The First Date Shag Consequences..

Darlughda

Ok. Question for all you gentlemen in this forum.

Spotted a thread in PI just the now, and a fella stated honestly that if he sleeps with a girl on the first date, he would consider sleeping with her again, but not dating.

I was beyond shocked to say the least, after all, he slept with her!
What I am saying in do any of you, honestly, still have this kind of idea in your head - if she sleeps with you on first date-then no to dating just a potential ons or fb in the future?

Can you explain this double standard to me? Or give your honest reasoning if you agree with this? It just leaves me flabbergasted that these kind of old fashioned standards are still going strong today.....

amacachi

I don't see the double standard tbh, I'm untidy and wouldn't want to live with someone as untidy as me for example.

I can't envisage myself ever being in such a situation tbh, but if I were I wouldn't let it worry me.

Darlughda

amacachi wrote: »

I don't see the double standard tbh, I'm untidy and wouldn't want to live with someone as untidy as me for example.

I can't envisage myself ever being in such a situation tbh, but if I were I wouldn't let it worry me.

What.. what? Are we on the same thread Amacachi?

Stink on the inside

If a girl is sleeping with a guy on the first date then a lot of guys would look upon her as a bit of a slut/ loose woman, call it what you will..

Sleeping with her again is no problem also for said guys as it is a shag and is all a bit of fun..

But to date that girl and maybe someday have her as the father of said guys kids is a different story altogether.

Sleeping with guys on the first date = loose woman = may have had lots of sexual partners = not the type of woman most guys want to date.

On the other hand the more girls a guy has slept with is looked upon as a badge for a lot of guys.

Its a double standard yes, but if you look at it like this

Its generally easy for girls to go out and have many many sexual encounters, night after night.

It can take a lot of effort for guys to go out and bed a lot of girls.

Guys get cred for it, girls get dissed for it..

Elliejo

"But to date that girl and maybe someday have her as the father of said guys kids is a different story altogether".

Fair play to any girl who can change sex and father a child after sleeping with a guy on a first date.

Darlughda

Mod Edit: It's generally frowned on to quote posts from PI.

Is this really how men think nowadays in 2010? Honestly?

I'd expect this from 30 years ago, even 20..

But now?

Keptic

Darlughda wrote: »

a fella stated honestly that if he sleeps with a girl on the first date, he would consider sleeping with her again, but not dating.

I can only speak for myself.
It's all about the girl, not some silly rules. If she was amazing and most importantly "my type" I'd be mad into, I'd be an utter fool if I let her go.

Stink on the inside

Elliejo wrote: »

"But to date that girl and maybe someday have her as the father of said guys kids is a different story altogether".

Fair play to any girl who can change sex and father a child after sleeping with a guy on a first date.

Genius reply

Stink on the inside

Darlughda wrote: »

Is this really how men think nowadays in 2010? Honestly?

I'd expect this from 30 years ago, even 20..

But now?

Sadly I know quite a few guys that think like this, I myself slept with my current girlfriend on the first night and am still with her 9 months later.

amacachi

Darlughda wrote: »

What.. what? Are we on the same thread Amacachi?

Which bit weren't you clear on? You mentioned a "double standard" and I said that I didn't think it was a double standard.

I then went on to say that I don't imagine hopping quickly into bed with a woman, but if I did that it happen that I most likely wouldn't use it to judge whether that person was relationship material.

Goduznt Xzst

Darlughda wrote: »

Is this really how men think nowadays in 2010? Honestly?

Even though men want to have sex with women on impulse, we generally find sexual restraint in women appealing. The greater the chase usually, the higher the attraction and emotional investment.

A girl who gives in sexually without much hesitation may feed the mans sexual urges, but emotionally she has probably left him with nothing.

I don't know, do women generally find men who push for sex at the first opportunity great husband material? I don't think it is a double standard, I think it works both ways.

Darlughda

Wow. I am genuinely surprised so far. Its like in spite of the stigma I would..... reaction.

I really thought that kind of she 'puts out' on first date, therefore could be a 'loose' woman 1950's thinking had disappeared a while back along with the pledge, no sex before marriage and considering co-habiting as living in sin.

Jayzus, some women I know consider the shag on the first date essential as an extension of getting to know someone. No point prolonging the tension if there is no sexual compatibility kind of thinking.

I didn't realiase that there was such a gulf here in attitudes.

minidazzler

I know how alot of guys think of this, shag on first date, that means she's easy for everyone.

Me, I see it as a situation of neither party denying a simple pleasure, so if I sleep with a girl on the first date I am as likely, if not more likely, to ask her out again.

Girl I am currently dating I would have, for want of a condom, shagged on the first date, have a great time with her, personalities mesh very well, so I generally don't judge people on that bit, though, I would put a time limit on sex TBH. I probably wouldn't go on more than 4 or 5 dates without sex, if I wanted a new friend I wouldn't be on a date.

I am probably different from most guys though, at least I've been told so!

melekalikimaka

double standards yes
a fact that most men think it... yes

Darlughda

melekalikimaka wrote: »

double standards yes
a fact that most men think it... yes

So it seems melekalikimake (where on earth did your username come from btw?)

But surely there must be men here who are happy with sleeping with women on the first date to find out if they are sexually compatible or not?
And have no hang ups about previous or potential quantity of her sexual partners?

Novella

I'm not a guy, but if a guy was put off by the fact that I slept with him on a first date, fine. I'm not into putting time constraints on things like sex - when it happens, it happens, be that on a first date or the fiftieth... So, if that was something that bothered him, I guess we wouldn't work out in the long run anyway.

I don't really think it's a double standard. Some women would equally be turned off by that, maybe not for the same reasons, but different strokes for different folks and all that.

Stink on the inside

I dont have too much of a hangup about my girlfriend sleeping with me on the first night, follow your heart and if it feels right and all that..

On the other hand the amount of past sexual partners that she has had is really eating away at me. I'm trying to be logical and say to myself let the past be the past but Its getting to me.

Galvasean

Meh, most guys would be delighted to get some sex on a first date. I mean, heaven forbid a woman should enjoy sex too right?
I wouldn't look down on anyone for putting out on a first date. Do it when you both feel the time is right is my two cents. It could be the first date, could be the fifth, could be after many months of dating.
I'm not gonna be put off a girl I really like because she wants to have sex with me.

O Shea

Galvasean wrote: »

Meh, most guys would be delighted to get some sex on a first date. I mean, heaven forbid a woman should enjoy sex too right?
I wouldn't look down on anyone for putting out on a first date. Do it when you both feel the time is right is my two cents. It could be the first date, could be the fifth, could be after many months of dating.
I'm not gonna be put off a girl I really like because she wants to have sex with me.

I was aware that guy liked me as he continually chatted to me for 4 months every sat night - eventually because he was persistant and respectful I met him for coffee the one day. We hit it off in a way that wasn't possible in a pub or club and I realised that I really liked him. On our third date I slept with him as I knew he really liked me and I felt secure. Afterwards he complained that I had slept with him too quickly and I should have waited ! I had not been with someone in 12 months I explained I had waited long enough and finally met someone I felt I was comfortable with and went for it - am human after all. he said he didn't believe me re the 12 months and scolded me for it. We were togather happily enough for 6 years but the frickin' double standard is enough to drive a woman insane.

honru

The major biological reason behind this double standard is the male's need to ensure the parenthood of his child in relationships that extend past the "dating" phase. To the male mind, if a woman is perceived as promiscuous, the likelihood of her committing infidelity in the future increases. Thus, should childbirth occur, there is the lingering possibility that this child will have a different biological father.

If this scenario plays out, the father who believed the child to be his own has expended important resources and faculties on a child that is not biologically his, and furthermore will not pass on his genes to the next generation. Besides infertility, not being able to ensure parenthood is the biggest disadvantage men have in the mating department. It is why purity in women is so highly valued by men.

The other explanation is the madonna/whore complex. We wouldn't be so quick to accept affection from our mother if she was sleeping around a lot, and this seems to extends to our prospective partners.

Otis Driftwood

I generally avoid one night stands anyway so this isnt an issue for me however a few months ago I met a girl,instantly hit it off,spent the whole night together and she ended up coming home with me.We spend the next 2 or 3 months seeing eachother.

It didnt even remotely bother me that we had had sex on the first night.Ive always and will always operate a "dont ask dont tell" stance when it comes to past partners.

Wibbs

f®eak s©enery wrote: »

The major biological reason behind this double standard is the male's need to ensure the parenthood of his child in relationships that extend past the "dating" phase. To the male mind, if a woman is perceived as promiscuous, the likelihood of her committing infidelity in the future increases.

This has a lot to do with it I reckon. And today the consequences emotionally and financially of such an outcome make it as serious as it's ever been.

It depends on what is meant by first date shag too. Some can describe it in terms of already knowing someone as an acquaintance through mates or work and then you have a date and end up in bed together. Or the more modern one where you know someone online, maybe have had long chats on MSN and then meet and hook up. IMHO That's a very different scenario to meeting a complete stranger for the very first time at 10 PM and getting busy by 12. The latter would trouble me if I'm being honest. Why? OK for me it suggests someone who gets "caught up in the moment" and someone who makes value judgements based on that, especially if they're looking for a relationship on the back of it. Driven by passion/lust/love at first sight magical thinking etc. Not such a good bet IMHO for a stable considered long termer. Also IMHO and IME they're many times more likely to bolt when the emotion/passion waxes and wanes in a relationship as it will.

nedtheshed wrote: »

Ive always and will always operate a "dont ask dont tell" stance when it comes to past partners.

I do up to a point, but for all that I've learned through the years that previous actions tend to inform future ones, so if I'm making a serious emotional investment I'd like to know a bit about her past(and would expect her to want same from me).

So honestly speaking for myself? Would I consider a long termer after a first night shag with a complete stranger before that night? Nope. Though I would likely not go through with the deed, unless they were clear it was a ONS.

theofficepest

Clearly not all men think this way. Some women are backward, so are some a lot of men.

One person doesn't speak for all people. So if one person answer yes, men think like this, this is only what they think. Just avoid people like this.

One way to do this is to get to know someone before throwing it about. :pac:

Let me explain what I mean by backward, that would be judging someone for doing something you are freely engaging in also. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Greyfox

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

Even though men want to have sex with women on impulse, we generally find sexual restraint in women appealing. The greater the chase usually, the higher the attraction and emotional investment.

+1,000 on this, for me the simple fact is the more of a chalenge it is to get a woman into bed the more I'd be attracted to her

Yes it's a horrible double standard, yes it's very unfair on a women who just happens to want to have sex with the guy who's been kissing her all night but I can't help the fact that I find sexual restraint very very very attractive, I absolutely love the chase

homerun_homer

The funniest and most accurate interpretation I've seen for the clash of attitudes towards the sexes is;

If a key opens lots of locks, then it's a master key. But if a lock is opened by lots of keys...

I've no real issue with it either way. I prefer to hold off if it's someone I like and I prefer to let the anticipation build. If I liked the girl and it happened 1st date then it wouldn't affect whether I'd want to see her again but I understand why it would for many. You would think "Is she like this with every guy? Has she done it a lot or am I just special for getting it this soon?"

Greyfox wrote: »

I absolutely love the chase

I'm tired of it, I'm slinging up the boots again.

hobochris

Stink on the inside wrote: »

Sadly I know quite a few guys that think like this, I myself slept with my current girlfriend on the first night and am still with her 9 months later.

Is it a Boy or a Girl?



I think it depends on the two people, if the guy is a moron who can't think for himself or the girl comes across as someone who sleeps around a lot to the point where I would wonder, If we got together would she cheat?

Luckily, I have found the woman I am going to spend the rest of my life with so I don't need to worry about such things.

28064212

melekalikimaka wrote: »

double standards yes
a fact that most men think it... yes

Many men think it, many men don't, I wouldn't blanket it with "most"

The double standard is fairly sickening. Even from generally progressive posters like Wibbs. They wouldn't date someone who would have sex on a first date/ONS, but they would have one themselves and go on to date someone else.

Like Novella said, if someone has a general objection to first-date sex/ONS, then fair enough, that's their choice. But it is massively hypocritical to have ONSs yourself, and go on to judge others for having them

thirtythirty

I think people are defining "first date" as different things in this thread.

If we're talking "first date" as in "you meet someone on a night out, kiss them, and go home and shag them", then hell no she's not girlfriend material (in 99% of cases), for me anyway. Why? Because based on what I know about her, the likelihood is that this isn't the first time she's done this, and I couldn't deal with the jealousy of thinking about her with (potentially) all those other men. Slut. (jk, just had to add it!)

If we're talking "you met and kissed a girl on a night out, then organised a first date another night and happened to shag her that night", then it wouldn't make an iota of difference to me. Why? Because based on what I know about her, she's not a one night stander like in the other case, which is a big thing for me. Plus there's an obv not-smashed-drunk connection that you've made outside of the night you originally hooked up.

Having said that (and why I said 99% in the first case), I have met and shagged a girl in the one night who was so awesome that everything I said in the first case went out the window and she quickly became mine!

Wibbs

28064212 wrote: »

Many men think it, many men don't, I wouldn't blanket it with "most"

I'd agree though I would also say more think this than don't.

The double standard is fairly sickening. Even from generally progressive posters like Wibbs. They wouldn't date someone who would have sex on a first date/ONS, but they would have one themselves and go on to date someone else.

Like I said though I generally wouldnt go for it unless it was clear it was a ONS(though mea culpa I have in the past and would not consider it one of my high points).

I would have a distinction between ONS and sex first date anyway. A ONS is just sex pretty much. A date is a different thing to me. The potential of a relationship springing from that and it has been my experience that impulsive types aren't always a good bet for a healthy long termer. I'd say that of either gender BTW. A guy who has low impulse control is also not a good bet for a long termer.

Though because a woman has potentially more to lose I'd be more concerned about their impulse control. They're more likely to contract an STD, they get pregnant, and are more likely to be sexually assaulted. So a woman who meets a complete stranger and goes back to his is taking far more risks. Risks which she is ignoring on impulse. She's being driven by her crotch not her head(or heart though it's usually explained that way). Not someone I would want a relationship with and have had a few experiences with women like that and I would not want to go down that road again as I would only trust them as far as their impulse control at any particular time. Simple as that.

But yes there is a double standard at work here. Discussions on gender are full of them it can go both ways too.

Logical Fallacy

I'd only sleep with a girl on the first date if she promised to respect me in the morning.

In all seriousness, i've turned down sex on a first date because i didn't see there being a second one, i've had sex on the first date where i saw there being more.

metrovelvet

Wibbs wrote: »

Though because a woman has potentially more to lose I'd be more concerned about their impulse control. They're more likely to contract an STD, they get pregnant, and are more likely to be sexually assaulted. So a woman who meets a complete stranger and goes back to his is taking far more risks. Risks which she is ignoring on impulse. She's being driven by her crotch not her head(or heart though it's usually explained that way). Not someone I would want a relationship with and have had a few experiences with women like that and I would not want to go down that road again as I would only trust them as far as their impulse control at any particular time. Simple as that.

But yes there is a double standard at work here. Discussions on gender are full of them it can go both ways too.

Why does a woman have more of a chance of contacting an std?

A man is just as likely to get someone else pregnant.

A man is also taking risks by going back to a stranger's apartment.

He can also be driven by his crotch, much more likely actually. Women often do the ONS thing for the cuddles [also questionable]. A man doing this is an extension of masturbation, a woman doing this can be that too, or for attention, or affirmation, or any number of reasons.

28064212

Wibbs wrote: »

Though because a woman has potentially more to lose I'd be more concerned about their impulse control. They're more likely to contract an STD, they get pregnant, and are more likely to be sexually assaulted. So a woman who meets a complete stranger and goes back to his is taking far more risks. Risks which she is ignoring on impulse. She's being driven by her crotch not her head(or heart though it's usually explained that way). Not someone I would want a relationship with and have had a few experiences with women like that and I would not want to go down that road again as I would only trust them as far as their impulse control at any particular time. Simple as that.

But you have better impulse control? Even though you have ONSs?

Are women more likely to contract an STD? I've never heard that before. Pregnancy can have a huge impact on both parents' lives, not just the mother's. Sexual assault? Yes, a woman is at more risk, although if she's going back for sex anyway, it would seem much less of a risk than if the other option is walking home alone. General assault? Not really. A man going back to somewhere he doesn't know is taking a big a risk as a woman. Jealous exs and 'planned' robberies are a bigger danger for the man (not to mention the possibility of being sodomised with a strap-on).

Regardless, all those things are separate to the actual act of having ONS. If she's having unprotected sex, or going into dangerous situations without telling anyone where she'll be, those are completely separate issues. I would judge someone who did that, but I don't do those things myself

Well I do not know if the OPs experience over on PI is representative but I would add myself to the list of guys who do not think this way.

I simply do not have a set of rules in my head on how relationships should go. Each one is different and each pair of people who come together will find that different things are right for them together than was right from them with other people before.

If a girl sleeps with me on the first date, the tenth, or any date after that then all this tells me is that what was right for us as a couple at the time.

A girl sleeping with me on the first date does not mean she is “loose” and has done this with every guy before. A girl sleeping with me on the thirtieth date does not mean she did not sleep with every guy before me on the first.

Go with the flow and judge not each other, but only what is right for both of you at the time. What else is important?

Logical Fallacy

metrovelvet wrote: »

Why does a woman have more of a chance of contacting an std?

Because they are having more sex. He's not saying it's because they are a woman. If you cross the road a thousand times you are more likely to get hit by a car than crossing once.

28064212

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Because they are having more sex. He's not saying it's because they are a woman. If you cross the road a thousand times you are more likely to get hit by a car than crossing once.

The comparison is between a woman who has lots of ONSs and a man who has lots of ONSs. He is saying it's because they are a woman

metrovelvet

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Because they are having more sex. He's not saying it's because they are a woman. If you cross the road a thousand times you are more likely to get hit by a car than crossing once.

But so is a man who is having a lot of sex with different partners.

Logical Fallacy

28064212 wrote: »

The comparison is between a woman who has lots of ONSs and a man who has lots of ONSs. He is saying it's because they are a woman

I don't see it that way, i see a male orientated forum talking about sex on a first date. I don't see Wibbs saying "women are more likely to get an STD that men", i see Wibbs saying "A woman who has a lot of loose sex is more likely to get an STD".

I imagine he can come back and clear it up himself though.

Logical Fallacy

metrovelvet wrote: »

But so is a man who is having a lot of sex with different partners.

Indeed, but we are not talking about men, we are talking about women. This is the Gentleman's Club afterall.

No one is ignoring that point, we are just keeping stuff forum specific.

Bitch about men and their mannerisms = Ladies Lounge, bitch about women and their mannerisms = here.

28064212

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I don't see it that way, i see a male orientated forum talking about sex on a first date. I don't see Wibbs saying "women are more likely to get an STD that men", i see Wibbs saying "A woman who has a lot of loose sex is more likely to get an STD".

I imagine he can come back and clear it up himself though.

He was specifically responding to a post about the double standard. He mentions a guy with low impulse control and compares him to a woman with low impulse control, then says the woman has "potentially more to lose" and is "more likely to contract an STD". Seems pretty clear-cut to me

metrovelvet

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Indeed, but we are not talking about men, we are talking about women. This is the Gentleman's Club afterall.

No one is ignoring that point, we are just keeping stuff forum specific.

Bitch about men and their mannerisms = Ladies Lounge, bitch about women and their mannerisms = here.

Ok. I thought he was aknowledging the double standard.

senordingdong

I really don't think that promiscuity goes hand in hand with infidelity.

Logical Fallacy

28064212 wrote: »

He was specifically responding to a post about the double standard. He mentions a guy with low impulse control and compares him to a woman with low impulse control, then says the woman has "potentially more to lose" and is "more likely to contract an STD". Seems pretty clear-cut to me

LoL, fair enough, i'm not gonna argue about different interpretations of a post when we can simply wait for the poster himself to come back and clear it up though.

LegacyUser

I don't think there's any double standard at all.

Yes, we're all supposed to be sexually liberated etc. these days, but I completely reject the idea that everyone should have a carefree attitude to sex and should consider a potential partner's sexual history irrelevant.

Personally, I have had few sexual partners, and a potential sexual partner having had more previous partners than me would bother me. All the logic and rationality in the world tells me that it shouldn't, but it does. Perhaps this will change if/when I get more sexually experienced, but for now, I'm sorry, but it is an issue for me, and you can go fúck yourself if you think this is dated or chauvinist or whatever.

Now, of course, it is wrong to infer from a woman sleeping with you on a first date that she is promiscuous, but I guess it's an indication, and people often go with their instincts.

Also, is there any evidence to suggest that a lot of women do not think the exact same way about promiscuous guys?

Wibbs

metrovelvet wrote: »

Why does a woman have more of a chance of contacting an std?

Biology and mechanics. In unprotected sex women have more risk of contracting an STD. http://www.rhtp.org/std/types.asp EG the transmission rate of HIV is stronger from men to women than the other way around. Simply because men leave fluids containing such pathogens behind in a warm and moist environment where they can propogate. They get a bigger viral/bacterial load. They're also more likely to suffer complications from many STD's too. Chlamydia one of the more common ones is largely asymptomatic in men and indeed in women but has far bigger consequences for her reproductive health. HPV another one that can even lead to death in its role in cervical cancer. I'm sure more men and women have known of or heard of cervical cancer affecting someone. How many have heard of penile cancer(which its also implicated in). TBH I'm actually surprised more men and women don't realise the greater risk for women with regard to STD's.

A man is just as likely to get someone else pregnant.

Of course, but it's a helluva lot easier for him to walk away if he so chooses. The man's issues usually only come up if he actually does want to stay around and the woman wants to put barriers up. Plus he doesnt face the pregnancy, birth and the complications that can arise from that.

A man is also taking risks by going back to a stranger's apartment.

True, but in talking about the averages here, how many men are assaulted by women? Other men certainly, but women? How many men have experience of anything approaching date rape? Very very few. Regardless of double standards the dice is loaded more on one gender than the other.

He can also be driven by his crotch, much more likely actually.

I wouldnt agree, or I would define it a little differently. As some women often do. They're equally driven by their libidos, but it's more often explained away by spur of the moment/emotional/weak at the knees/love at first sight.

Women often do the ONS thing for the cuddles [also questionable].

As do men believe it or not.

28064212 wrote: »

But you have better impulse control? Even though you have ONSs?

I have had ONS's yes, but I've not had them where I expected more, or with one exception where I felt they wanted more and like I said not one of my finer moments, so yes I do have better impulse control than some who either do the ONS thing regularly for the "wrong" reasons. Men and women.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Because they are having more sex. He's not saying it's because they are a woman. If you cross the road a thousand times you are more likely to get hit by a car than crossing once.

There is that element too that the average woman by say 30 tends to have had more sexual encounters than the average man at 30. But even on an equal experience footing women are still at more risk of STD's than men.

Wibbs

28064212 wrote: »

He was specifically responding to a post about the double standard. He mentions a guy with low impulse control and compares him to a woman with low impulse control, then says the woman has "potentially more to lose" and is "more likely to contract an STD". Seems pretty clear-cut to me

Yep and in both cases I stand by that. There is a moral double standard which I take some issue with, but there's a practical one which I dont.

Pembily

Stink on the inside wrote: »

Sleeping with guys on the first date = loose woman = may have had lots of sexual partners = not the type of woman most guys want to date.

So men can and women can't!!!! If on a third date with a girl she said to you that she found out you had a lot of sexual partners and lots of ONS and she didn't see a future how p!ssed would you be?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Seriously... Sex is sex, it not the end of the freaking world, doesn't mean you will be unfaithful, mean you won't make a good mother or mean you will make a crap girlfriend!!! Just means you like sex - which from reading this thread is a bad thing for some people :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Darlughda wrote: »

Jayzus, some women I know consider the shag on the first date essential as an extension of getting to know someone. No point prolonging the tension if there is no sexual compatibility kind of thinking.

I didn't realiase that there was such a gulf here in attitudes.

Exactly - you test drive a car before you buy it right?? 4 dates in, vested interest, both parties getting on and bam crap, sh!te sex - wasted time IMO!!!!

f®eak s©enery wrote: »

The major biological reason behind this double standard is the male's need to ensure the parenthood of his child in relationships that extend past the "dating" phase. To the male mind, if a woman is perceived as promiscuous, the likelihood of her committing infidelity in the future increases. Thus, should childbirth occur, there is the lingering possibility that this child will have a different biological father.

Ha that is priceless...

Greyfox wrote: »

+1,000 on this, for me the simple fact is the more of a chalenge it is to get a woman into bed the more I'd be attracted to her

Yes it's a horrible double standard, yes it's very unfair on a women who just happens to want to have sex with the guy who's been kissing her all night but I can't help the fact that I find sexual restraint very very very attractive, I absolutely love the chase

So you are less attracted to a woman cause she wants to go back with you after you kissed her all night and possibly turned her on?!?!?!?!?! Weird thinking... How is sexual restraint attractive?? That boggles me... My brother is of the same opinion though and I just don't get it :eek:

senordingdong wrote: »

I really don't think that promiscuity goes hand in hand with infidelity.

Exactly, just cause someone enjoys having fun sexually doesn't mean they are unfaithful...

Wibbs

Pembily wrote: »

Exactly, just cause someone enjoys having fun sexually doesn't mean they are unfaithful...

That I do agree with.

Stink on the inside

Pembily wrote: »

So men can and women can't!!!! If on a third date with a girl she said to you that she found out you had a lot of sexual partners and lots of ONS and she didn't see a future how p!ssed would you be?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Seriously... Sex is sex, it not the end of the freaking world, doesn't mean you will be unfaithful, mean you won't make a good mother or mean you will make a crap girlfriend!!! Just means you like sex - which from reading this thread is a bad thing for some people :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I see where your coming from and every logical part of my brain agrees with you.

''Sleeping with guys on the first date = loose woman = may have had lots of sexual partners = not the type of woman most guys want to date''

I have quite a few friends that say they wont get into a relationship with a girl if she puts out on the first night.

As I said earlier sex on the first date doesn't bother me and if It feels right go for it.

On the other hand my current girlfriend has slept with a lot of guys and a lot were from hook ups in bars / clubs. This is really eating away at me, it shouldn't but it is.

Boskowski

Makes no difference to me but going by this thread the majority of guys think otherwise..

28064212

watisgoingon wrote: »

I don't think there's any double standard at all.

Yes, we're all supposed to be sexually liberated etc. these days, but I completely reject the idea that everyone should have a carefree attitude to sex and should consider a potential partner's sexual history irrelevant.

Personally, I have had few sexual partners, and a potential sexual partner having had more previous partners than me would bother me. All the logic and rationality in the world tells me that it shouldn't, but it does. Perhaps this will change if/when I get more sexually experienced, but for now, I'm sorry, but it is an issue for me, and you can go fúck yourself if you think this is dated or chauvinist or whatever.

Now, of course, it is wrong to infer from a woman sleeping with you on a first date that she is promiscuous, but I guess it's an indication, and people often go with their instincts.

Also, is there any evidence to suggest that a lot of women do not think the exact same way about promiscuous guys?

Actually most posters aren't objecting to people judging others on being promiscuous. It's no different than me saying I won't date a smoker, because it demonstrates a lack of intelligence. It's one of my personal deal-breakers. That's perfectly reasonable. What isn't reasonable is if I was a smoker myself and said I wouldn't date one. That's just massively hypocritical.

Wibbs wrote: »

Biology and mechanics. In unprotected sex women have more risk of contracting an STD. http://www.rhtp.org/std/types.asp EG the transmission rate of HIV is stronger from men to women than the other way around. Simply because men leave fluids containing such pathogens behind in a warm and moist environment where they can propogate. They get a bigger viral/bacterial load. They're also more likely to suffer complications from many STD's too. Chlamydia one of the more common ones is largely asymptomatic in men and indeed in women but has far bigger consequences for her reproductive health. HPV another one that can even lead to death in its role in cervical cancer. I'm sure more men and women have known of or heard of cervical cancer affecting someone. How many have heard of penile cancer(which its also implicated in). TBH I'm actually surprised more men and women don't realise the greater risk for women with regard to STD's.

Wasn't aware of that, thanks for the info. However, unprotected sex is a completely different kettle of fish. I would judge someone who has unprotected sex, but then I don't do it myself. If I regularly slept around without condoms, then no, I would be in no position to judge someone who did.

Wibbs wrote: »

Of course, but it's a helluva lot easier for him to walk away if he so chooses. The man's issues usually only come up if he actually does want to stay around and the woman wants to put barriers up. Plus he doesnt face the pregnancy, birth and the complications that can arise from that.

He will face maintenance and support issues. But again, the unprotected sex agrument comes into it.

Wibbs wrote: »

True, but in talking about the averages here, how many men are assaulted by women? Other men certainly, but women? How many men have experience of anything approaching date rape? Very very few. Regardless of double standards the dice is loaded more on one gender than the other.

How many woman are raped after agreeing to a ONS? That's the only figure that's relevant here. Is that figure going to be higher than men who are robbed, sexually assaulted or physically assaulted (whether by the woman or other involved men) after agreeing to one? I don't know, but it's certainly not a given.

Wibbs wrote: »

I have had ONS's yes, but I've not had them where I expected more, or with one exception where I felt they wanted more and like I said not one of my finer moments, so yes I do have better impulse control than some who either do the ONS thing regularly for the "wrong" reasons. Men and women.

But that's not the point. I'm asking about a double standard, not different standards for different situations. If a woman acts in exactly the same manner as you, has ONS for the same reasons you do, takes the same precautions as you do, would you think less of her?

Boskowski

watisgoingon wrote: »

I don't think there's any double standard at all.

Yes, we're all supposed to be sexually liberated etc. these days, but I completely reject the idea that everyone should have a carefree attitude to sex and should consider a potential partner's sexual history irrelevant.

Personally, I have had few sexual partners, and a potential sexual partner having had more previous partners than me would bother me. All the logic and rationality in the world tells me that it shouldn't, but it does. Perhaps this will change if/when I get more sexually experienced, but for now, I'm sorry, but it is an issue for me, and you can go fúck yourself if you think this is dated or chauvinist or whatever.

Now, of course, it is wrong to infer from a woman sleeping with you on a first date that she is promiscuous, but I guess it's an indication, and people often go with their instincts.

Also, is there any evidence to suggest that a lot of women do not think the exact same way about promiscuous guys?

So it's ok for you to fvck around but it's not for your future girlfriend? You're obviously not going to hook up with a girl having the same views on that then...

And also, you know it makes no sense on all levels, but you don't care and anyone pointing this out to can go and.... ?

Nice boyfriend material you are...

Edit: Sorry, I think I misunderstood. I read 'have had few' as 'have had a few'.