Womens attitudes to previous sexual encounters see mod note post #1

BeerSteakBirds · 12-07-2014 06:09PM

Hey OP wrote: »

But she wasnt obliged to tell you about HER past! Same way you werent obliged to tell her about yours!!

''Guest'' if you think dishonesty is a solid foundation for a meaningful relationship then you are an idiot as well as a coward who uses guest accounts. Look up the meaning of ''meaningful''

ragnarl · 12-07-2014 06:12PM

username123 wrote: »

This holds a lot of weight coming from someone who thinks every Irish woman is a slut.

Another exceptionally dreadful post. This isn't "The Ladies Lounge". You're out of your depth here in a more logical environment.

eviltwin · 12-07-2014 06:14PM

ragnarl wrote: »

Another exceptionally dreadful post. This isn't "The Ladies Lounge". You're out of your depth here in a more logical environment.

you really don't like women much do you?

Pawwed Rig · 12-07-2014 06:15PM

Mod note - Ok guys, what was a healthy discussion has descended into a farce. Thread closed.

Edit: posts will be actioned when the mods get a chance to review the thread. It will probably be tomorrow before we get to it though. Thank you for your patience.

Pawwed Rig · 13-07-2014 01:09AM

Mod note - ok all we will give this thread another chance. ragnarl is obviously banned for the seagull posting so please do not respond to any of his inputs.
If anyone is unsure of what an acceptable standard of posting is then read the charter or pm me.
Do not personalise the debate.
Be respectful to other peoples opinions.
Do not be a dick.
No more backseat modding.
Oh and refrain from using derogatory sexist language from here on.

Buzz Killington the third · 13-07-2014 01:16AM

Something that doesn't sit right with me is that given the level of detail in the first post, why did the op wait until after a few hundred posts to tell us all that he's been tested positive for STI's? This is a huge detail, which clarifies all of the judgements about the "as long as she was safe" kind of stuff.

Sulla Felix · 13-07-2014 02:06AM

Having had 500 sexual partners while claiming two previous boyfriends is inherently disingenuous, on par, I think, with having a homosexual tryst while with a heterosexual partner and replying with no when asked "are you seeing another man /woman?". Sure, it's technically correct but it's lawyerish equivocation.

Most adults aren't going to count up all the boyfriends/girlfriends they had as kids/teenagers when asked the question so it's fairly accepted that the requested answer has more to do with how many people you've had sex with, rather than a catalogue of every four week puppy love experience from the end of primary school onward.

goz83 · 13-07-2014 02:51AM

I have looked through a few pages. Maybe I am wrong, but it seems to be a very sexist argument here, mainly with the women vehemently defending the OPs ex. There is nothing wrong with loving sex and having lots of it, but having sex with anywhere near 500 people is, in my opinion, something a hooker, porn star, or mentally unstable person would only be able to lay claim to.

The OPs ex was not genuine, so far as I can tell from what I have been able to gather from this thread. She may have said she had two previous boyfriends, but if there was a real chance that revealing such a high number of sexual partners, would cause a problem, then she should have told him, or the relationship was based on a lie.

I know of only one girl who has had a large number of partners and I would safely say she is unstable emotionally. She is a very nice person, but uses sex as a way to feel wanted and has had a lot of partners. I know, because she told me.

Larry Wildman · 13-07-2014 08:23AM

The kernel of the argument is as follows in my view:

Historically, women absolutely were repressed sexually. Thankfully, that is no longer the case. However, there is a hard core of "feminists" who want to push things to frankly ludicrous levels by claiming that crazy stuff like having 500 sexual partners is "okay". It definitely is not okay - It's outrageous.

The point that they're missing is that the lunatic with 500 sexual partners isn't liberated at all. He / She is a victim and has some serious underlying issue(s).

lavinia hathaway · 13-07-2014 09:29AM

Hi all,

Having read the whole thread, the two main issues for me are the lying to the OP and the flagrant disregard to his feelings about a very prolific sexual history.

Having multiple partners at the same time and performing sexual acts for a
drink is just tawdry in the extreme, and that applies to both sexes.

This so called sexual liberation should not confused with a total lack of dignity.

Celly Smunt · 13-07-2014 10:37AM

It seems any kind of resistance to sex these days is seen as prudish, how is not throwing your willy around being a prude?

I've never really been into the whole sex for the sake of sex, so having sex for other reasons really doesn't cross my radar. I don't know if it's strange for a fella to reserve himself for a relationship or at least for somebody with a bit of a foundation before hand.For me I suppose there's more to sex than just the act, it's really the most intimate act you can take part in which for me requires it to mean a little bit more than a shag.

I don't know why, but my heart sinks sometimes when I see women and men doing "the walk of shame", it's not a reaction of disgust or anything, I mean whatever floats your boat but it's just an unconcious reaction/feeling for me.

Thin line between liberation, self respect and being a prude it seems.

diveout · 13-07-2014 10:39AM

Celly Smunt wrote: »

It seems any kind of resistance to sex these days is seen as prudish, how is not throwing your willy around being a prude?

I've never really been into the whole sex for the sake of sex, so having sex for other reasons really doesn't cross my radar. I don't know if it's strange for a fella to reserve himself for a relationship or at least for somebody with a bit of a foundation before hand.For me I suppose there's more to sex than just the act, it's really the most intimate act you can take part in which for me requires it to mean a little bit more than a shag.

I don't know why, but my heart sinks sometimes when I see women and men doing "the walk of shame", it's not a reaction of disgust or anything, I mean whatever floats your boat but it's just an unconcious reaction/feeling for me.

Thin line between liberation, self respect and being a prude it seems.

The puritans approved love without sex. The neo-puritans approve sex without attachment.

Larry Wildman · 13-07-2014 10:58AM

Exactly.

Unfortunately, it's women that generally try and advance this crazy argument.

Women were repressed back in old God's time and that was an outrage but unfortunately that seems to have led to a generation of women some of whom think it's okay to have hundreds of sexual partners and some of whom think that it's okay to cheerlead such behaviour.

What they fail to realise is that sluttish behaviour isn't emancipation - It's the opposite. Promiscuous women are a laughing stock and the butt of people's jokes. "Not the marrying kind" / "You'd bang her but you wouldn't date her" are some of the monikers that might apply.

Women need to realise that simply by respecting themselves and only sleeping with guys when it's appropriate, they have all of the power. They hold all the cards. But the women whose bedrooms are like Grand Central Station and their cheerleaders? A laughing stock.

thebullkf · 13-07-2014 11:08AM

Magaggie wrote: »

"Get a girlfriend" - like getting a carton of milk in Tesco.
A nice subservient woman from a country where women know their place.

Oh for the days of the Magdalene Laundries and marital rape not being a crime.

whats with the smileys and religious overtones

jimd2 · 13-07-2014 11:21AM

Firstly, I have read quite a bit of this thread but haven't really got the time to read it all.

To me this is a really strange and unusual thread. The 500+ sexual partners bit is not a shocker as in all walks of life we have extremes, also a guy having a problem with his partner's sexual past is not particularly surprising. What surprises me is that this comes together in a relationship that seems to have been a reasonably long one ( forgive me but I didn't pickup how long they have been together or whether they lived together).

If they were together less than 6 months then I could perhaps understand his being unaware of her past. However, more than that and you are probably starting to have a situation where you are meeting family, friends, ex friends, college buddies and experiences shared. Discussions regarding a variety of issues, holidays etc etc. I find it very difficult to rationalise the OP not knowing of his girlfriends previous lifestyle before they met or at least suspect what it was like. I used the word lifestyle as (in my humble opinion) that's what it must have been. Like, I can't imagine her being able to work full time, be a member of a tennis club/ hockey/ athletics club and manage to rack up 500+ partners in that time. Her friends at the time. Use have had similar lifestyles and, considering her age, many would still be living similar lives. I

The OP's ex gf must have suspected that her lifestyle (rightly or wrongly) was not one that would interest certain guys. She obviously liked the OP and, I suspect, saw him as a good catch. She might genuinely have decided that that lifestyle was no longer for her and that she wanted to settle down. She never actually lied to the OP but definitely, once a period passed, guilty by omission.

As I said, I don't know how long they were going out together and this might have been a deliberate way by the OPs ex gf to inform him of this aspect to her life. It might have been on her mind for a while but when she finally told him she messed it up and it was too late. In essence she has probably tried to change her lifestyle and settle down and exhibited a lack if experience in who she hooked up with and how she communicated her past with him.

When the OP first met the ex, did they jump into bed straight away? Did she say things like, I normally don't do this straight away or to that effect, which is something you might expect if she just had had 2 boyfriends. I just find it difficult to believe that there was no suspician there on the OPs part.

I have known a few women who were very very promiscuous and it didn't really effect my opinion of them and we were quite friendly. One made it known to me directly and indirectly to me that she was very interested in me. I had a good job in the same workplace but would have been reasonably quiet and not known for "screwing around". Thinking back why I didn't bite was probably a number of reasons, part of it was insecurity on my part that I would live up to other guys she was with and also partly that it would be "news" that we got together considering how much of a reputation she had and me being relatively new on their scene. However, I was under no illusions as to her past and find it very difficult as to how that could have been masked.

I hope that the OP has learned from this experience. When you start going out with someone and you have had zero contact in the past and no common friends you should be trying to build up a picture of them and their personality, attitudes, experiences if you are thinking of the relationship long term. I think the OP is at least partly at fault for failing to do that.

From the point of view of the ex, she has probably learned a lesson here also in that she realises that, even if her lifestyle has changed, she should try and ascertain the attitudes tv of a new bf and that these differences could well come to a head if she doesn't draw them out early enough on.

thebullkf · 13-07-2014 11:22AM

lavinia hathaway wrote: »

Hi all,

Having read the whole thread, the two main issues for me are the lying to the OP and the flagrant disregard to his feelings about a very prolific sexual history.

Having multiple partners at the same time and performing sexual acts for a
drink is just tawdry in the extreme, and that applies to both sexes.

This so called sexual liberation should not confused with a total lack of dignity.

this. 500 sexual partners at 27 years of age ( seems exaggerated but hey, one never knows) is the behaviour of a slut/tramp with absolutely no self respect, that person needs help. its unhealthy physically and mentally.

and yes were it my daughter, wife,mother, sister, i would call them a tramp- to their face.

Wibbs · 13-07-2014 11:37AM

jimd2 wrote: »

I just find it difficult to believe that there was no suspician there on the OPs part.

I dunno, it can happen. I can think of two people, a man and a woman who were extremely promiscuous and their current partners(both pretty inexperienced) have no clue about that aspect of them. Or if they do they are ignoring it in a big way. In a non sexual notch count way I've known others whose relationship history was more than a little unhealthy and again the current partners have no clue. Being in love can make you blind to even ignore obvious red flags and that's across the board.

iwantmydinner · 13-07-2014 12:15PM

thebullkf wrote: »

this. 500 sexual partners at 27 years of age ( seems exaggerated but hey, one never knows) is the behaviour of a slut/tramp with absolutely no self respect, that person needs help. its unhealthy physically and mentally.

and yes were it my daughter, wife,mother, sister, i would call them a tramp- to their face.

Cool, I'm sure calling someone a tramp will help whatever issues you've diagnosed them with. Great approach.

Saipanne · 13-07-2014 12:17PM

h.bolla wrote: »

Myself and my GF broke up a few months back and it happened after a discussion about another girl with a similar story to the Magaluf girl.

I said something like 'no self respecting man will date the girl after this' and my GF defended her saying that shes young and drunk and what you do expect at that age.

I replied by saying "you were young and did you ever do anything like that?". Then her face changed I knew something was up.

After a lot of rowing she admitted she had a 6-some one night (her and 5 other men) along with a dozen or 3-somes over the years and has lost count on the amount of drunken one night stands shes had with randomers. Oh and for most of her teens right up to her mid 20's she has always had 1 or 2 friends with benefits at any given time most of them lasting for 3-4 months. She guessed all in all that she'd had around 500 partners give or take.

Its not exactly the kinda image that sprang to mind when we first got together and told me she only ever had 2 boyfriends and I'd be her third.

But alas, apparantly its none of my business what went on in her past, and if Im annoyed about her past then obviously I dont deserve her.

I thought I just had the worst luck and was dating a right bitch and put it behind me and moved on. But then I was reading a few threads on here (in the personal issues section) and I noticed that quite a lot of women posters have the same attitude.

This attitude really blows my mind. How do you gentlmen feel about the whole thing?

Personally, it would put me off her.

lavinia hathaway · 13-07-2014 12:17PM

Wibbs wrote: »

I dunno, it can happen. I can think of two people, a man and a woman who were extremely promiscuous and their current partners(both pretty inexperienced) have no clue about that aspect of them. Or if they do they are ignoring it in a big way. In a non sexual notch count way I've known others whose relationship history was more than a little unhealthy and again the current partners have no clue. Being in love can make you blind to even ignore obvious red flags and that's across the board.

I agree that we all ignore red flags in relationships but the main issue here isn't even one's opinion on promiscuity, the issue is that according to the OP he asked and wasn't given the information. Then he got accused of not deserving his girlfriend if he couldn't handle it. To be fair, it is a pretty big bombshell particularly in a long term relationship.

Teyla Emmagan · 13-07-2014 12:18PM

h.bolla wrote: »

She spent 3 years in Oz with her grandparents and it was in a party hotspot. It seems every second night was party night and its where she clocked up a lot of numbers. Thats where she had the 6-some and played lots of drinking games were she could end up having to lie on the table in front of everyone and masturbate for them or give someone a blowjob.

I actually think this is really sad. And demeaning. To me a game where you 'have' to masturbate for a bunch of people at the end of it, or give some randomer a blow job is not a game I would be interested in playing. I am all for doing whatever gets your rocks off, as long as you're in charge of the situation and a full participant, but being drunk and trading sexual tricks for the lolz doesn't sound like a position of power for a young woman to be in to me. I would question the level of self respect you'd have to be doing this regularly.

Personally I think sex is a million times better with someone you're really into. Someone who you fancy the ar&e off and spend as much time laughing in bed with as riding. To me, having a connection with someone is really important, it enhances the whole experience, both physically and emotionally. I think we're all better off when sex is still treated as being something 'special', and not as unimportant as a handshake. Then again, I spent most of my teenage years reading Mills & Boon and not honing my fellatio technique, so I would think like that.

500 sexual partners is way out of the woods IMO. I wouldn't want to sleep with anyone who had been around that much myself.

Saipanne · 13-07-2014 12:26PM

I would be worried about her being unfaithful, to be honest. She seems to lack self control and could possibly be a sex addict.

Aurora Green · 13-07-2014 12:33PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Exactly.

Unfortunately, it's women that generally try and advance this crazy argument.

Women were repressed back in old God's time and that was an outrage but unfortunately that seems to have led to a generation of women some of whom think it's okay to have hundreds of sexual partners and some of whom think that it's okay to cheerlead such behaviour.

What they fail to realise is that sluttish behaviour isn't emancipation - It's the opposite. Promiscuous women are a laughing stock and the butt of people's jokes. "Not the marrying kind" / "You'd bang her but you wouldn't date her" are some of the monikers that might apply.

Women need to realise that simply by respecting themselves and only sleeping with guys when it's appropriate, they have all of the power. They hold all the cards. But the women whose bedrooms are like Grand Central Station and their cheerleaders? A laughing stock.

Maybe some women are more interested in doing what they enjoy than looking for ways to gain power.

Why does a woman not respect her self simply because she enjoys having lots of sex ?

Aurora Green · 13-07-2014 12:35PM

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

I actually think this is really sad. And demeaning. To me a game where you 'have' to masturbate for a bunch of people at the end of it, or give some randomer a blow job is not a game I would be interested in playing. I am all for doing whatever gets your rocks off, as long as you're in charge of the situation and a full participant, but being drunk and trading sexual tricks for the lolz doesn't sound like a position of power for a young woman to be in to me. I would question the level of self respect you'd have to be doing this regularly.

Personally I think sex is a million times better with someone you're really into. Someone who you fancy the ar&e off and spend as much time laughing in bed with as riding. To me, having a connection with someone is really important, it enhances the whole experience, both physically and emotionally. I think we're all better off when sex is still treated as being something 'special', and not as unimportant as a handshake. Then again, I spent most of my teenage years reading Mills & Boon and not honing my fellatio technique, so I would think like that.

500 sexual partners is way out of the woods IMO. I wouldn't want to sleep with anyone who had been around that much myself.

That's your opinion but some people prefer sex with strangers.

Larry Wildman · 13-07-2014 12:45PM

Aurora Green wrote: »

Maybe some women are more interested in doing what they enjoy than looking for ways to gain power.

Why does a woman not respect her self simply because she enjoys having lots of sex ?

I don't believe that for a minute.

Ask anyone with an ounce of cop on whether first time sex with a randomer is better than 3rd/4th/5th time sex and you'll have your answer.

These women who think that they're empowered are actually more repressed than the women of the past who they ridicule.

lavinia hathaway · 13-07-2014 12:47PM

Aurora Green wrote: »

That's your opinion but some people prefer sex with strangers.

And some people don't want to deal with the repercussions of their partner's previous sexual preferences, especially when it results in a trip to an STI clinic.

eviltwin · 13-07-2014 01:07PM

Why try and psycho analyse? For every damaged individual having sex for validation there is a person who just enjoys it. Getting back to the OP's ex I don't think 500 is normal or healthy and I would have concerns about reasons driving that behaviour but that doesn't have to equal judging. I have about as much interest in a persons number of partners as I do in what their favourite colour is. Its not something that is relevant to me. I don't know why people get so hung up on it and use it as a way of judging the character of a person, we are all more than the sum of our sexual history aren't we? Do what makes you happy once you are safe about it and doing it for the right reasons.

Wibbs · 13-07-2014 01:19PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

I don't believe that for a minute.

Ask anyone with an ounce of cop on whether first time sex with a randomer is better than 3rd/4th/5th time sex and you'll have your answer.

I'd agree there. I'm pure shíte out of the gate. Need to build up some rapport, even if it's only physical. One nighters and once offs for me generally broke down into itch needs scratching/ego. Sexual pleasure was down the list TBH. People differ though. They might be more into the itch scratched kinda thing? At that time in their lives anyway.

py2006 · 13-07-2014 01:36PM

Aurora Green wrote: »

Why does a woman not respect her self simply because she enjoys having lots of sex ?

Who actually said this?

Btw there is a difference between somebody who enjoys having lots of sex (who doesn't) and the individual been discussed here.

h.bolla · 13-07-2014 01:45PM

jimd2 wrote: »

Firstly, I have read quite a bit of this thread but haven't really got the time to read it all.

To me this is a really strange and unusual thread. The 500+ sexual partners bit is not a shocker as in all walks of life we have extremes, also a guy having a problem with his partner's sexual past is not particularly surprising. What surprises me is that this comes together in a relationship that seems to have been a reasonably long one ( forgive me but I didn't pickup how long they have been together or whether they lived together).

If they were together less than 6 months then I could perhaps understand his being unaware of her past. However, more than that and you are probably starting to have a situation where you are meeting family, friends, ex friends, college buddies and experiences shared. Discussions regarding a variety of issues, holidays etc etc. I find it very difficult to rationalise the OP not knowing of his girlfriends previous lifestyle before they met or at least suspect what it was like. I used the word lifestyle as (in my humble opinion) that's what it must have been. Like, I can't imagine her being able to work full time, be a member of a tennis club/ hockey/ athletics club and manage to rack up 500+ partners in that time. Her friends at the time. Use have had similar lifestyles and, considering her age, many would still be living similar lives. I

The OP's ex gf must have suspected that her lifestyle (rightly or wrongly) was not one that would interest certain guys. She obviously liked the OP and, I suspect, saw him as a good catch. She might genuinely have decided that that lifestyle was no longer for her and that she wanted to settle down. She never actually lied to the OP but definitely, once a period passed, guilty by omission.

As I said, I don't know how long they were going out together and this might have been a deliberate way by the OPs ex gf to inform him of this aspect to her life. It might have been on her mind for a while but when she finally told him she messed it up and it was too late. In essence she has probably tried to change her lifestyle and settle down and exhibited a lack if experience in who she hooked up with and how she communicated her past with him.

When the OP first met the ex, did they jump into bed straight away? Did she say things like, I normally don't do this straight away or to that effect, which is something you might expect if she just had had 2 boyfriends. I just find it difficult to believe that there was no suspician there on the OPs part.

I have known a few women who were very very promiscuous and it didn't really effect my opinion of them and we were quite friendly. One made it known to me directly and indirectly to me that she was very interested in me. I had a good job in the same workplace but would have been reasonably quiet and not known for "screwing around". Thinking back why I didn't bite was probably a number of reasons, part of it was insecurity on my part that I would live up to other guys she was with and also partly that it would be "news" that we got together considering how much of a reputation she had and me being relatively new on their scene. However, I was under no illusions as to her past and find it very difficult as to how that could have been masked.

I hope that the OP has learned from this experience. When you start going out with someone and you have had zero contact in the past and no common friends you should be trying to build up a picture of them and their personality, attitudes, experiences if you are thinking of the relationship long term. I think the OP is at least partly at fault for failing to do that.

From the point of view of the ex, she has probably learned a lesson here also in that she realises that, even if her lifestyle has changed, she should try and ascertain the attitudes tv of a new bf and that these differences could well come to a head if she doesn't draw them out early enough on.

That was a long post!

As I mentioned, her family are Ozzies. Her parents moved here and I guess they liked it and settled down and had kids. Shes the only kid that stayed here, her two brothers are over there with the rest of their grandparents/aunties/uncles/cousins. Her parents are still here and I did meet them. I doubt they knew what she got up to, but even if they did I doubt they'd care. They are very hippyish constantly trying to rebel against Catholic oppression and talk about free love and naturism and all this kind of thing. Maybe its not suprising their daughter turned out the way she did.

Yeh the 500 number is high but its what she told me! Was she lying? I personally dont think so. But yes its possible.

For me I think its possible because if she was going to lie you would expect her to at least keep it low enough that I might forgive her. Afterall she was wanting for us to start a family.

As I said she clocked a chunk of numbers in Oz by giving maybe 3 or 4 lads blowjobs all in the one night because its a game and shes not oppressed and shes drunk and its what you do.

My fear was that if she had those kinda nights lets say even just twice a week (though she reckoned she was doing stuff every second or third night because her high sex drive) thats 6 lads a week. 52 x 6 = 312 lads each year and she was there for 3 years.

My fear is 500 was a conservative estimate. But yeh. For all I know the number could be 10, 50, 500, 1000 or anything inbetween. I only know what she told me. And she told me she wasnt sure herself what the number was but she guessed it would be around 500.

Oh and someone asked why did I not mention STDs sooner? I didnt think it made much odds to the discussion really. I still dont. Yeh its somewhat related, but its not the main focus. THe main focus here is why women keep insisting what goes in her past is none of her current boyfriends business.

Was I ever suspicious? Nope. Not at all. She seemed like a well travelled, open minded, intelligent, career/family focused woman. We didnt have sex for about 2-3 months after we started dating because she felt its important to wait and not just give in. And that really made me fall for her if Im honest. Basically her opinion was that after she arrived home in Ireland she had got all the partying of her system and wanted to settle down with a man and have kids/career.

OK. I would like to ask to username123 (or any of the other girls on here) why they feel thats its absolutely none of a mans business what went on in a girls past? Whats the logical reason? Why do girls get so defensive about it?

After my experiences, if a girl ever says that to me Im just going to think "skanky background. RUN LIKE CRAZY...."

Womens attitudes to previous sexual encounters see mod note post #1

Comments