# thoughts on casual sex and ONS



## barry35

Hello everyone.

Im a male, 35 years old and I'm writting this post just to have another point of view from other people on casual sex and One night stands. As the relationship i have in mind is now over i'm not trying to seek any advice however although i wouid welcome suggestions of how otherwise i could have handled the situation.

I was single for a few years before me latest relationship and then i met somone in december. We used to get along quite well and never had any major argumens. My then girlfriend was quite upfront about her past and told me the she was into casual sex and also one night stands before meeting me and at first i was ok with it although never very comfortamble around it. During our time together however i'd hear different details and stories of her past and I started to feel more and more uncomfortable about it. Finally i had to end our relationship as i decided it was going to be very upseting for me in the long term having to re think some of the detalis that my ex told me.

That is pretty much the story. I would appreciate if I were to hear thoughts on the matter, other points of view and any type of constructive contribution.


----------



## Andy1001

Don’t ask.
Don’t tell.


----------



## Yeswecan

If promiscuity concerns you then do not date promiscuous people. Nothing wrong with having boundaries.


----------



## Married but Happy

I'm not into ONSs, but am fine with casual sex. I prefer to seek some kind of ongoing relationship, even if it's just friendship, FWB, or similar, and never becomes a lasting romantic relationship. Of course, when dating, sometimes you may have sex and decide to move on after one time. Some people may prefer that, actually, if they want variety and no commitments. I do NOT want to hear about it from someone I'm dating, except in very general terms just to know their mindset re: sex and relationships.


----------



## Cletus

Just make sure with the next gf that you get a complete accounting before you get serious. Which might be difficult, given the fact that many women know that doing so will create just the kind of response your last gf received when she was honest with you. 

That's not me telling you that you're wrong, only that this topic can be a relationship minefield to those who are sensitive about it.


----------



## sokillme

This sounds like dating. You are entitled to not move forward for any reason. I suspect lots of people (many who think sexual history should have no bearing on your choices) would have a different take if you were to bring up who you vote for. 

You are entitled to have requirements and no one has the right to shame you for them.


----------



## MJJEAN

I've had casual sex and ONS, so I'm fine with a partner who has done the same. 

You, however, are different and that's ok. Seek out partners who share your values and who haven't been promiscuous.


----------



## ConanHub

Yeswecan said:


> If promiscuity concerns you then do not date promiscuous people. Nothing wrong with having boundaries.


I think the problem wasn't with promiscuity but she couldn't seem to keep her mouth shut about how many miles of penis she went through and some of the "bumps" she had along those miles.:wink2:

He should be upfront and honest about his boundaries and it looks like one of them would be to not go on about past penis pogo competitions.:grin2:


----------



## barry35

Cletus said:


> Just make sure with the next gf that you get a complete accounting before you get serious. Which might be difficult, given the fact that many women know that doing so will create just the kind of response your last gf received when she was honest with you.
> 
> That's not me telling you that you're wrong, only that this topic can be a relationship minefield to those who are sensitive about it.



She was aware that I would not like what she had done as she would usualy start talking about such things with first making me promise that i would not be upset. She also wanted some kind of reward from me for telling the truth but the way i see it, she was obliged to tell anyway out of human decency.


----------



## Casual Observer

Andy1001 said:


> Don’t ask.
> Don’t tell.


Thank goodness he DID ask. And she DID tell. Because if these are things that bother him (and it's up to HIM, nobody else, to determine what bothers him), then he avoided a much greater amount of pain down the road. This was a relationship that had little chance of turning out well.



Yeswecan said:


> If promiscuity concerns you then do not date promiscuous people. Nothing wrong with having boundaries.


Right! But instead of saying "promiscuous" maybe we could just say those who have very different ideas about sex and relationships. This is a personal thing, not a value judgement for humanity at large.



Cletus said:


> Just make sure with the next gf that you get a complete accounting before you get serious. Which might be difficult, given the fact that many women know that doing so will create just the kind of response your last gf received when she was honest with you.
> 
> That's not me telling you that you're wrong, only that this topic can be a relationship minefield to those who are sensitive about it.


For the OP, a complete accounting is relevant and required. For many others, it wouldn't be. 



sokillme said:


> This sounds like dating. You are entitled to not move forward for any reason. I suspect lots of people (many who think sexual history should have no bearing on your choices) would have a different take if you were to bring up who you vote for.
> 
> You are entitled to have requirements and no one has the right to shame you for them.


Exactly. I think OP handled it perfectly. He may be feeling some remorse but that's a lot better than coming back here years later looking for help with a sexless marriage or that he no longer "desires" his wife.


----------



## barry35

ConanHub said:


> I think the problem wasn't with promiscuity but she couldn't seem to keep her mouth shut about how many miles of penis she went through and some of the "bumps" she had along those miles.:wink2:
> 
> He should be upfront and honest about his boundaries and it looks like one of them would be to not go on about past penis pogo competitions.:grin2:



It wasnt quite the fact that she could not keep the mouth shut but a lot of details came up naturally in the conversations that we had together. We used to get on well with each other, and never had any fights, not even even during the break up so a lot of information was exhanged.

I was upfront about my boundaries and did make an effort to kind of outstep them to keep the relationship going but in the end decided that it would be impossible in the long run, she pretty much knew that too.


----------



## Cletus

barry35 said:


> She was aware that I would not like what she had done as she would usualy start talking about such things with first making me promise that i would not be upset. She also wanted some kind of reward from me for telling the truth but the way i see it, she was obliged to tell anyway out of human decency.


The only problem I have with this is that it puts a person in relationship jail for life. 

If you were ever promiscuous, I want nothing to do with you. If you are not honest with me about your past promiscuity, I want nothing to do with you.

I look at this from the behavioral economics perspective - what incentives have you created with this position? You have certainly created an incentive to "not be promiscuous", but this is not actionable because it's in the past. You have also created an incentive to lie, as your partner (who may no longer desire promiscuity) has no way to have a relationship with you and be honest at the same time. 

Your past gf tried to be honest, and was punished for the effort for something over which the present her has no control to change. I would say she was quite courageous in at least trying. 

All of which you are allowed to do. You're not wrong - but your position does have consequences and incentives that you should be well aware of.


----------



## barry35

Cletus said:


> The only problem I have with this is that it puts a person in relationship jail for life.
> 
> If you were ever promiscuous, I want nothing to do with you. If you are not honest with me about your past promiscuity, I want nothing to do with you.
> 
> I look at this from the behavioral economics perspective - what incentives have you created with this position? You have certainly created an incentive to "not be promiscuous", but this is not actionable because it's in the past. You have also created an incentive to lie, as your partner (who may no longer desire promiscuity) has no way to have a relationship with you and be honest at the same time.
> 
> Your past gf tried to be honest, and was punished for the effort for something over which the present her has no control to change. I would say she was quite courageous in at least trying.
> 
> All of which you are allowed to do. You're not wrong - but your position does have consequences and incentives that you should be well aware of.


You are very right, there are no winners in this picture.

She did ask me when we broke up if there was a way for her to fix it, and i had to reply that there isn't a way so i had no option but to break up. I also explained her that i was not doing it as a punishement to her but only because i felt i had no choice.


----------



## Cletus

barry35 said:


> You are very right, there are no winners in this picture.
> 
> She did ask me when we broke up if there was a way for her to fix it, and i had to reply that there isn't a way so i had no option but to break up. I also explained her that i was not doing it as a punishement to her but only because i felt i had no choice.


Oh, and one other thing - I hope that you never had a "wild oats" phase in your past, and that you're not being a hypocrite here.


----------



## ConanHub

barry35 said:


> It wasnt quite the fact that she could not keep the mouth shut but a lot of details came up naturally in the conversations that we had together. We used to get on well with each other, and never had any fights, not even even during the break up so a lot of information was exhanged.
> 
> I was upfront about my boundaries and did make an effort to kind of outstep them to keep the relationship going but in the end decided that it would be impossible in the long run, she pretty much knew that too.


Ok, so you really don't want a partner with a certain past? Promiscuous to be clear?

It sounds like a good and open communication relationship?


----------



## uhtred

People vary in what they care about. As long as everyone is honest and polite, no harm no foul.

Personally the only issue I'd have at all with a woman who had had lots of ONSs or any other sexual history, would just be potential disease risk. If we both get tested, then great. Or, we play very safe (but that is less fun). 

If someone wanted an open relationship OTOH, I would probably decline, not for moral reasons but just because I don't think that would work well for me.


----------



## barry35

Cletus said:


> Oh, and one other thing - I hope that you never had a "wild oats" phase in your past, and that you're not being a hypocrite here.


Not quite, when my ex told me about the way her sexual encounters were organised and how devoid of love they used to be, my own wild oats phase looked to me more innoccent and benign.


----------



## sokillme

Casual Observer said:


> Exactly. I think OP handled it perfectly. He may be feeling some remorse but that's a lot better than coming back here years later looking for help with a sexless marriage or that he no longer "desires" his wife.


Right and assuming the person OP was dating is happy with her choices (and we have no reason to assume otherwise) she is better for it too. 

I never understood why this was a problem to begin with. It seems to me it's only a problem if one person regrets their actions (lots of sex or not a lot of sex) or they don't like the idea that whatever their actions are those actions may limit their choices, but you could say that about a lot of stuff not just sexual history.


----------



## barry35

ConanHub said:


> Ok, so you really don't want a partner with a certain past? Promiscuous to be clear?
> 
> It sounds like a good and open communication relationship?


The answer to all of your questions is yes, what worried me the most was the way the encouters of my ex were set up, for sexual purposes and devoid of love, i would have handled it better if she had told me that she used to find her casual sex parter attractive in other ways besides sex

. The communication was good as i never got angy at what she said, i don't useally get angry but i was also trying to step out of my comfort zone at the time.


----------



## Andy1001

barry35 said:


> Not quite, when my ex told me about the way her sexual encounters were organised and how devoid of love they used to be, my own wild oats phase looked to me more innoccent and benign.


 @barry35 you’re thirty five years old and single. 
Unless you’ve been living in a monastery then surely you’ve got some sort of sexual history. 
Even at a conservative estimate of sex once a month since you were seventeen, unless you were in some long term relationships you must have a few notches on your bedpost.


----------



## RebuildingMe

I think it’s great your saw a red flag and bailed. My stbx told me when we were dating that she slept with a married man before (she was never married before me). Big red flag I missed. A decade later guess who was her AP? Yep, a married man.


----------



## Cletus

sokillme said:


> I never understood why this was a problem to begin with. It seems to me it's only a problem if one person regrets their actions (lots of sex or not a lot of sex) or they don't like the idea that whatever their actions are those actions may limit their choices, but you could say that about a lot of stuff not just sexual history.


Why does regret have to enter the equation?

Sometimes the only way to know if something is not for you is to try it. Casual sex isn't like heroin - it's not (usually) fatal to give it a whirl and discover "yeah, not my thing". Perhaps at 21 you don't realize that you're doing something that will limit your future relationship choices. You may even be wise enough to understand that learning something important about yourself this important will have positive effects in your future relationships. No regrets, but lesson learned.

Hindsight might be 20/20, but foresight is more macular degeneration.


----------



## sokillme

Cletus said:


> The only problem I have with this is that it puts a person in relationship jail for life.
> 
> If you were ever promiscuous, I want nothing to do with you. If you are not honest with me about your past promiscuity, I want nothing to do with you.
> 
> I look at this from the behavioral economics perspective - what incentives have you created with this position? You have certainly created an incentive to "not be promiscuous", but this is not actionable because it's in the past. You have also created an incentive to lie, as your partner (who may no longer desire promiscuity) has no way to have a relationship with you and be honest at the same time.
> 
> Your past gf tried to be honest, and was punished for the effort for something over which the present her has no control to change. I would say she was quite courageous in at least trying.
> 
> All of which you are allowed to do. You're not wrong - but your position does have consequences and incentives that you should be well aware of.


First off I have issue with the word punish, that implies she was entitled to a continued relationship with him, which she wasn't. He didn't punish her, he simply decided he didn't want to pursue anything with her when he got to know her better. Again that's dating. The only reason why there is any controversy about this is because it's about sex. People decided not to date others from much less trivial reasons. 

The problem is there are people advocating for not asking on the one hand advocating for being able to tell even if your dating partner says they don't want to know. 

Again this whole discussion just proves the point. People have different opinions about sex and this should be discussed (A LOT) before moving forward in a relationship.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

If I was single, and dating from 35 to 45 yo women, it would seem normal they'd have a good bit of sexual history.


----------



## sokillme

Cletus said:


> Why does regret have to enter the equation?


Regret enters the equation because more then one person on here and other boards has argued that you should keep it a secret. I am of the opinion that anything you keep a secret from a potential partner at least implies that there is a regret there. 

I suspect if you don't regret it you won't want to hide it and would not want a relationship with someone who thinks differently.


----------



## Cletus

sokillme said:


> Regret enters the equation because more then one person on here and other boards has argued that you should keep it a secret. I am of the opinion that anything you keep a secret from a potential partner at least implies that there is a regret there.
> 
> I suspect if you don't regret it you won't want to hide it and would not want a relationship with someone who thinks differently.


Well then we'll have to disagree. I've seen so many retroactive jealousy threads here that I think people can be forgiven for at least worrying what their partner will think and do based on something they do not personally regret but cannot change.


----------



## sokillme

uhtred said:


> Personally the only issue I'd have at all with a woman who had had lots of ONSs or any other sexual history, would just be potential disease risk. If we both get tested, then great. Or, we play very safe (but that is less fun).


I agree with this but I have also come to the belief that both men and women are sometimes very sexual active because they use sex as kind of a currency. As a way of evaluating their worth. I would be very weary of someone who thinks that way and thinks that way about sex. I do not believe that is a healthy way to think. That would be my fear. 

I think it is unrealistic to believe if you are dating at middle age that the person you are dating won't have a sexual history. It's more the feelings about sex and the motives.


----------



## sokillme

Cletus said:


> Well then we'll have to disagree. I've seen so many retroactive jealousy threads here that I think people can be forgiven for at least worrying what their partner will think and do based on something they do not personally regret but cannot change.


Which is why I always advocate for living your life whatever it is openly. The good and the bad. Take me as I am is a much better strategy when you are dating.


----------



## Yeswecan

Casual Observer said:


> Right! But instead of saying "promiscuous" maybe we could just say those who have very different ideas about sex and relationships. This is a personal thing, not a value judgement for humanity at large.


Why should we sugar coat the very definition of promiscuous?


----------



## Yeswecan

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> If I was single, and dating from 35 to 45 yo women, it would seem normal they'd have a good bit of sexual history.


Sexual history certainly. Why type of history? ONS and casual? Maybe committed for some months or years but did not work out?


----------



## minimalME

I have tons of regrets in my life - my sexual behavior being one of them.

Having said that, a person can be honest without having any discussions about the details, which are completely unnecessary.

Speaking only for myself, if someone told me they preferred a woman with only x amount of partners, and I didn't fit that criteria, I'd simply say we weren't compatible. 

A long, drawn out explanation isn't required.



sokillme said:


> Regret enters the equation because more then one person on here and other boards has argued that you should keep it a secret. I am of the opinion that anything you keep a secret from a potential partner at least implies that there is a regret there.
> 
> I suspect if you don't regret it you won't want to hide it and would not want a relationship with someone who thinks differently.


----------



## barry35

As a general response to the way this conversation is going:

In my particular case the number of partners my ex had was not the real issue, what was bothering me was that she had made an arrangement with someone she only found sexually attractive to have sex and nothing else, and i could not stomach that. She pretty much believed that it was ok to have a sexual partner and then think of her romantic life in the meanwhile and i found that quite shocking.


----------



## Casual Observer

sokillme said:


> First off I have issue with the word punish, that implies she was entitled to a continued relationship with him, which she wasn't. He didn't punish her, he simply decided he didn't want to pursue anything with her when he got to know her better. Again that's dating. The only reason why there is any controversy about this is because it's about sex. People decided not to date others from much less trivial reasons.
> 
> The problem is there are people advocating for not asking on the one hand advocating for being able to tell even if your dating partner says they don't want to know.
> 
> *Again this whole discussion just proves the point. People have different opinions about sex and this should be discussed (A LOT) before moving forward in a relationship.*


How many times do we have to deal with compatibility issues in long-term marriages that wouldn't have happened if people had thought a bit more about vetting their partner going in, and being open enough *about themselves* to admit to their own vulnerabilities? How many threads do we see about dysfunctional relationships due to privacy, secrets and boundary issues that were ignored or glossed over? 

I don't get it. For most of us, our marriage will be the single biggest thing in our entire life. Why would we go into it without taking into account our own limitations? This isn't just to protect yourself, but your partner as well. This is as much about judging yourself as your potential life partner. 

If you have a situation that's troublesome yet you think maybe you can get past it, then seek help with counseling. Consider it an investment in your future. But don't pretend that you'll magically change your tune because he or she is "the one" and love conquers all.

The OP got it right. The only reasonable alternative I can think of would be to go through IC to see if he can work through the issue and change how he sees things. And hope that he views the process realistically and not deceive himself into thinking he's changed, when he hasn't, because that's what he wants.


----------



## notmyjamie

So it doesn't bother you that she slept with x amount of people in the past, it bothers you that these were meaningless encounters? Are you sure that you weren't worried that her time with you was also meaningless to her? 

I know a woman who had many one night stands after her divorce. "People have biological needs and I'm just fulfilling mine" and then one day she met someone she had a real connection with and had no reason for ONS's anymore. The fact that she'd had those ONS did not in anyway mean that she didn't truly care about and love her new partner. They have gone on to live together and last I heard they are engaged and have a great relationship. 

I've never been with someone that was meaningless to me but I've known plenty of people who have had those types of encounters and gone on to find real, true love. If I'm at all close to the mark, it's a real shame you're giving up someone you could have a real relationship with over the fact that earlier in her life she was not able to find someone with which to have a meaningful encounter.

If it just grosses you out that her beliefs include meaningless sex than carry on. There are plenty of women out there who just buy a vibrator to get them from one relationship to another or even abstain from any type of sex at all. It's not at all unheard of...you'll find someone whose belief's line up better with your own.


----------



## Yeswecan

barry35 said:


> As a general response to the way this conversation is going:
> 
> In my particular case the number of partners my ex had was not the real issue, what was bothering me was that she had made an arrangement with someone she only found sexually attractive to have sex and nothing else, and i could not stomach that. She pretty much believed that it was ok to have a sexual partner and then think of her romantic life in the meanwhile and *i found that quite shocking*.


And that is ok.


----------



## Casual Observer

notmyjamie said:


> I've never been with someone that was meaningless to me but I've known plenty of people who have had those types of encounters and gone on to find real, true love. If I'm at all close to the mark, it's a real shame you're giving up someone you could have a real relationship with over the fact that earlier in her life she was not able to find someone with which to have a meaningful encounter.
> 
> If it just grosses you out that her beliefs include meaningless sex than carry on. There are plenty of women out there who just buy a vibrator to get them from one relationship to another or even abstain from any type of sex at all. It's not at all unheard of...you'll find someone whose belief's line up better with your own.


It may be a shame that it can't work out for OP, but it would be an even greater loss for his partner if he ignored what bothers him and things exploded later. She will likely find someone for whom her particular narrative isn't an issue. He will hopefully find someone as well. And it could even be that, a few years down the road, he learned from this encounter how to change and be more accepting of such things. And maybe they might reconnect. Who knows. 

Above all, I don't think OP is suggesting that it's wrong to be like her. He sincerely wishes he could be more accepting. He's taking ownership of where the issue is.


----------



## barry35

notmyjamie said:


> So it doesn't bother you that she slept with x amount of people in the past, it bothers you that these were meaningless encounters? Are you sure that you weren't worried that her time with you was also meaningless to her?
> 
> I know a woman who had many one night stands after her divorce. "People have biological needs and I'm just fulfilling mine" and then one day she met someone she had a real connection with and had no reason for ONS's anymore. The fact that she'd had those ONS did not in anyway mean that she didn't truly care about and love her new partner. They have gone on to live together and last I heard they are engaged and have a great relationship.
> 
> I've never been with someone that was meaningless to me but I've known plenty of people who have had those types of encounters and gone on to find real, true love. If I'm at all close to the mark, it's a real shame you're giving up someone you could have a real relationship with over the fact that earlier in her life she was not able to find someone with which to have a meaningful encounter.
> 
> If it just grosses you out that her beliefs include meaningless sex than carry on. There are plenty of women out there who just buy a vibrator to get them from one relationship to another or even abstain from any type of sex at all. It's not at all unheard of...you'll find someone whose belief's line up better with your own.


I do not believe that our encounters were meaningless because we did do a lot more than sex during our brief relationship.

You might be right about there still being the possibility of a succesful relationship and I wonder sometimes about the what ifs if i had stayed with my ex because it felt like she geniuinely wanted to me to stay. I also mentioned it to her on the day we broke up. Its a case of forces of repulsion being stronger than those of attraction.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Yeswecan said:


> Sexual history certainly. Why type of history? ONS and casual? Maybe committed for some months or years but did not work out?


It could be either / or. Much more likely a combination I'd think.

Perhaps she was married a number of years, divorced, and slept around a bit after her freedom. Likely. 

Could be never married, traveled quite a bit, yes some ons either a little or a lot, and that interpretation can vary.

Or just divorced, no other men, who knows.

Playing the what if game; any of these variations is not unexpected and if she had a clean bill of health physically and mentally, it wouldn't matter to me.

I just never was one to even think about comparisons, or jealous of a past, or horrified of a past.

Everyone has a past.


----------



## Andy1001

barry35 said:


> I do not believe that our encounters were meaningless because we did do a lot more than sex during our brief relationship.
> 
> You might be right about there still being the possibility of a succesful relationship and I wonder sometimes about the what ifs if i had stayed with my ex because it felt like she geniuinely wanted to me to stay. I also mentioned it to her on the day we broke up. Its a case of forces of repulsion being stronger than those of attraction.


Did you explain to your ex the honest truth about why you were breaking up with her?
Because she had some meaningless one night stands and for whatever reason you couldn’t accept it. 
This despite originally telling her that you were okay with her past. 
Would you have preferred that she’d had three five year relationships which included daily sex?


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

barry35 said:


> As a general response to the way this conversation is going:
> 
> In my particular case the number of partners my ex had was not the real issue, what was bothering me was that *she had made an arrangement with someone she only found sexually attractive to have sex and nothing else, and i could not stomach that.* She pretty much believed that it was ok to have a sexual partner and then think of her romantic life in the meanwhile and i found that quite shocking.


Really.

Why would that matter? She wanted to have sex with someone and found a willing, attractive, not-psycho partner, disease free.

Haven't we all had those? Sometimes those were exactly what that evening or weekend warranted. No mind games. No what if stressors.


----------



## barry35

Andy1001 said:


> Did you explain to your ex the honest truth about why you were breaking up with her?
> Because she had some meaningless one night stands and for whatever reason you couldn’t accept it.
> This despite originally telling her that you were okay with her past.
> Would you have preferred that she’d had three five year relationships which included daily sex?



Yes, i tried to be as clear as i could with her during the break up. Also during our first date together i warned her that our pasts were different from one another and i needed some time to digest all the information she was giving me when we first talked about it.

I would not have had an issue if she had daily sex in more serious relationships.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Yeswecan said:


> Why should we sugar coat the very definition of promiscuous?


And how sweet it is!

Sorry 😎


----------



## Andy1001

barry35 said:


> Yes, i tried to be as clear as i could with her during the break up. Also during our first date together i warned her that our pasts were different from one another and i needed some time to digest all the information she was giving me when we first talked about it.
> 
> I would not have had an issue if she had daily sex in more serious relationships.


So on your very first date you let her know that she was being evaluated, you were giving her a trial run to see if she could meet your exacting standards. 
I’m surprised she didn’t tell you to go and **** yourself.


----------



## Yeswecan

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Really.
> 
> Why would that matter? She wanted to have sex with someone and found a willing, attractive, not-psycho partner, disease free.
> 
> Haven't we all had those? Sometimes those were exactly what that evening or weekend warranted. No mind games. No what if stressors.


Disease free...you are assuming. Not-pshycho? How does one tell? Have we not all done this? Nope.


----------



## Casual Observer

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Really.
> 
> Why would that matter? She wanted to have sex with someone and found a willing, attractive, not-psycho partner, disease free.
> 
> Haven't we all had those? Sometimes those were exactly what that evening or weekend warranted. No mind games. No what if stressors.


It matters because some people, not all, but some people, regard sex as something shared only with a special person you're having a relationship with that's based upon more than "just" sexual needs. That's being made into a bigger issue than it really is. It's just a thing. People are free to choose how they view what they're willing to share. Nobody is making a blanket indictment that it's a bad thing for everyone. It's just not their view of what sex means to them, and since that's an important thing in their inner world, what sex means to them, it's an important compatibility issue.


----------



## barry35

Andy1001 said:


> So on your very first date you let her know that she was being evaluated, you were giving her a trial run to see if she could meet your exacting standards.
> I’m surprised she didn’t tell you to go and **** yourself.



She told me that she found me very attractive and we slept togther from the first date. She changed the mind about the nature of our relationship later on and wanted to turn it into a more serious kind of thing, i did not disagree to that as it was my goal from the start.


----------



## leftfield

Andy1001 said:


> So on your very first date you let her know that she was being evaluated, you were giving her a trial run to see if she could meet your exacting standards.
> I’m surprised she didn’t tell you to go and **** yourself.


There is nothing wrong with either of those things.


----------



## Andy1001

barry35 said:


> She told me that she found me very attractive and we slept togther from the first date. She changed the mind about the nature of our relationship later on and wanted to turn it into a more serious kind of thing, i did not disagree to that as it was my goal from the start.


So you were both looking for no strings attached sex and then you both developed feelings. 
Then something changed within you and you used her past as an excuse to break up. 
That was exceptionally ****ty of you. And weak.
I could be nasty here but I won’t. 
You are going to have a lonely life if you don’t get yourself sorted out.


----------



## Andy1001

Casual Observer said:


> It matters because some people, not all, but some people, regard sex as something shared only with a special person you're having a relationship with that's based upon more than "just" sexual needs. That's being made into a bigger issue than it really is. It's just a thing. People are free to choose how they view what they're willing to share. Nobody is making a blanket indictment that it's a bad thing for everyone. It's just not their view of what sex means to them, and since that's an important thing in their inner world, what sex means to them, it's an important compatibility issue.


That’s a lovely piece of advice. 
Except the op had sex with his ex on their first date and continued having sex with her until he decided that she was unsuitable.


----------



## barry35

Andy1001 said:


> So you were both looking for no strings attached sex and then you both developed feelings.
> Then something changed within you and you used her past as an excuse to break up.
> That was exceptionally ****ty of you. And weak.
> I could be nasty here but I won’t.
> You are going to have a lonely life if you don’t get yourself sorted out.



I wasn't looking for a no strings attached sex and after our first date i contacted her first and asked for another date. I was not even expecting our first date to turn out like that, she suggested to go to somewhere private herself and initiated sex, I simply did not refuse her advances.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Sexual history was one of my top priorities while dating after my divorce. But I'm a sexist pig.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

The thing that really turned me off about women into casual sex is that sperm can survive down there for about 5 days. Maybe just a good ol thrashing would work with protection, but would you go down there?? I think I might vomit.


----------



## ConanHub

Andy1001 said:


> So you were both looking for no strings attached sex and then you both developed feelings.
> Then something changed within you and you used her past as an excuse to break up.
> That was exceptionally ****ty of you. And weak.
> I could be nasty here but I won’t.
> You are going to have a lonely life if you don’t get yourself sorted out.


I have to second the sentiment expressed here.

Dirty pool my friend.


----------



## ConanHub

barry35 said:


> I wasn't looking for a no strings attached sex and after our first date i contacted her first and asked for another date. I was not even expecting our first date to turn out like that, she suggested to go to somewhere private herself and initiated sex, I simply did not refuse her advances.


It does take two to tango.

If you really felt strongly about refraining, you would have.


----------



## Casual Observer

ConanHub said:


> I have to second the sentiment expressed here.
> 
> Dirty pool my friend.


Isn't it so much better for her that he did express these sentiments sooner than later? You can think what you will about the OP, how it was OK for him as long as it was a fun thing to do in the moment, and then he turned righteous or whatever. Sure, consider him a jerk. But give him credit for showing his true nature sooner than later. Things would not have turned out well for her, staying with him. No way, no how.

In my opinion, best-case scenario is that he gets IC to sort himself out, because now he's carrying the same baggage he accuses her of having. He should explain to her it's him, not her (which I think/hope he did?) and that this brought up his need to get sorted out before he has another relationship. If he comes out the other end intact, great, but she should be looking elsewhere for someone not quite as broken as he is.

None of this changes the premise that, for many, "history" can be important and not easily dismissed. And that, for some, that's OK. It's a choice, based on their own ethics and morals. People have a right to that. They do not have a right to allow those ethics and morals to cause harm to others though.


----------



## Cletus

barry35 said:


> She told me that she *found me very attractive and we slept togther from the first date*. She changed the mind about the nature of our relationship later on and wanted to turn it into a more serious kind of thing, i did not disagree to that as it was my goal from the start.


Now THAT'S hypocrisy.


----------



## Lila

Yeswecan said:


> Disease free...you are assuming. Not-pshycho? How does one tell? Have we not all done this? Nope.


In all fairness, even virgins can be psycho. It's impossible to tell until someone has been dating a while. It's just the risk one takes when they invite other people into their lives.


----------



## notmyjamie

Casual Observer said:


> It may be a shame that it can't work out for OP, but it would be an even greater loss for his partner if he ignored what bothers him and things exploded later. She will likely find someone for whom her particular narrative isn't an issue. He will hopefully find someone as well. And it could even be that, a few years down the road, he learned from this encounter how to change and be more accepting of such things. And maybe they might reconnect. Who knows.
> 
> Above all, I don't think OP is suggesting that it's wrong to be like her. He sincerely wishes he could be more accepting. He's taking ownership of where the issue is.


My post was not meant to imply he needs to stay with her, just to sort through his reasons better. As I said, I don’t engage in meaningless sex either. And even if he wanted to judge her behavior, he has every right to his opinion. I just had trouble figuring out what his reasoning was and was giving my opinion on 2 different scenario’s. 

I’m in 100% agreement that if her past of meaningless sex grossed him about because it turns him off he has done the right thing in breaking it off...that’s what my “carry on” comment meant.

ETA: Just caught up on the rest of the thread. I’m calling No bueno on sleeping with her on the first date and then judging her for that kind of behavior later on. So it’s ok when OP does it or when she does it with him but not anyone else. Hypocrisy at its finest. She’s much better off finding someone new. I feel for her. If OP was so repulsed by that behavior he should look in the mirror and figure out why HE did it too. Because first date sex is not meaningful, it just isn’t. You can end up having a relationship later but that first time is not meaningful.


----------



## Casual Observer

notmyjamie said:


> ETA: Just caught up on the rest of the thread. I’m calling No bueno on sleeping with her on the first date and then judging her for that kind of behavior later on. So it’s ok when OP does it or when she does it with him but not anyone else. Hypocrisy at its finest. She’s much better off finding someone new. I feel for her. If OP was so repulsed by that behavior he should look in the mirror and figure out why HE did it too. Because first date sex is not meaningful, it just isn’t. You can end up having a relationship later but that first time is not meaningful.


We are in complete agreement. And again, something his partner needed to be aware of, the hypocrisy that it's OK for him and not here. There's a bit of a feeling that he thinks less of her because she was "too easy." 

Still want to give some OP credit for recognizing he'd be a bad partner for her. He needs help dealing with his own issues.


----------



## notmyjamie

Casual Observer said:


> We are in complete agreement. And again, something his partner needed to be aware of, the hypocrisy that it's OK for him and not here. There's a bit of a feeling that he thinks less of her because she was "too easy."
> 
> Still want to give some OP credit for recognizing he'd be a bad partner for her. He needs help dealing with his own issues.


I’d give him credit except his posts read more like he realized she’d be a bad partner for him which would eventually negatively affect her. I think he broke it off because her sexual behavior bothered him too much...even though he engages in the same behavior. He’s fooled himself that’s not the case, but it is the case. It’s a real shame...it seems like he had a good connection with her.


----------



## Casual Observer

barry35 said:


> I wasn't looking for a no strings attached sex and after our first date i contacted her first and asked for another date. I was not even expecting our first date to turn out like that, she suggested to go to somewhere private herself and initiated sex, I simply did not refuse her advances.


I think you need IC in a very desperate way. You are essentially saying that you're willing to engage in sex with a woman you've just met, no relationship required, but you have no respect for that woman *because* she's willing to do so. That sort of thinking is incredibly destructive. It's almost entrapment, proving to you she's a bad woman because you can make her do something you disapprove of. 

This cycle of disappointment will repeat, over and over and over again, until you get right in your head. How many women will you submit to testing and judgment? How many will think the problem is them when in fact it's you? 

I am so glad you set this woman free, for her sake.


----------



## Marduk

Casual Observer said:


> I think you need IC in a very desperate way. You are essentially saying that you're willing to engage in sex with a woman you've just met, no relationship required, but you have no respect for that woman *because* she's willing to do so. That sort of thinking is incredibly destructive. It's almost entrapment, proving to you she's a bad woman because you can make her do something you disapprove of.
> 
> This cycle of disappointment will repeat, over and over and over again, until you get right in your head. How many women will you submit to testing and judgment? How many will think the problem is them when in fact it's you?
> 
> I am so glad you set this woman free, for her sake.


I'm not sure.

I'm kinda like him. Relationships are fluid until they're not.

I really don't care about their past within certain boundaries (not numbers, but stuff like cheating or abuse). I just don't really want to hear about it or think about it unless there's a reason that I have to. Like she's processing something or it's impacting our relationship or something. Then, I like to dive in and figure it out, and I can be clinical and empathetic with that stuff. Not take it personally.

But my wife sometimes gets all penthouse forum about her past because she's an open book. Which is fine with her girlfriends. But I'm not her girlfriend. She was worse when we were dating, and I almost dumped her over it - not because of the things she did, but because she wouldn't shut up about it.


----------



## barry35

It might be the case that i'm a hypocrite but just to be a bit more clear on what happened during our first date: We first were out drinking together, and i didn't have much to drink and afterwards my ex suggested that we go somewhere private and i pretty much knew what was going to happen but went with it. Now i realise that i could have said no because i got principles so we will not go anywhere to have sex on our first date but then I serioulsy doubt that you will find many men to do that. I didn't make any hints on my side that I wanted to be alone with her at that point.


----------



## uhtred

I do separate "judging" from ending a relationship. 

I think anyone can end a relationship after a few dates, for any reason that they wish - it can be as simple as finding that after a few dates, you just don't really "click" with the person. If someone does end it though, I think that gentleman or lady would do so as politely and gently as possible. If you are ending a relationship, then judgement is completely unnecessary - that person is no longer part of your life.


----------



## notmyjamie

barry35 said:


> It might be the case that i'm a hypocrite but just to be a bit more clear on what happened during our first date: We first were out drinking together, and i didn't have much to drink and afterwards my ex suggested that we go somewhere private and i pretty much knew what was going to happen but went with it. Now i realise that i could have said no because i got principles so we will not go anywhere to have sex on our first date but then I serioulsy doubt that you will find many men to do that. I didn't make any hints on my side that I wanted to be alone with her at that point.


You are suggesting that because you’re a man sleeping with someone you don’t know is okay but it’s not ok for a woman. That’s more repulsive to me than I can find the words to express. For the record, that is the very definition of a hypocrite. So yes, you’re a hypocrite. 

I’m feeling gratitude that your ex is free of you. I hope she finds a great guy soon. 

I hope you find some insight into yourself because you are sorely lacking in that department.


----------



## phillybeffandswiss

You both had agreed upon casual sex.
That was your mutual purpose.
You both mutually decided to try and make it more serious.
That was your mutual agreement.

It didn’t work because her ideas of casual sex didn’t match yours. That’s fine as well. 



> She pretty much believed that it was ok to have a sexual partner and then think of her romantic life in the meanwhile and i found that quite shocking.


Why did this bother you?


Be prepared, this is going to turn towards gender bias and will get uglier.


----------



## Hiner112

Growing up it seemed to me that there wasn't any more intimate act than allowing someone into or being allowed into someone else's body. That it should be considered serious and important.

It also seemed like someone that took it lightly might have trouble making the switch to exclusivity.

My personality and attitude would have never led to "notches on the bedpost" either in reality or as an approach to relationships.

Post-divorce (soon), I don't know. Part of me wants to treat it as just another fun activity to do with another willing participant. Part of me thinks that something would be lost or devalued if my perspective was different. I'm likely not going to figure it out for myself without actually doing some dating to gauge my feelings, which I've done very little of ever.


----------



## Wolfman1968

Andy1001 said:


> So on your very first date you let her know that she was being evaluated, you were giving her a trial run to see if she could meet your exacting standards.
> I’m surprised she didn’t tell you to go and **** yourself.



OK, I don't get this attitude.

*ALL* dating relationships start off as an evaluation. 
*ALL* dating relationships are essentially a trial run to see if the initial attractions (physical, personality, etc.) will sustain the relationship as the flaws that EVERY person has comes to the surface.

He stated what is essentially happening with EVERY relationship. (Or should happen...i suppose there are deeply flawed people who think that the relationship is an eternal bond from the first date--those people probably morph into stalkers when it falls apart.)

That's dating. If someone told me to "go **** myself" for that I would tell them to "go **** themselves" right back.



******
Note: as I moved on the thread, I see how he confessed to his own first date sex, so that certainly knocks over the pedestal he put himself on. But my statement about dating relationships being an evaluation still stand.


----------



## sokillme

Andy1001 said:


> So on your very first date you let her know that she was being evaluated, you were giving her a trial run to see if she could meet your exacting standards.
> I’m surprised she didn’t tell you to go and **** yourself.


Like any adult doesn't know that is what dating is anyway.

Besides he could stop dating her because he didn't like the color of her sweater, she is not entitled to anything from him. Frankly she is better off, both of them are.

Maybe he won't find what his is looking for or maybe he will. Again that is dating and kind of the point.


----------



## sokillme

Hiner112 said:


> Growing up it seemed to me that there wasn't any more intimate act than allowing someone into or being allowed into someone else's body. That it should be considered serious and important.
> 
> It also seemed like someone that took it lightly might have trouble making the switch to exclusivity.
> 
> My personality and attitude would have never led to "notches on the bedpost" either in reality or as an approach to relationships.


I am exactly the same way. Never had a ONS and I doubt I ever will. Seems way to personal to do with someone I just met.


----------



## Diana7

barry35 said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> Im a male, 35 years old and I'm writting this post just to have another point of view from other people on casual sex and One night stands. As the relationship i have in mind is now over i'm not trying to seek any advice however although i wouid welcome suggestions of how otherwise i could have handled the situation.
> 
> I was single for a few years before me latest relationship and then i met somone in december. We used to get along quite well and never had any major argumens. My then girlfriend was quite upfront about her past and told me the she was into casual sex and also one night stands before meeting me and at first i was ok with it although never very comfortamble around it. During our time together however i'd hear different details and stories of her past and I started to feel more and more uncomfortable about it. Finally i had to end our relationship as i decided it was going to be very upseting for me in the long term having to re think some of the detalis that my ex told me.
> 
> That is pretty much the story. I would appreciate if I were to hear thoughts on the matter, other points of view and any type of constructive contribution.


I think that the way she acted sexually would show to me very clearly what her attitude was to sex. IE it wasn't something important or meaningful or that should be part of expressing love and commitment. 

Its then up to whoever goes out with her to decide if that is ok with them or not. 

For me with a man it would definitely be not.


----------



## Diana7

sokillme said:


> I am exactly the same way. Never had a ONS and I doubt I ever will. Seems way to personal to do with someone I just met.


Yes and intimate :surprise:. This is someone who you know absolutely nothing about, maybe not even their name. They maybe on drugs, have STD's, have had hundreds of partners before you. 

I wouldn't have a single date with a man who was so casual about sex and using others.


----------



## Diana7

barry35 said:


> It might be the case that i'm a hypocrite but just to be a bit more clear on what happened during our first date: We first were out drinking together, and i didn't have much to drink and afterwards my ex suggested that we go somewhere private and i pretty much knew what was going to happen but went with it. Now i realise that i could have said no because i got principles so we will not go anywhere to have sex on our first date but then I serioulsy doubt that you will find many men to do that. I didn't make any hints on my side that I wanted to be alone with her at that point.


yes there are many men who would not have sex on a first date even if offered it, thankfully. You had casual sex on the first date but are sort of blaming her for your decision and implying that its ok because most men would do the same. 
Excuses excuses. 
.


----------



## Diana7

sokillme said:


> I am exactly the same way. Never had a ONS and I doubt I ever will. Seems way to personal to do with someone I just met.


Absolutely, I am not even sure of I would kiss on a first date.


----------



## Diana7

barry35 said:


> She was aware that I would not like what she had done as she would usualy start talking about such things with first making me promise that i would not be upset. She also wanted some kind of reward from me for telling the truth but the way i see it, she was obliged to tell anyway out of human decency.


You cant possibly promise that you wont be upset.


----------



## Diana7

sokillme said:


> Right and assuming the person OP was dating is happy with her choices (and we have no reason to assume otherwise) she is better for it too.
> 
> I never understood why this was a problem to begin with. It seems to me it's only a problem if one person regrets their actions (lots of sex or not a lot of sex) or they don't like the idea that whatever their actions are those actions may limit their choices, but you could say that about a lot of stuff not just sexual history.


I am sure there are things that you would have problems with in a partner, we all have our different boundaries and standards.


----------



## Laurentium

I can't be non-judgmental about this. It seems to me there's something wrong emotionally with anyone over the age of say 30 who wants to have sex recreationally with someone they've just met and don't really know. I'm not talking morals, and I'm not talking risks and dangers either, although both of those things might apply, I'm talking retarded emotional development.


----------



## Lila

Laurentium said:


> I can't be non-judgmental about this. It seems to me there's something wrong emotionally with anyone over the age of say 30 who wants to have sex recreationally with someone they've just met and don't really know. I'm not talking morals, and I'm not talking risks and dangers either, although both of those things might apply, I'm talking retarded emotional development.


I'm interested in hearing why you would think like this. 

During my time as a single person looking to date, it seems like casual sex is more prevalent with people over 30 and generally the norm in over 40s.


----------



## ConanHub

Laurentium said:


> I can't be non-judgmental about this. It seems to me there's something wrong emotionally with anyone over the age of say 30 who wants to have sex recreationally with someone they've just met and don't really know. I'm not talking morals, and I'm not talking risks and dangers either, although both of those things might apply, I'm talking retarded emotional development.


In some cases your assessment might be accurate. Some people just choose and it is a rational decision and they don't have emotional retardation or problems of any sort.

I was very promiscuous as a young man, mostly do to my environment growing up.

I would not have sex again without being married to the woman but that is a spiritual decision.

If I wasn't a Christian, I would see few reasons to not indulge if an attractive situation arose.


----------



## Laurentium

Lila said:


> I'm interested in hearing why you would think like this.
> 
> During my time as a single person looking to date, it seems like casual sex is more prevalent with people over 30 and generally the norm in over 40s.


Well, let me again be clear. I'm talking about sex with someone who is essentially a stranger, that you don't really know at all. (I am *not*, for example, talking about no-strings no-plans non-exclusive sex with a friend you've known for a while and like as a person). 

The fact that it might be the norm in single over-40s (I don't know if that's true, but if you say so) it doesn't change my view. Perhaps in some cases that's related to why they are single. 

I hesitated before posting this, and I guess I expected it to be met with howls of outrage. Thank you for your measured response. If someone wants sex with a stranger, it suggests to me that all they see of person is their body, like whether they are cute or not. It's like buying something because the advertising said it was good.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Laurentium said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm interested in hearing why you would think like this.
> 
> During my time as a single person looking to date, it seems like casual sex is more prevalent with people over 30 and generally the norm in over 40s.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, let me again be clear. I'm talking about sex with someone who is essentially a stranger, that you don't really know at all. (I am *not*, for example, talking about no-strings no-plans non-exclusive sex with a friend you've known for a while and like as a person).
> 
> The fact that it might be the norm in single over-40s (I don't know if that's true, but if you say so) it doesn't change my view. Perhaps in some cases that's related to why they are single.
> 
> I hesitated before posting this, and I guess I expected it to be met with howls of outrage. Thank you for your measured response. If someone wants sex with a stranger, it suggests to me that all they see of person is their body, like whether they are cute or not. It's like buying something because the advertising said it was good.
Click to expand...

I would atleast think they may be fun time but certainly not LTR material much less spouse material. I also think that males view this much differently than females in general.

I don't understand her comment about 40's plus people either. I would guess the opposite from what I've seen.


----------



## ConanHub

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> I would atleast think they may be fun time but certainly not LTR material much less spouse material. I also think that males view this much differently than females in general.
> 
> I don't understand her comment about 40's plus people either. I would guess the opposite from what I've seen.


Well let me disillusion you.

I'm a man, last time I checked anyway, and I don't view promiscuity differently in women than I do in men. There can of course be different repercussions.

I also married a woman that was in my bed mere hours after we met.

Our marriage is strong and we are closing on 29 years together, 25 married, with two sons and three grandchildren.

Generalizing can sometimes be accurate but I don't think your take on this is the consensus.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

ConanHub said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would atleast think they may be fun time but certainly not LTR material much less spouse material. I also think that males view this much differently than females in general.
> 
> I don't understand her comment about 40's plus people either. I would guess the opposite from what I've seen.
> 
> 
> 
> Well let me disillusion you.
> 
> I'm a man, last time I checked anyway, and I don't view promiscuity differently in women than I do in men. There can of course be different repercussions.
> 
> I also married a woman that was in my bed mere hours after we met.
> 
> Our marriage is strong and we are closing on 29 years together, 25 married, with two sons and three grandchildren.
> 
> Generalizing can sometimes be accurate but I don't think your take on this is the consensus.
Click to expand...

The repercussions are exactly the reason. Men could theoretically go around spreading their seed across the world with hundreds of offspring and go about their normal routine. Whereas, the women would have mouths to feed for the next 18 years.

Introduce the sexual revolution and all its party gifts of latex and pills and IUDs and everything is changed. Women can act as men now. But there is this itch in my hind brain that is saying something ain't right here... Religion and morality put aside.


----------



## ConanHub

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> The repercussions are exactly the reason. Men could theoretically go around spreading their seed across the world with hundreds of offspring and go about their normal routine. Whereas, the women would have mouths to feed for the next 18 years.
> 
> Introduce the sexual revolution and all its party gifts of latex and pills and IUDs and everything is changed. Women can act as men now. But there is this itch in my hind brain that is saying something ain't right here... Religion and morality put aside.


Fair. In a different time, I would kill a cad in a duel or simply a brawl, if he went about seducing women at will while I would be far less harsh with the women.

I'm not an advocate for promiscuous behavior but we live in the time we live in.

If a woman should behave chastely, so should a man. You can't really expect it to be normal for one gender and not the other.


----------



## Lila

Laurentium said:


> Well, let me again be clear. I'm talking about sex with someone who is essentially a stranger, that you don't really know at all. (I am *not*, for example, talking about no-strings no-plans non-exclusive sex with a friend you've known for a while and like as a person).
> 
> The fact that it might be the norm in single over-40s (I don't know if that's true, but if you say so) it doesn't change my view. Perhaps in some cases that's related to why they are single.
> 
> I hesitated before posting this, and I guess I expected it to be met with howls of outrage. Thank you for your measured response. If someone wants sex with a stranger, it suggests to me that all they see of person is their body, like whether they are cute or not. It's like buying something because the advertising said it was good.


Thanks for providing your opinion.

To your first point, I think there is a fine line between sex with an essential stranger and no-strings attached sex. Lots of people look for potential dating partners online these days. Usually there is some initial chatting online to screen for immediate red flags then a face to face date. Some of the those first dates end up being whirlwind romances that end in sex on that date. In many cases, those first date sexual adventures end up with one person getting ghosted and the other moving along to their next conquest. Would that be considered a ONS or was that a no-strings attached situation with someone known? 

IME, single people over 40s, more men than women, are not looking committed relationships. They have responsibilities to their kids, their parents, their jobs, ect.. and are not interested in adding the responsibility of an emotional investment with someone with their own baggage. Casual sex, whether that's a FWB or ONS (as I described above) is more common than not.


----------



## Lila

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> I would atleast think they may be fun time but certainly not LTR material much less spouse material. I also think that males view this much differently than females in general.
> 
> I don't understand her comment about 40's plus people either. I would guess the opposite from what I've seen.


You just answered your question about people over 40. A lot of people over 40 are overwhelmed by responsibility and are not looking for LTR or commitment - IME moreso men then women. They want the fun times without the responsibility of caring for a relationship. It is what it is.


----------



## Dreadful Penny

Strange how people see things, i doubt that i would meet some posters criteria, i had sex first at 15 and between 18 and 20 spent my life clubbing often drinking far to much and often with a nose full of coke and a lot of ONS and no strings sex.

At 21 i had a ten month try anything and everything sex fest with a 39 year old divorced man.

This however does not define who i an now, i have been faithful to my husband since i met him this is me now, I also consider my younger selfs actions to be perfectly acceptable.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Lila said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would atleast think they may be fun time but certainly not LTR material much less spouse material. I also think that males view this much differently than females in general.
> 
> I don't understand her comment about 40's plus people either. I would guess the opposite from what I've seen.
> 
> 
> 
> You just answered your question about people over 40. A lot of people over 40 are overwhelmed by responsibility and are not looking for LTR or commitment - IME moreso men then women. They want the fun times without the responsibility of caring for a relationship. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

Sounds like something I would tell someone to avoid a relationship but meanwhile keep the sex flowing 🙂


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

ConanHub said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The repercussions are exactly the reason. Men could theoretically go around spreading their seed across the world with hundreds of offspring and go about their normal routine. Whereas, the women would have mouths to feed for the next 18 years.
> 
> Introduce the sexual revolution and all its party gifts of latex and pills and IUDs and everything is changed. Women can act as men now. But there is this itch in my hind brain that is saying something ain't right here... Religion and morality put aside.
> 
> 
> 
> Fair. In a different time, I would kill a cad in a duel or simply a brawl, if he went about seducing women at will while I would be far less harsh with the women.
> 
> I'm not an advocate for promiscuous behavior but we live in the time we live in.
> 
> If a woman should behave chastely, so should a man. You can't really expect it to be normal for one gender and not the other.
Click to expand...

I agree, but mainly on religious principle. But the sexes are not equal and there is still very different repercussions that face women vs men. It's not even close and accidents happen. Thinking as a father...You had two sons. But having a daughter is very different. Just wear a condom might be my advice for a son, whereas not even close for my daughter!


----------



## Dreadful Penny

Best keep sex and religion seperate.


----------



## Lila

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Sounds like something I would tell someone to avoid a relationship but meanwhile keep the sex flowing 🙂


Hey, I have no issues with this as long as both people are up front and honest about intentions. If both people are in agreement that it's all about the sex, then more power to both of them. 

It's lying about intentions to get the sex with which I have a huge issue. Don't go telling people that you are interested in a committed relationship when in fact you are not.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Lila said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like something I would tell someone to avoid a relationship but meanwhile keep the sex flowing 🙂
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, I have no issues with this as long as both people are up front and honest about intentions. If both people are in agreement that it's all about the sex, then more power to both of them.
> 
> It's lying about intentions to get the sex with which I have a huge issue. Don't go telling people that you are interested in a committed relationship when in fact you are not.
Click to expand...

I have mixed emotions on this. If the circumstances are changed a little, I'd agree. 

Say for instance, they talked awhile, got to know one another, went on some dates, developed feelings and such as happens, then they have sex and the guy ghosts her after. That's a ***** move.

But say he is just looking for sex mainly and he tells a girl that he is looking for a relationship (which may also be the case) then they go on one date, have sex and he ghosts her. Then, my feelings would be less on the side of the ghostee. What did you expect?


----------



## ConanHub

Dreadful Penny said:


> Best keep sex and religion seperate.


Do what you want in your bedroom dear but don't think religion and sex should be separated for others.

I actually upped my game by magnitudes after becoming a Christian.


----------



## Lila

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> I have mixed emotions on this. If the circumstances are changed a little, I'd agree.
> 
> Say for instance, they talked awhile, got to know one another, went on some dates, developed feelings and such as happens, then they have sex and the guy ghosts her after. That's a ***** move.
> 
> But say he is just looking for sex mainly and he tells a girl that he is looking for a relationship (which may also be the case) then they go on one date, have sex and he ghosts her. Then, my feelings would be less on the side of the ghostee. What did you expect?


I think if he's mainly looking for sex, then he should be upfront about it. All he has to say is "I'm really just looking to casually date right now but if someone great happens to show up in my life, then I would consider a relationship". Nothing wrong with that and it's very honest. The problems lies with how one expresses their intentions. Selling yourself as someone whose goal is to find a committed partner is not the same as selling yourself as someone who is primarily interested in a casual relationship. That's called lying.

See the issue with being honest is that it limits the dating pool. When I was online dating, I chatted to lots and lots of men and went on 33 first dates in what amounted to 12 weeks online. Any profile that stated "casual" or who answered the question "what are you looking for?" with "I don't know" or "casual" or "maybe something serious" was an automatic NO. Of those 33 first dates, probably a third would fall under the "looking for casual" category but lied because they knew I wouldn't have wasted my time with them. Women don't have as hard of a time finding casual sex as men so we tend to see more men lying about their intentions than women, but I'm sure there are women who say they want casual who are actually interested in a committed relationship.


----------



## Laurentium

Dreadful Penny said:


> At 21 i had a ten month try anything and everything sex fest with a 39 year old divorced man.
> 
> This however does not define who i am now, i have been faithful to my husband since i met him this is me now, I also consider my younger selfs actions to be perfectly acceptable.


Yeah, I agree with this. (I did say over the age of 30 in my original post).


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> Women don't have as hard of a time finding casual sex as men.


How true is this?

I'm genuinely curious.

It seems probable that women might have a slight edge in obtaining casual sex but I really don't have a real world clue about it.

I had an Italian friend through high school that had a steady stream of ladies for sex and I could have easily put him in the amateur ranks if I had a mind to.

He wasn't even tall or exceptional looking.

Many of my other friends were clueless but I think that evens out with age for most.

I have seen younger ladies having an easier time getting casual sex with a few male exceptions but doesn't that average out with some age?


----------



## minimalME

Over the years, I've found that this behavior is seen as quite acceptable among men, with the explanation being - we'd never have sex if we told the truth.

Not all men, of course, but in general.

To me, this tact (men not being forthcoming about their intentions/motivations) isn't really the problem - it's our denial of it. 

If a man has offered you nothing but his penis (as opposed to commitment, responsibility, obligation), then he's offered you nothing but his penis.

Yes, it is lying by omission, but instead of trying to change men (futility), accept that this is what they do (shade the truth to get sex on their terms), and then women will be more empowered to deal with reality as it is, rather than how they wish it could be.



Lila said:


> It's lying about intentions to get the sex with which I have a huge issue. Don't go telling people that you are interested in a committed relationship when in fact you are not.


----------



## minimalME

Not in my experience.

If I wanted to have sex every night with a different man, I could find willing men.



ConanHub said:


> I have seen younger ladies having an easier time getting casual sex with a few male exceptions but doesn't that average out with some age?


----------



## uhtred

I think there is a tendency for women to worry that they will be "used" for sex and men to worry that they will be "trapped". This provides an unfortunate motivation for lying. 

The often realistic situation where someone wants to enjoy dating, but if they find the right person (which can only be determined after a number of dates) they would like something long term, sounds sort of wishy-washy. 




Lila said:


> I think if he's mainly looking for sex, then he should be upfront about it. All he has to say is "I'm really just looking to casually date right now but if someone great happens to show up in my life, then I would consider a relationship". Nothing wrong with that and it's very honest. The problems lies with how one expresses their intentions. Selling yourself as someone whose goal is to find a committed partner is not the same as selling yourself as someone who is primarily interested in a casual relationship. That's called lying.
> 
> See the issue with being honest is that it limits the dating pool. When I was online dating, I chatted to lots and lots of men and went on 33 first dates in what amounted to 12 weeks online. Any profile that stated "casual" or who answered the question "what are you looking for?" with "I don't know" or "casual" or "maybe something serious" was an automatic NO. Of those 33 first dates, probably a third would fall under the "looking for casual" category but lied because they knew I wouldn't have wasted my time with them. Women don't have as hard of a time finding casual sex as men so we tend to see more men lying about their intentions than women, but I'm sure there are women who say they want casual who are actually interested in a committed relationship.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Lila said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have mixed emotions on this. If the circumstances are changed a little, I'd agree.
> 
> Say for instance, they talked awhile, got to know one another, went on some dates, developed feelings and such as happens, then they have sex and the guy ghosts her after. That's a ***** move.
> 
> But say he is just looking for sex mainly and he tells a girl that he is looking for a relationship (which may also be the case) then they go on one date, have sex and he ghosts her. Then, my feelings would be less on the side of the ghostee. What did you expect?
> 
> 
> 
> I think if he's mainly looking for sex, then he should be upfront about it. All he has to say is "I'm really just looking to casually date right now but if someone great happens to show up in my life, then I would consider a relationship". Nothing wrong with that and it's very honest. The problems lies with how one expresses their intentions. Selling yourself as someone whose goal is to find a committed partner is not the same as selling yourself as someone who is primarily interested in a casual relationship. That's called lying.
> 
> See the issue with being honest is that it limits the dating pool. When I was online dating, I chatted to lots and lots of men and went on 33 first dates in what amounted to 12 weeks online. Any profile that stated "casual" or who answered the question "what are you looking for?" with "I don't know" or "casual" or "maybe something serious" was an automatic NO. Of those 33 first dates, probably a third would fall under the "looking for casual" category but lied because they knew I wouldn't have wasted my time with them. Women don't have as hard of a time finding casual sex as men so we tend to see more men lying about their intentions than women, but I'm sure there are women who say they want casual who are actually interested in a committed relationship.
Click to expand...

I will only say many many many men would take sex if it presented itself, but that doesn't mean that it changes the fact that they aren't looking for a relationship if the right person came along.

What happens if a man tells a lady he is looking for a relationship and the woman changes her usual strategy of sleeping with men on the first date to making this guy wait? I have heard women who do this depending on the 'sort of man' they go on a date with.

I don't see a problem with saying you are looking for a relationship then if sex happens with them at that early a point, deciding it's not what you are into. Maybe it was good sex but you aren't really feeling it. Or whether sexist or not, as a general rule don't seriously date women that have sex with them that early.


----------



## Laurentium

Lila said:


> Thanks for providing your opinion.


No problem! 



> IME, single people over 40s, more men than women, are not looking committed relationships. They have responsibilities to their kids, their parents, their jobs, ect.. and are not interested in adding the responsibility of an emotional investment with someone with their own baggage.


It seems to me, in my own experience, that "dating" is much much more work, time, (and expense) than being in a stable relationship. I could spend 40 minutes every day just "managing" OK cupid. And then the time of setting up and having "dates" with a string of strangers, are you telling me they are doing that *not* in the hope of finding someone, but just for entertainment? When they are short of time and energy? That they are not looking to make an emotional commitment, but just to spend evenings with strangers? I find it hard to believe. 

So what do they get out of it, if it's not someone who they know well enough to get emotional contact from? Is it really just the actual sex? I mean, most people can do better with some porn and a vibrator if it's just the orgasm.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> How true is this?
> 
> I'm genuinely curious.
> 
> It seems probable that women might have a slight edge in obtaining casual sex but I really don't have a real world clue about it.
> 
> I had an Italian friend through high school that had a steady stream of ladies for sex and I could have easily put him in the amateur ranks if I had a mind to.
> 
> He wasn't even tall or exceptional looking.
> 
> Many of my other friends were clueless but I think that evens out with age for most.
> 
> *I have seen younger ladies having an easier time getting casual sex with a few male exceptions but doesn't that average out with some age?*


What I have seen is that women looking for casual sex usually look for much younger partners (15+ years) and they don't seem to have any problems finding it.


----------



## Lila

minimalME said:


> Over the years, I've found that this behavior is seen as quite acceptable among men, with the explanation being - we'd never have sex if we told the truth.
> 
> Not all men, of course, but in general.
> 
> To me, this tact (men not being forthcoming about their intentions/motivations) isn't really the problem - it's our denial of it.
> 
> If a man has offered you nothing but his penis (as opposed to commitment, responsiblity, obligation), then he's offered you nothing but his penis.
> 
> Yes, it is lying by omission, but instead of trying to change men (futility), accept that this is what they do (shade the truth to get sex on their terms), and then women will be more empowered to deal with reality as it is, rather than how they wish it could be.


Oh, I completely agree. 

I have a very cut-throat mentality when it comes to dating. There's no such thing as fair play. I don't complain when I hear women say the dude ghosted them after sex and I don't complain when I hear a guy say "she used me for my money". It's all fair in love and war.:smile2:


----------



## ConanHub

minimalME said:


> Not in my experience.
> 
> If I wanted to have sex every night with a different man, I could find willing men.


What I meant was, don't men, in general, figure things out as they age more than when they were younger anyway, and it gets easier for them to obtain casual sex?


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> What I have seen is that women looking for casual sex usually look for much younger partners (15+ years) and they don't seem to have any problems finding it.


That's interesting!

I'm not in the game but I wonder how their male counterparts fair?

I've always thought that once men get experienced, it averages out for them having an easier time getting casual sex.


----------



## minimalME

I love this! :smnotworthy:



Lila said:


> I have a very cut-throat mentality when it comes to dating.


----------



## Lila

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> I will only say many many many men would take sex if it presented itself, but that doesn't mean that it changes the fact that they aren't looking for a relationship if the right person came along.
> 
> What happens if a man tells a lady he is looking for a relationship and the woman changes her usual strategy of sleeping with men on the first date to making this guy wait? I have heard women who do this depending on the 'sort of man' they go on a date with.
> 
> I don't see a problem with saying you are looking for a relationship then if sex happens with them at that early a point, deciding it's not what you are into. Maybe it was good sex but you aren't really feeling it. Or whether sexist or not, as a general rule don't seriously date women that have sex with them that early.



There's current phenomenon where people keep FWB to meet their sexual needs while going on dates to see if the "right person comes along". Many, many, many people (particularly men) get their panties in a knot when they hear the person they are dating is having sex with someone else and not them. This is essential the reverse of what you presented above where someone is having sex in order to find the "right person".


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> There's current phenomenon where people keep FWB to meet their sexual needs while going on dates to see if the "right person comes along". Many, many, many people (particularly men) get their panties in a knot when they hear the person they are dating is having sex with someone else and not them. This is essential the reverse of what you presented above where someone is having sex in order to find the "right person".


Umm....yuk....:|


----------



## Buddy400

Cletus said:


> Perhaps at 21 you don't realize that you're doing something that will limit your future relationship choices.


That's the issue. I have absolutely no problem with people making decisions with the full knowledge of the potential future consequences.

It would be a shame though, if those actions were made not having any idea of the possible consequences and then, 10 years later the consequence of those choices became clear. Had they known that, they might have made different choices.

It should be made clear to young women that some men have a problem with a high number of casual sex partners. It's easy enough at 18 or 21 to say "I wouldn't be interested in any guy who thought like that anyway" but, at 30, dating a wonderful guy (in every other way) it may not be so easy to follow through on..


----------



## Lila

Laurentium said:


> It seems to me, in my own experience, that "dating" is much much more work, time, (and expense) than being in a stable relationship. I could spend 40 minutes every day just "managing" OK cupid. And then the time of setting up and having "dates" with a string of strangers, are you telling me they are doing that *not* in the hope of finding someone, but just for entertainment? When they are short of time and energy? That they are not looking to make an emotional commitment, but just to spend evenings with strangers? I find it hard to believe.


For reference, swipe apps are much easier to handle than say Match or Ok Cupid. All it takes is one swipe with the right person and you're in. 

As far as the intention of "dates" from online connections... I think it works the same as Meetup where people gladly meetup with total strangers who share a similar hobby/favorite activity/culture, etc.. Some people go on "dates" simply for the company. Others go to find someone with whom to meet their sexual needs. Others yet want to find an emotional connection. There's a key to every lock. I don't attribute my personal values to anyone else's intentions. 




Laurentium said:


> So what do they get out of it, if it's not someone who they know well enough to get emotional contact from? Is it really just the actual sex? I mean, most people can do better with some porn and a vibrator if it's just the orgasm.


I can't answer your question above but I do know that there are people who enjoy sex because it's pleasurable and do not engage in it for emotional connection; others use sex to emotionally bond. I know I asked this question a few months ago when a male TAM member stated that men just need their belly full and their balls empty. There were a lot of opinions on the matter with some men stating they didn't emotionally connect during sex but it was a basic need for them.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> Umm....yuk....:|


Hate the game, not the player.


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> There's current phenomenon where people keep FWB to meet their sexual needs while going on dates to see if the "right person comes along". Many, many, many people (particularly men) get their panties in a knot when they hear the person they are dating is having sex with someone else and not them. This is essential the reverse of what you presented above where someone is having sex in order to find the "right person".


I never got my panties in a knot about it before we decided we were exclusive.

But I did dump them if they were. Not out of malice or being judgy, I just didn't like the drama. I've had all kinds of relationships, including flings and WFB-kinda deals (before they were called that). But if I even asked out someone that I was actually interested in dating, I'd immediately call off everything else before I even took them out for the first time.

It's just the way I rolled. I've tried to date women that were also dating other guys, and I've tried to date while dating others. Just became all dramatic and stupid.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Lila said:


> There's current phenomenon where people keep FWB to meet their sexual needs while going on dates to see if the "right person comes along". Many, many, many people (particularly men) get their panties in a knot when they hear the person they are dating is having sex with someone else and not them. This is essential the reverse of what you presented above where someone is having sex in order to find the "right person".


Depends I guess on if the FWB stops after you had a date and hit it off and went on a second. If I had been on a few dates with a woman and found she had a FWB on the side, that would be it. 

But when I was dating, if I found someone that I was into then I would stop looking and explore that relationship. If you keep different partners on swivel, I'm not sure you will ever find the right person.

But many men that do spin plates have no intention to commit and convey that to the women too.


----------



## Lila

Marduk said:


> I never got my panties in a knot about it before we decided we were exclusive.
> 
> But I did dump them if they were. Not out of malice or being judgy, I just didn't like the drama. I've had all kinds of relationships, including flings and WFB-kinda deals (before they were called that). But if I even asked out someone that I was actually interested in dating, I'd immediately call off everything else before I even took them out for the first time.
> 
> It's just the way I rolled. I've tried to date women that were also dating other guys, and I've tried to date while dating others. Just became all dramatic and stupid.


It's a different world we live in these days. 

Read any singles forum and you'll learn:

1) Do no assume the other person is seeing (or having sex with) only you unless you have had the "exclusivity" talk.
2) Exclusivity must be defined because to some it means sexually exclusive but open to date others (no sex). To others it means a dating trial period where both are getting to know each other to the exclusion of others.
3) Down to Relationship (DTR) talks are what defines a committed relationship. These can happen as part of the exclusivity talk or after the trial period.


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> Hate the game, not the player.


I'm an equal opportunity hater.

The people doing this are pegging my lowlife meter in the red.

I hate that game and have negative respect for any player of it.

Yuk is the only word.

I have an explosive revulsion to sharing partners and the thought of a woman, trying to land me with another man's scent recently on her is vile.


----------



## Lila

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Depends I guess on if the FWB stops after you had a date and hit it off and went on a second. If I had been on a few dates with a woman and found she had a FWB on the side, that would be it.


Read my response to @Marduk. That's just not how it works nowadays.



UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> But when I was dating, if I found someone that I was into then I would stop looking and explore that relationship. *If you keep different partners on swivel, I'm not sure you will ever find the right person.*
> 
> But many men that do spin plates have no intention to commit and convey that to the women too.


I agree to the bolded. Based on trial and error, I waited until the 4th date with someone before I stopped looking/dating others. That's also about the time I brought up exclusivity with the person with whom I wanted to get involved. That's happened exactly twice since my separation 18 months ago.


----------



## Buddy400

Cletus said:


> Well then we'll have to disagree. I've seen so many retroactive jealousy threads here that I think people can be forgiven for at least worrying what their partner will think and do based on something they do not personally regret but cannot change.


There are two kinds of "regret".

One is sort of "meta-regret". If you are happy with your present condition, then you shouldn't regret things in the past which were a part of putting you in your current good circumstances. In this view, I don't regret marrying my crazy ex wife. After all, if I hadn't gone through that I wouldn't have met my wonderful wife of 30 years and I wouldn't have learned some things that helped my current marriage thrive. 

However, it was a terrible choice to marry her and I'd be a fool to think that I made a good choice in doing so. So, in that respect, I regret marrying her.

My wife was promiscuous before she met me. She regrets the decisions she made prior to that; she was having sex with men trying to fill a hole in her self esteem and only ended up digging it deeper. She was very unhappy, realized that she had been making poor decisions and vowed to make better ones in the future. She attained levels of happiness and satisfaction being married to me that she had always thought were unavailable to her. However, if she hadn't gone through what she did, she never would have met me. So, should she regret her early promiscuity? She says she does.

Regretting (or some better term) past actions does matter. Let's say that a woman who hates giving oral sex had done it in the past because she lacked the will or self esteem to refuse. Now, she's more mature, her current SO would like oral sex but she says "no". Her SO becomes aware that she's done it in the past. 

Does it make a difference if she says 

1) "Yes, I did it in the past, I don't regret it at all but I'm still not going to do it for you" 

or

2) "Yes, I did it in the past even though I hated it because I was too weak to stand up for myself. I regret having done that. Now that I am more mature, I am not going to do it for you or anyone else because I don't like doing it"


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Lila said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Depends I guess on if the FWB stops after you had a date and hit it off and went on a second. If I had been on a few dates with a woman and found she had a FWB on the side, that would be it.
> 
> 
> 
> Read my response to @Marduk. That's just not how it works nowadays.
Click to expand...

That's fine, but that would be curtains for me. I never encountered that and I'm not far removed from the dating market. I could usually gage something like that pretty well by the first date (coming from a guy who was oblivious his wife was cheating on him lol).


----------



## Buddy400

Andy1001 said:


> So on your very first date you let her know that she was being evaluated, you were giving her a trial run to see if she could meet your exacting standards.
> I’m surprised she didn’t tell you to go and **** yourself.


Everyone is being evaluated on a first date.

Why should sexual history be an exception?

Sounds like she brought it up, which most people recommend should be done as early as possible.


----------



## JustTheWife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> ...
> 
> Introduce the sexual revolution and all its party gifts of latex and pills and IUDs and everything is changed. Women can act as men now. But there is this itch in my hind brain that is saying something ain't right here... Religion and morality put aside.





Dreadful Penny said:


> Strange how people see things, i doubt that i would meet some posters criteria, i had sex first at 15 and between 18 and 20 spent my life clubbing often drinking far to much and often with a nose full of coke and a lot of ONS and no strings sex.
> 
> At 21 i had a ten month try anything and everything sex fest with a 39 year old divorced man.
> 
> This however does not define who i an now, i have been faithful to my husband since i met him this is me now, I also consider my younger selfs actions to be perfectly acceptable.


Some of that sounds like me. I was from a religious background but rebelled and drank and had a lot of ONS and got involved with the wrong guys (sex fest as you call it - like guys who wanted to share me and trade me with their friends and stuff like that).

I have to say that this takes its toll so I can relate to the first view above. In way you're like wow this is so liberating but in another way, it kind of felt like it was eroding my soul. Just speaking for myself as a female, it made me feel used to some degree. Of course you could say that it take two to tango or whatever so I could be using these guys, but to UpsideDown's point, I think men and women are different with sex. I mean the guy is *inside your body* when it comes down to it. And when the guy is a stranger, it might feel good and be exciting in some ways, but in other ways, it can feel...well...just wrong to have a stranger inside of you. So intimate yet with absolutely no connection. Even if you're on birth control, I think women are wired differently than men and related to the consequences of sex like UpsideDown says. So having sex with a guy who walks away right after can leave you feeling abandoned, scared, and alone and unprotected - even if there is no way you're going to get pregnant. Just speaking for myself.

Like I said, it's complicated and there's not just one way that I feel about my past but in the end, as much as I wanted it to feel liberating like the sexual revolution likes to make it seem, for me, having a stranger on top of me and inside my body felt more degrading and wrong than liberating. And it was like cumulative for me. The more I did it, the more I felt like I was giving more and more of myself away, over and over. Sacrificing a part of me. At some points it felt like there was nothing left to me.

I'm married but I sometimes struggle with my promiscuous past and it makes me sad and depressed sometimes.


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> It's a different world we live in these days.
> 
> Read any singles forum and you'll learn:
> 
> 1) Do no assume the other person is seeing (or having sex with) only you unless you have had the "exclusivity" talk.
> 2) Exclusivity must be defined because to some it means sexually exclusive but open to date others (no sex). To others it means a dating trial period where both are getting to know each other to the exclusion of others.
> 3) Down to Relationship (DTR) talks are what defines a committed relationship. These can happen as part of the exclusivity talk or after the trial period.


And what I'm saying is that was always my base assumption, even 20 years ago. All of that. I would assume that we weren't exclusive until we decided we were. And just roll with that.

Except if I discovered while dating, or while having the 'exclusivity' talk that she was also dating/sleeping with other guys up to that point, that I would just bow out. Because for me, if I was actually into the person, I'd shut all the other stuff down and focus on her. If she hadn't already done that, then my interpretation was that she wasn't that into me. And I don't compete for women.

I wouldn't go all neanderthal about it, or be judgy about her sex life - I'd just say it wasn't working out and end things before it became even more serious. But that's me!

Let me give you an example. I was dating a girl that I was super into before I met my wife. I actually was head over heels in love with her, and we had been explicit about it being a casual relationship. She absolutely would not commit. It was a very messy relationship, but such is life.

Anyway, I throw a party one night and she can't come. There's this hot girl there that is all over me. And I play it off all night. She gets frustrated with me, and just takes my hand and drags me into my own bedroom and says "we're going to shag now." I said no, she asks why (hot girls get confused when you won't sleep with them). I said I was dating someone, and even though it was casual and it wouldn't be cheating, that I didn't want to mess up whatever that was. So I didn't sleep with her. 

Anyway, a few weeks later, the girl I was casually dating goes away. Makes out with some dude. She tells me about it - we had agreed to not being monogamous, but we agreed to tell each other if there was someone else involved. At that moment, even though I was still in love with her, I just bowed out of the race. I made it clear that it wasn't because she broke any commitment to me - in fact, she upheld it. It was just that it was clear that I was way more serious about her than she was with me. So we split up. Remained friendly after, so there was no animosity.

That's kind of what I mean. Don't assume until you have the conversation. But for me, if she didn't drop whatever side pieces or flings she was having when I came in the picture, I took that as a sign she just wasn't that into me, or wasn't in a place to date seriously.


----------



## Buddy400

Dreadful Penny said:


> Strange how people see things, i doubt that i would meet some posters criteria, i had sex first at 15 and between 18 and 20 spent my life clubbing often drinking far to much and often with a nose full of coke and a lot of ONS and no strings sex.


I understand that nothing done sexually by a woman in the past is ever to be regretted under any circumstances.

But, three years of "clubbing, often drinking far too much and often with a nose full of coke" is never to be regretted either?

Although, it is a lot of fun if you come out of that alive and without having permanently ****ed up your life (which both you and I seem to have achieved).


----------



## ReformedHubby

Lila said:


> There's current phenomenon where people keep FWB to meet their sexual needs while going on dates to see if the "right person comes along". Many, many, many people (particularly men) get their panties in a knot when they hear the person they are dating is having sex with someone else and not them. This is essential the reverse of what you presented above where someone is having sex in order to find the "right person".


I have been in this situation twice and in a weird way it made me feel bad for the other guys. Assuming my FWB was being honest with me, I guess I found it odd that they would go out on dates looking for someone serious and make that guy wait for sex, but still be sleeping with me. I should also add that both started as ONS with me, so its possible they were sleeping with the other guys they went on dates with too, but just weren't honest with me about it. But I doubt it, because when I am in an FWB situation with someone I truly am their actual friend. Meaning they actually talk to me about the guys they go on dates with and even show me pics, and even ask me for advice. Its kind of a strange spot to be in. Its not like you're friend zoned, but at the same time you aren't viewed as relationship material either. I don't begrudge people for putting me in this box, because it was obvious to anyone that met me at certain times that I really didn't have a clue what I wanted, but was still generally fun to hang out with. Of the two situations I had like this, I do think one of them probably was hoping I would commit, the other...well she was just a player, it was a don't call me I'll call you kind of situation LoL. It was an off and on thing depending on what she she had going on in her life. 

But sadly and hypocritically so (hey at least I am admitting it). I can't be on the other side of that fence. If a woman is sleeping with someone else as an FWB while trying to date me seriously, and on top of that I am not getting laid. It would make me feel like I don't really do it for her. Not to sound like those sad she did it for him but not for me threads. But thats not a situation that works for me. I'd imagine when her physical needs are being met elsewhere, I wouldn't think being intimate with me would be a priority. I certainly wouldn't sit around and wait for her to deem me worthy. So I agree, I think it would be an issue for a lot of men. With that said men do this all the time, sleep around until they find someone they really like, I don't think we are as upfront about it. The term non-exclusive just sounds so much better I guess, but I think we all know what it means. I would think most people male or female wouldn't want to hear the words "I banged my FWB last night but I'm on a first date with you today". I think if you're that upfront about it would be a total turn off.


----------



## Married but Happy

ConanHub said:


> I've always thought that once men get experienced, it averages out for them having an easier time getting casual sex.


IMO, it gets _easier_, but for _most_ men it is rarely _easy_ at any age. And many men never become good enough at meeting and attracting women to have much success. 

IMO, most women can pick up a man almost anywhere, anytime, but usually don't because of the risks they'd have to avoid to do so - often, the rewards are not sufficient, especially for a first encounter.


----------



## Dreadful Penny

No I come from a very liberal atheist family and tbh i was mostly the one in control, if i did not want sex with you then it was not going to happen.

This is the man who fks a lot is a stud but the woman who does the same is a w.... never have i subscribed to that BS.

The sexfest i had was great from my point of veiw i never felt used and over 25 years later ihave zero regrets

Sex is good sex is fun, it is to be enjoyed.


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> Read my response to @Marduk. That's just not how it works nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree to the bolded. Based on trial and error, I waited until the 4th date with someone before I stopped looking/dating others. That's also about the time I brought up exclusivity with the person with whom I wanted to get involved. That's happened exactly twice since my separation 18 months ago.


I'd have a lot of first dates.

If I was on 4 dates and we weren't sleeping together and totally into each other, I'd be gone. 

I also had a lot of first dates with stuff like:

Me: "Hey, you're great and this was super fun. What are you doing this Friday, I have tickets to this thing you might be into."

Her: "Oh, too bad, that sounds great, but I'm actually on a date with this other guy I just met Friday. How about Saturday?"

Me: "I totally get it, no biggie. How about this: I really think you're cool, how about you give me a call if you're ever not seeing anybody else and we see what happens? I'm not really looking for a casual thing."

And then I would end it on the spot. If she calls me, she calls me. If I was single if she did, we'd see what happened. If she didn't, so be it. I basically went into it with the mindset that if she wasn't that into me to focus on me, I'd find someone else that did.

Basically what I'm saying here is if you're not blown away by this guy on the first 3 dates, and he's not blown away by you, then keep on moving.


----------



## Lila

ReformedHubby said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's current phenomenon where people keep FWB to meet their sexual needs while going on dates to see if the "right person comes along". Many, many, many people (particularly men) get their panties in a knot when they hear the person they are dating is having sex with someone else and not them. This is essential the reverse of what you presented above where someone is having sex in order to find the "right person".
> 
> 
> 
> I have been in this situation twice and in a weird way it made me feel bad for the other guys. Assuming my FWB was being honest with me, I guess I found it odd that they would go out on dates looking for someone serious and make that guy wait for sex, but still be sleeping with me. I should also add that both started as ONS with me, so its possible they were sleeping with the other guys they went on dates with too, but just weren't honest with me about it. But I doubt it, because when I am in an FWB situation with someone I truly am their actual friend. Meaning they actually talk to me about the guys they go on dates with and even show me pics, and even ask me for advice. Its kind of a strange spot to be in. Its not like you're friend zoned, but at the same time you aren't viewed as relationship material either. I don't begrudge people for putting me in this box, because it was obvious to anyone that met me at certain times that I really didn't have a clue what I wanted, but was still generally fun to hang out with. Of the two situations I had like this, I do think one of them probably was hoping I would commit, the other...well she was just a player, it was a don't call me I'll call you kind of situation LoL. It was an off and on thing depending on what she she had going on in her life.
> 
> But sadly and hypocritically so (hey at least I am admitting it). I can't be on the other side of that fence. If a woman is sleeping with someone else as an FWB while trying to date me seriously, and on top of that I am not getting laid. It would make me feel like I don't really do it for her. Not to sound like those sad she did it for him but not for me threads. But thats not a situation that works for me. I'd imagine when her physical needs are being met elsewhere, I wouldn't think being intimate with me would be a priority. I certainly wouldn't sit around and wait for her to deem me worthy. So I agree, I think it would be an issue for a lot of men. With that said men do this all the time, sleep around until they find someone they really like, I don't think we are as upfront about it. The term non-exclusive just sounds so much better I guess, but I think we all know what it means. I would think most people male or female wouldn't want to hear the words "I banged my FWB last night but I'm on a first date with you today". * I think if you're that upfront about it would be a total turn off.*
Click to expand...

I think the healthiest dating situations I've been in were with men who were very upfront about their intentions. They didn't care what was going on beforehand but were clear about what they expected moving forward. The two men I've had the exclusivity talks with since my separation were like this. 

I did have occasions where men asked if I was seeing other people. My response was always "are we having the relationship talk?". That was enough to make them change the topic real quick.


----------



## Lila

Marduk said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read my response to @Marduk. That's just not how it works nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree to the bolded. Based on trial and error, I waited until the 4th date with someone before I stopped looking/dating others. That's also about the time I brought up exclusivity with the person with whom I wanted to get involved. That's happened exactly twice since my separation 18 months ago.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd have a lot of first dates.
> 
> If I was on 4 dates and we weren't sleeping together and totally into each other, I'd be gone.
> 
> I also had a lot of first dates with stuff like:
> 
> Me: "Hey, you're great and this was super fun. What are you doing this Friday, I have tickets to this thing you might be into."
> 
> Her: "Oh, too bad, that sounds great, but I'm actually on a date with this other guy I just met Friday. How about Saturday?"
> 
> Me: "I totally get it, no biggie. How about this: I really think you're cool, how about you give me a call if you're ever not seeing anybody else and we see what happens? I'm not really looking for a casual thing."
> 
> And then I would end it on the spot. If she calls me, she calls me. If I was single if she did, we'd see what happened. If she didn't, so be it. I basically went into it with the mindset that if she wasn't that into me to focus on me, I'd find someone else that did.
Click to expand...

You haven't been single in 20+ years. Times have changed. 

And no, I don't sleep with guys unless we're in an exclusive relationship. One that has been discussed and agreed upon. 

Of the 33 first dates, 7 made it to three dates and only 2 made it to four dates. Again, through trial and error I learned three dates seems to be the cut-off for guys looking for just sex or where we'd shared enough information to determine if we were really compatible. I really can't imagine having had sex with all of those three date guys. Just not my cup of tea.


----------



## Yeswecan

Lila said:


> In all fairness, even virgins can be psycho. It's impossible to tell until someone has been dating a while. It's just the risk one takes when they invite other people into their lives.


And some of the reasons(now I'm assuming) the OP does not want to be part of the ONS/casual sex dating game. ONS opens a person up to all types of STD or crazy/phsyco other party involved. These days, it is not worth the risk IMO.


----------



## Andy1001

Yeswecan said:


> And some of the reasons(no I'm assuming) the OP does not want to be part of the ONS/casual sex dating game. ONS opens a person up to all types of STD or crazy/phsyco other party involved. These days, it is not worth the risk IMO.


You seem to have elevated the op to some sort of statesman like status. 
Have you actually read the thread?
He had sex with this woman on their first date and subsequently kept having sex with her. For whatever reasons he changed his mind but instead of being a decent human being and just breaking up with her, maybe telling her he wasn’t feeling it he told her that her promiscuity was the cause of the break up. 
Hypocrisy much?


----------



## barry35

Andy1001 said:


> You seem to have elevated the op to some sort of statesman like status.
> Have you actually read the thread?
> He had sex with this woman on their first date and subsequently kept having sex with her. For whatever reasons he changed his mind but instead of being a decent human being and just breaking up with her, maybe telling her he wasn’t feeling it he told her that her promiscuity was the cause of the break up.
> Hypocrisy much?


When i went on that first date it was not my intention to have sex with her, far from it, she did suggest herself that we go somewhere private after spending a few hours together.

Also i really tried to make it work but realised that her past would bother me in the long run, because our first date went not as i expected it would it was difficult for me to make up my mind on how i felt right away. it took almost a month to decide that i could not accept her past.

I believe I was a hypocrite but in a non deliberate way.


----------



## Andy1001

barry35 said:


> When i went on that first date it was not my intention to have sex with her, far from it, she did suggest herself that we go somewhere private after spending a few hours together.
> 
> Also i really tried to make it work but realised that her past would bother me in the long run, because our first date went not as i expected it would it was difficult for me to make up my mind on how i felt right away. it took almost a month to decide that i could not accept her past.
> 
> I believe I was a hypocrite but in a non deliberate way.


Look buddy unless she tied you down and fed you viagra then you could have walked away. 
Or does an erection trump morality in your ideology.


----------



## Yeswecan

Andy1001 said:


> You seem to have elevated the op to some sort of statesman like status.
> Have you actually read the thread?
> He had sex with this woman on their first date and subsequently kept having sex with her. For whatever reasons he changed his mind but instead of being a decent human being and just breaking up with her, maybe telling her he wasn’t feeling it he told her that her promiscuity was the cause of the break up.
> Hypocrisy much?


You seemed incorrectly. I have no mention of what had taken place with the XGF nor have need to. I answered to dating ONS/casual sex/promiscuity....it is something the OP does not care for. Is it wrong or weird? No it is not. Was it not good to practice what he is preaching. No, it was not good. OP should not participate in a ONS to only judge the other involved. I hope OP grows a little bit from the experience.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Andy1001 said:


> barry35 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When i went on that first date it was not my intention to have sex with her, far from it, she did suggest herself that we go somewhere private after spending a few hours together.
> 
> Also i really tried to make it work but realised that her past would bother me in the long run, because our first date went not as i expected it would it was difficult for me to make up my mind on how i felt right away. it took almost a month to decide that i could not accept her past.
> 
> I believe I was a hypocrite but in a non deliberate way.
> 
> 
> 
> Look buddy unless she tied you down and fed you viagra then you could have walked away.
> Or does an erection trump morality in your ideology.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me she couldn't keep her mouth shut on her sexual exploits and it kinda grossed him out - she's a playa... he figured out after a few weeks that it wouldn't work out and was truthful. I see nothing wrong with that. Is making up a fake reason and letting her guess what really caused the breakup better?


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Yeswecan said:


> Disease free...you are assuming. Not-pshycho? How does one tell? Have we not all done this? Nope.


No one said it was risk free. You buy a ticket and takes yo chances. 😎


----------



## barry35

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Sounds to me she couldn't keep her mouth shut on her sexual exploits and it kinda grossed him out - she's a playa... he figured out after a few weeks that it wouldn't work out and was truthful. I see nothing wrong with that. Is making up a fake reason and letting her guess what really caused the breakup better?


After our break up she sent me diffent texts saying how sorry she was and how she was used by her casual partner. I believe she was trying to manipulate me into believing that she was manipulated in turn by her partner but given her age 32 she should take full consequence of her actions.


----------



## TAMAT

Barry,

Kudos for acting before long term distrust and retroactive jealousy took hold.

What's more common on this website is that men marry women with a hidden past and only find out too late after they are married, and find out about an ex contacting their wife.

The separation of love and sex is something I would have a issue with as well, I could picture someone like that having casual sex in a closet at work and rationalizing that it was just sex and meant nothing. 

There is also an issue in that her ex'es will always be a part of her life and may try to return to her for money/lodging/food/sex/comfort , it's what loser men do. Do the ex'es know who she is? 

Were any of them married?


----------



## barry35

TAMAT said:


> Barry,
> 
> Kudos for acting before long term distrust and retroactive jealousy took hold.
> 
> What's more common on this website is that men marry women with a hidden past and only find out too late after they are married, and find out about an ex contacting their wife.
> 
> The separation of love and sex is something I would have a issue with as well, I could picture someone like that having casual sex in a closet at work and rationalizing that it was just sex and meant nothing.
> 
> There is also an issue in that her ex'es will always be a part of her life and may try to return to her for money/lodging/food/sex/comfort , it's what loser men do. Do the ex'es know who she is?
> 
> Were any of them married?



When we met she was in regular contact with two of them and i asked her to cut contact with them altogether as if she had fallen off the face of the earth. She made a big deal out of it and even mentioned it to me during and afer the break break up, as some kind of huge sacrifice she made for me.

As to them using her for money/lodging etc. i don't know. I never asked her questions about them, it might have been a possibility, i didn't think of it at the time.

One of them was divorced, the other was single and about 5 years younger than her.


----------



## Mr. Nail

I used to think I couldn't be interested in sex outside of an emotionally fulfilling committed relationship. Funny how that changes when your relationship becomes a convenient, comfortable, available relationship. Commitment and emotional connection faded but the sex is still appealing. 
How would I know what would attract me now. Perhaps an invitation to find somewhere private would do it even for a convenient stranger. 
I'll tell you this, I'm intellectually more interested in the Anything goes sex every day relationship, than the solid provider baby daddy role.


----------



## TAMAT

Barry,

You wrote, *She made a big deal out of it and even mentioned it to me during and afer the break break up, as some kind of huge sacrifice she made for me.*

So she remained in some kind of "poly" or "open" relationship mindset, that is more troubling than even her past. 

And she had sex with you at the same time as two other guys were you aware of that, with all the STD risk it put you at.


----------



## barry35

TAMAT said:


> Barry,
> 
> You wrote, *She made a big deal out of it and even mentioned it to me during and afer the break break up, as some kind of huge sacrifice she made for me.*
> 
> So she remained in some kind of "poly" or "open" relationship mindset, that is more troubling than even her past.
> 
> And she had sex with you at the same time as two other guys were you aware of that, with all the STD risk it put you at.



She promised she would only have sex exlusively with me from the get go. I also asked her about stds before having sex and she told me she was clean because she had a test done recently.

But you are right otherwise, i could not have been sure of her claims and promises but i decided to take my chances. I have decided to take an std test soon. I do not think she had sex with anyone else in the meanwhile because we pretty much spent every night and most days together from the first date so her opportunites to do that were slim but not impossible. I didn't knew her for very long so i never trusted her words to the 100%.

Aso you are quite right about her mindset. after the break up she told me to call her anytime for casual sex and i became somewhat angry given that it was the very reason why i left her.


----------



## manfromlamancha

This is an interesting thread indeed.

I don't know exactly what details were shared with the OP by his ex, but here are some of my thoughts on this:



I believe that you have to be attracted to and at least like the person you are going to sleep with. Else (in the case of males) if it's just a question of a hole to stick it into, then there are plenty of holes to stick it into.


Organizing one's life around finding meaningless sex may be OK for some especially if they have a very busy life occupied with other things and sex is just something that they need to have from time to time with no complications. However, life is rarely that simple and it can lead to feelings being hurt from time to time. Better to have some sort of feelings for the one you are sleeping with.


I applaud someone for deciding that the facts he heard were going to come back and bite everyone in the bum and letting go of the relationship before real damage was done further down the line.


And for whoever asked the question, an erect penis almost always trumps most things in the heat of the moment.


----------



## ConanHub

barry35 said:


> She promised she would only have sex exlusively with me from the get go. I also asked her about stds before having sex and she told me she was clean because she had a test done recently.
> 
> But you are right otherwise, i could not have been sure of her claims and promises but i decided to take my chances. I have decided to take an std test soon. I do not think she had sex with anyone else in the meanwhile because we pretty much spent every night and most days together from the first date so her opportunites to do that were slim but not impossible. I didn't knew her for very long so i never trusted her words to the 100%.
> 
> Aso you are quite right about her mindset. after the break up she told me to call her anytime for casual sex and i became somewhat angry given that it was the very reason why i left her.


Ouch.

You might be a little hypocritical but I get it.

Her mindset was wrong and I couldn't tolerate it unless she had it very firmly in her past.

I could honestly be with anyone with almost any past, including prostitute or porn star, as long as she had really left it behind and didn't approve of it.

Current views matter however.

Mrs. Conan was the OW twice and cheated in both her marriages before me.

The woman I met was a changed woman who has been fiercely loyal and supportive of me.

As long as the past is in the past, I'm good with who a woman is when I meet her, obviously.:smile2:


----------



## Lila

@barry35 you state you met this woman in December and dated for a month. A month is not a very long time so good of you to let her go without wasting any more of either of your time. I hope you won't make the same mistake of sleeping with someone unless they meet your criteria.


----------



## BruceBanner

barry35 said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> Im a male, 35 years old and I'm writting this post just to have another point of view from other people on casual sex and One night stands. As the relationship i have in mind is now over i'm not trying to seek any advice however although i wouid welcome suggestions of how otherwise i could have handled the situation.
> 
> I was single for a few years before me latest relationship and then i met somone in december. We used to get along quite well and never had any major argumens. My then girlfriend was quite upfront about her past and told me the she was into casual sex and also one night stands before meeting me and at first i was ok with it although never very comfortamble around it. During our time together however i'd hear different details and stories of her past and I started to feel more and more uncomfortable about it. Finally i had to end our relationship as i decided it was going to be very upseting for me in the long term having to re think some of the detalis that my ex told me.
> 
> That is pretty much the story. I would appreciate if I were to hear thoughts on the matter, other points of view and any type of constructive contribution.


What was it exactly that made you change your mind about the relationship?


----------



## phillybeffandswiss

barry35 said:


> When we met she was in regular contact with two of them and i asked her to cut contact with them altogether as if she had fallen off the face of the earth. She made a big deal out of it and even mentioned it to me during and afer the break break up, as some kind of huge sacrifice she made for me.
> 
> As to them using her for money/lodging etc. i don't know. I never asked her questions about them, it might have been a possibility, i didn't think of it at the time.
> 
> One of them was divorced, the other was single and about 5 years younger than her.





barry35 said:


> She promised she would only have sex exlusively with me from the get go. I also asked her about stds before having sex and she told me she was clean because she had a test done recently.
> 
> But you are right otherwise, i could not have been sure of her claims and promises but i decided to take my chances. I have decided to take an std test soon. I do not think she had sex with anyone else in the meanwhile because we pretty much spent every night and most days together from the first date so her opportunites to do that were slim but not impossible. I didn't knew her for very long so i never trusted her words to the 100%.
> 
> Aso you are quite right about her mindset. after the break up she told me to call her anytime for casual sex and i became somewhat angry given that it was the very reason why i left her.


Welcome to TAM. What you learned with this thread is choose your words carefully and give all information. 


Thanks, this is what I needed to know. I thought it was something like this.


----------



## As'laDain

hmm...

im definitely non-monogamous, but im not interested in casual sex. im not asexual by any means, but i find nothing appealing in having a ONS. 

i could probably carry on a FWB type of relationship with someone that i really like and trust, but the relationship would have to be based on more than sex. it would have to be friends first, or sex never...


----------



## jlg07

After reading this thread, all I can say is THANK GOD I'm not single/dating. I would never be able to do it.
Casual sex is abhorrent to me. FWB while dating others is AWFUL (to ME). I just cheapens the whole thing in my opinion.
Sex is MEANT to bond two people together -- I'm sure everyone here knows of the hormonal changes we go through when we have sex.

I did have ONE ONS when I was young, dumb, and full of.. hormones. I regretted it a TON the next day (drunk, at a bar, dancing, out to the car, etc.).

I had one other "ONS" but that's because after being with this girl, I found out she had a BF and had sent him home from the party (I was playing in the band at the party). I sort of knew her, but obviously NOT enough about her dating life (sister of a friend, and had met her a few times in that context -- I was VERY interested to have this be a relationship). Once I found out what she did, I was done.

How many times have cheaters used "It was only sex". Does that make it all better? The idea of sex without emotions just doesn't do it for ME. For those who can separate/compartmentalize this out, I guess good for you. 
I think it just cheapens the whole thing. AGAIN, this is for me.

After reading what a typical dating environment is like these days(TY @Lila for that!), all I can say is.... I need to go hug my wife.


EDT: Also, just in case, I don't think it's OK for men to sleep around and women not to. I don't think either should be doing casual sex. As for the argument that you WANT to have sex with someone who's been around and have experience, I think that's BS also. I think learning together about sex is a tremendous part of the fun of being together. I think most of the "they had no previous experience" causing issues is because the couple doesn't really know how to communicate with each other --- esp. being open/honest about sex with each other.


----------



## Lila

jlg07 said:


> After reading what a typical dating environment is like these days(TY @Lila for that!), all I can say is.... I need to go hug my wife.


Yes you should go hug your wife....and tell her how awesome you think she is.:wink2:


----------



## jlg07

Lila said:


> Yes you should go hug your wife....and tell her how awesome you think she is.:wink2:


I do this EVERY SINGLE day for sure! (and she does the same to me!). (The more I get to hug her, the better....)


----------



## She'sStillGotIt

Looks like Barry's left the building but in case he comes back...



barry35 said:


> Aso you are quite right about her mindset. after the break up she told me to call her anytime for casual sex and i became somewhat angry given that it was the very reason why i left her.


 LOL. And her attitude about casual sex on your first date is what got you 'some,' and you sure weren't complaining about her loose attitude when you unzipped your pants, were you? And some more of that fun was one of the reasons you were driven to call her for a SECOND date. If you want me to believe that calling her again for a 2nd date *wasn't* driven by the possibility of more sex, then you have a better chance of shaking hands with Jesus than that happening.

I've never seen *anyone *back-pedal as much as the OP every time someone called him out for his utter hypocrisy. NUMEROUS times he's tried to play the victim and claimed that it was HER fault they had sex on the first date because it was her idea to go somewhere private and it was her intention that they have sex. Well gosh and golly, he's just a victim who went along with it because he's a guy - and that's what they do! 0

Freakin' unreal.


----------



## She'sStillGotIt

barry35 said:


> Now i realise that i could have said no because i got principles so we will not go anywhere to have sex on our first date but then I serioulsy doubt that you will find many men to do that. I didn't make any hints on my side that I wanted to be alone with her at that point.


 And there we have it, kiddies.

Men are allowed to have sex on the *first date* because ya know...they're guys, and what guy would turn THAT down? So of course he was entitled to jump right in there and get himself some when it was being offered on their first date. And OP, just because you called for a second date (and who are we kidding here - you wanted sex again and knew you'd get it by continuing to see her) doesn't magically cancel out the fact that you did the exact thing you feel so damned self-righteous pointing your finger at someone ELSE for doing.

"Do as I SAY, not as I DO," is apparently the motto of OP, who is the ultimate *hypocrite*.

According to the OP, women who choose to have sex on the first date or with someone they barely know don't have the same_* moral fiber*_ HE does, and he's got his boundaries, dammit! And he's allowed to force them on the women he dates even though *he's *completely happy to get himself laid on the first date with someone if the opportunity arises. Ya know, cause he's a _guy_ so it's ok.









Can we say judgmental *"hypocrite?"* Why yes, I think we *can*.

You did HER a favor breaking up with her. She doesn't need a hypocrite constantly judging every move she's ever made since she was born back in the 80's.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

She'sStillGotIt said:


> barry35 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now i realise that i could have said no because i got principles so we will not go anywhere to have sex on our first date but then I serioulsy doubt that you will find many men to do that. I didn't make any hints on my side that I wanted to be alone with her at that point.
> 
> 
> 
> And there we have it, kiddies.
> 
> Men are allowed to have sex on the *first date* because ya know...they're guys, and what guy would turn THAT down? So of course he was entitled to jump right in there and get himself some when it was being offered on their first date. And OP, just because you called for a second date (and who are we kidding here - you wanted sex again and knew you'd get it by continuing to see her) doesn't magically cancel out the fact that you did the exact thing you feel so damned self-righteous pointing your finger at someone ELSE for doing.
> 
> "Do as I SAY, not as I DO," is apparently the motto of OP, who is the ultimate *hypocrite*.
> 
> According to the OP, women who choose to have sex on the first date or with someone they barely know don't have the same_* moral fiber*_ HE does, and he's got his boundaries, dammit! And he's allowed to force them on the women he dates even though *he's *completely happy to get himself laid on the first date with someone if the opportunity arises. Ya know, cause he's a _guy_ so it's ok.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can we say judgmental *"hypocrite?"* Why yes, I think we *can*.
> 
> You did HER a favor breaking up with her. She doesn't need a hypocrite constantly judging every move she's ever made since she was born back in the 80's.
Click to expand...

There is a double standard. Men typically value virtuous women (in the sexual sense), however not many women value virtuous men. On a pure biological basis, men could go and spawn off thousands of offspring without consequence, whereas women couldn't do that until the easy access to birth control. The fallacy is men and women are the same, just with different parts. You are asking apple's to act as apple's but expecting oranges to act as apple's too.


----------



## hinterdir

Gross.
Never had any interest in anyone who was ever into this.


----------

