of the men here are suggesting they lose their manhood around a tomboy, TBF OP you have a good figure but you give out a 'butch' vibe. Make the most of what you have.


----------



## misslonelyheart

turnera said:


> As for the sex thing, I guess I'd ask you to ask yourself WHY you believe you shouldn't have sex before then. What's your real reasoning?


It's pretty simple actually. It's how I was raised. In fact I took a purity pledge as a teen and actually kind of regret that I broke it with my first ex. We justified it with our engagement. Which didn't work out, so it really wasn't justified in the end, was it? I remember how much it bothered my second BF that he was a virgin and I wasn't. He really wanted our wedding night to be the first time for both of us not just him. I often wonder if that didn't contribute as much to his leaving as my not wanting to give up my career plans. He brought it up often enough for me to know it was something he was having a hard time accepting. I think maybe just as much as the religious aspect of it, he might have been afraid that since he had ZERO experience, he might not measure up to my HS BF. He was SO anti-sex before marriage, we never did ANYTHING past kissing in 2 years together! He said he was afraid we might lose control and go too far so he wouldn't do anything at all. It's a shame, really. He was a really passionate guy about everything he ever did and I'm guessing he probably ended up being the same way in bed.


----------



## always_alone

Julius Beastcavern said:


> You keep mentioning being emasculated but I don't think any of the men here are suggesting they lose their manhood around a tomboy, TBF OP you have a good figure but you give out a 'butch' vibe. Make the most of what you have.


Several other (male!) posters used the word first, I'm just riffing on it.

What I would like to know, though, is what makes a woman "butch"?

I mean I get that women aren't supposed to wear combat boots, and they are supposed to wear dresses and high heels, etc.

But is it all wardrobe? Is a woman "butch" if she is competitive? Independent? Better at sports or athletics than her man?


----------



## Julius Beastcavern

always_alone said:


> Several other (male!) posters used the word first, I'm just riffing on it.
> 
> What I would like to know, though, is what makes a woman "butch"?
> 
> I mean I get that women aren't supposed to wear combat boots, and they are supposed to wear dresses and high heels, etc.
> 
> But is it all wardrobe? Is a woman "butch" if she is competitive? Independent? Better at sports or athletics than her man?


Good question, I actually can't really explain it, I think clothes play a big part, it's the first thing I thought when I saw the pic. I don't consider competitive, independent and athletic women are butch otherwise I wouldn't fancy so many Olympic athletes :grin2:


----------



## samyeagar

always_alone said:


> And you've said a whole mouthful here. And the underlying message is that a lot of men do not like tomboys. They might sort of like the idea of being able to do the occasional activity with them, but that this is absolutely *not* what they want in a woman.
> 
> And, of course, I totally agree and have said as much.
> 
> All I can say is that personally, I am very glad that "a lot" of men, even "most" men, is not *all* men. And not because I am a tomboy, because I'm not really. Heck, I'm even wearing a skirt as I type this. But apparently wearing a dress isn't enough to avoid being emasculating.
> 
> And for me this is the crux: you can change whatever about yourself so that "a lot" of men find you more desirable. But at what point does it stop? And ultimately what purpose does it serve? More dates with guys who want you to be a SAHM who wears flowered dresses?


I think it is vitally important to stay true to who you are. In order to do that, you have to actually know who you are at your core, as opposed to what your personal preferences are.

At my core, I am not a selfish person. I am honest. I subscribe to things being shades of grey as opposed to black and white. I see no value in being right simply for the sake of being right...sort of the whole cut off your nose to spite your face. I tend not to take very many things personally because I understand that I can not control, and have no say in what others think, feel, and do.

My preference is to be clean shaven, but my wife loves the facial hair, so I don't often shave, but keep things trimmed up nice and neat. I don't feel as if I am betraying who I am at my core. My personal identity and being is not tied to my facial hair, or lack there of. Most things, when you get right down to it have nothing to do with a persons core being, but are simply preferences masked as needs and core values.

My first thought when I hear things like I don't want to dress a certain way, keep my hair a certain way...is that persons self identity really tied that tightly to their appearance that they feel it is betraying who they are at their core? That applies to other things in life as well.

The more one ties personal preferences to their core being, to their personal identity, the more difficult it will be to find a suitable match. There is nothing wrong with that, but contrary to popular mantra, very few people can actually have it all.


----------



## Thor

misslonelyheart said:


> I wonder if there's a case to be made that if I actually did find the right guy I would find myself WILLING to change - at least somewhat - for him? Would I be willing to have sex prior to engagement/marriage if not doing so would risk losing someone I couldn't bear losing? I just don't know.


That's a really tough spot for you. I guess my main comment is for you to really think about why you have this boundary of no sex before engagement. Where does that come from? What are you trying to accomplish with it?

The predominant local religion (Mormonism) is very strong on chastity before marriage. As a result, many young adults do everything, and that does mean _everything_, imaginable except PiV before the wedding night. They have rationalized it that they are meeting the requirements put in place by their church doctrine. We can understand what the goal is for these young adults, which is to not cross that PiV line.

Wanting to make sure you're not just being used for sex is a good goal. I bet a lot of young men are looking for an exclusive relationship but aren't looking for marriage yet. Those are the guys you have run into so far and it sounds like don't want to get too deeply involved in in the future.

I think you may find that many religious men who value chasteness will not themselves be virgins. They'll just have histories like yours, with a few relationships and one or two sex partners. Don't get hung up on thinking you're in some kind of limbo where you're not a virgin but you're too inexperienced or restrained.

Big point here: Don't lie or be deceptive about your past! If you do get involved with a religious man who may be uncomfortable with your past, be openly honest with him.

You sound like you're pretty focused on having kids. Finding a man who wants to jump in to a family probably means looking for slightly older men rather than younger men. Around 30 yrs old I bet the men are starting to think a bit more about kids.


----------



## Luvher4life

misslonelyheart said:


> It's pretty simple actually. It's how I was raised. In fact I took a purity pledge as a teen and actually kind of regret that I broke it with my first ex. We justified it with our engagement. Which didn't work out, so it really wasn't justified in the end, was it? I remember how much it bothered my second BF that he was a virgin and I wasn't. He really wanted our wedding night to be the first time for both of us not just him. I often wonder if that didn't contribute as much to his leaving as my not wanting to give up my career plans. He brought it up often enough for me to know it was something he was having a hard time accepting. I think maybe just as much as the religious aspect of it, he might have been afraid that since he had ZERO experience, he might not measure up to my HS BF. He was SO anti-sex before marriage, we never did ANYTHING past kissing in 2 years together! He said he was afraid we might lose control and go too far so he wouldn't do anything at all. It's a shame, really. He was a really passionate guy about everything he ever did and I'm guessing he probably ended up being the same way in bed.


Trust me when I say this. It wasn't you that had the problem, it was him. I'm a Christian, and I can identify with the "pledge". I can't see fault with that at all, and I admire you for sticking to your guns about it. Don't compromise this core belief just because you "want" a man to hang around. If he's not cool with it, he is not the right man for you. Both of my daughters (ages 18 & 15) have taken this same pledge, and I pray they stick to it, and I think they will.

Have faith. Pray about it. It will happen.

Did you read my posts? Is there anything you can identify with that I mentioned, or is there something else that could be causing men to not stick around?


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
Being true to your beliefs is important. 

But - there is never harm in introspection to understand your own beliefs about right and wrong. I do not believe that a "purity pledge" made as a teen binds you as an adult. You are free to choose differently IF YOU WANT.


If you think waiting for sex is reducing your chances of finding what you want, then think about that choice - think about why you made it and whether those reasons are still valid.

The same goes for any other choices you have made about life. 

Violating your own beliefs is bad, but consciously deciding to change your beliefs is fine as long as you are honest with yourself. 






misslonelyheart said:


> It's pretty simple actually. It's how I was raised. In fact I took a purity pledge as a teen and actually kind of regret that I broke it with my first ex. We justified it with our engagement. Which didn't work out, so it really wasn't justified in the end, was it? I remember how much it bothered my second BF that he was a virgin and I wasn't. He really wanted our wedding night to be the first time for both of us not just him. I often wonder if that didn't contribute as much to his leaving as my not wanting to give up my career plans. He brought it up often enough for me to know it was something he was having a hard time accepting. I think maybe just as much as the religious aspect of it, he might have been afraid that since he had ZERO experience, he might not measure up to my HS BF. He was SO anti-sex before marriage, we never did ANYTHING past kissing in 2 years together! He said he was afraid we might lose control and go too far so he wouldn't do anything at all. It's a shame, really. He was a really passionate guy about everything he ever did and I'm guessing he probably ended up being the same way in bed.


----------



## Annie123

OP, you mentioned that one of your exes said that you talked about marriage and kids too much and it was a turn off for him. Can you explain this a little bit? Do you agree with him that you brought up marriage and kids too much/too often?


----------



## weightlifter

misslonelyheart said:


> Please ignore the corny music references it's just something I do.:grin2:
> 
> Found this site googling relationship advice. Been lurking here for a while but here goes with my first post.
> 
> I'm 28 years old. Never been married. Can't seem to make it to the altar. My relationship history over the past decade:
> 
> 1. High school boyfriend from age 15 to 19. This guy was my brother's best friend. 3 years older than me. We got engaged when I was 18 and were planning on getting married as soon as I finished college. Everyone thought we were the perfect couple including me. Then he 'found' his dream when he got scouted by a minor league baseball team. Got sent out of state for a few weeks. Met a girl who was a real life Sports Illustrated Swimsuit model and hooked up with her. Came home and dumped me. After 4 years together, I'm suddenly not exciting enough, not attractive enough, not sexy enough. He's now married to a red-headed bombshell and they have 2 year old twins. (In case anyone is wondering he never did make it to the majors.)
> 
> 2. Second boyfriend met about a year later. He was almost 5 years older than me. We were together for 2 years. I was CRAZY about him and really thought he felt the same way. Once again, we got engaged and made plans to marry as soon as we graduated. He went home to Texas for Christmas, called and told me he had met someone else and on the flight home no less. He actually said he loved me more but she "fit his lifestyle" better. Apparently I was 'too independent' for him - I wanted a career and she was happy to be a stay at home wife/mom. Well he had never told me that was what he wanted. Hell I didn't think any men wanted that anymore. He married her only 3 months later. It just about killed me. Now they're expecting their first child and it still hurts. I keep thinking that should have been me.
> 
> 3 and 4 - co-workers at the job where I worked to put myself through college. Chefs in the restaurant where I was a server. Both relationships lasted about a year. Second one started about 3 months after the first one ended - in fact the first guy introduced me to the second guy. Both left me for the same reason - they got better jobs out of state. Neither of them invited me to go with them. It was pretty obvious I cared more about them than either one of them cared about me.
> 
> 5th - another co-worker (another restaurant). Dated for about 4 months. Was really starting to care A LOT about this guy we had a ton in common and he just made me feel really really good just being with him. One day our boss took me aside and asked me what my involvement was with him. Proceeded to tell me the guy had 3 kids with 3 different women and that he was still living with the mother of the youngest kid. Apparently I being groomed to be his next in line. Broke up with him and quit working there on the same day. Couldn't believe I had been so foolish/naive as to have been the 'other woman' and not even suspected it.
> 
> Finished my Master's degree last spring. Got a "real" job working as a librarian/computer teacher in my local elementary school. My niece and nephew go to school there so it's pretty cool working there. There's this one teacher there, he's 32, single, really nice, good looking. He made it pretty obvious he was interested in me right from the beginning. Then after we had gone out a few times, he basically friend-zoned me. Said it wasn't working for him on a romantic level so he wanted to just be friends. Now I have to work with the guy on a daily basis and I was really starting to like him so it hurts. Not to mention I thought we had some serious chemistry kissing him was absolutely amazing. He's now dating the divorced mother of one of our students.
> 
> The only other guy I ever dated 3+ times was from my church and he got back together with his ex and that was the end of that.
> 
> I feel like the girl who is nothing more than a placeholder until a guy finds another person (or place) in his life where he would rather be. I'm actually still Facebook friends with all these guys except the married one and the cheating ***. What's wrong with me that I can't seem to be the one who wins the guy for good?
> 
> I'm attractive enough - at least I think I am - 5'4", about 110 pounds, dark blonde, pixie-ish hair and face, been told I look kind of like a cross between Shailene Woody and a young Meg Ryan. I don't think I come across as desperate. I have plenty of friends of both sexes and my guy friends flirt with me a lot. I have a BA and an MLIS degree, I'm something of a geek, I love doing active things outdoors and going to concerts. I think I have a good sense of humor. My self-esteem is pretty good except, nowadays, where guys are concerned. I date fairly regularly, mostly guys I meet through church, work, or volunteering. I won't do casual sex, and refuse to get physical until a relationship seems to be getting serious, and that's the only thing I can figure is keeping my relationships from lasting. If that's the case, I guess I'm destined to be alone, because it's not something I'm willing to compromise on.
> 
> I'm reaching a point where I've been burned and hurt so much I'm almost afraid to try again now anyway. I never imagined I'd be pushing 30 and still single. I can't help but be depressed. I know I'm still fairly young but I feel like such a failure when it comes to relationships. I can't help but think this is the way the rest of my life is going to be. Girlfriend material but apparently not wife material. I just wish I knew why.


Waiting for at least some seriousness before sex shows a guy you aren't the female equivalent of a taxicab. DONT CHANGE.

Excuse me while I put on my flame proof undies.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Luvher4life said:


> My question is, again, is she asking for advice on how to attract men, or is she just trying to validate herself to other women?
> 
> Without meeting her, or with little information, it is hard to say "exactly" why she's having trouble finding the right man. All we can do is give advice based on the little she has let us know about.


Not sure what you mean about validating myself to other women. I've never really cared what other women thought of me. I think to some extent growing up on military bases makes you a little (and in some cases a lot) harder than most other people. You learn to live and let live but you also learn to not care about the opinions of others because you realize awfully young that those sorts of things just aren't that important in the grand scheme of things. There's also a lot of gossip and nastiness among military families on a base which is really sad. Base families (at least in my experience) aren't half as supportive of each other as you'd think/hope. You grow a thick skin or you'll be miserable. I was glad when my parents sent me and my two youngest brothers to live with my grandparents for our middle/high school years. It was a much more stable, accepting environment.

So what more can I tell you? It's kind of hard to figure out things about your own personality you know. Ask and if it's appropriate I'll try to answer as honestly as I can.


----------



## misslonelyheart

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Being true to your beliefs is important.
> 
> But - there is never harm in introspection to understand your own beliefs about right and wrong. I do not believe that a "purity pledge" made as a teen binds you as an adult. You are free to choose differently IF YOU WANT.
> 
> 
> If you think waiting for sex is reducing your chances of finding what you want, then think about that choice - think about why you made it and whether those reasons are still valid.
> 
> The same goes for any other choices you have made about life.
> 
> Violating your own beliefs is bad, but consciously deciding to change your beliefs is fine as long as you are honest with yourself.


My Christian beliefs have not changed since I took that pledge at 14 years old. If anything they are stronger now than they were then because I have more real understanding of what back then was just following my family's beliefs. And in fact I believe God is more likely to grant my desires if I obey Him than if I do not. At the same time, I don't want to get in my own way. God can't work with me if I keep unwittingly throwing roadblocks in both His way and my own. So I'm trying to figure out what roadblocks I may have. And I'm reading back through my own posts and wondering if I talk as much like a teacher as I write, because I can see where that could be a real turn off.


----------



## norajane

Ask yourself what those men have in common. They have you in common, so there must have been something about each of those men that was meaningful to you. 

Fiance #1: You two were soooo young. It's almost impossible not to have changing needs and desires at that age. That break-up wasn't about you, it was about how the two of you grew apart as you got older. That small age difference at that time your life, at age 15 when he was 18, became a bigger age difference 4 years later when he had turned 22. He'd had some years as an adult, and his needs and desires changed. You had yet to form your needs and desires.

Fiance #2: This guy was 5 years older than you, so you were 21 to his 26? Again, different life stages. A LOT of change happens in a person's life during their 20's. Their life experiences give them different perspectives. You said you had plans to marry before he went home for Christmas and met someone else he married who fit his lifestyle better in wanting to be a SAHM, something you hadn't known he wanted. What kind of marriage plans were you making that this didn't come up? Would you have broken up with him if you had known? Would you have refused his proposal? Would you have moved to Texas with him? What is it about THIS guy that made you keep thinking it should have been you as his wife, about to be mom? This guy is the one you were crazy about, so he brought something out in you...what was it? 

#3 and #4: You said it was pretty obvious that you cared more about them than they cared about you. What did you like about them? What attracted you to them? What did they bring out in you?

#5: You dated him for 4 months, and worked with him, and you had never gone over to his place and had no idea he lived with one of his 3 baby mommas. How is it possible you didn't know where he lived for the entire 4 months you dated? He never invited you over to watch a ball game or movie? Pizza? How can you start to care for someone who hasn't ever invited you to their home? Think about this one...you already answered it: he made you feel really really good just being with him. Made you feel good about yourself, too? In what way? 

The teacher at school: Yeah, he's young, single, and attractive in a school full of women. He sounds like a guy who just may have dated a lot of his co-workers, maybe just because he could, or maybe he's looking for love and it just hasn't clicked with anyone yet. I'll be the other teachers could tell you. 

Just some stuff to think about. It's not about the guys. You are the central figure here; so look at the choices in men that you have made, and try to find patterns. If you look honestly enough, you might realize you're seeking the same thing in each of these relationships, or are self-sabotaging somehow by "falling for" men who aren't suitable from the start, but you didn't let yourself see it, and aren't "falling for" the men who might be an easier fit. 

A lot of us who have trouble with relationships have some unresolved issues of our own that follow us from relationship to relationship until we step back and try to see what we're doing, over and over. Once you see it, then you can catch yourself before you leap into something that's not quite right, AND to leap for the ones that are.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Annie123 said:


> OP, you mentioned that one of your exes said that you talked about marriage and kids too much and it was a turn off for him. Can you explain this a little bit? Do you agree with him that you brought up marriage and kids too much/too often?


I'm not sure if I can explain because I dated this guy back in 2012 so I don't really remember all that well the kinds of things we talked about. Considering he was even more career-oriented than me, he may have thought any conversation in those directions was too much. It was only after we broke up that he actually admitted to me that he didn't really think he was ever going to get married because the thought of a long term monogamous relationship didn't appeal to him. Wish he could have told me that before I invested a year of my life in him.

I'm sure all the guys I've dated realize how I feel about kids though. I teach grade school. I work in the church nursery and teach preK Sunday school classes. I babysit whenever I get the chance. I spend a good chunk of my paycheck on cutesy things for my nieces and nephews. I go gaga over other peoples' babies. I guess you could say I've got babies on the brain LOL.


----------



## Celes

What are your thoughts on sex, besides religion? I mean the act itself. Is it something you look forward to? Do you desire it? Or are you take it or leave it?


----------



## turnera

Most men don't look for women to date so they can have babies with them. They look for women they can (1) have fun with and (2) have out of this world sex with. Oh, and women they can show off.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
if following one's one beliefs didn't come with a cost, everyone would do it. Your beliefs may make it more difficult to find a husband, but that does not make those beliefs wrong.

As long as you are conscious of your choices and not just holding to things out of habit, then you should not bend your principals. I just wanted to be sure that you had thought about your beliefs, not just followed them out of habit.





misslonelyheart said:


> My Christian beliefs have not changed since I took that pledge at 14 years old. If anything they are stronger now than they were then because I have more real understanding of what back then was just following my family's beliefs. And in fact I believe God is more likely to grant my desires if I obey Him than if I do not. At the same time, I don't want to get in my own way. God can't work with me if I keep unwittingly throwing roadblocks in both His way and my own. So I'm trying to figure out what roadblocks I may have. And I'm reading back through my own posts and wondering if I talk as much like a teacher as I write, because I can see where that could be a real turn off.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Norajane - it's going to take me a while to figure out the answers your post. But the thing that comes to mind first as to what all these guys had in common was that they were fun, great sense of humor, easy going, got along with everyone. The 3 who were chefs were the types that made working in an otherwise horrible environment tolerable. All of them had a certain level of career ambition which I definitely find appealing. Also they were all athletic except #2 - and he was extremely musical which is part of what I loved about him because I'm very musical as well. He was definitely the one I loved the most which looking back seems strange because he was the only one who wasn't a very alpha male type. I really, really loved him. When he broke up with me I was shattered. I'm not sure even now I've ever completely gotten over him. And yet I was the one who made the decision NOT to do the one thing he wanted me to do to keep the relationship going. Although now that I think about it he never actually ASKED me to give up my career. He just assumed I wouldn't and replaced me with someone who "fit the mold" he wanted better than I did. But why did I love him the way I did? I think perhaps because he was the only one I ever felt I could truly open up with emotionally. He was the most incredibly CARING person. I can't think of any other way to describe it. I could talk to him about anything and he would listen without judging. He was also extremely intelligent - more so than any of my other BFs except the teacher. I'm thinking it's not coincidental that I was starting to care for the teacher more than anyone else since the 2nd fiance because personality-wise they were a lot alike although they were very different physically. I will say I don't think the teacher ended our relationship because of my lack of femininity. The woman he is dating now is a organic farmer who never seems to wear anything other than Carrhardt overalls.

I'm going to take some time to really think about WHY each of these guys appealed to me the way they did. It's not something I can answer easily. But I'm going offline now to take a shower and go to bed early. Common Core ELA testing this week (and math/science next week) which is every bit as stressful for the teaching staff as it is for the kids.


----------



## turnera

There's a great book you can read (the first half of it) that will talk about why you choose the partners you choose. It's called Getting The Love You Want by Hendrix.


----------



## norajane

Give it more thought, that's a great start. It's worth the time and effort to understand yourself and how your life experiences relate to who you are now.

Seems like maybe you might do better with a more intellectual/emotional thinker. Are many or any of your friends like that? If not, maybe it's time to branch out and make some new friendships. I'll bet your teacher colleagues would be good company.

The other thing? If you want to get married, get to know some married women. They always want to fix you up with their brother-in-law. Sometimes blind dates work.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Celes I can't really answer that since it's something I haven't done in almost a decade. And obviously HS BF and I weren't very experienced. I'm sure it would be more enjoyable with an experienced man. I have had a lot of experience with oral and enjoy it although giving it starts to hurt if it lasts too long. I will admit (oh the shame) to owning a vibrator although I don't use it much since I'm never home alone and it would probably give my grandmother a heart attack if she ever caught me with it.

Now I reall do need to get ready for bed. My addiction to the Internet has grown far too much since I got an iPad.


----------



## tech-novelist

norajane said:


> Give it more thought, that's a great start. It's worth the time and effort to understand yourself and how your life experiences relate to who you are now.
> 
> Seems like maybe you might do better with a more intellectual/emotional thinker. Are many or any of your friends like that? If not, maybe it's time to branch out and make some new friendships. I'll bet your teacher colleagues would be good company.
> 
> The other thing? If you want to get married, get to know some married women. They always want to fix you up with their brother-in-law. Sometimes blind dates work.


One of Dalrock's primary pieces of advice to young women who want to get married is to tell the married women at their church that they want to get married.


----------



## Evinrude58

I'm guessing "pixieish" hair means short hair???

You have all the traits that a marrying man would want--- job that provides time to nurture your own children, Sunday school teacher--- you are a great catch.

You tell us. What do YOU think is keeping you from finding a man to marry?
Personally, I think when the right man comes along, everything will fall into place. It will seem easy.
Likely God is not answering your prayers for a partner because he has someone special picked out for you that may be around the next corner.

Just make sure when you round the corner, you're not wearing combat boots and a sport coat.😉

I don't know what to say, but wish you the best of luck. You sound great to me.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marc878

misslonelyheart said:


> Our pastor told me maybe God is calling me to be single and all I could think was how cruel would that be to give me this huge desire for a family if I'm never going to have one.


This is total bullsh!t. Don't listen to this moron. Pastors are like everything else good ones and bad ones.

You're young plus you are gaining experience. Look at the positive you could've married one of these previous guys and be going through a divorce right now.

I would advise you to take a close look at becoming more feminine. A man doesn't want another man he wants a woman.

Look at your wardrobe too. Clothes make the woman and you will need to attract the tight guy when he comes along.

You're young don't worry. Have fun with your life and you'll run into Mr Right soon enough.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

misslonelyheart said:


> Celes I can't really answer that since it's something I haven't done in almost a decade. And obviously HS BF and I weren't very experienced. I'm sure it would be more enjoyable with an experienced man. I have had a lot of experience with oral and enjoy it although giving it starts to hurt if it lasts too long. I will admit (oh the shame) to owning a vibrator although I don't use it much since I'm never home alone and it would probably give my grandmother a heart attack if she ever caught me with it.
> 
> Now I reall do need to get ready for bed. My addiction to the Internet has grown far too much since I got an iPad.


This kind of ambivalence about sex is enough to scare about 95% of men away. You dated a guy for 2 years and two others for a year each but never had sex. These guys probably envisioned getting married and living sexless with someone who could take it or leave it once she got her babies. Yikes. Nope, best to find someone who is much more sexual. Even if waiting for marriage, she should be obviously struggling to hold out.


----------



## QuietSoul

misslonelyheart said:


> Being feminine is really hard for me. I am the only girl in a household of 6 boys, and we had 5 more boys (my cousins) in the house next door. In fact on my dad's side I am the first girl in 4 generations. I learned very quickly that I had to do boy things if I wanted to have playmates since I had no female cousins. I don't recall playing with other girls until I started school. And my brothers are what you would call manly men - 5 out of 6 of them are in the military (like my dad was, I'm a Navy brat) and the 6th is a missionary in the Australian outback. I never really learned how to be a girl although my mother certainly tried she gave up by the time I was about 10. I would have gone in the Navy myself but I failed the physical due to childhood asthma I have since outgrown.
> 
> Don't understand the recommendation for a life coach? I know who I am and what I want, more than a lot of people my age I think. I have a great job I love, lots of activities outside of work, plenty of friends. But I want love, and I want children. I love kids which is why I went into the world of elementary education. I babysit, I work in the church nursery, and every time I hold somebody else's baby I dream of having one of my own. And I watch all my friends, both male and female, pair off, get married, buy houses, have babies. While I get left behind. It's starting to really get to me. Our pastor told me maybe God is calling me to be single and all I could think was how cruel would that be to give me this huge desire for a family if I'm never going to have one.


Hi. 

I know i'm late in the piece here and haven't gone through replies past page 1, but wanted to respond to this...

1. I can relate to being a tomboy or not being very girlish... I wasn't raised around a hundred brothers or anything but I had no friends at school (got bullied by the girls) until a small group of boys let me hang out with them. I also went through some abuse and neglect in childhood but much more in my early teens when my identity and femininity were developing. I had no money, no food, no bus fares (i had to sneak on sometimes), absolutely nothing pretty, no pretty girl things, zero make up, no idea what to do with my crazy curly cat lady hair, no products to help me figure that out, no deoderant of my own (ended up using my dad's Lynx so smelt like a guy), no clothes of my own. Had alot of second hand clothes from Vinnies (that my dad bought for me) or hand me downs, including boy hand me downs. I think this was part of the reason why i developed a certain dress style. I kind of like a military look (khaki type pants or with army print), Doc Marten boots, certain types of hats. Down the track (when i got out of my home situation and one day had a little money i could buy clothes with), i kind of feminised my look (not sure if that's even a word). There is a feminine style of that kind of look/theme if you look for it. It sounds like you have a similar style. Check out Uniqlo, but especially (my favouritest) SuperDry. You will find that kind of theme in women's clothes but the garments are built for the female form and will accentuate your body shape  do try to avoid mens clothes, they will not be the best thing for your body type (whatever your body type is!) Dangerfield also has an alternate, gritty edge but still has great stuff for women that looks great.

Also, don't be scared of a dress. Having come from a kind of similar lack of being able to explore feminine frilly stuff as you, dresses are great because you don't have to spent time trying to put together an outfit. 

Shoes... i am guessing you prefer sneakers like me. There are some pretty comfy flats out there that are also feminine. Check out brands that are better for comfort but that still have a bit of style. Hush puppies are a good one, so are Easy Steps and comfs.

Also, am guessing you don't wear make up. You don't have to wear heaps but at a minimum, i would recommend concealer and foundation for a clear skin look, or at a minimum, tinted moisturiser which is great on the go. Also a lip gloss is usually a good essential.

I hope i am not coming across condescending, i just feel like i can relate to some of where you have come from. This kind of knowledge isn't in-built in us, and if we don't learn it or have the opportunity to be exposed to it much, it can make things a bit difficult later in life. It makes me sad that i didn't have the opportunity to explore fashion or anything girly or find my style or identity at a time when it was crucial. But i am glad i have control of my own life now and i know i can make changes 

Re suggestion of lifecoach above, i saw one once. I was skeptical but they were quite good, better than i thought. They were really helpful to help me get insight into certain patterns in my life and to give me strategies for change and success. I am not easily influenced but if you find a good one that isn't off with the fairies, they can be very helpful


----------



## QuietSoul

Was just looking on the Superdry website for you. The Aussie one is better than the US one (imo), seems edgier and more true to the original brand. American one seems a bit more mainstream and beige. Some of the stuff is cross over but you can see some of it here anyway...

Superdry Ultimate Snow Service Ski Pants - Womens Superdry Snow 
Superdry Glitter Logo Leggings - Womens Pants 
Superdry Sleeveless Boyfriend Shirt - Women's Shirts 
Superdry Sophia High Waist Super Skinny Jeans - Women's Jeans 
Womens Jackets, Coats, Designer Jackets - Superdry Jackets

There is heaps more in the way of more feminine things, i would recommend you check out some of the dresses, there are some good ones here that are easy to wear, can be casual or you can dress them up a bit if you want.

Dresses - DANGERFIELD - Clothing 
Pants & Shorts - DANGERFIELD - Clothing
Jackets & Coats - DANGERFIELD - Clothing 

I would like to know, what do you think your best physical features are? Hope this is not putting you on the spot  breasts? Legs? Waist? Curves? Whatever it is, excentuate or reveal that part. Things like tight garments, sheer, garments that may reveal a little and show off your shape


----------



## primavera

OP, have you thought about moving out of the family home and getting a place of your own - or perhaps better, if you're looking to widen your social circle, a room in a houseshare? It would give you some independence and I think would really help you make that transition to thinking of yourself as a woman rather than a girl. At 29 you shouldn't have to think whether your grandmother considers your clothes too sexy, or worry about what will happen if someone finds your vibrator.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## misslonelyheart

primavera said:


> OP, have you thought about moving out of the family home and getting a place of your own - or perhaps better, if you're looking to widen your social circle, a room in a houseshare? It would give you some independence and I think would really help you make that transition to thinking of yourself as a woman rather than a girl. At 29 you shouldn't have to think whether your grandmother considers your clothes too sexy, or worry about what will happen if someone finds your vibrator.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Don't have a lot of time this morning as I have to go prepare myself for a day I am not looking forward to, but just wanted to answer this really quick.

I can't move out of the family home. I am the legal primary caregiver for my grandparents who are both pushing 90 and not exactly healthy anymore. If I left, they would have no choice but to move into a nursing home. My grandmother was born in this house and has lived here all her life. I'm going to make sure she's able to die here if that is what she wants. It would break her heart to leave and I don't think I would ever forgive myself for that. NONE of the rest of my family lives in this state anymore, my brothers and cousins have all moved far away (almost all in the service so they don't get home much either), my parents are in Virginia and my mom's brother is in Texas. My grandparents have been raising me since I started 7th grade I feel like I owe them for that. Someday they will be gone and I won't be able to get the time back I don't want to have regrets.


----------



## misslonelyheart

WorkingOnMe said:


> This kind of ambivalence about sex is enough to scare about 95% of men away. You dated a guy for 2 years and two others for a year each but never had sex. These guys probably envisioned getting married and living sexless with someone who could take it or leave it once she got her babies. Yikes. Nope, best to find someone who is much more sexual. Even if waiting for marriage, she should be obviously struggling to hold out.


Who says I'm not struggling to hold out? The chemistry I had with the teacher I dated was incredible. I couldn't get enough of kissing him and making out with him. But we had only been seeing each other for 3 months and I was pretty sure it wasn't exclusive on his part (which as it turned out I was right). So I sure as heck wasn't going to let it go any further.

The guy I dated for 2 years never LET it go beyond kissing! He didn't believe in flirting with temptation. And I probably would have slept with him if he had wanted it, because I truly loved him.

The two chefs I dated seriously both seemed perfectly happy with the regular oral sex we had. In fact the first one told me most men would willingly give up intercourse for a lifetime in favor of oral if forced to choose between the two. Neither one of them ever pushed me for more as long as I was willing to continue the BJs. And the first guy turned out to not be interested in marriage anyway. Told me monogamous faithful relationships were for losers.


----------



## BetrayedDad

WorkingOnMe said:


> This kind of ambivalence about sex is enough to scare about 95% of men away. You dated a guy for 2 years and two others for a year each but never had sex. These guys probably envisioned getting married and living sexless with someone who could take it or leave it once she got her babies. Yikes. Nope, best to find someone who is much more sexual. Even if waiting for marriage, she should be obviously struggling to hold out.


Agreed. 

@misslonelyheart

Seems fairly obvious to me why you keep getting dumped:

1) You're too much of a tomboy (eg "Pixie" hair, male centric activities, army store wardrobe, etc.) Pick up some magazines at the grocery checkout line and learn to be more effeminate. Guys don't want to date a dude. 

2) You don't put out. Two years and no sex?!? It's not like your a virgin and men need sex. Not casual but really, after a few months of dating, if you're not putting out don't be shocked when you get dumped.

A 28 yo, 5' 4" and 110 lb blonde should have suitors lined up out the door. Your stats are exactly what I look for. Your biggest problem is your behavior and attitudes on dating.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
I had somewhat misunderstood. If you engage in sexual activity with men, just not intercourse that paints a somewhat different picture. I think many men would be OK with that. Do you think you give the impression of enjoying sex and wanting a passionate sex life? 

BTW - your grandmother likely has her own vibrator - you youngsters didn't invent sex :grin2:






misslonelyheart said:


> Celes I can't really answer that since it's something I haven't done in almost a decade. And obviously HS BF and I weren't very experienced. I'm sure it would be more enjoyable with an experienced man. I have had a lot of experience with oral and enjoy it although giving it starts to hurt if it lasts too long. I will admit (oh the shame) to owning a vibrator although I don't use it much since I'm never home alone and it would probably give my grandmother a heart attack if she ever caught me with it.
> 
> Now I reall do need to get ready for bed. My addiction to the Internet has grown far too much since I got an iPad.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Betrayed dad - sorry, but I just won't do sex without love/commitment. It's the way I am, it's the way I was raised. You know, if I really have to sleep around to find a husband, I'd RATHER be single for the rest of my life. It's a better choice than compromising my principles. Principles that, by the way, worked just fine in this country until the free love disaster that was the 1960s.

And honestly - would most men rather marry a woman who had slept with every man she'd dated more than 3 times, or a woman he knew had saved herself for him? I was raised to believe that men slept with good time girls but married good girls. I'd rather be the good girl.

And you know what? Not ONE of the guys I've ever dated long term has ever complained (at least openly) that I wouldn't have actual intercourse with them. They all seemed perfectly content getting BJs on a regular basis.


----------



## badsanta

BetrayedDad said:


> Agreed.
> 
> @misslonelyheart
> 
> Seems fairly obvious to me why you keep getting dumped:
> 
> 1) You're too much of a tomboy (eg "Pixie" hair, male centric activities, army store wardrobe, etc.) Pick up some magazines at the grocery checkout line and learn to be more effeminate. Guys don't want to date a dude.
> 
> 2) You don't put out. Two years and no sex?!? It's not like your a virgin and men need sex. Not casual but really, after a few months of dating, if you're not putting out don't be shocked when you get dumped.
> 
> A 28 yo, 5' 4" and 110 lb blonde should have suitors lined up out the door. Your stats are exactly what I look for. Your biggest problem is your behavior and attitudes on dating.


I'm sure this comes across as "try to be someone you are not" and "allow yourself to get used for sex" but as a guy I do not see it that way. I read it like this:

If you want to have a family, you need to send visual signals to men that you are fertile. This primarily includes growing you hair out long and grooming it. It also includes wearing cloths that also give an appearance that you care about yourself (not ripped up jeans or t-shirts). You also want to pay attention to your dental hygiene and fingernails. If either of those look dirty, it is a huge turn off!

Regarding sex, once you are in a relationship with a man that expresses interest in you, if the two of you are not having sex within a modest amount of time, odds are you might find yourself in a sexless marriage and unable to have children. BOTH you and your partner need to enjoy sex and be able to comfortably express that naturally in the relationship if you want a family as a result. 

Regards, 
Badsanta


----------



## nirvana

Evinrude58 said:


> Is the OP a manly dresser? Yes, admittedly she shops at army surplus and wears combat boots.
> There are men that find that attractive. Are they the marrying type? I don't know. They likely aren't the type OP wants, or she'd be married.
> 
> I say dress and act like a woman, because the OP IS A WOMAN. Her 60 mph fastball and driving skills aren't good bait for most guys. Her skinny frame that she doesn't like DOES attract plenty of men.
> She is just combining the butchy look with it and it's a turn off for me, anyway.
> 
> She needs to be herself. Nobody is asking her to change herself. I actually like 99% of the things she describes herself to be. But the manly dressing and man-buddy behavior are not conducive to making men desire her. Just my opinion. She could dress a little more feminine. I think her calling up her exes and asking them about what happened is a great idea---- but I was at first thinking WTH!! when I first read that. I think the guy answered her honestly and it's something for her to think about.
> 
> The sex thing is not a problem to me. A woman who is easy and has sex in three dates is not marriage material in my book. Dating material, but not marriage material. Heck, I don't have sex with someone in three dates in most cases! That's nasty.
> 
> OP, just consider wearing some more feminine clothes. I would not go for "sexy", I'd go for "womanly". I believe a good man is just wanting a loyal, hardworking, fun woman to marry. They don't have to be models, they just have to represent themselves as a WOMAN. They don't have to be sex gurus, they just have to show their man they WANT them sexually. They don't have to be super exciting, they just need to make their man EXCITED to see them-- and that comes from fulfilling their needs for intimacy and womanly conversation and create a good nest. Not all about sex. But a man does need some sex, and a woman should need it too.
> 
> If it wouldn't kill you to wear a dress, put on some clean shoes and a little lipstick, and smile at a man once in a while-- I think that would go a long way. We don't care how good you are at sports. But we might like knowing you'd be willing to do some things a man likes to do ( you are, and that's a great thing).
> 
> Yes, one should look nice when being taken out on a date. And one should look nice for the person they are going out with, not themselves. Show the person you care about what THEY think. Don't make everything all about showing them how YOU are. That makes a guy think if they date you, it's always going to be all about what you like and what you want to do. Women always want the man to do all the compromising and take them to do things the woman enjoys. You have the desire to enjoy things a MAN likes to do. I'm kind of shocked with that good trait alone, you haven't had a line of guys wanting you badly.
> THere's got to be more to this story. The combat boots says a lot, though.


Evinrude58, what a beautiful post!

OP, If a woman wants to know how attract a man or why men are not attracted to her, the best people to ask is another man. Now what the men will say may not be what you want to hear but you have a higher likelihood of getting to the real reason. You can ask women but their perspective would be different and many times they may add in their feminist warped logic to the conversation and muddy it for you and eventually tell you what is most pleasant to hear - that you are right and the men are all wrong. The problem is that will not get you anywhere.

OP, You did a brave thing to ask your ex. The fact that he was sleeping with someone else during the time he was with you shows what a d-bag he is and you dodged a bullet there.

As most of us men here are saying, ditch the dude look and dress feminine in skirts, tops etc etc. You don't have to be sexy or dress like a slvt, just show your feminine side. You will attract more men and maybe the right kind of men (which has been the problem). I think you are attracting the wrong type who don't look at you as marriage material. 

Try this for a couple of months and see if it works. You have nothing to lose. Don't compromise on your sex rules though. If a man really wants you, he will go along with it.


----------



## samyeagar

misslonelyheart is not having any problems attracting men. She is having a problem keeping the kind of man that she is wanting.


----------



## misslonelyheart

RichardSharpe you just nearly made me spew coffee all over my iPhone with that comment about my gram having a vibrator. Gram is almost 90 years old and the increased heart rate of an orgasm would probably kill her!

I'm sick of hearing that I'm not interested in sex because I won't do intercourse, so I'm going to admit to something very few people know about me. I had an oral threesome with the two chefs I dated the night the first one introduced me to the second one. It was after work and we went for a walk that ended up down by the lake. The guy I was dating started kissing me and when the other guy started to leave my BF invited him to join us. I'm not really sure what made me agree to it. But I found it to be an incredibly erotic experience especially since the second guy was only 21 at the time and I'm pretty sure he was pretty much in shock about what was happening. I was really turned on by HIS lack of experience. He was the kind of guy most girls ignore (too heavy, too geeky, too just plain nice) and I'm pretty sure HE was a virgin. I've also given and received oral in some pretty public places (like on the pool table at the bar after work). So I am definitely open to sexual experiences. I just want to save that ultimate intimacy for someone I love.

I suppose maybe that's hypocritical considering my religious beliefs but my own mother actually told me that if I didn't think I could hold out otherwise that oral sex was an acceptable alternative. And I was going through a pretty powerful rebellion against my upbringing at the time, in large part because my ex-fiancé had dumped me for what he considered religious reasons. I was pretty mad at God in those days. I'm not proud of the way I behaved for a couple of years there. And I don't ever want to go back to the person I was then. Although the tips I got working in that bar helped me to get through six years of college debt-free...

But actual sex is different. There's a level of emotional intimacy involved that doesn't exist during oral sex, at least not in my experience. And that's not something I want to share with someone I don't already share that level of emotional intimacy with outside of sex. If that makes sense.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
Some of the posters (like me) may have misinterpreted your not "having sex" as meaning "no sexual activity". (the term "sex"means different things to different people). 


I think you are right that many men are fine with other forms of sexual activity. 




misslonelyheart said:


> snip
> And you know what? Not ONE of the guys I've ever dated long term has ever complained (at least openly) that I wouldn't have actual intercourse with them. They all seemed perfectly content getting BJs on a regular basis.


----------



## primavera

misslonelyheart said:


> Don't have a lot of time this morning as I have to go prepare myself for a day I am not looking forward to, but just wanted to answer this really quick.
> 
> I can't move out of the family home. I am the legal primary caregiver for my grandparents who are both pushing 90 and not exactly healthy anymore. If I left, they would have no choice but to move into a nursing home. My grandmother was born in this house and has lived here all her life. I'm going to make sure she's able to die here if that is what she wants. It would break her heart to leave and I don't think I would ever forgive myself for that. NONE of the rest of my family lives in this state anymore, my brothers and cousins have all moved far away (almost all in the service so they don't get home much either), my parents are in Virginia and my mom's brother is in Texas. My grandparents have been raising me since I started 7th grade I feel like I owe them for that. Someday they will be gone and I won't be able to get the time back I don't want to have regrets.


Understood, and I applaud you for it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Celes

misslonelyheart said:


> Betrayed dad - sorry, but I just won't do sex without love/commitment. It's the way I am, it's the way I was raised. You know, if I really have to sleep around to find a husband, I'd RATHER be single for the rest of my life. It's a better choice than compromising my principles. Principles that, by the way, worked just fine in this country until the free love disaster that was the 1960s.
> 
> And honestly - would most men rather marry a woman who had slept with every man she'd dated more than 3 times, or a woman he knew had saved herself for him? I was raised to believe that men slept with good time girls but married good girls. I'd rather be the good girl.
> 
> And you know what? Not ONE of the guys I've ever dated long term has ever complained (at least openly) that I wouldn't have actual intercourse with them. They all seemed perfectly content getting BJs on a regular basis.


Sounds like you have pretty warped views on sex. You do realize oral sex is sex, no matter how you spin it right? It is just as intimate as penetrative sex. 

So you want to be the "good girl" who waits for the man who uses women for sex? You're okay with the man having high numbers but not you? That's kind of sad. 

Look you're not a virgin. You give BJs freely. You engaged in a BJ threesome with 2 men. You're no "good girl". It doesn't work that way. You have weird hang ups about sex and use your upbringing to hide behind them. 

Yeah your BFs were content getting BJs from you until something better came along. That's what you're not getting. 

I'm not saying you should say eff it and sleep with everyone. But you definitely need to understand that your warped views on sex, combined with the whole tomboy thing, is why men aren't sticking around long term. It's just reality.


----------



## Luvher4life

One sin is no greater than the other in that you must seek forgiveness.

One thing you have to understand is that if a man is being sexually satisfied with oral, he doesn't really see PIV as being much better. In other words, that's not exactly the cherry-on-top type of thing that it would be if he weren't being gratified otherwise. How would he even know that PIV is any better?

A HJ I could see, but a BJ would be considered as actual sex by most men, maybe better than PIV to some. Being a man, I hate to inform you of this, but I would advise against giving a BJ until the same night or day you plan on having PIV.

You have no trouble whatsoever attracting men, but the marrying type of man (in my opinion) is elusive because most men feel like, if you are willing to give a BJ, you should be going to PIV, too.

Based on everything you've posted, and I think most men here would agree, you are going to make some man very happy some day. You "seem" to be more uninhibited that most women, even though you are not sleeping around. That is one of the supreme qualities you have that is what most men dream of.

I'm thinking that all you really need to do is be patient, not rushing into any conversations about marriage, children, etc., until after you've been dating somebody long enough to know their motivations for dating you to begin with. If they are truly interested in a LTR with you, it "should" be obvious, although not foolproof. Check somebody out before committing. That means, know as much as possible about their past relationships, whether they are players, have cheated in those relationships, their job history, etc. Snoop around a little, but do NOT be obvious about it. You can tell a whole lot about a person's character by their past.

I know this has been brought up before many times, but try to embrace your feminine side as much as possible. You are most definitely a woman. Why not be proud of that fact? You are no longer that little girl that your brothers and cousins teased while you were growing up. You don't have to compromise "who" you are, or your principles, nor should you feel "weak" if you embrace your womanhood. A man wants to know that his woman will be a woman after he marries her, BEFORE he will marry her. Make sure you send that message, instead of leaving that as an unknown.

Just my advice, and I might add, some man will be lucky to have you as a wife one day, if you will be a woman, and not just a buddy. Be patient. It will happen one day.


----------



## GB McKenna

For the OP and other people in similar situations. There are a couple of dimensions to consider. Call it structural challenges and personal challenges. Both have to do with increasing probabilities (not absolutes or binary trade-offs) albeit in different ways.

The structural challenges are best viewed simply through a rational lens. I.e. Relative to her stated goal, how do her fundamental life choices work toward (or against) that goal based on the external factors (context)? In what ways is the environment she chooses to operate within fertile ground for creating and eventually harvesting opportunities? 

Some things to consider:
- living in a smallish town, your hometown, or an area that does not naturally produce a lot of 'churn' in terms of people moving in/out is a structural challenge is an impediment. There are tradeoffs of family, friends, job, and familiarity. But the fact remains: the pond is small and it gets smaller the longer you are there. Like searching for that 'perfect' job, you have to consider what you are willing to change structurally in your life to improve your chances of landing that job. 

- A femcentric culture that is destroying marriage, intact families, masculinity, tradition, religion, natural law, and Truth. The challenge for you is that this culture has afforded you a tailwind throughout your youth but is not, in fact, aligned with the values and virtues that you desire to instruct your marriage/relationship. The Feminists here can snip their hamster cages all they want but there is a zero-sum war going on and quite simply the prevailing winds are not going to fill your sails with marital bliss. 

In one breath they shame men for not "manning up" to marry the strong independent woman, in the next they will tell you "you don't need to change, you don't need a man to be happy". Be wary of those who come with pretty lies. Considering how to be more attractive, how to add-value to the life of a potential mate is not selling your soul or selling out your integrity, it is the practical approach to the reality of attraction, coupling, and complimentary relationship dynamics that are the backbone of the marriage you seek. 

You want a strong, confident, loving, skilled, driven, principled man. These attributes are cultivated over years and years - and must continue to be cultivated even within marriage. This takes WORK. SACRIFICE. DELAYED GRATIFICATION. DISCIPLINE. and SELF-AWARENESS. "Just be yourself" is horrible advice for men or women. You want equality, here it is. You want a fully baked man at the ready, then he is going to want the same. Pro Tip: your masters degree does not make you more attractive. It might be appealing to many men, but it is on the margin, second order to those physical attributes and your pleasant demeanor (or lack of). You need to look at attraction through the male lens. Stop projecting your own ideas of what you want in a man onto those potential men. 

Enter the truth about what men are really attracted to (not what women or Comso say according to the PC narrative), what they really desire in a Wife (not what our culture or feminized church says they should desire) and find those things that best align with your natural gifts and embrace them. Focus on developing your strengths. 

- You need to carve out and protect the culture you desire. The people around you who share your values - this is your village. Look to them for examples of what works - how and why. The culture-at-large is not interested in your happiness.

- Don't be talked into unicorn hunting. Not All Men Are Like That is a weak perspective. You need to play the odds, solve toward the fat part of the curve. Consider this. You are likely a unicorn to A LOT of men looking to get married. But those men are not well served by refusing to change, improve, or develop themselves in ways that acknowledge the underlying truths and practical realities of what (most!) women are attracted to, what (most!) women desire in a mate, and then work to align their own desires, values, and goals with contexts (most!) likely to provide interaction/exposure to the cohorts of women who share the same. 

Make yourself available and attractive to the majority of men, not some distant minority of men - and then put yourself in the environments most likely to overlap with the men who share your values, beliefs, and goals. You are doing some of this already, but there are always ways to improve. Even unicorn hunting men are not likely to just magically show up at your local bar and grill like some Hallmark Channel holiday special. Or you can be yourself and just wait for the secret millionaire handyman on his way to build a orphanage in your small town to show up and literally bump into you. 

- Understand the ladders of sex-date-marry, the reality of our cultural zeitgeist. Feminism and the progressive elites have determined that sex and marriage (or any relationship) are completely separate. Women can "be like men" (apex fallacy) and have all of the sex they want without being "judged" or otherwise negatively impacted by those decisions. Ok, fine. But what that means for you is that your "price" of sexual intimacy (e.g. wait until marriage) is "out of the market" (e.g. no strings, casual, friends with benefits, third date max, etc.) 

Navigating this difference is a huge impediment for men and women, in different ways of course. The short of it for you, aside from fishing in the right pond for men who share your beliefs, is that you have to master the art of being sexual, being able to clearly demonstrate your sexual attraction (and physically showing this via "sexualized" affection) while also honoring your beliefs. You have to find ways to approximate, create facsimiles or proxies for sex to demonstrate that yes, you DESIRE HIM, want HIS SEXUALITY, but... You need to make sure that you are a sexual being for him. Be careful not to compartmentalize or create too much distance (dangle the carrot) with your sexuality. Be sexual (as an indication of your attraction and passion) without making sex all about the act of. 

As for "dating". Accept the harsh truth that the most attractive men have A LOT of sexual options these days. Accept that there are a lot of men who want you for sex, there are less men who will want to date you, and there are even less men who will want to marry you. You are physically attractive, so you are lucky. Most of these men will, in one way or the other, present themselves. Your job is to filter them. The other harsh truth is that in this filtering of sex-date-marry, the attractiveness of the men is negatively correlated. Meaning, the men who are most likely to want to marry you, wait until marriage for sex, etc. are not going to be less attractive than the men who will date you (but expect sex) and likely even less attractive (on average) than the men who will just want to sex you. It is a supply/demand reality you can ignore at your own peril. And again, be wary of those who make exceptions the rule. 

As for your Personal Challenges:
- You are going to have to come to terms with the fact that the vast majority of highly attractive alpha types are probably not going to forego sex - or may not even be interested in exclusive "dating" at all, and so focusing your attraction cues on some of the less obvious attributes of men who share your beliefs. IOW, men who may be less attractive on the surface but offer the attributes and integrity and values that you ultimately value more, right? Don 't count out divorced men either. At your age, you can't afford to eliminate an entire population of men. The reality of the low value of sex in our culture is just (one of many) price "we" pay for all of the liberation we supposedly value. Many more men that you have been taught to believe will value how you have held sexuality, but there is a rubber-hits-the-road reality that you cant ignore either. Work on filtering the men you encounter. 

- Are you promoting your interests - do people know you are "looking"? Do you have friends and family with an eye/ear out for you? Your relationships are a great resource for you, make sure they understand what you are looking for. 

- Staying friends with exes, Facebook, male "just friends" etc. For many men, these are red flags. Most will never admit it, because it is always in his best interest to appear as non-judgemental as possible. But these seemingly small choices add up. Many women claim to be single, but are not in fact Available. They are harboring all kinds of feelings, they kindle relationships from the past, they collect male "friends" for validation, ego-stoking, and plan B options. 

Set yourself apart by aligning your beliefs with your actions. If the past is the past, make it so. They had their time. Make yourself truly available to the potential man. You may find that fully letting go of the past is also quite empowering to you as well. This is not about men being "insecure" or "intimidated" that's feminist nonsense. Its about men with options not having to take on additional risk, its about indicating a level of respect for the next man, a level of sanctity regarding ones emotional and physical intimacy, and not sending signals of selfishness. Yes, it is selfish to hold onto relationships (in any way, of any kind) that do not serve the future you supposedly desire. These days, with the infestation of social media, what was once "baggage" is now repackaged as virtuous. "I'm friends with all my exes!" is not a positive attribute. Sure, some men don't care. Most do, again, go with probabilities. 

- Your appearance. Yes, a lot of this fashion stuff is overblown. But we all have to consider our outward attractiveness, how it might be received by the opposite sex. Nothing wrong with having your style - and there is no sense pretending to be something you are not. But there is a lot of wiggle room in between. Experiment with a few little changes here and there. The aspect of demonstrable femininity is a real issue. Particularly within the 'traditional' pool of men. Think of it not as subordinating your preference for certain style or look, but rather optimizing your strengths. Consider working with a personal stylist - even a friend or acquaintance that you admire for their own ability to look good in their unique ways, to blend your style with what works with your figure, colors, and lifestyle. A few small changes can go a long way. 

- Personality. Tough to tell based on merely writing. But again, there is a reality that shouldn't be ignored because it is uncomfortable or asks something of us or goes against the Strong Independent Woman narrative. Marriage minded, conservative, religious men are (most) likely to desire a woman who demonstrates more of a helping, supporting, nurturing, and feminine personality. They do not want to compete with their mates. They do not want to be confrontational with their mates. 

They may give lip service to "Equality" but what they want in their hearts is a complimentary relationship in which they maintain headship. Femininity is not weakness, it is about understanding and embracing the natural feminine gifts - and their role within the family unit, and demonstrating those things. The inverse is also true. You may believe in "equality" but you really desire a man who is stronger, smarter, more successful, and more dominant. So lets all just be honest about this. If this is not the case, well then, marriage is just a business deal - a tri-party contract with the state. A contract that most men are well aware puts them in a position of much greater risk, especially if children are involved. 

The more you demonstrate that you understand the disproportionate risk that men acquire when entering a marriage, and the more clearly you signal what you are willing and able to bring to that marriage that are unique to woman, a wife, and the complimentary roles, the more positively men will respond. Men don't want business partners. Men can get sex easily. So what do you bring? 

Good luck.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Interesting. I guess I've never seen it that way. I don't find it intimate to be on my knees in front of some guy whose pants are the only thing he's missing. I see intimacy in full body contact - kissing while it's happening - maintaining eye contact - being able to exchange loving words while it's happening. There's nothing intimate about a guy pulling your hair, yanking your head until your neck hurts, yelling oh yeah baby. Exciting? Sometimes. Intimate? Not by my definition. Who knows, maybe I need to date older men who have better technique or concerned with something more than JUST getting off.

Of course it's also true that even this hasn't happened in 3 years now. I haven't had any sexual relations at all since the 2nd chef moved away. Haven't dated anybody long enough to go past necking. Hell the third chef and I were never once alone in a place where it would have been possible.


----------



## norajane

> I had an oral threesome with the two chefs I dated the night the first one introduced me to the second one.


But you felt slighted that he didn't invite you to move with him when he got his chef job? Honestly, you shouldn't have had a moment's worth of expectation that either one of these guys was remotely interested in marrying you, ever.

A guy who is interested in a woman as a lifetime partner, with a few exceptions, would not ever invite another dude into their sex life. If you don't consider bj's to be sex, just ask a husband whose wife gave oral to a guy at work behind his back whether that was "sex" or not.

I think you do need to take a closer look at your beliefs about sex. I'm not saying have PIV with every guy you date, but think about what sex, marriage and relationships actually mean to YOU (not to your church).


----------



## BetrayedDad

badsanta said:


> I'm sure this comes across as "try to be someone you are not" and "allow yourself to get used for sex" but as a guy I do not see it that way. I read it like this:
> 
> If you want to have a family, you need to send visual signals to men that you are fertile. This primarily includes growing you hair out long and grooming it. It also includes wearing cloths that also give an appearance that you care about yourself (not ripped up jeans or t-shirts). You also want to pay attention to your dental hygiene and fingernails. If either of those look dirty, it is a huge turn off!
> 
> Regarding sex, once you are in a relationship with a man that expresses interest in you, if the two of you are not having sex within a modest amount of time, odds are you might find yourself in a sexless marriage and unable to have children. BOTH you and your partner need to enjoy sex and be able to comfortably express that naturally in the relationship if you want a family as a result.
> 
> Regards,
> Badsanta


Thank you sir. Well put.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Sadly enough this was normal behavior at the bar where I was working. The kitchen staff slept with the wait staff. The waitstaff slept with the bartenders. Some of the staff was sleeping with the regular patrons. It was not a good place other than the fact that the money was good. I never would have taken the job there if I hadn't been in a really bad place in my life at the time, both financially and emotionally. To say I was really screwed up would be putting it VERY mildly. I was hurting and in total rebellion against everything I had been brought up to believe. It took me over 2 years to get past it and realize I didn't want to be in that place anymore. By then I had done pretty much everything I always said I'd never do. Well, I never did get into drugs. Grateful for that because drugs would have made it that much harder to pull myself back out. But it took almost flunking out of college, combined with my grandfather having a massive heart attack, to make me grow up and get my life back on track.


----------



## nirvana

norajane said:


> A guy who is interested in a woman as a lifetime partner, with a few exceptions, would not ever invite another dude into their sex life. If you don't consider bj's to be sex, just ask a husband whose wife gave oral to a guy at work behind his back whether that was "sex" or not.


I was going to say the same thing. If a man is serious about you, he will not let someone else have you. He will be possessive about you. That itself should have told you that he was up to no good.


----------



## BetrayedDad

misslonelyheart said:


> Betrayed dad - sorry, but I just won't do sex without love/commitment. It's the way I am, it's the way I was raised. You know, if *I really have to sleep around to find a husband,* I'd RATHER be single for the rest of my life. It's a better choice than compromising my principles. Principles that, by the way, worked just fine in this country until the free love disaster that was the 1960s.


You were in TWO year relationships with some of these guys.... THAT'S sleeping around to you?!? TWO years isn't a commitment? Only a fool buys the car before taking it on a test ride.



misslonelyheart said:


> And honestly - would most men rather marry a woman who had slept with every man she'd dated more than 3 times, or a *woman he knew had saved herself for him?* I was raised to believe that men slept with good time girls but married good girls. I'd rather be the good girl.


You're not a virgin. You already popped the cork on the champagne bottle. Guys don't want slightly used. They want mint condition or it's completely irrelevant.



misslonelyheart said:


> And you know what? Not ONE of the guys I've ever dated long term has ever complained (at least openly) that I wouldn't have actual intercourse with them. *They all seemed perfectly content getting BJs on a regular basis*.


They complained trust me (just not openly). They took the blowjobs while they shopped around for your replacement. A girl who would put out. Sorry but it's true.

I also find it amusing that it's okay to stick a penis in your mouth but not okay to stick it in your vagina. Like somehow that's COMPLETLEY different. FYI, it's STILL sex.

When I was a kid, oral sex has considered DIRTIER and more taboo than regular sex. I know it was prior to the 1960s since that's the age you apparently live in. 

Look, you asked why. It very obvious to most people here why. We are telling you why. You can be open to making changes or be close minded and continue to keep doing what you've been doing and failing miserably. 

Up to you.


----------



## misslonelyheart

No, I was in a 2 year relationship with ONE guy. We were engaged for half of that time. I would have WILLINGLY slept with him. HE was the one who wouldn't. He was a virgin at 26 years old and absolutely insisted on waiting until our wedding night. He was seriously bothered by the fact that I wasn't a virgin.

I need to get back to work. Hell I can't believe I'm talking about this kind of stuff at work, even on my lunch break.


----------



## Luvher4life

I agree with BetrayedDad, and the others on here who have stated that a BJ is in fact "sex", and that it is actually considered more taboo than PIV in most people's minds.


----------



## samyeagar

Luvher4life said:


> I agree with BetrayedDad, and the others on here who have stated that a BJ is in fact "sex", and that it is actually considered more taboo than PIV in most people's minds.


If nothing else, a bj requires more active involvement, more effort, actual intent as opposed to PIV that doesn't actually require those things. Not really any such thing as a starfish bj...


----------



## badsanta

BetrayedDad said:


> I also find it amusing that it's okay to stick a penis in your mouth but not okay to stick it in your vagina. Like somehow that's COMPLETLEY different. FYI, it's STILL sex.


with sarcasm: Hi my name is Bob and I have shoved my face as deep as possible into many vaginas on a regular basis, BUT I am still a virgin because I have strong moral values. 

Now if I can be honest and ask you an odd question @misslonelyheart ? If hypothetically you were a lesbian and you had engaged in oral sex with a few partners, would you still call yourself a virgin? My point being is that you should question what SIGNALS that your morals are sending to your boyfriends. 

I am not saying this to be crude and rude, but I am making an awkward statement that for *heterosexuals engaging in oral sex only, is a gesture of desired infertility.* By all means you are fully sexually active as a heterosexual, but at the same time you are purposely denying the one part of your fertility that says, "hey I want to have a baby with you sometime!" 

I happen to have a friend that dated a girl that would ONLY give BJs. Her father had passed away and his last words to his daughter were to ask her to remain a virgin until she married. The result was that she would overcompensate in relationships by giving her boyfriends as many BJ's as they wanted. It was awkward as they eventually wanted sex but she insisted on BJs ONLY. Needless to say, they broke up over this awkwardness of being sexually active but limited to BJs ONLY. It is simply NOT a natural way to express intimacy in a healthy heterosexual relationship where PIV is natures goal.

Badsanta


----------



## Evinrude58

I would just like to say this: No matter what happens, never, ever, in a million years, admit that you had a bj threesome with 2 chefs. That will be instant death for your relationship if you have a man that thinks like me. Not judging you at all. To you a bj is no big deal. To other people, like me, it is. The threesome part is the deal breaker for me, but it does show that you are quite the sexual animal, and willing to try new things and such, which a cool thing. Just saying.

I think something is clear: 

1) you're attracted to the wrong type of guys. 
2) You're attracting the wrong type of guys--disloyal, players, interested only in short-term relationships.
3) you need to dress more feminine. It would take a woman that is model-like gorgeous for me to date her if she has short hair. That's how important reasonably long hair is to me.
4) A dress attracts conservative type guys. It attracts me. It works. Trust me.

You have mentioned you are busy in church. Yet you've never dated a guy you met there. That's odd. It leads me to believe that you are attracted to bad boys, not stable/sane/employed good men.

You also live with your grandparents and it's obvious you're welded to them until they die. That is a HUGE problem for a man that's interested in long term. What good would it do to date you?

Yes, you have some things that you could work on that can change your results that are pretty obvious.


----------



## always_alone

@misslonelyheart

I'm curious: what do you think of these ongoing instructions to be more "feminine"? Do they resonate with you? Is this something you wish for or aspire to?

I find it interesting because in some ways, I think you are probably more "feminine" than I am, and I have also received such instructions. My personal reaction is just to shrug. I don't care to be shoved into someone else's stereotypical box, and I know that even if I were to conform to this rule, then it would be immediately followed up by yet another rule, and so on. 

But I also know, deep down, that the people who think I should change wouldn't ever even be interested in me in the first place, nor I them. What they are doing, essentially, is telling me their fantasy, and assuming that somehow it is *them* that I want to attract and reel in. Which is absolutely not the case.

For me, anyone who doesn't see some good sh1tkicking boots as hot isn't even on my radar.

But I'm a very very different person than you, and so what you are looking for might be a lot closer to this than I could ever be.

Anyway, just curious what your take on all of this is.


----------



## Luvher4life

And I just hope that she lives far away from where she had the threesome, because word does travel. Not a good thing if you want a long-term relationship.

I think it's time for a little expansion of your horizons. If you live in a small town, it will become more and more difficult to find the right man the longer you stay single. Go to a church of similar faith in the next town over where nobody knows you. It's obvious that your horizons are too limited. You could join Christian Mingle, or some other dating site. Be careful with those sites because there will be players, and other superficial people that are not what they say they are. Check their stories and backgrounds to make sure.


----------



## always_alone

norajane said:


> But you felt slighted that he didn't invite you to move with him when he got his chef job? Honestly, you shouldn't have had a moment's worth of expectation that either one of these guys was remotely interested in marrying you, ever.


It took me some time to figure out that a lot of guys just want to use women too. It's not like they advertise that fact, and they will tell you what they think you want to hear. So if you don't have an older sister or someone to guide you, sometimes you have to learn the hard way.

Just sayin'.


----------



## BetrayedDad

OliviaG said:


> IMy impression is that not too many guys want to think of their wives as having given BJs (in particular) to other men. It would be a thought they'd likely have to actively block out of their minds if they knew about it, I think. (Am I right guys? Or is this a generational thing? I'm curious.)


I'll tell you this much from a guy standpoint.

If she were my girlfriend, I'd much rather she tell me she's slept with 25 guys than tell me she sucked two d!cks at the same time.

OP - Do yourself a huge favor and keep that tidbit to yourself, if you find another boyfriend. That's a deal breaker for a lot of men.


----------



## Celes

I disagree that you should hide the threesome. Don't throw it out there but don't lie if asked either. Who gives a **** if a guy doesn't want to be with you over it? You're better off without them. How many men would kill for a threesome with 2 women? 

Don't fall for the hypocrisy that's often promoted. How it's okay for men to have as much sex as they want, have threesomes, sow their oats etc. But not okay for women. Or the "women are the gatekeepers" BS. That you should be the "good girl" men marry while they're off having the time of their lives. You've missed out on your prime time for sex.

I was a lot like you. Didn't lose my virginity until I was 24. Parents kept telling me that "good girls" waited. That men had fun with the bad girls but married the good girls. So I wanted to wait until marriage. I didn't have sex until I was engaged to my ex, and we were together 1.5 years. There were only a few months left to our wedding and in my heart it was a done deal. Meanwhile I knew he had been with tons of girls before me and it always ate away at me. I knew so many girls enjoying sex and not having any trouble finding men who wanted to marry them. It's all a crock of **** to control you. I realized I didn't want to be with a man who'd use women for sex but judge me if I was sexual. Why would I want to be with a hypocrite? Sex is mutually beneficial. People don't "use you" for sex, if you enjoy it too. It's one thing if they apply the same beliefs to themselves, then good for them. But the men who think they'll sow their oats and marry the "good girls" are the WORST. 

In the end, my ex was able to wait because he didn't even care for sex that much. Our relationship collapsed for unrelated reasons and the wedding was called off. When I met my husband, I slept with him on our first date practically. It should have been a ONS to be honest. I wanted to get it out of my system after what my ex did to me and he was the first person I slept with after my ex. But my husband never judged me. He kept pursuing me. Because he liked me for me and didn't judge women based on who they slept with or how fast they slept with them. There are plenty of men like that. 

You have nothing to be ashamed about. It sounds like you're surrounded by backwards people who equate women's sexuality to shame. They're wrong.

Not saying go out and have tons of ONS, but you really need to think about what you're doing and why you're denying yourself. And if a man has a problem with your threesome, **** em. Sounds like a hot experience to me :wink2:


----------



## norajane

always_alone said:


> It took me some time to figure out that a lot of guys just want to use women too. It's not like they advertise that fact, and they will tell you what they think you want to hear. So if you don't have an older sister or someone to guide you, sometimes you have to learn the hard way.
> 
> Just sayin'.


Exactly. That's what she should be doing with these exes - learning from the experience by reflecting on how those relationships developed and then looking what her part in it was, and how she can avoid falling into those traps.

To me, it seems like she fell into her first relationship in high school with her brother's friend, and that break-up was devastating...as a very young woman with no life experience, it would be...and since then, her picker has been off. She's attracted to and attracting the wrong kinds of guys for her, maybe falling into relationships that are convenient or exciting, but not necessarily the kind that would lead to the life she says she wants to have.

And deciding she doesn't like women as friends is why she's in this boat. She has no one to tell her, "Girlfriend, you are choosing the wrong guys to get involved with."


----------



## Celes

BetrayedDad said:


> OP - Do yourself a huge favor and keep that tidbit to yourself, if you find another boyfriend. That's a deal breaker for a lot of men.


And yet I've seen so many threads where prior to marriage, the wife lied about her past sexual experience and the husband finds out the truth later on and has a freak out. Everyone tells him to divorce her for lying.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

BetrayedDad said:


> I'll tell you this much from a guy standpoint.
> 
> If she were my girlfriend, I'd much rather she tell me she's slept with 25 guys than tell me she sucked two d!cks at the same time.
> 
> OP - Do yourself a huge favor and keep that tidbit to yourself, if you find another boyfriend. That's a deal breaker for a lot of men.


I guess this is where you have to remember that every man is different in what they want. Me personally, I'm not concerned about how you had your fun in the past. I'm way more likely to be concerned that you own a vibrator that's sitting in a drawer gathering dust. I want to know that the woman I'm with is sexual on her own accord, not that she's "willing" to do it if her man wants it, but that she personally craves it.

Regarding hiding the 3sum or anything else...I'm a really big fan of just being who you are and finding someone who is cool with that, warts and all.

Regarding the tomboy thing...I'm totally into tomboys. Except the short hair; I have a strong personal preference for long hair. But I'm very much into girls who aren't afraid to get dirty. Especially if they can clean up in a little black dress once in a while.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

Celes said:


> And yet I've seen so many threads where prior to marriage, the wife lied about her past sexual experience and the husband finds out the truth later on and has a freak out. Everyone tells him to divorce her for lying.


Yup. I would totally freak if I found out that I was deceived in this way from the beginning and found out after marriage. Although for me it would only be a deal breaker if I felt my wife was more sexual with men from her past than she is with me.


----------



## GuyInColorado

Start having sex. That will fix your issues. No real guy wants an inexperienced woman. It tells him that she isn't interested in sex and has strict religious beliefs that were brainwashed into her from her childhood. She can't think on her own and enjoy life. 

My soon to be ex wife grew up in a strict reglious family. Did the pledge. I took her virginity a few months after dating. Had some decent sex for a while and then she wanted to quit before we got married. Got married and had sex maybe 10 times in the 8 years of marriage, none int he last 4 years. Titty fcked her once and she later told me she felt dirty and I saw it in porn videos. She hated giving oral. Worst sex ever. I filed for divorce back in January and haven't been this happy in forever. That's my story.


----------



## BetrayedDad

Celes said:


> And yet I've seen so many threads where prior to marriage, the wife lied about her past sexual experience and the husband finds out the truth later on and has a freak out. Everyone tells him to divorce her for lying.


I never said lie. I said keep it to yourself. Nothing to be ashamed about, it's your body.

OP, if asked point blank I'd say, "My sexually explicit past is something I'd prefer to keep private." 

Definitely, DON'T bring it up in casual conversation or volunteer it. Not everyone is so "understanding".


----------



## misslonelyheart

OliviaG said:


> You don't want your threesome exploits to become the talk of the town - not because you should be ashamed of it but because it's a fact that it will hurt your reputation. But you've lost control of that narrative - there are two guys who are no doubt talking about it. Like Luvher4life suggested: expand your horizons to get away from it.


Fortunately both of THEM moved away - one to NY, one to CA. In fact the older one moved away just 3 weeks after it happened. And this all happened 3-4 years ago and I've never gotten the impression anyone found out.

Someone asked why I don't date guys from church. My 2nd fiance was someone I met a my church during a missionary conference so I DID date one guy from church. I don't now because there aren't any single guys my age in my church. In fact there aren't even any divorced guys my age in my church - the one divorced guy we have is 53 years old with 2 daughters my age.

There's been a lot of updates here in the past few hours. I coach swim team tonight so I'll try to catch up when I get home.


----------



## Evinrude58

always_alone said:


> @misslonelyheart
> 
> I'm curious: what do you think of these ongoing instructions to be more "feminine"? Do they resonate with you? Is this something you wish for or aspire to?
> 
> I find it interesting because in some ways, I think you are probably more "feminine" than I am, and I have also received such instructions. My personal reaction is just to shrug. I don't care to be shoved into someone else's stereotypical box, and I know that even if I were to conform to this rule, then it would be immediately followed up by yet another rule, and so on.
> 
> But I also know, deep down, that the people who think I should change wouldn't ever even be interested in me in the first place, nor I them. What they are doing, essentially, is telling me their fantasy, and assuming that somehow it is *them* that I want to attract and reel in. Which is absolutely not the case.
> 
> *For me, anyone who doesn't see some good sh1tkicking boots as hot isn't even on my radar.*
> 
> But I'm a very very different person than you, and so what you are looking for might be a lot closer to this than I could ever be.
> 
> Anyway, just curious what your take on all of this is.


Always Alone???? Nasty boots don't turn a guys knob unless there's a SUPER HOT body in them. If a woman has that, they don't need to worry about what they wear, because they look good in virtually anything.


----------



## always_alone

Evinrude58 said:


> Always Alone???? Nasty boots don't turn a guys knob unless there's a SUPER HOT body in them. If a woman has that, they don't need to worry about what they wear, because they look good in virtually anything.


Yeah, whatever dude. You don't know what you're missing and clearly never will. *shrug*


----------



## WorkingOnMe

always_alone said:


> Yeah, whatever dude. You don't know what you're missing and clearly never will. *shrug*


It's kind of rare for me to be agreeing with AA, but in this case I sure do. But then I'm just a shy midwestern boy who grew up with girls wearing their **** kicking boots more often than anything else. I have two horses, and I guess it just seems like "normal" to me. I'm also, um, vertically challenged so I never liked women in heels unless they were super short.

By the way, women who ride horses know how to move their hips like no other. Just sayin.


----------



## Evinrude58

Celes said:


> I disagree that you should hide the threesome. Don't throw it out there but don't lie if asked either. Who gives a **** if a guy doesn't want to be with you over it? You're better off without them. *How many men would kill for a threesome with 2 women?*
> 
> Don't fall for the hypocrisy that's often promoted. How it's okay for men to have as much sex as they want, have threesomes, sow their oats etc. But not okay for women. Or the "women are the gatekeepers" BS. That you should be the "good girl" men marry while they're off having the time of their lives. You've missed out on your prime time for sex.
> 
> I was a lot like you. Didn't lose my virginity until I was 24. Parents kept telling me that "good girls" waited. That men had fun with the bad girls but married the good girls. So I wanted to wait until marriage. I didn't have sex until I was engaged to my ex, and we were together 1.5 years. There were only a few months left to our wedding and in my heart it was a done deal. Meanwhile I knew he had been with tons of girls before me and it always ate away at me. I knew so many girls enjoying sex and not having any trouble finding men who wanted to marry them. It's all a crock of **** to control you. I realized I didn't want to be with a man who'd use women for sex but judge me if I was sexual. Why would I want to be with a hypocrite? Sex is mutually beneficial. People don't "use you" for sex, if you enjoy it too. It's one thing if they apply the same beliefs to themselves, then good for them. But the men who think they'll sow their oats and marry the "good girls" are the WORST.
> 
> In the end, my ex was able to wait because he didn't even care for sex that much. Our relationship collapsed for unrelated reasons and the wedding was called off. When I met my husband, I slept with him on our first date practically. It should have been a ONS to be honest. I wanted to get it out of my system after what my ex did to me and he was the first person I slept with after my ex. But my husband never judged me. He kept pursuing me. Because he liked me for me and didn't judge women based on who they slept with or how fast they slept with them. There are plenty of men like that.
> 
> You have nothing to be ashamed about. It sounds like you're surrounded by backwards people who equate women's sexuality to shame. They're wrong.
> 
> Not saying go out and have tons of ONS, but you really need to think about what you're doing and why you're denying yourself. And if a man has a problem with your threesome, **** em. Sounds like a hot experience to me :wink2:


Yes, men love to fantasize about a threesome, with one caveat: They really want to have the threesome with someone they're NOT married to. A real man won't share his wife with anyone, and doesn't want to be married to a woman that would want to share HIM with another woman. A man wants his wife to want ONLY HIM, and is JEALOUS of other women wanting him.
Sure, there are those weirdo couples who like to swing and do the cuckold thing and let other women in their bed with their wife.
MOST men, I don't believe, would share their bed---even with another woman. I could be totally wrong-- it's just what I think.

I don't think OP should lie about it. But she's an idiot if she brings it up with a guy looking for a good woman to marry. 
Just my opinion. Given for free and maybe worth less.

The guy that asked some doofus if he wanted his GF to blow him was a scumbag extraordinaire. Honestly, I think it's a little beneath a good woman to actually do it.


----------



## GB McKenna

Funny how the story goes from praising of the near-virginal, presumably chaste 'moral' fortitude of the OP ("don't compromise!" "Don't sacrifice your values" "Real men will wait for sex" etc. etc.) to the praising and cheerleading for the OP to prioritize "Experience!" and "play the field" and "have sex like guys get to have sex!". Case in point as to why actual chaste women who are trying to preserve something sacred for their husbands are really up the creek in this culture. 

With the new revelations, which I have to say I'm not surprised, it probably does make sense for her to rethink her hair-splitting moral relativism when it comes to her views of her sexuality. And for men, this should be one more confirmation of the red flag of women with work histories in the service industry lol as well as those who seem to hide behind a self-defined morality, e.g. born again virgins, reformed party girls, etc.

Indeed, women can do what they want with their bodies. I've no interest in telling anyone what to do when it comes to these kinds of decisions. But the freedom to make their choices does not come with a restriction on how others will perceive those choices - as much as the sexpozz feminists would like to try. 

Men are free to think and feel whatever they want relative to a woman's past and present choices. Just as women are free to do the same (and boy do they). Some men don't care at all about the past. Other men see the past as a good predictor of the future and a means to understand her character, values, and worth as a potential mate. Across this spectrum of men, things like consistency of voice and actions, congruence in values and behaviors, and honesty are far more important than some number vs. some other number or some specific act vs. other acts. That said, obfuscation and lies of omission are no way to build a foundation for marriage. If the past is important to a man who is important to you, then you owe it to him to allow him to chose you (or not) based on the truths he desires to understand. 

A wise man will pay more attention to what a woman does and what she has done in terms of her choices and behaviors than what she says. Simple fact. The OP has presented some challenges in this regard. 

Men and women are not the same, just with different private parts. As such, there will be differences - some quite stark, in what is valued and for what reasons. By and large, a woman's past sexual choices matter. Full stop. Men and women hold different standards. That is reality. A woman is free to hold a man to any sexual standard she sees fit. This idea that men "get to" do anything is ridiculous. All women are free to decide if a man is too "experienced" and proceed accordingly. Just because they often choose not to pass up these men does not mean the freedom to enforce that same value is not available to them.

And just because the majority of women choose not to value his experience the same way that the majority of men value her experience does not mean it is a double-standard. Just different. In the same way that women will value "confident" traits in men and men will value "nurturing" traits in women. 

Any cultural-social praise that men receive from their experience with women is in no small part a function of the preselection that women evidence when selecting for men. IOW, women demonstrate (repeatedly and robustly) a preference for men that other women demonstrably find attractive. Sexual access is one significant, but not the only, indicator of his high social-sexual status. All women want higher status men. Most women may not be enthusiastic about his past experience, but as long as they secure his commitment (provisioning and protection and "love") they view this experience as hard evidence of his value.

Second to this, access to sex for men and women are on opposite ends of the spectrum. In order to just "get sex" a man must improve himself, compete with other men in a variety of contexts and conditions, approach, charm, carry the encounter, progress the encounter while establishing rapport both in comfort and in sexual tension; he must "just get it" in terms of a multitude of factors that play into the expectations, desires, and raw physical attraction cues specific to female sexuality, etc. For most women to "get sex", it requires making herself available. There is a huge difference in terms of what it takes to "get" sex between men and women. This is conveniently ignored by those who adhere to the same-same mentality.

So those who drag out the old sexual double standard are locked in the feminist/equalist dogma that refuses to knowledge the true differences between male and female sexuality, attraction, desires, incentives, and relationship roles. You can choose to operate within an ideology with an agenda or you can choose to operate with an understanding of the natural biological, physical, and social dynamics in play.

You can always revert to some unprincipled utopian blank-state regarding what you think the world should be like, what feels "fair", but this kind of thinking is about as useful as the kind of post facto rationalization that tends to follow closely behind. Its full of pretty little lies that make you feel good. If it is about the feelz and getting high-fives from your older sisters who are still pissed they didn't get to party like the guys did, well, good luck with that. But if honesty and truth are higher order to the feelz, it is perhaps worth exploring a bit more of what is really going on.

Interesting also how in one breath she can assume moral high ground by not having (vaginal) sex but also shed her moral agency by claiming "everybody was doing [sic. "Oral" "hooking up with the chefs"]. Getting on her knees with two men is not intimate. Ok, but what is it then? These kinds of choices are an issue for a lot of men, but not always for their obvious visceral impact. It is also because it is indicative of a broader issue: a duplicitous approach to (and support for) female sexuality that is part of what is working to drive men to the extremes of the dating market, e.g. either go ghost or go full player. And where the dating market goes, so goes marriage.

A woman who will get on her knees (literally) for two men at the same but holds back her sexuality as a condition of Marriage is presenting a challenge to potential mates that is not so easily dismissed as "the past shouldn't matter". She probably should drop some of what seems to be a moral charade or buffer and reconsider her relationship with (vaginal) sex. But not because "guys get to do it". She should look into her own sexuality and values because sex is very important to men. And the within cohort that she has preference for, men are particularly keen on these subtle, questionably fungible valuations of sexuality. 

A man wants to truly "own" his wife's sexuality. How she owns it herself, before him and with him, matters a great deal. If you think that's BS, then consider why a man with moral standing, high status, and plenty of options in the dating market would risk everything he has worked for to prostrate upon the alter of modern legal marriage. Sex can't occupy the "no big deal" (her past) and the "such a big deal that I have to be married first" (her present) space when only separated by what a woman desires in this moment. People need to look long and hard at what men really get out of marriage these days relative to what they can get on their own, outside of marriage and relative to the unique risks to them they acquire as soon as they sign that contract.


----------



## nirvana

^-- Evinrude, you da man!
I am actually shocked that the OP was okay when her bf asked her to blow another dude.
Wow.


----------



## always_alone

WorkingOnMe said:


> It's kind of rare for me to be agreeing with AA, but in this case I sure do. But then I'm just a shy midwestern boy who grew up with girls wearing their **** kicking boots more often than anything else. I have two horses, and I guess it just seems like "normal" to me. I'm also, um, vertically challenged so I never liked women in heels unless they were super short.
> 
> By the way, women who ride horses know how to move their hips like no other. Just sayin.


And a woman who isn't afraid to get dirty....

Well, I'll just let the imagination fill in those blanks.


----------



## Celes

Evinrude58 said:


> Yes, men love to fantasize about a threesome, with one caveat: They really want to have the threesome with someone they're NOT married to. A real man won't share his wife with anyone, and doesn't want to be married to a woman that would want to share HIM with another woman. A man wants his wife to want ONLY HIM, and is JEALOUS of other women wanting him.
> Sure, there are those weirdo couples who like to swing and do the cuckold thing and let other women in their bed with their wife.
> MOST men, I don't believe, would share their bed---even with another woman. I could be totally wrong-- it's just what I think.
> 
> I don't think OP should lie about it. But she's an idiot if she brings it up with a guy looking for a good woman to marry.
> Just my opinion. Given for free and maybe worth less.
> 
> The guy that asked some doofus if he wanted his GF to blow him was a scumbag extraordinaire. Honestly, I think it's a little beneath a good woman to actually do it.


So if a man has a threesome with random chicks prior to marriage, does that also make him non-marriage material?

If a man's gf invited her female friend in the bedroom, and he went for it, should women who are looking to marry a good man avoid him? Is it beneath the man to go for it?


----------



## Evinrude58

Celes said:


> So if a man has a threesome with random chicks prior to marriage, does that also make him non-marriage material?
> 
> If a man's gf invited her female friend in the bedroom, and he went for it, should women who are looking to marry a good man avoid him? Is it beneath the man to go for it?


I'm not stepping off in this hole. 

If you think a man wants to marry a woman that blows two guys at once, you are mistaken.
If you think a man would love to have sex with multiple women, I'm agreeing with you.
Forget the "double standard" or hypocrisy or whatever you want to call it. Reality is that a man doesn't really want to marry a woman that is promiscuous (not that the OP is) or has had multiple sex partners at one time.
And, I think that women are actually attracted to men who have had lots of experience with other women because it makes them think they are getting something other women wanted and can't have. I don't think they view this subject in the same way a man does. Maybe I'm wrong. I suspect not.


----------



## I Don't Know

Celes said:


> So if a man has a threesome with random chicks prior to marriage, does that also make him non-marriage material?
> 
> Depends on the woman considering him for marriage. She's certainly within her rights to decide it does.
> 
> If a man's gf invited her female friend in the bedroom, and he went for it, should women who are looking to marry a good man avoid him? Is it beneath the man to go for it?
> 
> I believe the point was that most men who are considering a woman for marriage would not invite another man to share her. If the gf in this example is of the same mind then she was never considering this man for marriage in the first place. is it beneath the man? Obviously not at that time in his life or he wouldn't have participated.


----------



## always_alone

Evinrude58 said:


> And, I think that women are actually attracted to men who have had lots of experience with other women because it makes them think they are getting something other women wanted and can't have. I don't think they view this subject in the same way a man does. Maybe I'm wrong. I suspect not.


Hahahahaha. Funny!

This whole preselection yarn you guys keep telling each other is so funny. Women don't go after a guy because other women like him. It just so happens that many women go after that same guy because he is *hot*.

Makes me laugh every time. Guys never think they all go after the same women because of "preselection", but for some reason the concept that women could just find someone hot is completely foreign to them. :scratchhead:


----------



## Celes

Evinrude58 said:


> I'm not stepping off in this hole.
> 
> If you think a man wants to marry a woman that blows two guys at once, you are mistaken.
> If you think a man would love to have sex with multiple women, I'm agreeing with you.
> Forget the "double standard" or hypocrisy or whatever you want to call it. Reality is that a man doesn't really want to marry a woman that is promiscuous (not that the OP is) or has had multiple sex partners at one time.
> And, I think that women are actually attracted to men who have had lots of experience with other women because it makes them think they are getting something other women wanted and can't have. I don't think they view this subject in the same way a man does. Maybe I'm wrong. I suspect not.


Got it. It's only beneath a woman to have sex threesomes or be promiscuous. But men are sex gods if they do. LMAO. Keep telling yourself that.


----------



## Celes

I agree with you @I Don't Know, but my question was a personal one to Evinrude. He said that if a bf invited another guy, and the gf participated, it's beneath her and men won't judge her as marriage material. But if the tables were turned, he's a sex god and that's okay. 

I'm not saying it's wrong to have standards when it comes to a future spouse's past sexuality (I don't understand it, but to each their own). So long as the person who has those standards applies them to themselves as well. If you seek a partner with low numbers, and you also have low numbers, more power to you. 

But those who think it's okay for them to do X,Y,Z but not someone they'd marry are a joke to me.


----------



## Evinrude58

always_alone said:


> Hahahahaha. Funny!
> 
> This whole preselection yarn you guys keep telling each other is so funny. Women don't go after a guy because other women like him. It just so happens that many women go after that same guy because he is *hot*.
> 
> Makes me laugh every time. Guys never think they all go after the same women because of "preselection", but for some reason the concept that women could just find someone hot is completely foreign to them. :scratchhead:


I'm just saying that if a guy has had sex with every cheerleader in the school, the next woman is not counting that against his "hotness".
Now a woman that has had sex with every guy on the football team--- that definitely affects her status related to being marriage material, and even her "hotness" status as well.


----------



## GB McKenna

Evinrude58, 
You are correct. Not PC to say it or advertise it, but its in the hearts and minds of most men. There is an evolutionary and biological basis for this but the rational and logical approach to these emotional arguments is quite useless, as any man who has dared to assert his own standards that may go against the femcentric narrative surely knows. 

Celes,

"So if a man has a threesome with random chicks prior to marriage, does that also make him non-marriage material?"

That is entirely up to you dear. You have agency. Enforce the "standards" you wish to enforce. Nobody is telling any woman she has to accept a man who has had a threesome. You don't think thats cool, well then say so and then back that up by declining to date attractive men who disclose such things. Better yet, ask men about their sexual past. Chances are you will get close enough to the truth to make an informed decision. That is more than most men get since a woman's sexual past is off limits, right? So your rhetorical question presumes this double-standard of some invisible hand while completely ignoring your own free will to act on standards which you are entirely free to set and enforce how you see fit.

Speaking of double standards, there are plenty of voices who wish to use subtle (and not so) shaming on men to enforce what they believe is equity (its not) in this standard. So if there is a double standard, it involves enforcing a hierarchy of sexual strategies that elevates female sexuality and subordinates male sexuality. Further, this primacy of female sexual optionality requires its own duplicity in encouraging and enabling women to both "be like men" but also in retaining the (presumed) superiority (and innate virtue) of female sexuality, all while simultaneously enforcing social and legal mechanisms to further restrict male sexuality. IOW, "you go girl, 'date' around, have fun, do what men get to do..." but when she is "ready" for marriage it is "I only have 'sex' with men I am committed to (or married to in the case of the OP)" And she will have the full support of the entirety of our cultural puppetmasters on either side of that continuum. 

So ok, do what you want, but these things don't change how men view most of these things. It does change some men, but in so many other ways that we end up with women complaining that "why are millennial men so weak" and "where are all of the 'good' men" etc. Which is what happens when you feminize generations of men with this kind of equalist, fairness junk. You reap what you sow. You want to be like a man and you want men to be more like women and then everybody wonders why marriage is becoming scarce.

"If a man's gf invited her female friend in the bedroom, and he went for it, should women who are looking to marry a good man avoid him? Is it beneath the man to go for it?"

See Above.


----------



## Evinrude58

Celes said:


> I agree with you @I Don't Know, but my question was a personal one to Evinrude. He said that if a bf invited another guy, and the gf participated, it's beneath her and men won't judge her as marriage material. But if the tables were turned, he's a sex god and that's okay.
> 
> I'm not saying it's wrong to have standards when it comes to a future spouse's past sexuality (I don't understand it, but to each their own). So long as the person who has those standards applies them to themselves as well. If you seek a partner with low numbers, and you also have low numbers, more power to you.
> 
> But those who think it's okay to do X,Y,Z but not someone they'd marry are a joke to me.


Look Celes,
When a person is judging another as far as if they're marriage material or not, they're not thinking of their own faults. They're not worried about what they are going to do as far as cheating, lying, stealing, divorcing. They're worried about what the OTHER person is going to do.

I'm not saying it's fair to be promiscuous and then expect their mate to be a virgin. It's not. I don't go around sleeping with a bunch of women. I don't want to marry a woman who's been with a bunch of men. Have I ever had a threesome fantasy? Well, I've had lots of fantasies. Doesn't mean I think it's right to do it, and I would be ashamed to tell a woman I was thinking of marrying that I had engaged in promiscuous behavior.

I think you are just looking for arguments with a man's point of view. That's fine, I like to argue as well. 
I couldn't care less if I'm a "joke" to you or not, or what you think of my opinions. They are mine. You don't have to like 'em.


----------



## Betrayedone

Ha! I was going to tell you that you are one hell of a catch and offer some advice but you have 15 pages of support here who love you already. If you compromise yourself in any way I will personally give you a loving size 11 in the ass. You are an absolute gemstone in a world of rocks........You should walk through this life with your head held high and a smile on your face because you are ahead of the rest of the crowd.......I loved reading your posts.......Carry on soldier........


----------



## I Don't Know

Celes said:


> I agree with you @I Don't Know, but my question was a personal one to Evinrude. He said that if a bf invited another guy, and the gf participated, it's beneath her and men won't judge her as marriage material. But if the tables were turned, he's a sex god and that's okay.
> 
> I'm not saying it's wrong to have standards when it comes to a future spouse's past sexuality (I don't understand it, but to each their own). *So long as the person who has those standards applies them to themselves as well. If you seek a partner with low numbers, and you also have low numbers, more power to you.
> *
> But those who think it's okay for them to do X,Y,Z but not someone they'd marry are a joke to me.


At some point does the slate get wiped clean? for example: a woman had 20 partners from age 21-25, then got married and was faithful for say 10 years, then gets divorced and finds herself in the dating pool again. She meets a guy and finds out he's had the opposite experience, he got married young then divorced and has had 20 partners in the last 4 years. Is she a hypocrite if she decides that's too many for her?


----------



## Celes

GB McKenna said:


> Evinrude58,
> You are correct. Not PC to say it or advertise it, but its in the hearts and minds of most men. There is an evolutionary and biological basis for this but the rational and logical approach to these emotional arguments is quite useless, as any man who has dared to assert his own standards that may go against the femcentric narrative surely knows.
> 
> Celes,
> 
> "So if a man has a threesome with random chicks prior to marriage, does that also make him non-marriage material?"
> 
> That is entirely up to you dear. You have agency. Enforce the "standards" you wish to enforce. Nobody is telling any woman she has to accept a man who has had a threesome. You don't think thats cool, well then say so and then back that up by declining to date attractive men who disclose such things. Better yet, ask men about their sexual past. Chances are you will get close enough to the truth to make an informed decision. That is more than most men get since a woman's sexual past is off limits, right? So your rhetorical question presumes this double-standard of some invisible hand while completely ignoring your own free will to act on standards which you are entirely free to set and enforce how you see fit.
> 
> Speaking of double standards, there are plenty of voices who wish to use subtle (and not so) shaming on men to enforce what they believe is equity (its not) in this standard. So if there is a double standard, it involves enforcing a hierarchy of sexual strategies that elevates female sexuality and subordinates male sexuality. Further, this primacy of female sexual optionality requires its own duplicity in encouraging and enabling women to both "be like men" but also in retaining the (presumed) superiority (and innate virtue) of female sexuality, all while simultaneously enforcing social and legal mechanisms to further restrict male sexuality. IOW, "you go girl, 'date' around, have fun, do what men get to do..." but when she is "ready" for marriage it is "I only have 'sex' with men I am committed to (or married to in the case of the OP)" And she will have the full support of the entirety of our cultural puppetmasters on either side of that continuum.
> 
> So ok, do what you want, but these things don't change how men view most of these things. It does change some men, but in so many other ways that we end up with women complaining that "why are millennial men so weak" and "where are all of the 'good' men" etc. Which is what happens when you feminize generations of men with this kind of equalist, fairness junk. You reap what you sow. You want to be like a man and you want men to be more like women and then everybody wonders why marriage is becoming scarce.
> 
> "If a man's gf invited her female friend in the bedroom, and he went for it, should women who are looking to marry a good man avoid him? Is it beneath the man to go for it?"
> 
> See Above.


Looks like you're throwing everything under the kitchen sink :smile2:

A woman who sleeps around in dating then suddenly becomes chaste when wanting to marry has it totally backwards to me. So not sure what your point is. 

Women enjoying sex has nothing to do with "acting like men". Sex is an enjoyable act to both parties. Fact.

Less and less men care about a woman's sexual past. 

What feminizing society has anything to do with anything, no clue. Are you trying to say that men who don't care about a woman's sexual past are feminized? Lol, ok. 

I have very low numbers. I'm not here shouting for women to go sleep around because men do. Simply pointing out the hypocrisy, and how I for one would never marry such a man. I hope the OP thinks hard on it as well. 

I married a man with very high numbers. But he was never a hypocrite about it. How many men a woman slept with has never been a factor in who he chose to be with, and he could care less about the fact that I have low numbers.


----------



## Celes

I Don't Know said:


> At some point does the slate get wiped clean? for example: a woman had 20 partners from age 21-25, then got married and was faithful for say 10 years, then gets divorced and finds herself in the dating pool again. She meets a guy and finds out he's had the opposite experience, he got married young then divorced and has had 20 partners in the last 4 years. Is she a hypocrite if she decides that's too many for her?


Totally. Her first husband accepted the 20 men she slept with. Now she won't accept it from someone else? Yup, hypocrite.


----------



## Evinrude58

Celes said:


> Looks like you're throwing everything under the kitchen sink :smile2:
> 
> A woman who sleeps around in dating then suddenly becomes chaste when wanting to marry has it totally backwards to me. So not sure what your point is.
> 
> Women enjoying sex has nothing to do with "acting like men". Sex is an enjoyable act to both parties. Fact.
> 
> *Less and less men care about a woman's sexual past. *
> 
> What feminizing society has anything to do with anything, no clue. Are you trying to say that men who don't care about a woman's sexual past are feminized? Lol, ok.
> 
> I have very low numbers. I'm not here shouting for women to go sleep around because men do. Simply pointing out the hypocrisy, and how I for one would never marry such a man. I hope the OP thinks hard on it as well.
> 
> I married a man with very high numbers. But he was never a hypocrite about it. *How many men a woman slept with has never been a factor in who he chose to be with, and he could care less about the fact that I have low numbers.*


Do you actually believe what you're typing?????

Your husband may SAY TO YOU that he could care less about the fact that you have "low numbers", but you are delusional if you think you could ask him that with a polygraph hooked up to him and think it wouldn't go nuclear.

I know what I'm saying is not PC. I'm just telling you how it is with men. Yes, your husband does care about your "numbers". You think he would marry you if he knew you were with a new guy every night for 10 years before he met you? He would have to be an IDIOT to think like that, if only for health reasons.

I find it interesting that your husband has HIGH NUMBERS, and you admittedly have LOW NUMBERS, but I've got it all wrong.


----------



## GB McKenna

always_alone said:


> Hahahahaha. Funny!
> 
> This whole preselection yarn you guys keep telling each other is so funny. Women don't go after a guy because other women like him. It just so happens that many women go after that same guy because he is *hot*.
> 
> Makes me laugh every time. Guys never think they all go after the same women because of "preselection", but for some reason the concept that women could just find someone hot is completely foreign to them. :scratchhead:


You are wrong. There are numerous studies that indicate otherwise. Don't be lazy and ask me to cite them. Its OK, preselection is a bit esoteric and ivory tower for a lot of people. Nobody really likes to have their attraction mechanisms peeled back and peered into. I get it. 

So look at it from the perspective of Hotness. A hot guy, by nature of him being hot (for simplicity we will table defining hotness), has sexual options. I will assume you agree. So a hot guy, being a guy - which also means "all he wants is sex", means by nature of his sexual options, he has sexual power. This power enables him to not only have greater sexual opportunity but also sexual access at a lower "price" than men of lesser hotness. 

This significantly increased probability of sexual contact is not ignored by women. Assuming a woman is precluded from seeing his attraction play out in the public sphere there is still an an attribution of presumed sexual experience based on her keen ability to do the math in her hindbrain. 

Whether presumed - or as I contend, directly observed via social interactions both consciously and unconsciously, as well as propagation of via communication (think Facebook and social circles), this sexuality embedded with experience is accretive to his value, his status, and ultimately his perceived attractiveness. 

Somewhere in there "preselection" lurks. But yeah, its just something us guys tell each other. Lol.

As for male attraction, like in most animals in nature, this aspect of sharing with other men is fundamentally counterproductive to the mating instinct. Females will share an alpha male; males will only share under specific conditions - often laced with potential for dire conflict or in other rare cases. 

Male attraction cues are not moderated (positively) by a woman's experience with other men - in essence, being mated by other men. A hot woman will be viewed as such, but her proximity and interaction with other men actually mitigates some of the physical hotness in the eyes of men. Taken further, men desire women THEY find to be hot. It goes to the ownership aspect of mating and thus the higher likelihood of passing on his genes and not the genes of another male. 

I'm sure you are on the edge of your seat, so I'll quit while I'm behind. I know it is uncomfortable and can be reductive to have such intimate affairs reduced to these base instincts, but somehow all of these evolutionary things seem to stop at the neck if they confront the rigid ideology that we are all the same. Good luck.


----------



## misslonelyheart

Ok home at last. Seriously long day. Just typed out a long post and my phone battery died. Gonna go have supper while it charges and then try again.

You guys really get into this, don't you?


----------



## Celes

Evinrude58 said:


> Do you actually believe what you're typing?????
> 
> Your husband may SAY TO YOU that he could care less about the fact that you have "low numbers", but you are delusional if you think you could ask him that with a polygraph hooked up to him and think it wouldn't go nuclear.
> 
> I know what I'm saying is not PC. I'm just telling you how it is with men. Yes, your husband does care about your "numbers". You think he would marry you if he knew you were with a new guy every night for 10 years before he met you? He would have to be an IDIOT to think that, if only for health reasons.


I'm 100% certain he would not have cared even if I slept with 100 men. He has even commented how he wished I slept with more men before him, so I don't regret my decision or have a mid-life crisis 10 years from now. I've assured him I'm fine with my choices. My husband has VERY liberal sexual views. Not talking open marriage or anything, so you don't jump to conclusions. In fact he was skeptical about dating me because I was with just 1 man before, he was worried I'd suck at sex. He always dated women with high numbers before.

But it's nice to know you think you know how ALL men think


----------



## Celes

misslonelyheart said:


> Ok home at last. Seriously long day. Just typed out a long post and my phone battery died. Gonna go have supper while it charges and then try again.
> 
> You guys really get into this, don't you?


Sorry, there's been a bit of a derail. I've said my piece. The boys here can keep trying to argue whatever they want but I've made my point.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

Evinrude58 said:


> Do you actually believe what you're typing?????
> 
> Your husband may SAY TO YOU that he could care less about the fact that you have "low numbers", but you are delusional if you think you could ask him that with a polygraph hooked up to him and think it wouldn't go nuclear.
> 
> I know what I'm saying is not PC. I'm just telling you how it is with men. Yes, your husband does care about your "numbers". You think he would marry you if he knew you were with a new guy every night for 10 years before he met you? He would have to be an IDIOT to think like that, if only for health reasons.
> 
> I find it interesting that your husband has HIGH NUMBERS, and you admittedly have LOW NUMBERS, but I've got it all wrong.


What you're saying is highly presumptuous. You don't speak for all men. Just because you personally don't want a woman with high numbers doesn't mean that all or even most men feel the same way. I know many men who feel as I do, and don't care about numbers. We care far more about our mates being as into us and as willing as she was with any other man. I have no interest in being in second place, but I don't feel at all that I have to be the only one in the race to ensure I'm in first.


----------



## GB McKenna

Celes said:


> *I have very low numbers....*
> 
> *I married a man with very high numbers. *But he was never a hypocrite about it. How many men a woman slept with has never been a factor in who he chose to be with, and he could care less about the fact that I have low numbers.


Thank you for affirming what my dissertation failed to establish in your mind. It may well not have been a "Factor" for him, but conveniently it didn't need to be either. 

Many men will openly state "no big deal" but this is not always authentic. It is part of what men are programmed to believe. Further, men are "with" women for sex, for dating, for fun, for no particular reason, but who they choose to marry often carries with it a different standard. This is a marriage site. My comments are in the context of marriage. 

Regardless, indeed there are men who don't care, and as you demonstrated, there are women who don't care about male sexual history either. 

So to my point, this double standard is purely a tool empower women to ignore what most men value in favor of "feels good" and to shame men into dropping their own standards in order to conform with this (false) notion of Equality. 

You are likely correct that "more men" are dropping such concerns about a woman's past. But again, its more a function of adjusting expectations to the marketplace as opposed to innate, biologically driven, and socially reinforced attraction and attachment cues. 

100,000 years of mating and then 50 years of social programming are bound to produce quite a lot of dissonance. 

Sexual enjoyment was never on the table. The enjoyment angle is one which seeks to circumvent the implications of differences in sexual attraction, incentives, and mating values between men and women. Bifurcating enjoyment from consequences is not a strong position.


----------



## GB McKenna

OliviaG said:


> Wow, could you be any more condescending?
> 
> You do realize that just because there are studies that back up this theory doesn't mean there aren't other studies that refute it? Evolutionary biology is an interesting subject, but you're getting carried away with your claims.
> 
> What you are saying, despite becoming dogma in certain circles, does not have enough evidence to have been accepted as fact - far from it. It's one of those theories that seems to mesh well with certain aspects of our daily experience, so it's easy to sell to people who want it to be true.


True. Its not condescending, this all cuts both ways. In my experience, most people don't like to have their motivations and choices drawn and quartered. 

In any case, of course the field is dubious, like any other in social "science", but is it more dubious than these grand, sweeping notions (meta-assumptions) that sex differences don't exist, that men and women hold very different perspectives in terms of attraction and mating, that gender fluidity is the norm, that somehow biology must stop at the gates of the prevailing political correct narrative? 

You speak of dogma and that is precisely what is telling young women to gamble their futures as wives and mothers so they can be like men, while these same efforts are instructing men that their natural dispositions - including sexual drives, are some kind of pathology that needs to be sublimated according to what fits best with the cultural whims, all while the female sexuality is presumed to be a virtuous ideal regardless of how it is deployed. 

These things may trip up the preferred simplistic view of modern courtship, but if women were truly interested in how men feel about these matters and how it ultimately impacts the institution of marriage, they wouldn't be so eager to dismiss and retrench into their own dogmatic positions. 

Thank you for your comment.


----------



## misslonelyheart

My grandpa is having a bad night so I'm not going to be around this evening. In fact I'm predicting a trip to the ER. Pray for him if you're the praying type. He had arterial angioplasty last week and he's not recovering well at all.


----------



## Evinrude58

WorkingOnMe said:


> What you're saying is highly presumptuous. You don't speak for all men. Just because you personally don't want a woman with high numbers doesn't mean that all or even most men feel the same way. I know many men who feel as I do, and don't care about numbers. We care far more about our mates being as into us and as willing as she was with any other man. I have no interest in being in second place, but I don't feel at all that I have to be the only one in the race to ensure I'm in first.


I'm being presumptious and I'm saying most men think like me and your attitude is the minority.
I believe I speak for most men. Most men don't want to marry a woman who is promiscuous. If your wife was before you married her, and you are happy, then I'm happy for you both.
I believe I am right. 
Prove me wrong.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## WorkingOnMe

Oh brother.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

Evinrude58 said:


> I'm being presumptious and I'm saying most men think like me and your attitude is the minority.
> I believe I speak for most men. Most men don't want to marry a woman who is promiscuous. If your wife was before you married her, and you are happy, then I'm happy for you both.
> I believe I am right.
> Prove me wrong.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Did you follow your own advice? Did you marry a good girl?


----------



## Livvie

misslonelyheart said:


> My grandpa is having a bad night so I'm not going to be around this evening. In fact I'm predicting a trip to the ER. Pray for him if you're the praying type. He had arterial angioplasty last week and he's not recovering well at all.


I hope he feels better soon.


----------



## tech-novelist

Celes said:


> And yet I've seen so many threads where prior to marriage, the wife lied about her past sexual experience and the husband finds out the truth later on and has a freak out. Everyone tells him to divorce her for lying.


Yes, I cannot believe that someone would tell anyone (man or woman) to lie about their sexual past.


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> I think the best policy is to never talk to a guy about past sexual experiences at all. And I wouldn't want to hear about theirs - nothing good can come of it. In fact, any guy who's telling tales about other women, I don't want to have anything to do with. The only thing that matters in a relationship is your shared experiences, IMO.
> 
> You don't want your threesome exploits to become the talk of the town - not because you should be ashamed of it but because it's a fact that it will hurt your reputation. But you've lost control of that narrative - there are two guys who are no doubt talking about it. Like Luvher4life suggested: expand your horizons to get away from it.


The reason it hurts a girl's reputation but not a guy's reputation to have had a lot of previous partners is that men and women are, in general, attracted to different characteristics. For example, very few women want a man that they feel no other woman wants, which is how women generally view male virgins.


----------



## Evinrude58

WorkingOnMe said:


> Did you follow your own advice? Did you marry a good girl?


I didn't advise anything except for the OP to not bring up the fact that she'd done the double blow. Not to lie about it.

Did you?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone

GB McKenna said:


> You are wrong. There are numerous studies that indicate otherwise. Don't be lazy and ask me to cite them. Its OK, preselection is a bit esoteric and ivory tower for a lot of people. Nobody really likes to have their attraction mechanisms peeled back and peered into. I get it.
> 
> So look at it from the perspective of Hotness. A hot guy, by nature of him being hot (for simplicity we will table defining hotness), has sexual options. I will assume you agree. So a hot guy, being a guy - which also means "all he wants is sex", means by nature of his sexual options, he has sexual power. This power enables him to not only have greater sexual opportunity but also sexual access at a lower "price" than men of lesser hotness.


I am familiar with the research, thanks. And if you want to talk about bird behaviour, maybe, just maybe you have a point. But the research attempting to prove that people are just like birds falls very far short of establishing that fact. 

"Preselection" is absolutely a yarn spun by people who can't quite accept that women can find men hot and actually have their own sexual initiatives and desires. They want so badly to believe that somehow their sexuality adds to their value (and detracts from a woman's) that they will bend every fact to fit that story.

A story that is completely belied by the reality that women choose men based on looks and personality, not numbers or sexual experience.

But you know, keeo trying if it makes you happy. And let us know how it works out for you.


----------



## Thor

Celes said:


> And yet I've seen so many threads where prior to marriage, the wife lied about her past sexual experience and the husband finds out the truth later on and has a freak out. Everyone tells him to divorce her for lying.


Yes, 1000 times yes!

My wife lied, obscured, minimized, and omitted information about her past. Here we are more than 30 yrs late and things are falling apart directly and indirectly as a result. 

Never lie or misrepresent your past when you get to the point of having those kinds of discussions in a serious relationship. When the lie comes out it undermines everything. It makes the whole marriage a lie.

One lie begets another. Lying once makes it easier to lie again. This is not the way a marriage thrives.


----------



## Thor

OliviaG said:


> This was an interesting post, and I agree with quite a bit in it, but I have some trouble agreeing with the above.
> 
> *OP, you do not owe any man the truth about every detail (or any detail) about your sexual past beyond your true sexual orientation, and your feelings about sex (i.e., your sex drive and anything you desire strongly that might be thought of as out of the norm).*
> 
> Just because a man *wants* to "own" his wife's sexuality, doesn't mean he has the right to own it. He'll have to make his decisions about her fitness as a mate based upon whatever she chooses to tell him.
> 
> If she has an outrageous history, he'll find out because people will know about it. If she has done one or two things in the past that he might not like, he may never find out about it.
> 
> This is the reality of relationships; none of us get a full accounting of everything the other person has ever done that we might be interested in knowing (whether sexual or nonsexual).
> 
> Any man worth marrying will not ask you personal questions about your past sexual history and will refuse to answer any questions you have about his. He'll judge your "fitness" as spouse material based upon his interactions with you, observing your relationships with others, what people say about you, how they treat you, etc., etc..


I'm going to disagree and give you my opinion, but an argument is pointless on this. FWIW so you and others can be aware of how your position is viewed from the other side.

A person deserves the truth so that he/she can make a fully informed decision about whether they are a match. Being lied to or intentionally mis-led will kill love. If someone finds something about you inconsistent with their needs, desires, or values then you are not a good match. If you trick them into marriage (or staying in a long term relationship) then you are stealing years from their life and taking their opportunities to look for a good match.

Now you can refuse to fully or even partially disclose some aspect of your past, sexual or otherwise. There is nothing dishonest about saying you are not going to talk about some topic. And then the other person can make his/her decision if there is still a good match between you.


----------



## Thor

tech-novelist said:


> Yes, I cannot believe that someone would tell anyone (man or woman) to lie about their sexual past.


Lies of omission are lies. Those who are saying to omit info which they believe might affect the other person's decision are in fact advising to intentionally mis-lead. And that is dishonest. A lie.

My marriage and life were greatly harmed by such lies of omission.


----------



## Holland

Thor said:


> I'm going to disagree and give you my opinion, but an argument is pointless on this. FWIW so you and others can be aware of how your position is viewed from the other side.
> 
> A person deserves the truth so that he/she can make a fully informed decision about whether they are a match. Being lied to or intentionally mis-led will kill love. If someone finds something about you inconsistent with their needs, desires, or values then you are not a good match. If you trick them into marriage (or staying in a long term relationship) then you are stealing years from their life and taking their opportunities to look for a good match.
> 
> Now you can refuse to fully or even partially disclose some aspect of your past, sexual or otherwise. There is nothing dishonest about saying you are not going to talk about some topic. And then the other person can make his/her decision if there is still a good match between you.


Pretty much agree with this. I have experienced this from the other end to you.

Early on in the piece with my partner he had the guts to disclose a couple of things to me that were quite confronting for him to disclose and me to hear. Nothing bad like hurting another person but still up there on the naughty list. His timing was very good, we were getting close enough that he knew he could trust me and that i would strong enough to deal with it. But not too far into the relationship that it would have been devastating should we have split up.

He let me reel for a while then we had a very open discussion on the matters. I do not judge him for his past, he does not judge me for mine but oh yes if he had of waited for years to tell me these things it would have been completely devastating.

Open, honest and adult communication is a good thing. Knowing when to tell someone something is a good life skill. Hiding important information is a potential train wreck in the making.


----------



## GB McKenna

OliviaG said:


> Oh, come on already. Seriously?


Consider these insults:

"She is a ****" (rhymes with hut)
"He is gay" or "He can't get laid"

Now ponder their origin and why these insults are not often reversed.


----------



## Personal

WorkingOnMe said:


> Evinrude58 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you actually believe what you're typing?????
> 
> Your husband may SAY TO YOU that he could care less about the fact that you have "low numbers", but you are delusional if you think you could ask him that with a polygraph hooked up to him and think it wouldn't go nuclear.
> 
> I know what I'm saying is not PC. I'm just telling you how it is with men. Yes, your husband does care about your "numbers". You think he would marry you if he knew you were with a new guy every night for 10 years before he met you? He would have to be an IDIOT to think like that, if only for health reasons.
> 
> I find it interesting that your husband has HIGH NUMBERS, and you admittedly have LOW NUMBERS, but I've got it all wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> What you're saying is highly presumptuous. You don't speak for all men. Just because you personally don't want a woman with high numbers doesn't mean that all or even most men feel the same way. I know many men who feel as I do, and don't care about numbers. We care far more about our mates being as into us and as willing as she was with any other man. I have no interest in being in second place, but I don't feel at all that I have to be the only one in the race to ensure I'm in first.
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less about numbers either, mutual sexual compatibility, willingness, enthusiasm, plus a lack of sexual hangups combined with an internal sense of self worth, contentment and happiness are what matter to me.


----------



## BetrayedDad

Thor said:


> Yes, 1000 times yes!
> 
> My wife lied, obscured, minimized, and omitted information about her past. Here we are more than 30 yrs late and things are falling apart directly and indirectly as a result.
> 
> Never lie or misrepresent your past when you get to the point of having those kinds of discussions in a serious relationship. When the lie comes out it undermines everything. It makes the whole marriage a lie.
> 
> One lie begets another. Lying once makes it easier to lie again. This is not the way a marriage thrives.


100% disagree. AGAIN, no one is talking about lying. What a person did sexually prior to meeting you is none of your business. Period.

If something is SO important to you then ask them. They DON'T have to give you an answer. They can tell you, "None of your damn business." THEN THE BALL IS IN YOUR COURT whether to accept that and be with them or say to yourself, "This is too important to me, I'd rather move on." And no you CAN'T hold it against them if you find out later on.

Now if they LIED too you about it then I would 100% agree but that's not what anyone is advocating. Nor should they have to volunteer it. If you got a problem with a type of behavior make it clear to them before you marry them. If they tell you, "I will not disclose that information." Then assume the WORST case scenario and walk away.

Example: I care how many men my girlfriend has slept with. I do ask every girl I'm in a committed relationship because it's important TO ME. If she tells me more than 15 which is my upper limit, I won't ask her to be my girlfriend. If she tells me "none of my business", I respect that, I'm going to assume it's 150, and I won't ask her to be my girlfriend. If I find out later it's 16+ I will dump her for lying and I certainly do count blowjobs part of the 15. Telling me you've only slept with 3 people but sucked 37 d!cks isn't exactly my cup of tea either.


----------



## Thor

BetrayedDad said:


> 100% disagree. AGAIN, no one is talking about lying. What a person did sexually prior to meeting you is none of your business. Period.
> 
> If something is SO important to you then ask them. They DON'T have to give you an answer. They can tell you, "None of your damn business." THEN THE BALL IS IN YOUR COURT whether to accept that and be with them or say to yourself, "This is too important to me, I'd rather move on." And no you CAN'T hold it against them if you find out later on.
> 
> Now if they LIED too you about it then I would 100% agree but that's not what anyone is advocating. Nor should they have to volunteer it. If you got a problem with a type of behavior make it clear to them before you marry them. If they tell you, "I will not disclose that information." Then assume the WORST case scenario and walk away.


I disagree with 2 parts. Her sexual history is my business if it is important to me. Now she can refuse to tell me, and I can make a decision based on that. My decision would be that whatever details I need are details I need, and her holding back makes us incompatible.

I also disagree that a person does not not have to volunteer something. How can I know to ask about something which I might not have thought of?

Did she ever have a double bj before we met? I would never think to ask about this. Did she ever get arrested for public urination? Did she ever appear in a professional porno? Did she ever work as a stripper? Did she ever whatever? 

I never thought to ask my wife certain things which I am now aware of. And she has told me she intentionally did not tell me about them because she knew I would have "reacted poorly" to the data.

She didn't overtly lie because she never said those things didn't happen. And I had no way to guess which specific questions to ask, so I never asked about those things. With the case of OP, just to use something particular, does her double bj count as a "3-some"? It might be parsed into no, it isn't a 3-some, because a common definition would include PiV in a 3-some. So even if someone asked her if she's ever had a 3-some, she may rationalize answering "no". And that answer would be intended to deceive.

If a person believes something in their past would be a significant problem to their partner, it is dishonest to hide that information. This is the lie of omission. It is omitted with the intention to deceive.

The lie of omission is still a lie. One lie makes it easier to commit another lie. A few lies of ommission make it easier to make a lie of commission. All done under the banner of being in the best interest of the deceived.

We owe it to our partners to provide them with an accurate portrayal of who we really are, and to allow them to make a fully informed decision for themselves whether we are a match.


----------



## Wolf1974

BetrayedDad said:


> 100% disagree. AGAIN, no one is talking about lying. What a person did sexually prior to meeting you is none of your business. Period.
> 
> If something is SO important to you then ask them. They DON'T have to give you an answer. They can tell you, "None of your damn business." THEN THE BALL IS IN YOUR COURT whether to accept that and be with them or say to yourself, "This is too important to me, I'd rather move on." And no you CAN'T hold it against them if you find out later on.
> 
> Now if they LIED too you about it then I would 100% agree but that's not what anyone is advocating. Nor should they have to volunteer it. If you got a problem with a type of behavior make it clear to them before you marry them. If they tell you, "I will not disclose that information." Then assume the WORST case scenario and walk away.
> 
> Example: I care how many men my girlfriend has slept with. I do ask every girl I'm in a committed relationship because it's important TO ME. If she tells me more than 15 which is my upper limit, I won't ask her to be my girlfriend. If she tells me "none of my business", I respect that, I'm going to assume it's 150, and I won't ask her to be my girlfriend. If I find out later it's 16+ I will dump her for lying and I certainly do count blowjobs part of the 15. *Telling me you've only slept with 3 people but sucked 37 d!cks isn't exactly my cup of tea either*.


Yeah this one was eye opening when I started to date again. Amazing that years after Clinton the debate seems to still rage with some if oral sex is sex and needs to be disclosed. How people justify things in their mind is amazing. Had several women tell me that oral sex didn't count.


----------



## I Don't Know

So if I'm shooting heroin but stopped a week before I meet someone and never got addicted (can stay clean), I don't need to tell them? Is that none of their business too? Or is it only past sexual relationships that are off limits? How about former cheating? That's a sexual relationship, yet many people say they don't want a former cheater.

My wife was living a life I wouldn't have been comfortable with a month (maybe less) before I met her. IMO, I'll give someone the benefit of the doubt about their behavior in their 20's. But if you're bar hopping and hooking up with randoms and writing blogs about it at 35, I want to know. It's totally up to you (general, not specific) if you want to tell me, but hopefully if you know it's important to me you would respect what I'm looking for enough to tell me and let me make an informed decision. Or decide yourself that my need to know makes me not a match for you. What you don't get to decide is that it's not important to you so it shouldn't be important to me.

Your ability to hold a job might not be important to me. But if one of the qualities you want is "stable", I'd be a d!ck to let you believe I was just to get you into a relationship.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
just to show that there is a wide variety in what men want. If I were to date again, I would not be at all bothered by a womna who had had many previous partners. I would see it as a suggesting that she very much enjoyed sex and would want an active sex life. 

The only way an extremely high "number" would bother me is if it suggested some sort of compulsive behavior. If after talking with her I decided that she just really enjoyed sex, then even a very high number wouldn't bother me. 

On the other hand, I would be very cautious about dating someone who had very little sexual experience for her age. I would be concerned that that indicated a lack of interest in sex. 

To me "sexual activity" , intercourse, oral, etc all count basically the same. I know that others view this very differently.


----------



## BetrayedDad

I Don't Know said:


> So if I'm shooting heroin but stopped a week before I meet someone and never got addicted (can stay clean), I don't need to tell them? Is that none of their business too? Or is it only past sexual relationships that are off limits? How about former cheating? That's a sexual relationship, yet many people say they don't want a former cheater.


Strawman argument.

Having many sexual partners is not harmful (putting STDs aside).

Being a junkie is. It can have consequences down the road including health and legal implications. So does having an STD which I would also EXPECT to be disclosed without asking.

Sucking 37 d!cks isn't bad for your health or a crime. Maybe just poor taste (pun intended).


----------



## samyeagar

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> just to show that there is a wide variety in what men want. If I were to date again, I would not be at all bothered by a womna who had had many previous partners. I would see it as a suggesting that she very much enjoyed sex and would want an active sex life.
> 
> The only way an extremely high "number" would bother me is if it suggested some sort of compulsive behavior. If after talking with her I decided that she just really enjoyed sex, then even a very high number wouldn't bother me.
> 
> On the other hand, I would be very cautious about dating someone who had very little sexual experience for her age. I would be concerned that that indicated a lack of interest in sex.
> 
> To me "sexual activity" , intercourse, oral, etc all count basically the same. I know that others view this very differently.


And then comes the question of what exactly defines "experience" My wife has ten times the number of partners that I do, and yet I have had far more total sexual encounters than she has, and the number of partners does not necessarily translate into skills in the sack, where skill is completely dependent on the desires of the specific partner.


----------



## I Don't Know

BetrayedDad said:


> Strawman argument.
> 
> Having many sexual partners is not harmful (putting STDs aside).
> 
> Being a junkie is. It can have consequences down the road including health and legal implications. So does having an STD which I would also EXPECT to be disclosed without asking.
> 
> Sucking 37 d!cks isn't bad for your health or a crime. Maybe just poor taste (pun intended).


If you're having unprotected sex weeks or months before you start seeing someone else there is a health risk. Many STD aren't detected right away. Some can't be reliably tested for unless you're having an outbreak at that time. 

What legal implications can I have for using heroin last week if I didn't get caught?


----------



## QuietSoul

So! Back to the OP's dilemma. Hey OP, have you been enlightened by anything shared or suggested here so far? Any insights? Makeover? Wisdom? Anything? Would love a status update


----------



## I Don't Know

OliviaG said:


> Most outrageous behaviour can't be hidden; if someone you're dating has a heroin problem, you'll likely find out about it unless you marry her the day after you meet her. Same thing if she is a former porn star or has a really trampy reputation. I mean, you are presumably socializing with her family and friends and possibly occasionally the people she works with. You are evaluating her relationships with others, aren't you?
> 
> If you are relying too much on what a person tells you about themselves verbally, then you are vulnerable to all kinds of deceit and manipulation. *You need a much more sophisticated approach then just asking questions and expecting honest answers.*


I agree with that 100%. Kinda thought it was part of basic human decency to not lie to someone you claim to love. Live and learn I guess.


----------



## tech-novelist

The question of what to discuss isn't really that complicated.

Before I would get into a serious relationship with a woman, I would want to know what her sexual history was, as well as whether she had been involved in drugs, drinking, criminal behavior, and anything else that might indicate character problems.

If she didn't want to tell me, obviously I couldn't make her do so, but I wouldn't get involved with her either.


----------



## Luvher4life

misslonelyheart said:


> My grandpa is having a bad night so I'm not going to be around this evening. In fact I'm predicting a trip to the ER. Pray for him if you're the praying type. He had arterial angioplasty last week and he's not recovering well at all.


Prayers sent, Sister.


----------



## I Don't Know

OliviaG said:


> It is basic human decency not to lie. I agree. Saying to someone: "I have a policy not to discuss my sexual history and I don't want to know about yours" is not lying.


I agree that wouldn't be lying. That's not what happened in my case. My wife flat lied, gas lighted, accused me of making things up, split hairs, used every technicality she could, and swore on her children's lives to keep me in the dark. All because it was "none of your (my) business. So, that makes it ok to lie about it." Actual words from her mouth.


----------



## samyeagar

I Don't Know said:


> I agree that wouldn't be lying. That's not what happened in my case. My wife flat lied, gas lighted, accused me of making things up, split hairs, used every technicality she could, and swore on her children's lives to keep me in the dark. All because it was "none of your (my) business. So, that makes it ok to lie about it." Actual words from her mouth.


And in my case, there were things my wife did, that nobody in their right mind would even dream of asking about that were pretty major, and the only reason she told me was because there was a good chance I would find out accidentally anyway, because people talk...


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
sexual history is a hint but I agree that it doesn't give the entire picture.

Overall though I think it is likely that someone who has had an active sex life is more likely to enjoy sex, than someone who has had a very limited sex life. 

(just more likely, by no means certain.




samyeagar said:


> And then comes the question of what exactly defines "experience" My wife has ten times the number of partners that I do, and yet I have had far more total sexual encounters than she has, and the number of partners does not necessarily translate into skills in the sack, where skill is completely dependent on the desires of the specific partner.


----------



## samyeagar

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> sexual history is a hint but I agree that it doesn't give the entire picture.
> 
> Overall though I think it is likely that someone who has had an active sex life is more likely to enjoy sex, than someone who has had a very limited sex life.
> 
> (just more likely, by no means certain.


I've had an extraordinarily active and varied sex life without having to have a whole lot of partners.


----------



## GB McKenna

OliviaG said:


> I don't associate with people who say such immature things. I never have, at any age. To me, these attitudes are a marker for class (and I don't mean economic class) and social maturity.


LOL


----------



## Wolf1974

OliviaG said:


> I'm not suggesting lying, I'm suggesting making questions about past sexual relationships off limits. I think most people in healthy relationships just know instinctively to do this anyway. My husband certainly did not want to hear about my past relationships and he *would not* discuss his. It's just being sensible and having some *class*, IMO.
> 
> You don't get to know everything your potential mate has ever said or done. Nobody gets a full accounting of everything they might be curious about. And that's okay, because people learn and grow and what's important is who they are at the time that you are in a relationship with them.
> 
> My opinion is that if you, as a female, get involved with a guy who is pre-occupied with knowing the details of your past sexual relationships, that is a red flag. His focus is on the trivial and not on what's really important in a relationship. And he's probably got strange ideas about "owning" your sexuality. Not a keeper - throw him back into the pond.
> 
> And before anyone asks, I do not have a wild or questionable sexual past. No axe to grind in this conversation. Nothing I'd done previously would have been a problem for my husband. I was not a virgin when we met; that's as much as he knows, 28 years later. If he had pumped me for sexual history info it would have been a huge turn-off, I think because it would have made him seem insecure and immature: not an attractive combination.


I don't see how this has anything to do with class. I would never be in a relationship where topics were taboo or off limits. If you can't share everything with your partner why have them? True intimacy is established by communication and trust. Truth is that everyone has different expectations. You don't want to talk about these things but many do. I'm one of them. Just as you see it as immature and insecure to want to know I see the inability to have an adult conversations about it the exact same way. 

Different strokes for different folks :smile2:


----------



## always_alone

tech-novelist said:


> Before I would get into a serious relationship with a woman, I would want to know what her sexual history was, as well as whether she had been involved in drugs, drinking, criminal behavior, and anything else that might indicate character problems.
> 
> If she didn't want to tell me, obviously I couldn't make her do so, but I wouldn't get involved with her either.


Says the man that proposed to his wife before he had even met her (in person). 

Tee hee. Definitely a "do as I say, not as I do" situation.


----------



## 2&out

JMHO :

Man under 25 yrs old maybe 1/2 care about "purity". Some still have parental instilled/demanded ideals and many haven't developed any game yet.
Man 25 to 35 -- if still "pure" high probability she's got some issues - starting with sexuality. Beepbeepbeep RED RED flag. Bible thumper, whatever. Marriage desirability declining.

As often - appears I'm an outlier. This *so serious* conversation about sexual pasts never came up between me and my first Ex but 9 yr wife. I guess we knew we both had some fun/experience and even possibly had been in a multiple or 2. Don't know if she had but umm.. her husband had. I guess I assumed she probably had also. I knew at least 1 guy she'd been with for sure and she knew a couple girls I had been. I don't think either of us really cared that much - only about us and our relationship. My marriage to her ended because being with me drove her to the funny farm - literally. I am pretty sure there was never any cheating on either side. She was fricken awesome sexually.

Signed, Jock who married cheerleader.


----------



## Evinrude58

So OP, I hope your grandpa is ok.

I think you have many good qualities. You just need to present these qualities to the right men.
Would you agree that you are attracted mostly to men that aren't the marrying type? Or, could your lack of intimacy in the form of PIV sex be a factor of men leaving you? I doubt that, but it could be. I think FOR SURE that you are better off losing all the men that left.

I'm thinking you might consider online dating. A lot of talking and reading between the lines and such with a lot of back and forth can weed out a lot of obvious duds before you ever have a date. There are guys on line that are looking for marriage. I am. I found a really nice woman that I'm proud of there. Maybe you might get lucky. The other place I would look for men is at church. Heck, make it known to the people in church that you are looking. I personally wouldn't even consider setting up someone with a person I thought was untrustworthy. I think most people that you find ARE trustworthy would be the same as me, so it could be a good way to meet quality people.

Please, dress more feminine and consider growing your hair longer. I think it's possible that may really make a difference in how a prospective guy sees you and desires you.
"sh&*kicker boots" are great to a country guy on the right kind of date. So are jeans and a tshirt.
However, I'm thinking a guy that values a date with you is going to take you somewhere nice to eat or go out, and that's the time to look your best (and most feminine).

I think a guy does want to go out and be seen with someone that he is proud of, and people think looks like a classy lady. There are some guys who don't care. Are those the guys you want? Guys that will date a person that acts and dresses "any-old-whichaway" on a date? 
I wash and vacuum my truck, I dress nicely (according to the destination), I PREPARE for a date with a woman I am excited about. I'm just saying a woman should do this as well. A woman that doesn't get a little dressed up for a first date with me, doesn't get a second date. And I am not in the least bit vain or arrogant (I have no reason to be). I just want to feel like my time and effort is valued; feel like I'm someone that they are excited to be with. If that's not the case, I'm not interested. I'm not sure how you feel about this??

Funny story about online dating:
I went out with this lady that was 12 years younger than me, and was very attractive.
When we were talking before I asked her out, she said she had no car (99.9% of people in my area do) and that she lived with her grandma. Within 5 minutes of meeting her in person, I find out she had recently been in jail (for harassing her ex), her family refused to bail her out, and is on some kind of medication for mental instability. She didn't have custody of her kids. She was loads of fun to talk to,(crazy people usually are) and was dressed nice. Then I find out that she was unable to "feel any affection" for anyone because of the medication she was taking. That kind of put a downer on things, but I was not worried because it was just a first date. I asked her, "well I guess that pretty much answers the question of a goodnight kiss". Lol.
Check please!
We did have a good time, actually, and I didn't really ask for a check. But of course, no second date. 

I do think honesty and openness is invaluable in a relationship, however, my point of view is that unless you have done some pretty bad stuff, there's no need to express every detail about your past (especially sexual past). Numbers and some other details would be important to me for various reasons. Health risk for one. Numbers DO affect risk, that's just a fact. High numbers also tell me that a person just too cheaply values their intimacy with another person. I don't want a woman that is able to have sex with someone they don't feel in love with. I don't make a habit of that, for sure. I wouldn't want a woman that had numbers that were out of the general range of my own. That's just me.

Good luck with your search, and I hope this thread gets back to helping you. Sorry I derailed it.


----------



## misslonelyheart

I'm sorry I haven't had time to check in and read all this and I don't know when I will. My grandfather had a massive stroke last night. He has not regained consciousness. Family has been called home as docs don't think he's going to last more than a few days. Even if he does leave the hospital he won't be able to come home probably ever again. My dating life doesn't seem very important at the moment although it would be nice to have a male shoulder to cry on. There's no telling how long it will be before any of my brothers get home if they even can.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

misslonelyheart said:


> I'm sorry I haven't had time to check in and read all this and I don't know when I will. My grandfather had a massive stroke last night. He has not regained consciousness. Family has been called home as docs don't think he's going to last more than a few days. Even if he does leave the hospital he won't be able to come home probably ever again. My dating life doesn't seem very important at the moment although it would be nice to have a male shoulder to cry on. There's no telling how long it will be before any of my brothers get home if they even can.


My thoughts are with you mlh. Stay strong.


----------



## Luvher4life

misslonelyheart said:


> I'm sorry I haven't had time to check in and read all this and I don't know when I will. My grandfather had a massive stroke last night. He has not regained consciousness. Family has been called home as docs don't think he's going to last more than a few days. Even if he does leave the hospital he won't be able to come home probably ever again. My dating life doesn't seem very important at the moment although it would be nice to have a male shoulder to cry on. There's no telling how long it will be before any of my brothers get home if they even can.


I'm so sorry to see this happening. It's tough losing a loved one. I know, I've been through it many times. I lost my grandparents, my father, my mother, and two brothers. I didn't have anybody in my life when my parents died, but I did have my wife when my brothers died. It certainly helps to have a shoulder to lean on in tough times. I'm praying for you.


----------



## Wolf1974

OliviaG said:


> Maybe class is not the right word. There are people who dwell on things like their partner's prior sex lives and people who realize that nothing good can come from dwelling on same and that that history really doesn't matter.. I find the obsession with knowing those details to be an indication of a way of thinking that doesn't bode well for relationship happiness.
> 
> If your prospective mate has a large circle of longstanding friends, is respected and loved by them, has good relationships with family, with neighbours, is respected at work, is fun to be around and generally well-liked, then chances are that s/he hasn't been involved in serious drugs/criminal activity/sexually deviant behaviour. I mean, think about it. These relationships tell you all you need to know.
> 
> So what if your prospective mate has all the above qualities but had a threesome with two guys in her youth that nobody knows about. This is for some reason vitally important information to you? If it is, then I'm glad you'd be up front with needing to know because that tells her something about your priorities too. In the end you've both learned that you are not compatible.


I certinaly don't dwell but I do want to know the information. The reason why is because I don't look at sex as just something that should be shared with everyone. I think sex is special and the act of intimacy should be reserved for people you actually care about. I hold myself to that standard and want to be with a woman who does the same. Threesomes, porno movies, or enough sexual partners that they need a slide rule to measure would be someone who has a whole different philosophy on sex and intimacy than I have. I make zero apologies for my view on this as someone who doesn't share my opinion should either. You are right we wouldn't be compatable but no way of knowing until you ask the question. 

In all my realtionships I have always asked, if they didn't ask me first, and never once has it been an issue. I think I would actually be shocked one day if someone did get upset by it. when I had this debate with faithful wife she made a good point that we are naturally attracted to people who we have the same philosophy as. So we tend to weed out those we don't prior to having this discussion. She claimed she had never been asked how many partners she had and I have always asked and my Gf has always asked. I think she had a valid point we are all different and that should be ok


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> So, you would ask her point blank if she had a criminal record, had ever taken drugs, what her average intake of alcohol was, and for a full accounting of all sexual acts/partners before you would get into a relationship with her? Good luck with that approach...!


As several other people have pointed out, some people will get upset by that sort of discussion and others won't. I would have no problem revealing that information before getting seriously involved with someone, and would not be interested in someone who refused to provide their history.


----------



## Thor

I Don't Know said:


> I agree that wouldn't be lying. That's not what happened in my case. My wife flat lied, gas lighted, accused me of making things up, split hairs, used every technicality she could, and swore on her children's lives to keep me in the dark. All because it was "none of your (my) business. So, that makes it ok to lie about it." Actual words from her mouth.


Yup. Similar situation here.

We were in college when we met. She made sure when we started to date exclusively to tell me she'd had 3 previous boyfriends, dated each for over a year, and made them all wait a significant time before having sex with them. Obviously she wanted me to conclude she wasn't a party girl who had lots of casual sex.

Potential spouses should have similar and compatible values. She was making sure it sounded like she matched mine.

What she left out was that her sexual experience wasn't as limited as the little bit she told me. And what she told me turned out to be lies, too, but how would I ever find out that she didn't make the guys wait before having sex with them? It seemed like a safe lie to say she didn't just jump in bed and have unprotected sex with men.

What she totally left out were the various random hookups, bjs, gangbangs/groupsex, public acts at parties, and who knows what else. These are things I've gleaned from various sources through the years.

When she told me of her CSA after all these years, the only effect she thought it had on her was she was "promiscuous" as a teen. When I asked her what she meant by that she changed the subject. The second time it came up she made a vague comment about her boyfriends and then diverted the subject. She didn't know I'd picked up on a lot of things across the years, so she was still trying to hide information.

She has said I have no right to the information, and that she kept things from me before the wedding because she knew I would react poorly (meaning leave her, not violence).

Eventually the truth starts to come out. Overheard snippets at parties with her old friends, love letters found in a yearbook, etc.

My advice to anybody is if there is something you think _may_ be important to your bf/gf/fiance then you should volunteer it up front. The lie is at least as bad as whatever is being hidden.

Imho, anyone who says their past is not the business of their future spouse is in some way embarrassed by their past and is hiding something. Not just sexual past, but all their life experiences.

We don't need to and probably shouldn't dig into all the salacious details of past sex acts, but we should share an accurate picture of who we are.


----------



## Thor

misslonelyheart said:


> I'm sorry I haven't had time to check in and read all this and I don't know when I will. My grandfather had a massive stroke last night. He has not regained consciousness. Family has been called home as docs don't think he's going to last more than a few days. Even if he does leave the hospital he won't be able to come home probably ever again. My dating life doesn't seem very important at the moment although it would be nice to have a male shoulder to cry on. There's no telling how long it will be before any of my brothers get home if they even can.


I'm sorry your grandfather is ill and that you're having to deal with this. You and your family are in my thoughts.


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> A few people here have proven the point that asking point blank for sexual history info is really an ineffective way to get the info. People who have nothing to hide will tell you the truth, and people who have something to hide will not, so what's the point?


Did you know that some proportion of the population will admit stealing from a previous employer on a job application?

Which is an example of the fact that people consider different things necessary to be hidden (as well as an example of an informal IQ test).

Also, some people are honest even when it is not to their immediate advantage to be so, at least partly because of their moral standards and partly because they are worried about getting caught later.

So I don't think it is useless to have that conversation.



OliviaG said:


> A much more effective tactic is to take your time evaluating the person before becoming sexual, by getting to know them, their friends and their family and seeing how they relate to others. You glean information from little jokes and asides about the person and by how others view them.


Only if they haven't been that good at concealing their behavior in the past. I would imagine that some people's families and friends don't have any idea how many sex partners they have had. And I'm not sure they need to, so long as they aren't having sex with them.



OliviaG said:


> And the other point I was trying to make: you really can't hide a significantly outrageous past.


1. What's your definition of "significantly outrageous"? Others may have different definitions from you.
2. If someone did hide it successfully, how would anyone ever know about it? That's like saying that all cheaters are eventually caught... except the ones who get away with it cold.


----------



## Thor

What if a person's history isn't aggregious but just isn't a match? As someone recently posted, they are looking for a woman with a sexual history similar to his. So if he were to ask a woman and find out her history was different enough to make him uncomfortable, he has helped them both out by not wasting time. This doesn't mean either his or her history is bad or out of the norm. It just means they aren't a match.

It is unfortunately true that people lie about their history. It is a selfish character flaw.


----------



## Thor

What's your definition of "normal"? 

My wife had a slightly more adventurous past than normal when I met her, according to what she told me. For her age and the time period, her dating and sexual history which she told me of was not within 1 or probably even 2 standard deviations. I was ok enough with that to marry her. It was all the hidden stuff which has turned out to be the harbinger of the dysfunction and intrusions into our marriage for over 30 years.

I don't consider one's moral value system to be a character flaw. That cuts in both directions. If someone has a casual attitude about sex it isn't a character flaw but it does not mesh with my value system as I conduct my own life. What is a character flaw is to lie either by commission or omission in order to deceive another about your value system in order to keep them from coming to a particular decision they would come to if they had an accurate understanding of who they are in the relationship with.

To bring this back to relevance with this thread, several have advised OP to hide the fact she had an oral 3-some. This is what I object to. If she has a number of conversations with someone she may likely marry, she should give an accurate representation of her history, including but not limited to sexual history. If she believes that man would not want to marry someone who had done that, it would be morally wrong to intentionally deceive him.

An alternate path might be to tell him that (assuming it to be true) she did some things she now regrets and disagrees with her decision to do them. She has come to understand an error of some kind, and has grown in some specific way. While she can't undo it, she does regret that it may be difficult for her potential fiance to hear about it. 

This kind of approach is far more honest, and it does show growth and maturity since the event.

If OP doesn't regret the event, and if she doesn't have a moral objection today to what she did in the past, she shouldn't pair up with a husband who does object to it. Imagine what happens when at some party he hears someone talking about those two men she blew, and up til then the husband believed her assertions she'd never done anything near like that.


----------



## Evinrude58

Thor said:


> What's your definition of "normal"?
> 
> My wife had a slightly more adventurous past than normal when I met her, according to what she told me. For her age and the time period, her dating and sexual history which she told me of was not within 1 or probably even 2 standard deviations. I was ok enough with that to marry her. It was all the hidden stuff which has turned out to be the harbinger of the dysfunction and intrusions into our marriage for over 30 years.
> 
> I don't consider one's moral value system to be a character flaw. That cuts in both directions. If someone has a casual attitude about sex it isn't a character flaw but it does not mesh with my value system as I conduct my own life. What is a character flaw is to lie either by commission or omission in order to deceive another about your value system in order to keep them from coming to a particular decision they would come to if they had an accurate understanding of who they are in the relationship with.
> 
> To bring this back to relevance with this thread, several have advised OP to hide the fact she had an oral 3-some. This is what I object to. If she has a number of conversations with someone she may likely marry, she should give an accurate representation of her history, including but not limited to sexual history. If she believes that man would not want to marry someone who had done that, it would be morally wrong to intentionally deceive him.
> 
> An alternate path might be to tell him that (assuming it to be true) she did some things she now regrets and disagrees with her decision to do them. She has come to understand an error of some kind, and has grown in some specific way. While she can't undo it, she does regret that it may be difficult for her potential fiance to hear about it.
> 
> This kind of approach is far more honest, and it does show growth and maturity since the event.
> 
> If OP doesn't regret the event, and if she doesn't have a moral objection today to what she did in the past, she shouldn't pair up with a husband who does object to it. Imagine what happens when at some party he hears someone talking about those two men she blew, and up til then the husband believed her assertions she'd never done anything near like that.


Thor,
I think the fact that you got majorly burnt by a wife who was hiding crazy stuff has you a little overly aggressive about this.
The OP had ONE incident of a threesome which wasn't instigated by her and was pretty random and I believe that the rest of her sexual history she has told us about makes it not so big of a deal. She's not a loose floozy that gangbangs the football team (in my opinion). I don't think this is worth mentioning to a prospective partner, because it was a one-time thing. Even I might be able to excuse it in the context of all her other history. It would really be a hurdle for me to get my head around, though.
I guess I disagree. You think people should divulge ALL of her sexual history. I think they should just divulge the BASICS of it, and only then when asked. I do not think they should lie, and if asked if she had ever had a threesome with two guys, she should answer yes, only once and it was oral only. 
Honestly, a lot of women want a "number" and I myself have asked for a "number" before. Now that I'm older, I find that kind of detail to be kind of intrusive. Nobody should have to provide that. I'm ashamed of my number, and compared to most people, it's pretty low. If they are asked if they have been with a lot of men or whether a guy has been with a lot of women, there should be ballpark range they should report, like less than 10 or more than 10 but less than 20. 
Yes, a person should have the right to make an informed decision.
But intricate details like you're expecting her to VOLUNTEER is probably a bad idea. If asked about whether she ever had a threesome, again, I'd say she should have to say yes. But the question itself might be considered intrusive by some and I don't know if I could argue either way.

Btw, I enjoy your posts. I hope you aren't too offended by mine, even if we disagree sometimes.


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> I'm on my way out @Thor so will get back to you later, but first, I have a related hypothetical question for you:
> 
> Say I do not want to be married to a guy who ever has sexual thoughts about other women. At the time we were dating, my husband had thoughts only of me, but after being married for a while, he has thoughts about other women when he comes across one that he's attracted to. I feel that he owes me complete honesty on the subject, but if he tells me the truth, I'm going to divorce him and take 1/2 our accumulated assets.
> 
> He feels that it's ridiculous for me to have these unrealistic standards because it's completely normal for men to have sexual thoughts about random attractive women. He loves me and wants to remain married and doesn't want to lose half his assets. He knows for a fact that what I don't know won't hurt me, so he withholds the info. Is he wrong to do so?


I'm not @Thor, but in order for this to be parallel, the following would have to be true:

1. You would have had to tell him that you had this requirement before getting married, and
2. He would have to have had those thoughts before marriage and lied to you about not having them so that you would marry him.

In that case, I would say he would be wrong to hide those thoughts.


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> My definition of significantly outrageous is a past that cannot be hidden. *I don't think there's much chance of people hiding that they've *had huge numbers of sex partners or been involved in acts multiple times that most people would find objectionable or been heroin addicts or abused a partner, or *had an affair.* Why? Because people talk! And people don't respect others who do that sort of thing, so not only do they talk but they treat these individuals with less respect.


Some people have affairs and never get caught, so *this *is clearly wrong.



OliviaG said:


> Now if your standards prevent you from wanting to date someone who has a past that most people find mundane and unremarkable, then yes, you're going to have trouble finding out about it. IMO, this is as it should be.


Why would anyone want to hide a past that is so mundane and unremarkable?


----------



## Holland

OliviaG said:


> I'm on my way out @Thor so will get back to you later, but first, I have a related hypothetical question for you:
> 
> Say I do not want to be married to a guy who ever has sexual thoughts about other women. At the time we were dating, my husband had thoughts only of me, but after being married for a while, he has thoughts about other women when he comes across one that he's attracted to. I feel that he owes me complete honesty on the subject, but if he tells me the truth, I'm going to divorce him and take 1/2 our accumulated assets.
> 
> He feels that it's ridiculous for me to have these unrealistic standards because it's completely normal for men to have sexual thoughts about random attractive women. He loves me and wants to remain married and doesn't want to lose half his assets. He knows for a fact that what I don't know won't hurt me, so he withholds the info. Is he wrong to do so?


This is not an apples for apples hypothetical. It is comparing thoughts to actions which is unrealistic. 

Apart from that who in their right mind would want to be with a partner that tried to mind control them? To me kind honesty is a much more realistic lifestyle. I want to know my man has blood running through his veins, he can see an attractive woman and think dang that is hot but I know it is me he loves for the whole package and it is me he wants to have an active, healthy sex life with.
If he withholds the fact that he is a normal man then that will only serve to cause tension on both sides.
If he were disrespectful about it that is a different issue.

People can have all sorts of thoughts but that is all they are. I have always wanted to steal a bus and take it for a joyride, not going to happen.


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> And yet you expect a potential partner who has had an affair to tell you that she has if you ask her?
> 
> They wouldn't. But some people like myself understand that it's of no use to ask people their sexual history because anyone with anything to hide will lie. So if someone's asking me that question, for one thing I'm wondering if he doesn't realize this fact and why doesn't he realize this fact? Does he just believe the stuff other women he's dated have told him? If so, I'm questioning his judgement.
> 
> The other reason I'd keep my stats and info to myself is because what I've done with a partner is nobody else's business. If someone wants to know details of my sex life with my former husband then they've got no class (sorry to use that word again, but I don't know how better to describe it). If I divulge the details of my sex life with my former husband to some guy I'm dating then I've got no class. So even though it's nothing to be ashamed of, I'm not telling.
> 
> Same with my other past relationships. My sex life within a committed relationship is not something I am going to talk about with a guy I'm dating because I've got more class than that. That's the bottom line.
> 
> If he feels better being lied to by some other woman and trusting what she tells him than accepting from me that he's not getting any information then that's his choice. But he's not protecting his interests by believing what a woman tells him (unless she had nothing to hide in the first place and didn't mind answering such questions.)


So what you are saying is that men should not believe women's statements about their sexual history.

Thanks for clearing that up!


----------



## Wolf1974

OliviaG said:


> I'm saying that both men and women should not believe each other's statements about things like sexual history, porn use, past affairs, dating married men/women, use of drugs etc.. Yes, that's right.


I see the point you're trying to make it just want to share the other side. 

First a seperate category are cheaters. Cheaters by in large are justifiers. They tend to downplay what happend and always want to make it someone else's fault. So while you think they would lie if asked if they ever cheat that has never been my experience. I was cheated on in my marriage and so cheating is a full stop we aren't getting involved deal breaker. I have been single for 5 years and met easily 100+ women through online dating. Always prior to a first meet I would explain clearing that I was cheated on and wasn't interested in getting involved with another one. Conventional wisdom would say they would lie but instead they all want to tell you the story of how they are the exception and how they were forced to do it and blah blah. I mean without exception, cat to catnip, they can't help themselves but justify . This is something that others have also shared in thier own personal experiences. If they don't justify they tend to just disappear and stop talking to you.

So excluding cheaters I can see that if you did something you were embarrassed by you might lie or exaggerate. But how many times have we seen where the truth comes out eventually and now the other spouse feels lied to and decieved. If you have something, anything you feel might cause another person to reconsider getting involved with you I think you have the obligation to disclose that or you take the consequences of that deception if/ when the truth comes out.

For me personally I have done one thing in my life that I am ashamed of and one other thing that I am in no way ashamed of BUT its something that causes some people to feel uncomfortable. Prior to forming a relationship I disclose both and neither are things people would think to ask.


----------



## Holland

OliviaG said:


> And yet you expect a potential partner who has had an affair to tell you that she has if you ask her?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They wouldn't. *But some people like myself understand that it's of no use to ask people their sexual history because anyone with anything to hide will lie.* So if someone's asking me that question, for one thing I'm wondering if he doesn't realize this fact and why doesn't he realize this fact? Does he just believe the stuff other women he's dated have told him? If so, I'm questioning his judgement.
> 
> .................................


Actually that is true for you but it is not a Universal truth. 

My experience is completely different, discussion of sexual history is very important and even if that means hearing some hard stuff , it is better to know what you are getting into than finding out years later.

I'm not talking about how many ppl they have been with or the intimate details of those encounters. This is more about major past exploits, desires, sexual style etc. Not about every person the other has had.

My SO had told me some really major things and while it was confronting I would rather have been told at the start than years later. You are incorrect to suggest that people always cover the truth. People that are deceitful may lie but IME the ones that are genuine are the ones that will expose their past if they feel safe enough and not judged.


----------



## Buddy400

misslonelyheart said:


> Interesting. I guess I've never seen it that way. I don't find it intimate to be on my knees in front of some guy whose pants are the only thing he's missing. I see intimacy in full body contact - kissing while it's happening - maintaining eye contact - being able to exchange loving words while it's happening. There's nothing intimate about a guy pulling your hair, yanking your head until your neck hurts, yelling oh yeah baby. Exciting? Sometimes. Intimate? Not by my definition. Who knows, maybe I need to date older men who have better technique or concerned with something more than JUST getting off.
> 
> Of course it's also true that even this hasn't happened in 3 years now. I haven't had any sexual relations at all since the 2nd chef moved away. Haven't dated anybody long enough to go past necking. Hell the third chef and I were never once alone in a place where it would have been possible.


Someone may think that it's okay to drive 40 mph in the left-hand lane of the expressway. I can respect that. But I'd be doing them a disservice if I didn't let them know that others have different opinions on the matter.

Check out all the posts from guys whose wives won't give blowjobs anymore although they still have PIV sex. They obviously put a higher value on receiving oral sex. They aren't going to be happy because you only gave blowjobs (and God help you if you start to slack off in that department with them!). You disagree but you should at least be aware of what many guys who you might be interested in would think.

I find oral sex to be much more intimate and, therefore, special. I would interpret it as a woman really being into me and it would make it far less special if I knew she gave it out to people who she wasn't even all that fond of. I know that there's a large group that would reverse this, but you should know that not everybody shares the same opinion.


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> I agree completely. I wouldn't want to withhold a potentially damaging secret from someone I planned to marry. It's too risky.
> 
> But I also don't feel the need to spill my guts about something personal that's not ever going to come out, can't possibly hurt anyone and is nobody's business.


It's hard for me to imagine how you could be *certain *that anything you did would *never *come out unless everyone else who was involved is dead and did not tell anyone while alive. And how would you know that they never told anyone while alive?


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> Here's an example:
> 
> I have a married friend who had a ONS while out of the country on a business trip. She did not know the guy, did not give him any true information about herself. He lives in a different country. If she hadn't told me about this fact, how would anyone ever know?
> 
> (BTW, I know she did a bad thing, she know she did a bad thing, I know there are dangers associated with sex with a stranger you know nothing about, etc., etc., etc.; this is just one example of how you could be reasonably sure that you could do something and no one would find out.)


But she *did *tell you, so as long as you are still alive it's possible that her secret can get out.

And pretty soon now, *any *picture of her (e.g., from a smartphone while she was asleep or the like) might be enough to identify her, if she has other pictures on social media. Is it a sure thing? No, but it should scare the crap out of anyone who thinks their secrets are safe if they don't give their real name: http://www.techverse.net/identify-person-using-photograph/


----------



## Steve1000

misslonelyheart said:


> Girlfriend material but apparently not wife material. I just wish I knew why.


You sound like a great catch. After so many setbacks and disappointments, it will be tempting for you to settle when a guy shows you his interest in marriage. My advice is to guard against that. Don't settle for a guy you are not excited about and do not settle for a guy who isn't excited about you.


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> Well, I'm not saying in her particular case her secret is safe because she did tell me, (in fact, she confessed to her husband too), but that it is conceivable that something like that could happen and a person tell no one. A tryst like that might not involve sleeping or cell phones.


Yes, it is conceivable, but not very likely. I would estimate that 99% of all affairs could be detected one way or another, so it is very hazardous to assume that they will be kept secret indefinitely.

It's a lot simpler and less stressful just to be truthful with someone you are considering having a relationship with.


----------



## Thor

OliviaG said:


> I'm on my way out @Thor so will get back to you later, but first, I have a related hypothetical question for you:
> 
> Say I do not want to be married to a guy who ever has sexual thoughts about other women. At the time we were dating, my husband had thoughts only of me, but after being married for a while, he has thoughts about other women when he comes across one that he's attracted to. I feel that he owes me complete honesty on the subject, but if he tells me the truth, I'm going to divorce him and take 1/2 our accumulated assets.
> 
> He feels that it's ridiculous for me to have these unrealistic standards because it's completely normal for men to have sexual thoughts about random attractive women. He loves me and wants to remain married and doesn't want to lose half his assets. He knows for a fact that what I don't know won't hurt me, so he withholds the info. Is he wrong to do so?


Yup. He is intentionally deceiving you in order to keep you from exercising your free will to direct your own life. You don't want to be married to someone like him, but he is lying to you about who he is. He is taking away from you your ability to make that fully informed decision about your own life.

You are entitled to your own standards and beliefs no matter if anybody else on the planet agrees with you. Nobody gets to decide for you.

His act of lying by omission is manipulative and has direct negative impacts on your life. This is not love, honor, or respect.


----------



## Thor

Evinrude58 said:


> Thor,
> I think the fact that you got majorly burnt by a wife who was hiding crazy stuff has you a little overly aggressive about this.
> The OP had ONE incident of a threesome which wasn't instigated by her and was pretty random and I believe that the rest of her sexual history she has told us about makes it not so big of a deal. She's not a loose floozy that gangbangs the football team (in my opinion). I don't think this is worth mentioning to a prospective partner, because it was a one-time thing. Even I might be able to excuse it in the context of all her other history. It would really be a hurdle for me to get my head around, though.
> I guess I disagree. You think people should divulge ALL of her sexual history. I think they should just divulge the BASICS of it, and only then when asked. I do not think they should lie, and if asked if she had ever had a threesome with two guys, she should answer yes, only once and it was oral only.
> Honestly, a lot of women want a "number" and I myself have asked for a "number" before. Now that I'm older, I find that kind of detail to be kind of intrusive. Nobody should have to provide that. I'm ashamed of my number, and compared to most people, it's pretty low. If they are asked if they have been with a lot of men or whether a guy has been with a lot of women, there should be ballpark range they should report, like less than 10 or more than 10 but less than 20.
> Yes, a person should have the right to make an informed decision.
> But intricate details like you're expecting her to VOLUNTEER is probably a bad idea. If asked about whether she ever had a threesome, again, I'd say she should have to say yes. But the question itself might be considered intrusive by some and I don't know if I could argue either way.
> 
> Btw, I enjoy your posts. I hope you aren't too offended by mine, even if we disagree sometimes.


No problem with the disagreements.

Yes I got burnt but I disagree with your analysis of this one. OP's future husband has a right to understand who she is in all aspects, as does OP have the right to understand who her husband is in all aspects.

This requires they each provide an accurate picture. It does not require they provide every possible detail, but it does require providing enough factual data to not mislead. Let's look at a couple of scenarios using OP just for an example.

1) She meets a conservative religious man who has little sexual experience due to his religious belief system. Maybe he's a virgin, maybe he's had one or two sex partners. In their discussions he makes it clear that his boundaries wrt a wife are that she not have done certain things. He mentions group sex, he mentions sexual contact (oral, vaginal, anal) with more than a total of 3 men.

OP knows that her history exceeds his limits, so she only tells him truthfully that she had PiV sex with her high school boyfriend. She says she had oral with a couple of boyfriends (which is also true but via omission is a lie and a misrepresentation of her true history).

In this scenario I believe she is lying to him and she is setting up for a big problem in the future when he discovers there was more to the story.

2) OP meets a man who has a moderate or average sexual history. In their discussions she learns that he isn't hung up on a woman's past if it is also within average. But he does want to know what she's done, what her number is, and who her past bf's were.

In this case I think she should tell him the basic facts of PiV with first bf, and oral with however many other men is accurate. She should also reveal she has had the 3-some if in the context of their conversations it would make sense to. If the conversation is limited to strictly numbers, then maybe don't bring it up. But if he is asking specifics like any ONS, any lesbian experimentation, etc, it is obvious he wants to know where the boundaries are of what she's done.

Note that in both these scenarios I am not saying she should be providing all the gory details, just providing an accurate picture of her history in a way that meets the goals of her potential future husband in terms of understanding her.

3) OP meets a man who says he really doesn't care what her history is. In this case there is no need to volunteer anything OP doesn't want to.

In all these scenarios she is respecting her potential future husband. She is providing him with as much factual information as she believes he is seeking in order that he can determine if there is a mismatch in their histories and belief systems wrt relationships and sex.

Her other option is to just say she won't provide any information. That is certainly her right. And then he has the full right to make a decision based on that.


----------



## Thor

OliviaG said:


> I didn't mean to suggest that 100% of people lie 100% of the time if they have something to hide, I'm saying that just because someone tells you they've only had vanilla sex with 5 partners their whole life doesn't mean it's true, so what have you learned by asking?


Well then if you start getting hints and external sources saying their Vanilla 5 is not true then you are learning this person is not to be trusted. If their real history is Vanilla 5 plus Wild 5 it may not be a problem, but their lying _is_ a deal breaker.


----------



## Thor

OliviaG said:


> Here's an example:
> 
> I have a married friend who had a ONS while out of the country on a business trip. She did not know the guy, did not give him any true information about herself. He lives in a different country. If she hadn't told me about this fact, how would anyone ever know?


So let's modify this to the woman is now single and out dating. She never told anyone about the ONS, not you and not her husband.

Doesn't her ONS affair say something about her character? Isn't this important information for a potential future 2nd husband to know about? Even though _she_ doesn't think he would ever find out, and doesn't think it would ever affect his life, isn't his right as a human to make a fully informed decision if he wants to marry a woman who had a ONS?


----------



## Thor

OliviaG said:


> What percentage of the male population would give up his happy marriage, daily access to his children and assets in such a case, do you think?
> 
> Of course I can't prove it, but I'd say it would be very, very low.


It doesn't make it right, though, does it? He is now the cake eater, like any cheater who wants to keep their AP and their comfy home life.


----------



## tech-novelist

OliviaG said:


> You seem to be arguing both sides of the issue depending on what suits you at the moment.


My earlier comment about some people not getting caught was to counter your claim that it's easy to find out if anyone cheats because everyone will know about it.

My later comment about not being able to be sure that no one will find out was to counter your claim of being able to have a ONS in another country without risk of being found out.

So to recap, you can't be sure of finding out (if you are the one being lied to) and you can't be sure of not being found out (if you are the one lying).

I hope it is obvious that these are not contradictory to one another.



OliviaG said:


> If you had a threesome at age 20 and you're now 50 and nobody has ever found out, probably it's not going to ever be found out. I don't see why you'd need to tell a potential partner even if s/he feels it's his/her right to know. *What you did when you were 20 doesn't define you for your whole life* and you shouldn't allow some guy to make you think it does.
> 
> Once you've told a potential partner and he's decided that such an act done 30 years ago is way too much sexual deviation from the norm for him, now there *is* someone out there who knows about it, finds it a significant enough fact to reject you for it, has no loyalty to you, and may be so shallow that he might be talking about it.
> 
> This is a risk that a person takes when revealing something. You may not like it but the fact is that it is *not* in a person's best interests to reveal something like that to someone at the beginning of a relationship.


One point I've been trying to make is that you can never be sure when someone will find out something about you. Therefore, if there's something you don't want anyone to know, then don't tell anyone. Even that isn't foolproof unless the hidden behavior didn't involve anyone else, which isn't generally true for sex.

Another point is that lying is immoral and should not be indulged in except in extraordinary circumstances such as hiding Jews from Nazis. And no, wanting to have a relationship with someone who won't want to have a relationship with you if you tell them the truth does not count as extraordinary circumstances.

Of course you have every right to say "I'm not answering that question", and the other person has every right to say "It's been nice knowing you".

Any other approach is cake-eating.


----------



## Thor

OliviaG said:


> If you had a threesome at age 20 and you're now 50 and nobody has ever found out, probably it's not going to ever be found out. I don't see why you'd need to tell a potential partner even if s/he feels it's his/her right to know. *What you did when you were 20 doesn't define you for your whole life* and you shouldn't allow some guy to make you think it does.


It doesn't *have to* define you, but it might in the mind of your partner. Whether or not what you did was within normal bounds, your partner has the right to choose for himself/herself what is ok to them.

I don't understand why someone would want to be with someone who had such a fundamental difference in values that they fear being found out for something they themselves are not ashamed of. 

Frankly, your attitude is quite common on this forum, so I presume it is common in the wild. And the idea that you can choose for someone else what is important to them is a major reason I have no interest in Wife 2.0 in the future.


----------



## Thor

OliviaG said:


> So what good does it do to shake our fists and say "but they *should* tell me the truth, it's the right thing to do!!!"


In the context of this thread my position is more that *OP should* tell the truth. Others have advised her to never tell a prospective partner about this.

I agree that people *should* but frequently don't tell the truth. The old rule of thumb back when I was single (in the Medieval period) to double whatever a woman told you was her number. Apparently young men are now using the rule to _triple_ whatever they are told.




OliviaG said:


> The problem is the way the "game" is structured:
> 
> In order for a person to reveal an embarrassing truth to you, they have to take a chance that you could use that information against them, hurting their reputation. You don't know their character, but remember they don't know yours either. This is why things are the way they are. It's risky for a potential date to tell you this stuff.
> 
> The antidote is to get to know the person well before making a commitment. You said that the truth came out about your wife in social situations over time: that's typical, and in reality, that's the only way you have to get to know a person's character.
> 
> That's just the way the "game" evolved. It's risky for both parties.


Obviously one does not reveal their inner secrets on a first date. Some stuff is reserved until a marriage proposal is on the table. One might even wait until after the proposal has been accepted.

I would reframe your argument into it is better to find out if the other person is a match, and thus you reveal potentially embarrassing or damaging information to confirm if there is a match. Rather than look at it as harming oneself to reveal the info, look at it as potentially harming oneself by hiding the information.

When you mention harming a person's reputation, I think that is why you wait to reveal deeper secrets until you feel you can trust the person with the information.

I did that with my wife, telling her something after we got engaged so that the table was clean. Her response was to sit with her mouth firmly clamped shut. I have since learned that this is one of her "tells" that she is actively hiding information.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening
Its tricky (my answer to lots of things :smile2: )

Asking about someones sex life to see if they have behaved in an unacceptable fashion in the past seems very rude and a poor thing to do early in a relationship.

OTOH, asking to learn if you are sexually compatible might save both of you a lot of grief in the future. This is especially true if someone has unusual sexual interests. Lets say you really love BDSM play, and you consider that necessary to a happy relationship. Finding out early if a potential partner also enjoys this seems important. 




OliviaG said:


> I took some time to think about this more over the weekend. I think we're in agreement, Thor.
> 
> I just want to reiterate though that one's best bet is really getting to know a person in his/her own element (social circle, family, etc.).
> 
> IMO, asking for a number or any sexual info early in a relationship is a worthless tactic because you can't know if you have the truth or not. And it might put a potentially great partner off.


----------



## bestyet2be

misslonelyheart said:


> ...I believe God is more likely to grant my desires if I obey Him than if I do not. At the same time, I don't want to get in my own way. God can't work with me if I keep unwittingly throwing roadblocks in both His way and my own. So I'm trying to figure out what roadblocks I may have.


I suggest you take responsibility for the choices you make with all the parts of your body, and your life, rather than putting it off on your imaginary friend ("God"). Whatever great powers there may be in the universe, I think you're quite right if you're saying there is no prepared script to your life that you need to fear deviating from.

I suggest you conclude you've had 50% bad luck and 50% bad choices and planning. Maybe it's really been 90%-10% or 10%-90%, but it's not useful to look at it as anything other than 50%-50%, because you must neither blame yourself for bad luck, nor fail to go forward understanding you have a lot of power to do better through your actions, to find love.

Without even realizing it, you may actually have been doing, and are now accelerating, the hard work that will soon help you reach your goals. Think of it at as trials God has put you through, if you find it useful to see it that way.



misslonelyheart said:


> ...And I'm reading back through my own posts and wondering if I talk as much like a teacher as I write, because I can see where that could be a real turn off. ...Do I really come across as sounding like a feminist?


"Oh would some power the gift give us, To see ourselves as others see us." --Robert Burns


----------



## Holland

OliviaG said:


> Thor,
> 
> I think that we fundamentally agree that in an ideal world everyone should have all the information they need to make an informed decision when choosing a spouse.
> 
> We don't live in an ideal world. You of all people know that you can't trust a potential partner to tell the truth - you've lived it!* So what good does it do to shake our fists and say "but they *should* tell me the truth, it's the right thing to do!!!" *It's like being mad because the price of gas should be lower or because the insurance companies have too much influence on mo............


Because there is always a risk it will come out at some stage and the further a long in a relationship that happens the worse the potential fallout.

TBH I want to know a man trusts me enough to be honest and transparent, that he trusts my character and knows I would not use that information against him. It is a sign of good faith.

Not talking about minor things here but major ones such as 3somes or other things that are generally outside of the norm. I have no need to go into detail about each and every encounter but there have been some things Mr H and I have told each other that do fall outside the norms. No judgement on either side but a hell of a lot of deeper understanding of the other is the end result.

My ex refused to even discuss his MB habits which should have been a red flag from day one.


----------



## Wolf1974

Holland said:


> Because there is always a risk it will come out at some stage and the further a long in a relationship that happens the worse the potential fallout.
> 
> TBH I want to know a man trusts me enough to be honest and transparent, that he trusts my character and knows I would not use that information against him. It is a sign of good faith.
> 
> Not talking about minor things here but major ones such as 3somes or other things that are generally outside of the norm. I have no need to go into detail about each and every encounter but there have been some things Mr H and I have told each other that do fall outside the norms. No judgement on either side but a hell of a lot of deeper understanding of the other is the end result.
> 
> My ex refused to even discuss his MB habits which should have been a red flag from day one.


Agreed!

I sincerely wonder about people unable to talk about their own past. We are all the sum total of our past and our experiences including sexual. To me asking or being asked the question of how many sexual partners I have had is no different thank asking where I grew up or what school I went to. Its information that goes to understanding someone else and if you can't have these simple conversations my guess is we won't be discusing big things in the future either.


----------

