Is there "something wrong" with a guy if he...

eviltwin

paddy1990 wrote: »

Good post.

My last girlfriend was 29. Wouldn't have sex on the first night. "I've had all my one night stands" she said.

What an insult.

Odd take on it.

Maybe the fact that she wasn't trying to jump your bones the first night was more of a compliment than anything else. She obviously felt you were special enough to get to know before you took things to the next level. Its funny but very telling you would take offence at that. :rolleyes:

bb1234567

Unless she was doing something illegal I dont think how she acted or what she did in the past is much of your concern, atleast it shouldnt be. Judge her on her present self. Who cares if she slept with lots of guys? like it literally makes NO difference to you? Unless she caught an STD from them the worst thing that could come out of this is that shes more experienced in bed, which is hardly a bad thing

Holsten

No, there is nothing wrong with a man who doesn't want his new girlfriend to be the town bike, that is pretty normal in my eyes.

I go with the view of ignorance is bliss, I'd never ask a girlfriend how many people she has been with, I don't want that information.

Views on sex are more important.

RDM_83 again

eviltwin wrote: »

Odd take on it.

Maybe the fact that she wasn't trying to jump your bones the first night was more of a compliment than anything else. She obviously felt you were special enough to get to know before you took things to the next level. Its funny but very telling you would take offence at that. :rolleyes:

Actually that raises an interesting point on how differently people can view sex and what a tricky fcuker of a subject it is, if somebody strikes you as a great person and somebody you want to get to know well and possibly see a future with, doesn't it sort of make more sense to have sex with them than some randomer you don't actually like that much

I'm not saying either one is wrong and I do get the reasons why somebody would wait, but at the same time what your sort of implying is that sex is a special thing that should be shared by people with genuine feelings with each other, if your going to hold that view surely ONS do sort of cheapen the act (referring to ONS in the typical Irish drunken fashion).

Mister Vain

RDM_83 again wrote: »

(referring to ONS in the typical Irish drunken fashion).

You mean fall into bed with someone and hope it all works out?

eviltwin

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Actually that raises an interesting point on how differently people can view sex and what a tricky fcuker of a subject it is, if somebody strikes you as a great person and somebody you want to get to know well and possibly see a future with, doesn't it sort of make more sense to have sex with them than some randomer you don't actually like that much

I'm not saying either one is wrong and I do get the reasons why somebody would wait, but at the same time what your sort of implying is that sex is a special thing that should be shared by people with genuine feelings with each other, if your going to hold that view surely ONS do sort of cheapen the act (referring to ONS in the typical Irish drunken fashion).

I don't hold that view at all but Paddy does so its odd that he would take her refusal to have sex on the first date as an insult seeing as he has said multiple times he isn't into women like that. You can't have it both ways, you can't want a woman who is selective about who she sleeps with but then get pissed when she won't sleep with you.

Mister Vain

eviltwin wrote: »

You can't have it both ways, you can't want a woman who is selective about who she sleeps with but then get pissed when she won't sleep with you.

Exactly. The irony is delicious.

bb1234567

double post

paddy1990

eviltwin wrote: »

I don't hold that view at all but Paddy does so its odd that he would take her refusal to have sex on the first date as an insult seeing as he has said multiple times he isn't into women like that. You can't have it both ways, you can't want a woman who is selective about who she sleeps with but then get pissed when she won't sleep with you.

This girl has had around 30 ONS.

Now when it comes to me she doesn't.

This is an insult.

Compare this to a girl who doesn't have ONS.

If she doesn't want to have one, thats fair and I respect it. The other girl has just insulted me by alllowing Danny the barman and John the athlete and who knows who else to have sex with her on the first night but lucky me gets the new and improved "mature" version.

No thanks.

Tokyo

paddy1990 wrote: »

This girl has had around 30 ONS.

Now when it comes to me she doesn't.

This is an insult.

Compare this to a girl who doesn't have ONS.

If she doesn't want to have one, thats fair and I respect it. The other girl has just insulted me by alllowing Danny the barman and John the athlete and who knows who else to have sex with her on the first night but lucky me gets the new and improved "mature" version.

No thanks.

I'm guessing that says far more about your attitude towards her, than her attitude towards you, to be honest.

eviltwin

paddy1990 wrote: »

This girl has had around 30 ONS.

Now when it comes to me she doesn't.

This is an insult.

Compare this to a girl who doesn't have ONS.

If she doesn't want to have one, thats fair and I respect it. The other girl has just insulted me by alllowing Danny the barman and John the athlete and who knows who else to have sex with her on the first night but lucky me gets the new and improved "mature" version.

No thanks.

You must have known about the ONS's before you went out if you were insulted by her knock back. Why after saying you had no time for women who have ONS's would you go out with one Kinda contradicting yourself there. So the only reason your angry is because you were turned down, your ego got damaged, you took it personally. Someone not wanting to sleep with you is not an insult, maybe they don't find you physically attractive or there is no much chemistry there, maybe you just made her feel uncomfortable. Whatever the reason, getting angry and insulted at someone not sleeping with you is pretty childish.

Ave Sodalis

paddy1990 wrote: »

This girl has had around 30 ONS.

Now when it comes to me she doesn't.

This is an insult.

Compare this to a girl who doesn't have ONS.

If she doesn't want to have one, thats fair and I respect it. The other girl has just insulted me by alllowing Danny the barman and John the athlete and who knows who else to have sex with her on the first night but lucky me gets the new and improved "mature" version.

No thanks.

Did you just start this thread because you were pissed you didn't get laid that one time?

ancapailldorcha

paddy1990 wrote: »

This is an insult.

No it isn't. She has complete and utter autonomy over who she sleeps with. Your posts make you sound more than a tad immature to be honest.

Liam McPoyle

paddy1990 wrote: »

This girl has had around 30 ONS.

Now when it comes to me she doesn't.

This is an insult.

Compare this to a girl who doesn't have ONS.

If she doesn't want to have one, thats fair and I respect it. The other girl has just insulted me by alllowing Danny the barman and John the athlete and who knows who else to have sex with her on the first night but lucky me gets the new and improved "mature" version.

No thanks.

Ahhhh, so now the crux of the issue comes to the fore.

A girl had approx 30 partners but wouldn't have sex with you on the first night.

Says more about you than her buddy.

paddy1990

eviltwin wrote: »

You must have known about the ONS's before you went out if you were insulted by her knock back. Why after saying you had no time for women who have ONS's would you go out with one Kinda contradicting yourself there. So the only reason your angry is because you were turned down, your ego got damaged, you took it personally. Someone not wanting to sleep with you is not an insult, maybe they don't find you physically attractive or there is no much chemistry there, maybe you just made her feel uncomfortable. Whatever the reason, getting angry and insulted at someone not sleeping with you is pretty childish.

You are displaying quite a strong lack of logic.

I have said I do not see girls that have multiple partners (in this case 30+) as "relationship material". I did not particularly want a relationship with this girl. Where is the contradiction?

If she didn't find me physically attractive or had no chemistry she wouldn't have had sex with me for 4 months would she?

paddy1990

sup_dude wrote: »

Did you just start this thread because you were pissed you didn't get laid that one time?

Just LOL at the reaching

eviltwin

paddy1990 wrote: »

You are displaying quite a strong lack of logic.

I have said I do not see girls that have multiple partners (in this case 30+) as "relationship material". I did not particularly want a relationship with this girl. Where is the contradiction?

If she didn't find me physically attractive or had no chemistry she wouldn't have had sex with me for 4 months would she?

Ok no need to get uptight about it, I was just looking for clarification. You must have gotten over her insult if you dated for 4 months so you got laid eventually, what is the problem?

Mister Vain

My ideal woman is a promiscuous virgin.

Ave Sodalis

paddy1990 wrote: »

Just LOL at the reaching

What reaching? That's genuinely the way it's coming across and you accuse the last person to have a lack of logic where I can see none in your posts. Girls can't have numerous sexual partners but you get annoyed if the ones that do, don't sleep with you the first night? Do you want them to sleep with people or not? Or do you just want them to sleep with you?

Potatoeman

eviltwin wrote: »

I don't hold that view at all but Paddy does so its odd that he would take her refusal to have sex on the first date as an insult seeing as he has said multiple times he isn't into women like that. You can't have it both ways, you can't want a woman who is selective about who she sleeps with but then get pissed when she won't sleep with you.

In his case sure but then maybe it was not the best idea to tell him she had done it with other people previously on their first date. Her attitude may have changed but it would make their relationship less special from the start. The same goes for sexual experimentation. Not being willing to try something with a partner you have done previously with someone else.

paddy1990

sup_dude wrote: »

What reaching? That's genuinely the way it's coming across and you accuse the last person to have a lack of logic where I can see none in your posts. Girls can't have numerous sexual partners but you get annoyed if the ones that do, don't sleep with you the first night? Do you want them to sleep with people or not? Or do you just want them to sleep with you?

This has been covered already. This girl had 30+ ONS she admitted, which im sure means it's probably double or triple that amount. This makes us uncompatible for a long term relationship.

A girl with few sexual partners would be more compatible and wouldn't be the kind to have ONS with guys anyway so its understandable.

The first girl had loads of ONS and won't with me = insult.
The second girl doesn't have ONS and won't with me = not an insult.

eviltwin

Its coming across as though Paddy just sees women as sex objects, he wants to sleep with one ergo she should want to sleep with him. No consideration for the fact she may not be feeling the same passion he is. How many guys she has slept with in the past will have no bearing on whether she sleeps with you, in order to want to have sex with someone you have to feel a connection, if its not there its not there. That is the nature of life Paddy, some you win, some you lose, not all people who you fancy will fancy you back. Maybe instead of thinking there is something wrong with these women you should take it one step further and try and see why you're not successful.

eviltwin

Potatoeman wrote: »

In his case sure but then maybe it was not the best idea to tell him she had done it with other people previously on their first date. Her attitude may have changed but it would make their relationship less special from the start. The same goes for sexual experimentation. Not being willing to try something with a partner you have done previously with someone else.

It was a strange thing to bring up on a first date alright but its still a huge leap to take it as an insult that she didn't want to sleep with him.

As for the sexual experimentation comment, if you try something and decide its not for you why should you feel obliged to try it with someone else?

Ave Sodalis

paddy1990 wrote: »

This has been covered already. This girl had 30+ ONS she admitted, which im sure means it's probably double or triple that amount. This makes us uncompatible for a long term relationship.

A girl with few sexual partners would be more compatible and wouldn't be the kind to have ONS with guys anyway so its understandable.

The first girl had loads of ONS and won't with me = insult.
The second girl doesn't have ONS and won't with me = not an insult.

So you want a ONS or an fbuddy... but you condone women who do this?
I don't see how it's an insult if she did sleep with you for four months.
Also, even if you're pretty "sure", that's quite an assumption for which you have no proof that it's double or triple. There is a huge difference between ninety and thirty...

Potatoeman

eviltwin wrote: »

It was a strange thing to bring up on a first date alright but its still a huge leap to take it as an insult that she didn't want to sleep with him.

As for the sexual experimentation comment, if you try something and decide its not for you why should you feel obliged to try it with someone else?

I think it's because in both cases she has done it with someone else and is not willing to do it with him.

If I was dating someone that had lots of ons's but would not sleep with me on the first date I would wonder if they were not as attracted to me.

Ave Sodalis

Potatoeman wrote: »

I think it's because in both cases she has done it with someone else and is not willing to do it with him.

If I was dating someone that had lots of ons's but would not sleep with me on the first date I would wonder if they were not as attracted to me.

Even if they did for the next four months? I mean, anything could have been the reason; period, sickness, needed to get home, wanting to change, the fact that in general a date and a ONS are two different things...

eviltwin

Potatoeman wrote: »

I think it's because in both cases she has done it with someone else and is not willing to do it with him.

If I was dating someone that had lots of ons's but would not sleep with me on the first date I would wonder if they were not as attracted to me.

Maybe she didn't enjoy it.

Pawwed Rig

Mod note - paddy1990 is banned (again) please do not respond to his posts.

Shakespeare's Sister

While I don't think it's reasonable or realistic for a guy today to want a virgin partner, I wouldn't have an issue with a guy not liking the idea of his partner having a huge number of sexual conquests either.
This only becomes problematic when it's ok for him to shag around as much as he wants, but not his prospective partner to have done so. If he doesn't have much casual sex though and would prefer to be with a woman who doesn't have much casual sex, that's merely his preference.

It's only when he's a hypocrite about it that it's objectionable - e.g. using that reprehensible "lock and key" thing. :rolleyes:

AndreaCollins

I can understand guys wanting to be with girls with a low number of partners for long term relationships. Just like girls have preferences.