Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Playing Hard to Get
Options
Comments
-
Eve_Dublin wrote: »
That wasn't my phrase though, I was quoting Sorcha16 who, ironically, thanked your post (which made me smirk)!
Here's the post in question with the phrase highlighted:
Anyway, glad we're on the same page. Night!
Oh I see, it wasn't in inverted commas so I wrongly attributed it to you. It was that particular phraseology that didn't sit well with me.
I have friends, both male and female, that can be very judgemental of such scenarios and I tend to react quite strongly to any negative language used around that.
Goodnight!
0 -
Eve_Dublin wrote: »It's not a fact. What risks are you talking about? What difference would it make if you met that stranger 20 more times then slept with them? STIs, for example, don't just cure themselves the more you get to know them.
How is having sex with someone disrespecting your body? And why does it make a difference if you do it on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 50th date?
Your comments are judgemental.
One thing I've noticed on here is that "the more liberal" people get very defensive about statements that if they weren't in direct reference to sexual relations would not raise an eyebrow.
Of course there's higher risks for all sorts of things with some one you;ve had a few hour long interaction, like if I was out drinking and and wanted to continue the night after the pubs closed I would be wary about going to some one that I'd just mets apartment alone with a few bottles where as if I probably wouldn;t hesitate if I'd met the person a few times. I would say thats uncontroversial common sense that wouldn;t raise an eyebrow on here, where as if this statement was rephrased into the person being a one night stand rather than just some drinks it suddenly becomes controversial and judgemental
0 -
One thing I've noticed on here is that "the more liberal" people get very defensive about statements that if they weren't in direct reference to sexual relations would not raise an eyebrow.
You're going to have to explain that one to me. I'm baffled.Of course there's higher risks for all sorts of things with some one you;ve had a few hour long interaction[/B], like if I was out drinking and and wanted to continue the night after the pubs closed I would be wary about going to some one that I'd just mets apartment alone with a few bottles where as if I probably wouldn;t hesitate if I'd met the person a few times. I would say thats uncontroversial common sense that wouldn;t raise an eyebrow on here, where as if this statement was rephrased into the person being a one night stand rather than just some drinks it suddenly becomes controversial and judgemental
Why "of course"? The vast majority of rapes occur between people who are already acquainted, for example. That'd be one risk which I'm sure springs to many people's mind. I wanted examples of how someone is more at risk with someone after a first date than with someone after two dates. Can you provide them instead of simply stating it's "common sense"? I can't see how it's common sense. We're specifically talking about safe sex with a stranger you've had one date with here, btw. I'd be grateful if you could provide examples of risks that are specific to this please.0 -
RDM_83 again wrote: »One thing I've noticed on here is that "the more liberal" people get very defensive about statements that if they weren't in direct reference to sexual relations would not raise an eyebrow.
Of course there's higher risks for all sorts of things with some one you;ve had a few hour long interaction, like if I was out drinking and and wanted to continue the night after the pubs closed I would be wary about going to some one that I'd just mets apartment alone with a few bottles where as if I probably wouldn;t hesitate if I'd met the person a few times. I would say thats uncontroversial common sense that wouldn;t raise an eyebrow on here, where as if this statement was rephrased into the person being a one night stand rather than just some drinks it suddenly becomes controversial and judgemental
I wouldn't be wary of this in the slightest. I've had some of the best nights of my life at house parties of people I've met and talked to that night. I believe most people aren't dodgy and can be trusted. I've travelled a continent on my own, moved country on my own, lived alone....if I didn't give a stranger a chance, I'd be a very lonely person. If the person seems like a weirdo or sleazy or dodgy, I wouldn't go back for an ONS or a house party. I'd take the same precautions in both circumstances. And I've usually talked to the person before I've slept with them just as I've talked to the person holding a house party. No one's talking about picking someone off the street without saying a word to them.
What has been liberal got to do with it? Conservatives don't enjoy a good house party with a stranger, no? 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Eve_Dublin wrote: »You're going to have to explain that one to me. I'm baffled.
Why "of course"? The vast majority of rapes occur between people who are already acquainted, for example.
I was referring to liberal in terms of the way these debates tend to follow into a liberal/modern vs a conservative/traditional view of things and the fact that disagreement does necessarily imply judgment.
In relation to the second part I'm aware that rape is generally committed by someone known the victim (70 or 80% i think) however I'm willing to be proved wrong on this (as I don;t know how they class 'known') but I consider that this known to the victim would probably encompass 1st dates and situations where attacker and victim have met for a period before the attack took place.Eve_Dublin wrote: »I wouldn't be wary of this in the slightest. I've had some of the best nights of my life at house parties of people I've met and talked to that night. I believe most people aren't dodgy and can be trusted.Eve_Dublin wrote: »Can you provide them instead of simply stating it's "common sense"? I can't see how it's common sense. We're specifically talking about safe sex with a stranger you've had one date with here, btw. I'd be grateful if you could provide examples of risks that are specific to this please.
I didn't realize this discussion was based entirely safe sex (in fact its clearly not as you brought rape into it), Here's an example, I just read on some other thread about some guy throwing a drink on a girl for chatting to him when she had a boyfriend, now in this hypothetical if that person went of to a one night stand with this guy and rejected his advance later she'd be in a situation alone guy with clearly poor anger management at the least, if she rejected him that night with the intention of meeting again she'd probably pick up the anger.Eve_Dublin wrote: »I wouldn't be wary of this in the slightest. I've had some of the best nights of my life at house parties of people I've met and talked to that night. I believe most people aren't dodgy and can be trusted.
Fair play to you and I agree that most people are decent however has nobody ever surprised you after a poor first impression? this things work the other way too, and there's plenty of people that are complete scumbags that can mask dodgyness for a while an extreme example of this is Ted Bundy (and no I don't live in fear of serial killers its just its hard to find a reported Joe Soap).Eve_Dublin wrote: »And I've usually talked to the person before I've slept with them just as I've talked to the person holding a house party.
0 -
-
-
In relation to the second part I'm aware that rape is generally committed by someone known the victim (70 or 80% i think) however I'm willing to be proved wrong on this (as I don;t know how they class 'known') but I consider that this known to the victim would probably encompass 1st dates and situations where attacker and victim have met for a period before the attack took place.
I don't have those stats here but most rapes committed by family members, boyfriends and husbands. I'm going to work now but can dig it out for you later.
I didn't realize this discussion was based entirely safe sex (in fact its clearly not as you brought rape into it), Here's an example, I just read on some other thread about some guy throwing a drink on a girl for chatting to him when she had a boyfriend, now in this hypothetical if that person went of to a one night stand with this guy and rejected his advance later she'd be in a situation alone guy with clearly poor anger management at the least, if she rejected him that night with the intention of meeting again she'd probably pick up the anger.
I've mentioned safe sex all the way through. Every single post, so yep, I'm talking about safe sex (I don't understand your point regarding rape). If someone doesn't take those precautions, they're a ****ing idiot. That guy you're talking about is nut job but you wouldn't go home with that guy, would you? You already know he's loo-la. You don't know a person any better and usually nutjobs, in my own personal experience don't usually act "nutty" when you meet them. My ex a long time ago threatened to set my friend's bedroom on fire and kill us both. I'd been going out with him for 3 months at that stage and he was nice as pie. It's those kinds of stories I hear more commonly (mad exes, crazy boyfriends, violent husbands) than people getting attacked on ONS or first dates.Fair play to you and I agree that most people are decent however has nobody ever surprised you after a poor first impression? this things work the other way too, and there's plenty of people that are complete scumbags that can mask dodgyness for a while an extreme example of this is Ted Bundy (and no I don't live in fear of serial killers its just its hard to find a reported Joe Soap).
Never....except the mad ex who I mentioned above. And the point you mad above about masking dodginess....of course! They'll mask it 'till they're alone with you...1st, 2nd or 5th date. The guy will be dodgy on the 1st date and dodgy on the 3rd.
That was sarcasm to highlight no one would be stupid enough to pick some randomer off the street and bring them home. I've ALWAYS talked to the person previously.
Anyway, you wouldn't have a ONS, you wouldn't go to a house party. I would and I've been fine. I'm in a relationship now so those days have ended (days of ONS). If a woman waits to see if the guy is safe or not, no problems. I've said before I've no problems with that. I'm specifically referring to those women who wait for waitings sake. Who play hard-to-get so as to avoid the label from society of "whore". Waiting to the 2nd date makes zero difference.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
I hate boards and its ability to loose long posts on you
(the lost reply had all the quotes in it)
OK in relation to the story of drinking and the flatmate coming down and yelling it was an example of how people judged/assessed us as a harmless group of lads of having a bit of craic, however the appearance of someone else they hadn't met who appeared intimidating suddenly changed the situation in their heads, whereas if they'd know us they would have known the guy (and known he was noisy at other times)Eve_Dublin wrote: »But he was EASTERN EUROPEAN Daisybelle! EASTERN EUROPEAN!! :eek:
So for example small Spanish student is just as intimidating as a EE ex service man :rolleyes: must tell Hollywood that so they can widen they're cast of villains and henchmen (you man was actually a nice guy though and for the record I actually really like eastern europe and its people).Eve_Dublin wrote: »I've mentioned safe sex all the way through. Every single post, so yep, I'm talking about safe sex (I don't understand your point regarding rape).
Ok maybe this is a male view but too me safe sex refers to contraception (and the various health ads would agree seem to imply that too) so by referring to rape in your posts your broadening the discussion.Eve_Dublin wrote: »That guy you're talking about is nut job but you wouldn't go home with that guy, would you? You already know he's loo-la.
Re-read the scenario
In this hypothetical how does she know he's got a major problem with rejection (loo-la)? if she agrees to go back with him the first time she doesn;t reject him (which triggers his aggression) till shes on her own.Eve_Dublin wrote: »You don't know a person any better and usually nutjobs, in my own personal experience don't usually act "nutty" when you meet them.
Ok I feel we're just in disagreement at a basic level on this, I think you get to know someone better after a period of time, you go on first impressions, each to their own.Eve_Dublin wrote: »My ex a long time ago threatened to set my friend's bedroom on fire and kill us both. I'd been going out with him for 3 months at that stage and he was nice as pie. It's those kinds of stories I hear more commonly (mad exes, crazy boyfriends, violent husbands) than people getting attacked on ONS or first dates.
You see again I'd take a different perspective on those sort of occurrence in that to an outside observer thats not involved a lot of the time these people seem "a bit off" or scumbaggy long before anything happens but their partners are blind to this or go off the initial charming impression made to them.Eve_Dublin wrote: »Anyway, you wouldn't have a ONS, you wouldn't go to a house party. I would and I've been fine.
I've done both actually (one more than other though) but I don't get offended by people considering that it may be slightly risky behavior, saying something is more risky doesn't necessarily imply judgment! positive or negative0 -
-
RDM_83 again wrote: »I hate boards and its ability to loose long posts on you (the lost reply had all the quotes in it)
OK in relation to the story of drinking and the flatmate coming down and yelling it was an example of how people judged/assessed us as a harmless group of lads of having a bit of craic, however the appearance of someone else they hadn't met who appeared intimidating suddenly changed the situation in their heads, whereas if they'd know us they would have known the guy (and known he was noisy at other times)
So for example small Spanish student is just as intimidating as a EE ex service man :rolleyes: must tell Hollywood that so they can widen they're cast of villains and henchmen (you man was actually a nice guy though and for the record I actually really like eastern europe and its people).
Ok maybe this is a male view but too me safe sex refers to contraception (and the various health ads would agree seem to imply that too) so by referring to rape in your posts your broadening the discussion.
Re-read the scenario
In this hypothetical how does she know he's got a major problem with rejection (loo-la)? if she agrees to go back with him the first time she doesn;t reject him (which triggers his aggression) till shes on her own.
Ok I feel we're just in disagreement at a basic level on this, I think you get to know someone better after a period of time, you go on first impressions, each to their own.
You see again I'd take a different perspective on those sort of occurrence in that to an outside observer thats not involved a lot of the time these people seem "a bit off" or scumbaggy long before anything happens but their partners are blind to this or go off the initial charming impression made to them.
I've done both actually (one more than other though) but I don't get offended by people considering that it may be slightly risky behavior, saying something is more risky doesn't necessarily imply judgment! positive or negative
We disagree. You're going off on one about the dangers of ONS. This thread is about judging those who have them unfairly labelling them sluts, whores etc. Should people be called these things for taking a risk?There was a thread in TLL which dealt with the risks of ONS. Maybe head over there and debate it. I'm not interested in debating it here as obviously our experiences differ hugely and it's not what the discussion is about.
By the way, the guy was intimidating to your guests...big deal. Nothing happened. That's what it comes down to. I live in a rough part of Madrid with lots of intimidating people. Am I going to avoid the streets everyday? No. Perhaps your guests are nervous types. I'm not. I don't expect everyone else to be like me, so I've no problem going to house parties and engaging in ONS. Perhaps others are nervous by it and are intimidated by tall (but ultimately harmless) men from Eastern Europe but I'm not. C'est la vie. Live and let live.
I just want to reiterate though: I have no problem someone deciding to not go home with someone because they feel it's unsafe. I can absolutely see where they're coming from. However, I don't like the names put on women who do decide to do this. I take risks everyday of my life but I'm not labelled a whore for it. It's more the harsh judgement of these women that I've a problem with.
That's it from me. I've made my feelings known. Good luck!0
Advertisement