Savage Love Podcast
Check out the all new Savage Lovecast site!
Got a question for Dan Savage?
Call the Savage Love Podcast at 206-201-2720
or email Dan at mail@savagelove.net.
Savage Love Archives
-
May 8
Reading Comprehension Fail -
May 1
Move On -
Apr 24
No Problem -
Apr 17
Dick Holes -
Apr 10
A First
More from Dan Savage
-
Slog Overnight
-
SL Letter of the Day: Gonna Boil My Laptop After Answering This One
-
Azerbaijan's Contribution to Eurovision
-
New Gun Enthusiast...
-
Meanwhile in Toronto
Books by Dan Savage
American Savage
It Gets Better: Coming Out, Overcoming Bullying, and Creating a Life Worth Living
The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family
Things I've Learned from Women Who've Dumped Me
Skipping Towards Gomorrah
The Kid: What Happened After My Boyfriend and I Decided to Go Get Pregnant
Savage Links
- Babeland
- Fleshbot
- Good Vibrations
- Joe Newton/Savage Illustrations
- Planned Parenthood
- Spreading Santorum
- Planned Parenthood's Teen Wire
- Kinsey Confidential
- Carnal Nation
- Tiny Nibbles
Want a Second Opinion?
Contact Dan Savage
Savage on YouTube
Loading...
Enemies First
December 18, 2008
+ Enlarge this Image
Joe Newton
Okay, I need a kick in the face or something.
My boyfriend of two years and I broke up a little more than a week ago. He cheated. But there's a bit more to the story: He was a raging alcoholic, and I've broken up with him a few times. One of those times—when he was at our place and supposed to be packing his things and be gone by morning—I kind of rebounded off of some guy, had sex with him, then came home later the next day and found out that my boyfriend was still at my place. We talked and got back together. Later on, he found out about the rebound sex I had, and I think that's why he cheated. We weren't a healthy couple, all in all.
We both want to remain friends, so a week after the breakup, we went out for coffee. We both realized that the feelings we have for each other haven't gone away. There's no chance in hell I'm getting back with him after he cheated, but I can't resist this urge to have sex with him. And I know the feeling is mutual. So now I'm torn on whether to start a sex-based "relationship" with him or just block him from my life.
Cheated On One
If you've ruled out getting back together with this guy because he's a raging alcoholic, COO, that's fine. If you're not getting back together with him because this relationship generates way too much conflict and drama, COO, that's also fine. But if you're not getting back together with this guy—a guy who you have strong feelings for—because he cheated on you, well, that's just retarded.
Yeah, yeah: You didn't cheat. Not technically. You were officially "off again" when you had rapid rebound sex with someone else, and you were "on again" when he had sex with someone else. But... come on. You fucked someone else during a particularly rough patch and kept that info from him when you decided to get back together. He found out you fucked someone else and went and fucked someone else himself. Now, you can choose to view his cheating as a violation of trust and an unforgivable betrayal and wocka wocka wocka, COO, or you can choose to view it as part of your most recent rough patch and round his cheating down to rebound sex, even if he was rebounding after you were officially back together, and get back together with him.
If that's what you want. And you know what? It sounds like that's what you want.
My girlfriend of seven years has disgusting manners. She eats loudly with her mouth open, farts and belches incessantly, snorts instead of blows her nose, and so on.
I used to find it refreshing to be with a girl who was so uninhibited. But now it is getting on my nerves, and it's embarrassing when she farts in front of our friends. I am starting to be turned off by this, and I don't see her as desirable anymore. She thinks I am being sexist and have a double standard.
Tell me PLEASE: Am I intolerant? And is there something wrong with me that I'm losing my libido?
Grossed Out
Yes, there's something wrong with you—there's something wrong with anyone who could spend seven years with this woman. Seven minutes sounds intolerable.
I wouldn't tolerate a dude who behaved the way your girlfriend does—or advise a woman to tolerate one—so there's no sexist double standard on my end. And so long as you're not ripping farts in front of her friends or chewing with your mouth open, there's no double standard on your end either, GO. Fact is, your girlfriend is a pig and a slob, and she'd be a pig and a slob even if she had a cock and balls.
There's a guy out there for her somewhere—a guy with similar habits, or a guy with a higher tolerance for loudly chewed food, or a guy with a fetish for girl farts—and the sooner you DTMFA, the sooner she can start delighting him with her uninhibited ways.
My partner and I have a great thing going—madly in love, together a year, a great sex life, similar hobbies/interests/etc. Basically, we're both on the same page in thinking, "This is it!" We've both been very open and honest about everything, including our relationship histories, but yesterday something caught me completely off guard. In the course of a dinner conversation that led to talk about old partners, I asked how many she'd had, thinking her number was a few more than mine (10, unless I'm forgetting someone). She sheepishly answered, "100." One-zero-zero!
She lived in NYC for a couple years, and maybe that's how people do it there. But I'm a good-hearted, Southern, serial-monogamist boy and this makes me feel, well, odd. I'm really not sure how I feel about this, but I am definitely feeling something. I have zero fear of her cheating on me, and she's way into our sex life, but I'm not sure what to make of this. Thoughts?
Way Tons Fewer
Your girlfriend had a lot of guys, so your girlfriend knows good guys from bad, and good sex from bad, and she could get another guy, a different one, whenever she wanted. And yet she's with you, WTF, and she's faithful to you. Which can only mean one thing: You must be pretty awesome. Your girlfriend could have any dude she wants—she's had almost every dude she's wanted—and yet she chooses to be with you.
You know what you should make of this? It's a compliment, WTF, and you should take it as one.
Long story short: I'm a 28-year-old Aussie gay guy, very recently dumped. His choice, not mine. But the reason he gave for breaking up was the way we met. He believes that for a relationship to truly work, it's important to be friends first. As a single gay guy, I've tended to meet guys at parties and clubs, and I always figured that you start with sexual chemistry and develop a friendship from there. Am I being shallow?
Suddenly In The Scene
Okay, SITS, your ex said it didn't work out because you weren't friends first. But what your ex meant, SITS, was that it didn't work out because once he got to know you... he didn't like you.
Sorry if that's harsh, but there it is. No one dumps a man he truly loves—or even likes well enough that love is still a possibility—on a bullshit technicality like that. ("I'm just crazy about you, but we met on a Tuesday and I've always felt that it's important to meet someone on a Thursday, so....") You had good sexual chemistry at the start, it seems, and you developed stronger feelings for him as things progressed. But the more he got to know you, the less attracted to you he was.
It's possible that your ex has concluded that the next person he dates has to be "friends first" because you weren't friends first and it didn't work out. God only knows what he'll decide to do if his next relationship—one with a guy who was "friends first"—doesn't work out. Enemies first, perhaps?
Share via
1
I'd love to know how old the guy and girl in the 3rd question are. If she's say, 35, thats on average about 5 or 6 people a year. Not really earth shattering if you ask me. You could have a monogamous boyfriend for a couple years, then a couple years being single where you have a casual one-time tryst once a month or so. Pretty normal behavior, and your number would be 100 by then.
The woman's probably been plenty faithful to other boyfriends, I don't see where the big compliment to this guy is.
The woman's probably been plenty faithful to other boyfriends, I don't see where the big compliment to this guy is.
5
Why is it weird that they were together a year and it never came up before that? I'm married with 2 kids and I still don't know how many people my husband slept with before me and he doesn't know my "numbers" either. It's a think of the past and we don't give a crap - it's totally petty. We're happy and in love now - hip hip hooray!
7
As a health educator, I would add to Dan's advice that both WTF and his partner (and, frankly, anyone who's sexually active) should get tested for all sexually transmitted infections. There are a handful of STIs that even condoms don't protect against, and being exposed to that many people increases her (and WTF's) risk of contracting one or two.
8
I'm all for having lots of partners, but I do think 100 is a little high unless the woman in question has been sexually active for over twenty years. A younger person claiming a number like that would make me wonder if there weren't some call girl work, swinging, or sexual compulsion in the past. Any of that would be fine by me, but I'd want to know about it before continuing the relationship. I think WTF might want to dig deeper and find out how this 100 number came to be. If it really was along the lines of five or six people a year for twenty years, then no biggie. If that 100 happened in, say, three years... this dude could have some valid concerns.
11
Wait, is it the 18? Hahahaha....sorry I couldn't resist. Maybe if I say it, this will be the first time that a newbie doesn't bring it up.
12
I've often wondered about the "no secrets" idea versus the "past is past" mentality.
Is one ever a better choice than the other? Is it up to curiosity / completely subjective? Is divulging more likely to lead to sharing of unwanted info, or is it worth it to avoid potentially surprising conversations later on?
Is one ever a better choice than the other? Is it up to curiosity / completely subjective? Is divulging more likely to lead to sharing of unwanted info, or is it worth it to avoid potentially surprising conversations later on?
14
Rock on, Rachelle! I completely agree. I've been with a guy for a year and a half and we have never asked each other about our "numbers" and I don't expect we ever will. Who cares? Those other partners have nothing to do with us. Dan, your advice was spot-on.
Personally, I don't see the point in trying to find a way for 100 to be "okay". Maybe she did sleep with 5 or 6 guys a year for 20 years. Or maybe she's had 5 relationships and also had a wild period where she slept with 5 guys in one night on 19 different occasions. Or she really liked orgies for a little while. There are plenty of ways in which you could work out the math but who cares either way? The point is, as Dan points out, she is with you now because you are who satisfies and makes her happy. That, and a clean bill of sexual health (which you should care about if a person has had ONE partner) is all you need to care about
Personally, I don't see the point in trying to find a way for 100 to be "okay". Maybe she did sleep with 5 or 6 guys a year for 20 years. Or maybe she's had 5 relationships and also had a wild period where she slept with 5 guys in one night on 19 different occasions. Or she really liked orgies for a little while. There are plenty of ways in which you could work out the math but who cares either way? The point is, as Dan points out, she is with you now because you are who satisfies and makes her happy. That, and a clean bill of sexual health (which you should care about if a person has had ONE partner) is all you need to care about
15
Dan, well done with your answer to WTF! I'm a female who stopped counting around 80. Yes, I had my fun, it was always *safe* fun, and so what? And you're right. It means that my current monogamous commitment to my partner is that much bigger of a commitment than it would be for someone who's always behaved in that way. If he's the one who tamed me, then he must be pretty special.
And yes, that IS the way they do things in New York. If you can't get laid in New York, you can't get laid.
And yes, that IS the way they do things in New York. If you can't get laid in New York, you can't get laid.
16
For those insisting the girl might be a slut for having slept with 100 people in her life - depending on her age - what's the allowable quota here?
It sounds like a lot to me, too, but maybe she counts partners differently. She could have had a wild couple of years in college. Who knows?
I'd be far more concerned that Southern Boy apparently has some quota in mind (or he wouldn't have asked) but didn't bother to bring it up until a year into the relationship. Suddenly she's got from "IT!" to a lukewarm. Never mind he's been boinking her without asking about her sexual history until now. THAT'S healthy.
So next time you get asked, girls, better lie about your past sex or you might make that guy feel insecure.
It sounds like a lot to me, too, but maybe she counts partners differently. She could have had a wild couple of years in college. Who knows?
I'd be far more concerned that Southern Boy apparently has some quota in mind (or he wouldn't have asked) but didn't bother to bring it up until a year into the relationship. Suddenly she's got from "IT!" to a lukewarm. Never mind he's been boinking her without asking about her sexual history until now. THAT'S healthy.
So next time you get asked, girls, better lie about your past sex or you might make that guy feel insecure.
17
In regards to the girl who had 100 sexual partners, the guy should be happy she told the truth. Most girls never do. The old addage goes that you can take the number of sexual partners a guy said he's had and divide it by 2, and take the number the girl says and multiply it by 2. I know very few girls who actually 'fess up to the real number of guys they've been with. I certainly never do.
18
You guys are missing the point. For those of us with fewer than 10 partners (I'm 45) hearing a number like 100 is vertigo inducing. Such a person would suddenly seem like an alien to you. This couple needs to spend some time delving into the ways that they've led their lives so that they can begin to have some kind of mutual understanding of sexuality.
19
Iono. Party on the weekends - that could prolly quickly add up to forty guys a year.
's the 21st centrury. I think it'll take more to get my knickers in a twist.
's the 21st centrury. I think it'll take more to get my knickers in a twist.
20
I agree that 100 partners is probably more normal than one might think, but one thing occurred to me: with straight sex it's fairly black-and-white as far as *actual* sex vs not goes, but this woman might include oral sex among her numbers. My partner does and the numbers would be quite different if she added in penetrative sex. (Then again, there's a chance this woman's numbers would skyrocket if she added oral in.)
21
"we met on a Tuesday and I've always felt that it's important to meet someone on a Thursday, so...."
Dan, you're the best.
Sad to realize that there really ARE people like this.
Keep em comin! :P
Dan, you're the best.
Sad to realize that there really ARE people like this.
Keep em comin! :P
22
Bit off topic, but... back in the 2 week window, I donated to No On Prop 8 and sent in my question, but never got an answer. I resent it from another mail account about a month later in case it got caught by Dan's spam filter. Still no answer.
Does anyone know if he's still backlogged on these? If not, uh - any suggestions?
Does anyone know if he's still backlogged on these? If not, uh - any suggestions?
24
My situation is not nearly to the extent that WTF is, (my gf is my first, but she was with someone in high school) but I still like your answer to him, and I have to say thank you for that perspective.
25
My fiance and I had the numbers discussion pretty early on. I can count mine on one hand, depending on what your definition of "is" is. His answer was "I'm pretty sure it's less than twenty."
Honestly it doesn't matter one whit to me, whether his number is five or fifty, or even that he's not entirely sure. I've seen the paperwork that tells me he's free of disease, I know he's faithful to me, and I get to enjoy the benefits of his experience with women, both in and out of the bedroom.
Honestly it doesn't matter one whit to me, whether his number is five or fifty, or even that he's not entirely sure. I've seen the paperwork that tells me he's free of disease, I know he's faithful to me, and I get to enjoy the benefits of his experience with women, both in and out of the bedroom.
26
Ever wonder what to make of those studies that say that men have on average 7 sex partners in a lifetime and women have 4? Doesn't that seem a bit low? Or am I just totally weird for having slept with more than 24 guys (and I'm not done yet)?
27
I don't think he can dig deeper cos he's acted all weird since asking and his gf has gotten the message that it was a mistake to be honest about her number, so she's prolly not gonna tell him anything more. I take mild offense at the idea that monogamy means more coming from "someone like her". Are we really labeling people this way still? When you're single you're single, it has no reflection on what type of person you are in a relationship. I personally never tell partner numbers, I don't lie, but I just don't divulge since its no one's business and it doesn't matter. If I was required to tell for some reason though my personal method of fudging the numbers would be not counting anyone I've only slept with once.
28
What happened in the situations with GO and SITS is actually the same, although their roles are reversed.
GO used to be quite happy with his girlfriend and found her habits "refreshing". Now he finds her habits disgusting. Why??
Because the more he got to know her, the less he found he liked her. When we like someone, we find ways to overlook their negative attributes, perhaps even to the point of celebrating them as "refreshing". When we find ourselves in a relationship with someone and realize we don't like them all that much anymore, we find ways to "justify" not liking them. It is psychologically more palatable to dump someone if you have solid "reasons" rather than the softer "I just don't like her anymore". The latter may be more emotionally and intellectually honest, but it begs the question of why you spent seven years with her.
GO used to be quite happy with his girlfriend and found her habits "refreshing". Now he finds her habits disgusting. Why??
Because the more he got to know her, the less he found he liked her. When we like someone, we find ways to overlook their negative attributes, perhaps even to the point of celebrating them as "refreshing". When we find ourselves in a relationship with someone and realize we don't like them all that much anymore, we find ways to "justify" not liking them. It is psychologically more palatable to dump someone if you have solid "reasons" rather than the softer "I just don't like her anymore". The latter may be more emotionally and intellectually honest, but it begs the question of why you spent seven years with her.
29
As a 20-year-old guy in the single digits (who hasn't kissed many girls, but who has had sex with every girl he's kissed). It always makes me feel a little weirded out when a girlfriend's number dwarfs mine. I feel jealous (hey, at least I admit it) and also rather confused; the concept of being able to fuck lots of people is something that I've not had.
And I don't think it's such a big compliment, as Karey said. Just because she's with him doesn't mean he's any good at sex at all. It just means that she loves him.
And I don't think it's such a big compliment, as Karey said. Just because she's with him doesn't mean he's any good at sex at all. It just means that she loves him.
31
Woah, Dan. When that woman a few weeks ago complained that her boyfriend kept a 7-Up bottle next to the bed for midnight peeing, you said that was fine. Now a man's complaining about his girlfriend's bad manners, something he knew about at the start of the relationship, and you've switched positions. Hello, double standard! I'm not saying that he should stay with her, but just because you say you don't have double standards doesn't mean that it's true.
33
I did some back-of-the-envelope calculations and as a relatively non-promiscuous 27yo gay guy I've had around 50 partners over 10 years, which I'd peg as well below-average for my demographic. I've had crabs and gonorrhea a couple of times each but that's it, and not for several years. None of my friends would remotely consider me a slut, methinks there's a double-standard for women?
34
On Dan's advise to Way Tons Fewer..
It's spot on. But again, feeding off these (suggested to be hot) straight boys, whether or not it elicits some of Dan's best work, makes wanna throw up. It's predatory, and obvious he's getting off on it.
It's spot on. But again, feeding off these (suggested to be hot) straight boys, whether or not it elicits some of Dan's best work, makes wanna throw up. It's predatory, and obvious he's getting off on it.
35
Yea, good point Mima Kiri. To claim that a number like 100 doesn't say ANYTHING about the person is nonsense. It just so happens that Savage Love doesn't think what the number says is BAD, but it definitely says SOMEthing.
If that number got racked up over a short period of time, I'd definitely want to know why, and I would probably not like the answer.
If that number got racked up over a 20 year period, I'd want to know why the person hasn't been able to get into a committed relationship for over 2 decades!
If that number got racked up over a short period of time, I'd definitely want to know why, and I would probably not like the answer.
If that number got racked up over a 20 year period, I'd want to know why the person hasn't been able to get into a committed relationship for over 2 decades!
36
I think as a race, humans best skill is being judgmental...just take a loko at some of the comments here. Okay, so if the guy's only 50% black...that is fine...but if you told me Barack was 100% black, well that's just a little too much for me.
37
For WTF, isn't that the reason some people say not to ask about the numbers thing? Assuming she is faithful to him, and both have been checked out regligiously for STIs, they can have a healthy monogomous relationship, as both seem to want. I have a less than spotless sexual past myself, and my bf has a less shady sexual history than me, but it doesn't affect the fact that I am with him and faithful to him now, regardless of my past actions or my reasons, not all of which were healthy when I was making those descisions,so I really don't think it is fair to judge whether or not this girl is going to be faithful because of her past. I am sure it was very hard for her to be honest with him about that big a number, and the fact that she was instead of making up a smaller, more comfrtable one is a big example of her desire to have a good relationship with him, so if he is absolutely certain she wouldn't cheat, and he said he was, I don't see why it is such a major issue that she has a bad girl past.
39
if you know you need a kick in the face, why write to Dan to ask for advice? because you clearly know what you need. a little maturity might help also.
40
How to you count? Is it only penetration or does getting a BJ count? Does giving her head count? How about hand jobs in clubs? Man, if that is the case I am well, well, into the hundred plus range-if not, then much, much lower-11.
42
A woman that has a lot of partners is not a bad person, or a whore. She is a woman that makes decisions about what she wants, when she wants it. There are conditions where women (or men) have sex uncontrollably, without enjoyment. I know some women like that, and it is sad. But, when they find someone they love, they always (at least in the cases I have seen) turn around and have a healthy sex life. Her past trangressions should not be an issue in the current relationship. And, a clean bill of health is important for ANYONE entering a new relationship to obtain. Unless you are a prude virgin, you need to get tested for STD's.
43
I don't know what the big deal is, WTF. I am in the same situation with my boyfriend - together a year, similar interests and attitudes on life, and around the same age. (early 30's). We will probably get married at some point. We've had this discussion, and our numbers are about the same - 30ish, but I don't count oral. Not sure he did either. So, maybe both 50ish? Who cares?
Like others have said, we love each other now, have accepted each others sordid pasts (not just the sexual stuff) and are monogamous and have been tested for STIs. That conversation should happen first. If you love her, love her for who she is now, and thank your lucky stars that she's probably a devil in bed! (I know that lots of practice made me good at what I do - but so does being in love with the person you're screwing).
For the record, we live in a city on the east coast, but not everyone is like us. Many are more promiscuous, some less. Good luck!
Like others have said, we love each other now, have accepted each others sordid pasts (not just the sexual stuff) and are monogamous and have been tested for STIs. That conversation should happen first. If you love her, love her for who she is now, and thank your lucky stars that she's probably a devil in bed! (I know that lots of practice made me good at what I do - but so does being in love with the person you're screwing).
For the record, we live in a city on the east coast, but not everyone is like us. Many are more promiscuous, some less. Good luck!
44
I've never understood the fetishism for virginity that our culture has. Personally, I'd like to think that my lovers want someone who knows what the hell he's doing.
Of course, the primary concern should be safety, but tests can deal with that, and if you're intimate enough to fuck, you're intimate enough to go get tested together. Safe practices and some sense in choosing partners means that a number is just that: a meaningless number.
I also think Dan's response was perfect. I know with other guys the fear is that someone, somehow, out there, was better than you in bed. I accept this as a fact of life. I realize my partners have probably had bigger and better than me at times in the past, but guess what: they're not having sex right with her right now, I am. Or maybe they are, but in that case, they're generous enough to share and that makes them OK in my book. So guys (and, I suppose girls too), lose the inferiority complex! If you weren't sexually desirable and satisfying, that person wouldn't be screwing you on a regular basis.
Of course, the primary concern should be safety, but tests can deal with that, and if you're intimate enough to fuck, you're intimate enough to go get tested together. Safe practices and some sense in choosing partners means that a number is just that: a meaningless number.
I also think Dan's response was perfect. I know with other guys the fear is that someone, somehow, out there, was better than you in bed. I accept this as a fact of life. I realize my partners have probably had bigger and better than me at times in the past, but guess what: they're not having sex right with her right now, I am. Or maybe they are, but in that case, they're generous enough to share and that makes them OK in my book. So guys (and, I suppose girls too), lose the inferiority complex! If you weren't sexually desirable and satisfying, that person wouldn't be screwing you on a regular basis.
45
As a 44 yr. old woman, I've been with probably about 70 -75 men and women. So, I had some fun when I was younger and IT WAS FUN!!! I'm in a committed 5 yr. relationship and very happy now, as I was then.
The point everyone has missed so far is that experience makes for a better lover, WTF is happy with their sex life, so I'd say the number of lovers is a bonus and I bet there is more to come...;).
The point everyone has missed so far is that experience makes for a better lover, WTF is happy with their sex life, so I'd say the number of lovers is a bonus and I bet there is more to come...;).
46
Speaking as someone with a fair amount of experience with substance abuse, I strongly recommend NOT being in relationships with raging alcoholics. You will get hurt, and you're not doing the addict any favors either.
47
I got dumped because my number was over 20 and his was 7...I was 27 and he was 26. I've been having sex since I was 15, so if I average it out, I have had less than 2 partners per year. Some of those were one night stands, some were friends with bennies and some were relationships. Guys are so sensitive about numbers, but it doesn't matter. Everyone has baggage, some more than others. You just have to decide if you love and trust the person enough to accept their baggage, whatever it might be. Good for WTF's girl for fessing up. She could have just said 10 and it would have probably never come up again.
48
I think it's pretty fucking lame for anyone to judge someone who had 100 sex partners, or to consider that a concern (outside of the normal 'let's get tested, please'). Sex is human nature, it has health benefits, and obviously is an enjoyable pastime. The only reason we would be 'concerned' about that is because we are applying our outdated parental and societal religious doctrines of shame on an activity that is sometimes beautiful, sometimes adventurous, sometimes mundane, always natural. We don't need to worry about disease and unintended pregnancy anymore (and please, crazies, no need to interpret this as 'we can all get abortions!'). Let's just love our bodies!
49
I think most of you guys are missing the point here. kresblamania nailed it-- this guy isn't judging her, he doesn't have some "sexist double standard," he just doesn't have that kind of experience and he's suddenly tripped up.
it's easy to jump to all the defensive double standard numbers talk, hell, i've given the slut/stud speech a million times too. but i think WTF sounded really thoughtful and accepting and was just trying to figure out how to wrap his head around someone who had a completely different sexual history than him. it would be like suddenly finding out your partner had a previous marraige, or i don't know, used to date someone famous. i'm fishing here. just imagine if you suddenly weren't quite sure how to relate to your partner's past. i think dan's advice was great.
it's easy to jump to all the defensive double standard numbers talk, hell, i've given the slut/stud speech a million times too. but i think WTF sounded really thoughtful and accepting and was just trying to figure out how to wrap his head around someone who had a completely different sexual history than him. it would be like suddenly finding out your partner had a previous marraige, or i don't know, used to date someone famous. i'm fishing here. just imagine if you suddenly weren't quite sure how to relate to your partner's past. i think dan's advice was great.
50
I'm in the same position as WTF - I'm nearly 40 and I've had 3 partners: A one-night-stand in college, an ex-wife, and now my current partner. The ex-wife had significantly more experience than me. My current partner lost count at some pretty large number. However, both the ex-wife and the current partner claim me as the best they've ever had.
So, Dan, your advice to WTF was absolutely perfect - if you have a "low" number and someone with a "high" number *wants* to stay with you - that means you've got something worth staying with. Ultimately, who cares about the 100 partners? They could've been 100 shitty short-term flings or one-night-stands (likely with other people who have had 100 shitty short-term flings or one-night-stands).
WTF - consider yourself very fortunate that you are the one out of 100 that this woman wants. You're in the 99th percentile - that is A+ material.
So, Dan, your advice to WTF was absolutely perfect - if you have a "low" number and someone with a "high" number *wants* to stay with you - that means you've got something worth staying with. Ultimately, who cares about the 100 partners? They could've been 100 shitty short-term flings or one-night-stands (likely with other people who have had 100 shitty short-term flings or one-night-stands).
WTF - consider yourself very fortunate that you are the one out of 100 that this woman wants. You're in the 99th percentile - that is A+ material.
51
The only thing that really concerns me about the 100 partners is (as someone pointed out earlier), it's important to be tested for STDs before having sex, since condoms can't protect against all STDs. I highly doubt that someone with that many partners has followed that route. She should have be upfront about that because she's putting his health at risk. Of course, it works both ways because he didn't bother to disclose his history and get tested either.
52
1. Sorry, don't agree. He's packing his stuff to move out? They're done. She has no obligation towards him, sexually, and getting hammered to have sloppy sex is perfectly reasonable break-up behavior. They're going out and he finds out about it and sleeps with someone else? That's cheating. If he was really uncomfortable, why the fuck didn't he BREAK UP WITH HER?? It seems to be something they're comfortable with.
2. Aaaah yes. Please copy and paste this and broadcast it for all the dudes to hear, all the dudes who insist they want a chick who likes ot watch sports and eat pizza 'just like one of the guys.' Oh, what's that? She has to eat ribs while maintaining clear skin and a tight body? She can watch sports but swearing like a sailor is embarrassing? she can play videogames but had better not beat you? She can't primp and spend hours getting ready like a girlie girl but has to be model hot at the drop of a hat. Right. Fantasy world. But Dan's right, women shouldn't accept this from men, either...
God I love getting to comment on advice columns. It feels so... I don't know, liberating.
2. Aaaah yes. Please copy and paste this and broadcast it for all the dudes to hear, all the dudes who insist they want a chick who likes ot watch sports and eat pizza 'just like one of the guys.' Oh, what's that? She has to eat ribs while maintaining clear skin and a tight body? She can watch sports but swearing like a sailor is embarrassing? she can play videogames but had better not beat you? She can't primp and spend hours getting ready like a girlie girl but has to be model hot at the drop of a hat. Right. Fantasy world. But Dan's right, women shouldn't accept this from men, either...
God I love getting to comment on advice columns. It feels so... I don't know, liberating.
53
My husband and I had the "numbers" chat in the beginning. Mine was higher than his, but he had to count because he'd never kept track. So, for demographic purposes, I am 30 and have never lived outside of a small town in the midwest, and my numbers are: 50 men and 5 women. My husband is 40 and spent 3 years in Europe in the military and his number is: 19 women and no men. Plus, I've had a wider variety of experience than him (3ways and such), but he's never been jealous. Socked maybe, but never jealous or disgusted. I think maybe WTF deserves the benefit of the doubt; he may just be momentarily shocked and he could get over it soon. Then again he may decide to be furious and disgusted and wreck the best thing in his life.
55
"it's easy to jump to all the defensive double standard numbers talk, hell, i've given the slut/stud speech a million times too. but i think WTF sounded really thoughtful and accepting and was just trying to figure out how to wrap his head around someone who had a completely different sexual history than him. it would be like suddenly finding out your partner had a previous marraige, or i don't know, used to date someone famous. i'm fishing here. just imagine if you suddenly weren't quite sure how to relate to your partner's past. i think dan's advice was great."
I agree. And as a young woman from a conservative background, my number is small (even if you count oral) and I'm very conflicted about the big number issue.
But I think one of my concerns that I think is logical, beyond the STD issue, would be that as a woman I think it's hard to find good partners. I can hardly imagine being able to find 100 good partners! And so it makes me feel like strictly from a probability standpoint she must have put up with a lot of shit and bad sex.
I don't know that that's the case, of course. It's just, as the guy above said, I have trouble wrapping my head around it.
And maybe in New York people get laid a lot. I also grew up in the south, and I think most people there get married after just having slept with a few people.
I do, however, feel that how many men she's been with doesn't necessarily say anything about how good in bed he is, OR how good in bed she is. (My few mediocre hookups, for instance, have not exactly resulted in more skillz in the sack for me to date. And I'm currently in the market for something more stable just b/c I'm tired and frustrated with bouncing around(no pun intended))
I agree. And as a young woman from a conservative background, my number is small (even if you count oral) and I'm very conflicted about the big number issue.
But I think one of my concerns that I think is logical, beyond the STD issue, would be that as a woman I think it's hard to find good partners. I can hardly imagine being able to find 100 good partners! And so it makes me feel like strictly from a probability standpoint she must have put up with a lot of shit and bad sex.
I don't know that that's the case, of course. It's just, as the guy above said, I have trouble wrapping my head around it.
And maybe in New York people get laid a lot. I also grew up in the south, and I think most people there get married after just having slept with a few people.
I do, however, feel that how many men she's been with doesn't necessarily say anything about how good in bed he is, OR how good in bed she is. (My few mediocre hookups, for instance, have not exactly resulted in more skillz in the sack for me to date. And I'm currently in the market for something more stable just b/c I'm tired and frustrated with bouncing around(no pun intended))
56
Oi Dan,
COO asked for a kick in the face (= advice to quit seeing her ex) and you tell her to get back together with him! He's an alcoholic, unreliable and a drama king - the cheating is indeed the least of it. She should stay clear of him (not "friends", that's just begging for more drama) until she has a happy stable new life. And then she probably won't want to see him.
COO asked for a kick in the face (= advice to quit seeing her ex) and you tell her to get back together with him! He's an alcoholic, unreliable and a drama king - the cheating is indeed the least of it. She should stay clear of him (not "friends", that's just begging for more drama) until she has a happy stable new life. And then she probably won't want to see him.
58
Addressing the farting girlfriend: If someone of either sex acted that way I would ditch them. Rude is rude.
The 100 partner question: I feel it is never appropriate to discuss past sexual encounters or relationships with your present partner. It only leads to suspicion and hurt feelings.
The 100 partner question: I feel it is never appropriate to discuss past sexual encounters or relationships with your present partner. It only leads to suspicion and hurt feelings.
59
Some days, your advice to heteros is a godsend, Dan, and some days you sound like a zebra lecturing a herring. Most of the time, of course, you're just another guy giving excellent advice.
You're being a total zebra today with GO. Sure, his girlfriend sounds like a slob and a pig. Sure, he should DTMFA if this bothers him so much, and it's absurd to accuse his *libido* of having a double standard, sexist or otherwise. What should it do, apologize? But you can't just laugh and say you're totally gender-blind just because you wouldn't "advise" any man or woman to tolerate a piggish slob like this. If there were "something wrong" with anyone who could spend seven years with this sort of a lover, my mom wouldn't still be married to my dad. Nor would most of my friends' mothers, nor some of my female friends for that matter. It's worlds easier to find a het girl or a gay person willing to tolerate farting, belching slobs (or one who even fetishizes them) than it's going to be for this girl. It's no wonder she's pouting, useless though it may be.
This guy probably wrote to you begging for answers because he knows from your record that you're good with the "Wanting X isn't sexist because I'd want X from my boyfriend too" routine. The obvious answer to give to such wimps is "So what if you're as sexist as everybody else, you want what you want. DTMFA and own up to it." And you know, his letter should have been enough to let you know that he's likely judging his girlfriend by some double standard or another. If this girl truly does belch and fart incessantly she doesn't need a debate about her boyfriend's feminist browny points. She needs medical attention.
You're being a total zebra today with GO. Sure, his girlfriend sounds like a slob and a pig. Sure, he should DTMFA if this bothers him so much, and it's absurd to accuse his *libido* of having a double standard, sexist or otherwise. What should it do, apologize? But you can't just laugh and say you're totally gender-blind just because you wouldn't "advise" any man or woman to tolerate a piggish slob like this. If there were "something wrong" with anyone who could spend seven years with this sort of a lover, my mom wouldn't still be married to my dad. Nor would most of my friends' mothers, nor some of my female friends for that matter. It's worlds easier to find a het girl or a gay person willing to tolerate farting, belching slobs (or one who even fetishizes them) than it's going to be for this girl. It's no wonder she's pouting, useless though it may be.
This guy probably wrote to you begging for answers because he knows from your record that you're good with the "Wanting X isn't sexist because I'd want X from my boyfriend too" routine. The obvious answer to give to such wimps is "So what if you're as sexist as everybody else, you want what you want. DTMFA and own up to it." And you know, his letter should have been enough to let you know that he's likely judging his girlfriend by some double standard or another. If this girl truly does belch and fart incessantly she doesn't need a debate about her boyfriend's feminist browny points. She needs medical attention.
60
WTF's letter is a perfect example of why I've never, never given a number when the issue of sexual history is on the table. I have answered "Well, I'm no virgin, but I don't sleep around if that's what worries you." and I've answered by assuring the asker of my spotless bill of health... when my then boyfriend, now husband asked I asked in return "Is the answer to that question going to contribute in any way to your happiness or peace of mind?"... He withdrew the question and never asked again... we're about to celebrate the tenth anniversary of our first date, so I guess my refusal to do the math was not a problem.
61
to WTF- I hope you are reading this...
I liked Dan's response to you quite a lot, we need that strong SEX positive attitude when it comes to sexual exploration, esp for women...
BUT- i hope you will be willing to spend a little time exploring yourself, just to be certain "this is it". If your woman is as open and accepting you about you doing your share of sexual soul searching as Dan is advising you be, and you still feel you have the best match, then you know the best one truly won, on both ends.
Otherwise, I'm thinking you'll always wonder.
I liked Dan's response to you quite a lot, we need that strong SEX positive attitude when it comes to sexual exploration, esp for women...
BUT- i hope you will be willing to spend a little time exploring yourself, just to be certain "this is it". If your woman is as open and accepting you about you doing your share of sexual soul searching as Dan is advising you be, and you still feel you have the best match, then you know the best one truly won, on both ends.
Otherwise, I'm thinking you'll always wonder.
62
The STDs thing is pretty valid. Miss 100 may have ruined any chances WTF has of real "sexual soul searching"- cuz he may have to give every prospective encounter the "I have to be honest, I have herpes" talk! which, even if he is The Hottest Man Ever, will significantly lower his chances of exploring.
I hope he gets tested, and encourages her to do the same... And asks himself whether she is really what she has appeared to be last year, this year.
I hope he gets tested, and encourages her to do the same... And asks himself whether she is really what she has appeared to be last year, this year.
64
Yeah, I'm with em, Lucy, and Leroy- although I did love Dan's response... I think it's just not that simple. There are a lot of pople with the "when it doubt, just get laid" mentality. While it is unfortunate that it has been so demonized to live this way, when you have not lived this way there may be a deeper compatibility issue that WTF is beginning to feel now that it has been a year. The fact that this has only come up now, after a year, that it is ringing in his ear so much he is compelled to write Savagelove, and that he is having strange feelings now all make me wonder if this isn't giving shape and form to other concerns... if he knows Dan's column at all, he knows what kind of response he'll get to this issue- which tells me he is willing to give her quite a lot of benefit... I just wonder how much this will benefit HIM toward committing to the most compatible partner.
65
Spot on, not a numbers girl! I feel the same way...when I was in my early 20s I dated a guy in his early 30s. I was hardly experienced, but still had slept with more people than he had (I was his second). After he made me feel like a whore, I swore I'd never answer that question again. Since then, whenever a partner asked me the dreaded number question, I've responded that my past is my past, his past is his past, and if he's concerned about disease, we'll both get tested again (I always provide new partners with my disease-free status and offer to give them dated test results). I realize it's pretty judgmental to say, but someone would have to be pretty insecure to be so concerned about a number.
66
well annony, your response sounds defensive--and albeit fair and PC and all, doesn't really hold water with real relationships, which involve both fair thinking, rational judgement, AND human emotion... and "insecure" doesn't necessarily = character flaw in this situation, since red flags make us unsure, or insecure.
(just like many many sex partners doesn't necessarily = better lover, in fact in my experience, it can be QUITE THE OPPOSITE!)
(just like many many sex partners doesn't necessarily = better lover, in fact in my experience, it can be QUITE THE OPPOSITE!)
67
I agree, 100 over 20 years of sexual activity is normal. But lets say its 10 years. Thats almost once a month. If she had a long relationship over that time, the number just goes up, maybe 2 a month during non-relationship times. This is important because it makes it likely that she separates sexual fulfillment and romantic feelings in her head. That is great if you think you might want to swing in the future without losing your love for each other, but not great if you want the traditional monogomous relationship.
68
WTF hasn't said things that could indicate its all related to other concerns he has about her compatibility. In fact what he states is that he and his gf have a perfect thing going in every way. I'd give anything to be in his position. And then he hears this number and now he's getting weird about her. He still doesn't think he would trust her any less, but is just hung up on the pure numbers of it. Its totally moronic. There's a good lesson to learn here that no one should ever tell their past numbers. He had a great thing going before anything was said, and all its taken to ruin it was to tell. Normally I would feel that its best to tell anyway, so that you can be rid of any morons who would have a problem with it cos they must be no-good assholes anyway. But this particular issue of jealousy/insecurity seems to be so common that your chances of finding happiness with anyone would be too slim if you did that. So best overall policy basically is just never tell.
69
Really, I don't think the ~100 number is too unusual. I did that between the ages of 15 and 24 - and then I was in a monogamous relationship for 10 years (so I'm certainly not incapable of commitment.)
I feel well-adjusted, I've never had an STD, and I've never had sex for any reason except for love and/or fun.
Oh, I am from NYC, so maybe that just is how we do it here!
I feel well-adjusted, I've never had an STD, and I've never had sex for any reason except for love and/or fun.
Oh, I am from NYC, so maybe that just is how we do it here!
70
a year is around the time that the rose colored glasses come off- i bet whether wtf and his present partner are compatible or not will start to get clearer from here on forward. he strikes me as quite in touch with both rational thought, AND his emotions.
and for the record, numbers (whether it's cell counts, cholesterol levels, or past sex partners) bring about more objective thinking, which is not always welcome when in the denial of disease, the indulgence in another steak and egg breakfast, or the honeymoon phase of a relationship.
sometimes technical skill in bed can mask lacks in other areas in the chemistry.
i would love to hear from wtf next year to find out where he stands with the number(s), the "this is it" feeling, and the compatibility of the relationship at that point.
writing from NYC, btw.
and for the record, numbers (whether it's cell counts, cholesterol levels, or past sex partners) bring about more objective thinking, which is not always welcome when in the denial of disease, the indulgence in another steak and egg breakfast, or the honeymoon phase of a relationship.
sometimes technical skill in bed can mask lacks in other areas in the chemistry.
i would love to hear from wtf next year to find out where he stands with the number(s), the "this is it" feeling, and the compatibility of the relationship at that point.
writing from NYC, btw.
71
Seems to me Dan was a bit presumptuously harsh with SITS...
By "the way we met" perhaps he means more than just that moment, but really the foundation-setting stage of any relationship... the first few weeks or months.
There's a definite psychology and power-dynamic that can be established at the start/foundation of any relationship, and perhaps this guy realized that the foundation was wrong, and didn't see a way to change the dynamic, or his own perspective.
Everyone's intimacy milestones are marked differently.
SITS may have felt he'd gotten to know enough to want more, but maybe the other guy wasn't exposed to the sides of SITS that SITS feels makes them compatible.
Maybe he did and decided he didn't like him, sure... BUT maybe he just didn't get to know him in a way to even be able to think about another level.
Hell, maybe the guy was experimenting with being a top (or bottom), but in reality wants the opposite.
It's certainly hard to change a dynamic once it's been established, and to do so requires something really compelling and/or intentional on the part of both parties..
By "the way we met" perhaps he means more than just that moment, but really the foundation-setting stage of any relationship... the first few weeks or months.
There's a definite psychology and power-dynamic that can be established at the start/foundation of any relationship, and perhaps this guy realized that the foundation was wrong, and didn't see a way to change the dynamic, or his own perspective.
Everyone's intimacy milestones are marked differently.
SITS may have felt he'd gotten to know enough to want more, but maybe the other guy wasn't exposed to the sides of SITS that SITS feels makes them compatible.
Maybe he did and decided he didn't like him, sure... BUT maybe he just didn't get to know him in a way to even be able to think about another level.
Hell, maybe the guy was experimenting with being a top (or bottom), but in reality wants the opposite.
It's certainly hard to change a dynamic once it's been established, and to do so requires something really compelling and/or intentional on the part of both parties..
74
Dan, you dropped the r-word?!? Noone wants to be too PC, but that word is mired in stigmas and social layers that make people with different abilities feel like shit E V E R Y time it's used. I don't know why, perhaps because I think you're a conscious person in general, but I thought you would be more responsible than that.
http://www.r-word.org/
http://www.r-word.org/
75
I had a discussion about numbers with a former girlfriend about a week into dating and I was surprised to hear that at in her mid 20's she had stopped counting by age 24 because it was too high. When I say high, she would go out a few nights of the week and take home a new fellow, rarely revisiting a former partner. I don't know the true number and never will but her OBGYN simply asked her "What are you doing?" when told an estimate. But I digress...
Now, if the couple were in their 30's, I wouldn't say that 100 is so bad, but if she's in her 20's. He may want to watch out, with her having and using the ability to have anyone sexually may be a problem when things go wrong relationship wise.
Now, if the couple were in their 30's, I wouldn't say that 100 is so bad, but if she's in her 20's. He may want to watch out, with her having and using the ability to have anyone sexually may be a problem when things go wrong relationship wise.
76
I dunno if I'd take someone who's been with 100+ other people 'choosing' me as a compliment! Obviously that person isn't terribly picky.
77
If you don't know the STD status of your partner anyway (and lots of people don't), there's no safety difference between having sex with the same person 100 times or 100 people once each. And just because you know someone better doesn't mean they're any less likely to have an STD if they haven't been tested.
78
As a non-health educator, I'd like to tell je10 to shut the hell up. Yes, there are STDs you can get even if you wear a condom. Guess what? There are STDs you can get without having sex at all! Not even first base!
Human papillomavirus (HPV) can be spread by any skin to skin contact, including shaking hands. Some kinds of HPV are asymptomatic until they become cancerous, and can have a dormancy period of up to several years.
So remember, the next time you see a sex educator, don't shake their hands and wear disposable latex gloves if you have to touch them. You don't know where they've been.
Human papillomavirus (HPV) can be spread by any skin to skin contact, including shaking hands. Some kinds of HPV are asymptomatic until they become cancerous, and can have a dormancy period of up to several years.
So remember, the next time you see a sex educator, don't shake their hands and wear disposable latex gloves if you have to touch them. You don't know where they've been.
79
Also, I really want to tell off tisk tisk too. You know what? Calling people retarded really is an unpleasant thing to do. But guess what? That's because having cognitive impairment is unpleasant!
Remember, "idiot", "simpleton", "moron", "cretin", and "imbecile" were also once technical terms used by mental health professionals to describe people who had mental disabilities, but over time they got to be such prevalent insults that doctors tried to come up with something new that didn't have those negative connotations, and we can see how well that works out.
Do us a favor and go to any elementary school playground: they don't call each other "retarded" anymore, they call each other "special", because the learning disabled kids are now described as "special needs".
No matter what you want people to call people with such impairments, it will always be co-opted into an insult. The sooner you realize that fact, the sooner we all can get on with our lives and providing opportunities for these people, instead of trying to make them into a socio-political issue.
Remember, "idiot", "simpleton", "moron", "cretin", and "imbecile" were also once technical terms used by mental health professionals to describe people who had mental disabilities, but over time they got to be such prevalent insults that doctors tried to come up with something new that didn't have those negative connotations, and we can see how well that works out.
Do us a favor and go to any elementary school playground: they don't call each other "retarded" anymore, they call each other "special", because the learning disabled kids are now described as "special needs".
No matter what you want people to call people with such impairments, it will always be co-opted into an insult. The sooner you realize that fact, the sooner we all can get on with our lives and providing opportunities for these people, instead of trying to make them into a socio-political issue.
80
for wtf, this sounds a lot like the plot of "chasing Amy" I would stick with her. But not get hitched for a while. My brother hooked up with a chick who had lots of prior guys, and she turned tail at the first rough patch. It's worth having at least one or two major disagreements before you seal the deal.
82
A partner a month for 10 years straight is not something I'd be comfortable with. Somehow for most of the people I've had sex with, I've wanted to do it again with them and spend other time with them. Not every time but most of the time this continues well over a month.
83
Re: Dumped Aussie.
Dan, you could be completely right. But some people fixate on issues like this. Sometimes they get over it. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes people are so hung up on the overly specific narrative they want their lives -or love lives- to take that they wind up missing the forest for the trees.
Dan, you could be completely right. But some people fixate on issues like this. Sometimes they get over it. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes people are so hung up on the overly specific narrative they want their lives -or love lives- to take that they wind up missing the forest for the trees.
84
Grossed out: my girlfriend blows bubbles with my cum, and when she farts a big glob of sperm usually runs down her leg- I still love her. Pick your battles a little better.
85
Okay, first, the weirdest part is that somebody that has reached as many as 100 would know the number and the next weirdest part is that this hasn't struck anybody else as weird. Has she kept a written record? I'm not sure I know how many I've had w/out giving it a lot of thought but I'm pretty certain it's far from 100. Even the roundness of the number seems farcical. Not to mention the implausability of somebody w/ that many partners meets this awesome guy and now is unwaveringly monogomous. What is this letters to Penthouse or something?
86
Dan! Uh please reply to your use of "retarted". I'm a teacher who has risked my job standing up to administrators who would not address students who used the "gay" adjective in many ways. You're brilliant, and I know you can find an adjective that will not hurt me and others. Also, I can't believe 82 people have commented online and ignored this.
87
How does someone get 101 people to have sex with them in a lifetime? This column really makes me wonder if I'm the only person not having outlandish sex or multiple sex partners on a regular basis.
88
A girl with that many partners is not likely to change -- the partners will only go up. She's quite likely to cheat or dump the guy. Please.
Yeah of course the guy is concerned. He does not want to get dumped or cheated on. As a practical matter that many sex partners means any real emotional intimacy through sex and bonding (and hormones released including oxytocin) is simply not in the cards -- human biology does not allow for that many partners (particularly for women) and continued intimacy and emotional attachment.
My advice would be to dump her, and go look for someone new, better, and with a heck of a lot less partners.
100 is way too high -- woman will be gone at the first rough spot, or better deal. Like she'd change? Also the more partners, the higher the STD chances and with that many partners, the probability of continued fertility is pretty low (high chance of fertility killing STDs).
There is a reason pretty much all cultures try to limit partners for women: basic fertility and investment by men in women/kids decreases radically with the number of sex partners a woman has.
If this guy was a pal of mine I'd advise him to drop her like a stone. Guy obviously is leaning that way anyway. The woman won't change, is obviously given her past behavior going to be gone the second a hotter guy comes along.
Yeah of course the guy is concerned. He does not want to get dumped or cheated on. As a practical matter that many sex partners means any real emotional intimacy through sex and bonding (and hormones released including oxytocin) is simply not in the cards -- human biology does not allow for that many partners (particularly for women) and continued intimacy and emotional attachment.
My advice would be to dump her, and go look for someone new, better, and with a heck of a lot less partners.
100 is way too high -- woman will be gone at the first rough spot, or better deal. Like she'd change? Also the more partners, the higher the STD chances and with that many partners, the probability of continued fertility is pretty low (high chance of fertility killing STDs).
There is a reason pretty much all cultures try to limit partners for women: basic fertility and investment by men in women/kids decreases radically with the number of sex partners a woman has.
If this guy was a pal of mine I'd advise him to drop her like a stone. Guy obviously is leaning that way anyway. The woman won't change, is obviously given her past behavior going to be gone the second a hotter guy comes along.
89
TOTALLY AGREE with the few who have noticed that 2 out of 4 of these letters were on Slog!
Dan- if you get HUNDREDS of letters a day, as you say, can you NOT find a few more so as to not repeat what we've already read? I know you're busy, but could you try?
Some of us love SLOG and your column, but this is frustrating.
Thank you.
Dan- if you get HUNDREDS of letters a day, as you say, can you NOT find a few more so as to not repeat what we've already read? I know you're busy, but could you try?
Some of us love SLOG and your column, but this is frustrating.
Thank you.
90
The socio-biological reality is even unattractive looking heterosexual women can get far more sex partners than the average looking heterosexual male, because women are mostly having sex with a small pool of alpha males (upper 20% of all males) - the only men who can equal the numbers women are able to rack up.
Most men (80% of the male population) are beta and omega males who simply can't attract that many women to have sex with, and who feel socially and sexually humilated by "losing" the sex count game to women and alpha males. This is why men in general are resentful and disgusted with women and society, and are swearing off marriage and relationships.
I could never feel any romantic love for a high sex numbered woman, because it means her true sexual validation goes to men who are more alpha than I am, and is most likely only using me as a beta male "nice guy" to spend time with her and spend money on her. No thanks. I'll just take the sex like the other 100's of bad-boy alpha males who she felt were so cool and sexually superior to me that they didnt even have to give her a relationship she requires of me (presumably because she sees me as beta and safe and unlikely to cheat because girls don't want me sexually and she knows it). Then I'll go look for a more monagamous low-sex count girl to have a romantic relatioship with who would actually value me, or just forget about love altogether and try to improve my game to try to raise my sex-number to alpha levels, or just drop out of the game altogether and become a monk.
These feelings may not be p.c. but they are the way most guys secretly feel, and it will never change (because these feelings are hardwired by evolution) no matter how much pc or feminist vitriol is spewed in our direction.
ps. I'm not religious or a conservative either - I'm an atheist.
More...
Most men (80% of the male population) are beta and omega males who simply can't attract that many women to have sex with, and who feel socially and sexually humilated by "losing" the sex count game to women and alpha males. This is why men in general are resentful and disgusted with women and society, and are swearing off marriage and relationships.
I could never feel any romantic love for a high sex numbered woman, because it means her true sexual validation goes to men who are more alpha than I am, and is most likely only using me as a beta male "nice guy" to spend time with her and spend money on her. No thanks. I'll just take the sex like the other 100's of bad-boy alpha males who she felt were so cool and sexually superior to me that they didnt even have to give her a relationship she requires of me (presumably because she sees me as beta and safe and unlikely to cheat because girls don't want me sexually and she knows it). Then I'll go look for a more monagamous low-sex count girl to have a romantic relatioship with who would actually value me, or just forget about love altogether and try to improve my game to try to raise my sex-number to alpha levels, or just drop out of the game altogether and become a monk.
These feelings may not be p.c. but they are the way most guys secretly feel, and it will never change (because these feelings are hardwired by evolution) no matter how much pc or feminist vitriol is spewed in our direction.
ps. I'm not religious or a conservative either - I'm an atheist.
91
>beta001
Wait... your third (and only other) option is to become a monk? Wha-??
Is it because I'm reading this from the depths of Asia that I don't understand you AT ALL?
Wait... your third (and only other) option is to become a monk? Wha-??
Is it because I'm reading this from the depths of Asia that I don't understand you AT ALL?
93
I do not know for sure how many partners my wife had before me, and she doesn't know my count. I do not see a win-win in the question, so I said "I won't say and I don't want to know." That has worked out just fine.
94
One isn't better than the other, it is all based on people's emotions. If someone could get very jealous, then I would say the past is past is the way to go.. If people are secure enough in themselves then no secrets is the way to go.
95
beta001.. you are an idiot.
The guy was talking about his girlfriend of a year that he loves.. not some girl he just met. He has feelings for her and is just uncomfortable about a stupid number. He should feel proud that he has this girl and just get over whatever insecurities he has.
As for you, you are obviously not a "nice guy" like you claim. A nice guy wouldn't find out that a girl he likes has a lot of past partners and decide that means he should just use her for sex. A nice guy would have the reaction like WTF and be a bit uncomfortable but still want things to work.
The guy was talking about his girlfriend of a year that he loves.. not some girl he just met. He has feelings for her and is just uncomfortable about a stupid number. He should feel proud that he has this girl and just get over whatever insecurities he has.
As for you, you are obviously not a "nice guy" like you claim. A nice guy wouldn't find out that a girl he likes has a lot of past partners and decide that means he should just use her for sex. A nice guy would have the reaction like WTF and be a bit uncomfortable but still want things to work.
96
Regarding the girl with with 100 past partners, I don't see what the big deal is. If she were a guy, it wouldn't be an issue.
97
My guess is that WTF's girlfriend is exaggerating. I know some of you want to try to explain HOW she managed to fuck her way through the century mark, but I doubt that many people have had over 100 lovers in their lifetime, regardless of age. That raises the question, though, of why she would pick that number. Can she just not remember? Is she trying to see what his reaction might be? Is she one of those people who can't really do math in their head so they just pick a number out of the air, even if it turns out to be ridiculous? She's probably just trying to fend off the the inevitable follow-up questions, like, "will you tell me about each of your lovers in turn?" In this case, he was so overwhelmed by her potential promiscuity that any further conversation was cut short.
98
as with most situations, it's all subjective. which questions to ask when - it all depends on your motivation. as in, "what am i trying to accomplish here?"
99
My husband is younger than me and was still quite young when we got together. I have had many more previous partners than he has, but I have never volunteered the information, he has never asked, and we have been together a long, long time. He's aware that I "got around" because there have been anecdotes shared about one-night-stands, etc. from time to time. I am positive he wouldn't care or be shocked by the number (it's not 100); for one reason or another it's just never come up. When I think about it now, I guess it could be that he was a little embarrassed about his relative lack of experience when we were first dating and didn't bring it up because of that. But now it's just pretty irrelevant.
100
You know, even if "101 Sex Partners" (could be a Disney movie) were a man I'd think that was too many people. It's not that having sex without comittment is immoral or depraved, but it would peg that person as being shallow or emotionally crippled or more probably an alcoholic with zero boundaries. I can understand a few one night stands here and there, but geez...I think he should dig a little deeper and then decide if he wants to continue with the relationship.
101
I don't care what you all say--100 partners mean that this woman was, at one time and probably right up until she was with this guy, a SLUT. She opened her legs and humped anything that would. 100 is a lot of people--that's a third of a year with a different partner every night!
I don't think he should take it as a compliment that she's monogomous; maybe she just finally found somebody who would talk to her the next morning, after the one night stand.
I don't think he should take it as a compliment that she's monogomous; maybe she just finally found somebody who would talk to her the next morning, after the one night stand.
102
Beta, you're probably a "nice guy," but that isn't saying much. Self-proclaimed nice guys are inevitably manipulative assholes steeped in self-pity who decide to blame ALL women for their utter lack of self worth.
Sure, some women go through the date-the-jerks phase. Some never outgrow it. But smart women avoid "nice guys" and go for real men... And real men don't whine about supposed alpha males who may or may not get laid more than they do, they just focus on their own lives.
Gimme a guy who asks for casual sex over a manipulative "nice guy" any day. I won't say yes to the former, but I'll have a beer and a laugh with him. I won't even associate with the latter. I hate being whined at.
Sure, some women go through the date-the-jerks phase. Some never outgrow it. But smart women avoid "nice guys" and go for real men... And real men don't whine about supposed alpha males who may or may not get laid more than they do, they just focus on their own lives.
Gimme a guy who asks for casual sex over a manipulative "nice guy" any day. I won't say yes to the former, but I'll have a beer and a laugh with him. I won't even associate with the latter. I hate being whined at.
103
raf88:
Whether it was a girl I just met or my wife of 20 years, If I found out (and the truth always comes out eventually) she has a way higher sex count number than I do then the relationship is over. I could never love such a woman or respect myself if I stayed.
Let her go and find some alpha who has equal or greater sex count numbers to have a committed relationship with. Of course we all know she'd NEVER be able to get any alpha to commit to her, that's why she's with me - the "sloppy seconds" beta male loser who gets to pay for the milk while the alphas got it for free.
jem:
In all likelikhood wtf's girlfriend is doing the opposite - she's greatly downplaying the number. For ANY woman to actually admit to 100 means the number is MUCH higher. My guess is she's had vaginal sex with around 200+ men and a few hundred more for oral and anal (non vaginal sex acts that women usually "conveniently" forget to add to their sex number). If you think I'm just some paranoid beta, very high sex count numbers among women have become the norm. I have known of several women with numbers way above 500.
Hey, if women want to live like groupies for alpha males that is their prerogative. But there's no way I'll ever be able to feel romantic love or desire a committed relationship of any kind with such women. And that is my prerogative.
-beta001
Whether it was a girl I just met or my wife of 20 years, If I found out (and the truth always comes out eventually) she has a way higher sex count number than I do then the relationship is over. I could never love such a woman or respect myself if I stayed.
Let her go and find some alpha who has equal or greater sex count numbers to have a committed relationship with. Of course we all know she'd NEVER be able to get any alpha to commit to her, that's why she's with me - the "sloppy seconds" beta male loser who gets to pay for the milk while the alphas got it for free.
jem:
In all likelikhood wtf's girlfriend is doing the opposite - she's greatly downplaying the number. For ANY woman to actually admit to 100 means the number is MUCH higher. My guess is she's had vaginal sex with around 200+ men and a few hundred more for oral and anal (non vaginal sex acts that women usually "conveniently" forget to add to their sex number). If you think I'm just some paranoid beta, very high sex count numbers among women have become the norm. I have known of several women with numbers way above 500.
Hey, if women want to live like groupies for alpha males that is their prerogative. But there's no way I'll ever be able to feel romantic love or desire a committed relationship of any kind with such women. And that is my prerogative.
-beta001
104
I was sitting around with a few friends and I mentioned that I recently found the tally I kept of "how many" and the number was "18". One friend actually gasped, she thought I was a big slut. I told her come on I was a gay man and was single in San Francisco in the seventies. I have been monogamous now for 28 years. My other two straight women friends said they had no idea but the number was way over 200...so we all have different histories, who cares, it is your life and you should live it the way you see fit.
105
don't ask a question if you're not sure you can handle the answer... especially the "numbers" question! why do it to yourself???
106
I'm from NYC and sleeping with over 100 people is NOT how it's normally done. Not that I'm judging someone for having had multiple partners. I AM judging someone for being an ignorant and assuming asshole about people from a different part of the country.
107
beta001 you are one seriously damaged dude. yeee-ikes...
Nice job cherry-picking random tidbits from evolutionary psych (a field who's presumptions are, to put it mildly, highly contested) to justify your own lack of self-worth, fear of other men, and misogyny. Bravo.
PS. Desperation is a universal turn-off. I've turned many "nice guys" away because I felt smothered by them and was annoyed by how wishy washy they were around me--the tragedy was that their "nice guys finish laugh" whine became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Doormats? Not sexy Doormat with a chip on his shoulder? Beyond endurance.
Nice job cherry-picking random tidbits from evolutionary psych (a field who's presumptions are, to put it mildly, highly contested) to justify your own lack of self-worth, fear of other men, and misogyny. Bravo.
PS. Desperation is a universal turn-off. I've turned many "nice guys" away because I felt smothered by them and was annoyed by how wishy washy they were around me--the tragedy was that their "nice guys finish laugh" whine became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Doormats? Not sexy Doormat with a chip on his shoulder? Beyond endurance.
108
If you are with a girl with 100 ex-sex-partners, in a random party meeting with a guy who has seen the same set of tits gets 10 times more in comparison to being with a girl with 10 ex-sex-partners.
110
why are u guys issuing the 100 guys? good for her.. my bf asked my number.. i gave him 7 and he added 3 to my list.. its said in south africa a woman subtracts 3 and a guy adds 3
112
Regarding WTF's letter,
I think that it's hard to conclude anything from the 100 number, and I don't think that the number is altogether irrelevant, or the most important thing EVER.
The important things to find out about a partner is (1) Do they have STDs? (2) Are they sexually-emotionally healthy? If the answers are no, and yes respectively--stay with the person by all means!
A person can have stds, and be sexually-emotionally unhealthy with 10 partners. Whereas a person can be std-free, and be sexually-emotionally healthy with 100 partners. I don't think the raw numbers matter all too much, what matters is (1) Was s/he having safe sex whenever s/he had sex? (2) Did s/he have quality long term relationships when s/he was actually in one?
I would go into a relationship with a gal or a guy who was std free but had 95 casual partners at some point in the past, but had 5 quality long-term relationships. Casual partners don't matter as long as they don't interfere with a person's long-term relationship. Because the odds are, if the person's good at long-term, then my long-term with them would be good! Obviously, if s/he uses casual partners to deal with emotional stress, then s/he's fucked up. But if the person had casual partners PURELY for consensual meaningless sex while no one was being monogamous, who the hell cares?
Alternatively, I wouldn't date someone who had 0 casual partners, but 5 shitty messy long-term relationships--cuz the odds are--I'd be in a shitty long-term relationship.
I think that it's hard to conclude anything from the 100 number, and I don't think that the number is altogether irrelevant, or the most important thing EVER.
The important things to find out about a partner is (1) Do they have STDs? (2) Are they sexually-emotionally healthy? If the answers are no, and yes respectively--stay with the person by all means!
A person can have stds, and be sexually-emotionally unhealthy with 10 partners. Whereas a person can be std-free, and be sexually-emotionally healthy with 100 partners. I don't think the raw numbers matter all too much, what matters is (1) Was s/he having safe sex whenever s/he had sex? (2) Did s/he have quality long term relationships when s/he was actually in one?
I would go into a relationship with a gal or a guy who was std free but had 95 casual partners at some point in the past, but had 5 quality long-term relationships. Casual partners don't matter as long as they don't interfere with a person's long-term relationship. Because the odds are, if the person's good at long-term, then my long-term with them would be good! Obviously, if s/he uses casual partners to deal with emotional stress, then s/he's fucked up. But if the person had casual partners PURELY for consensual meaningless sex while no one was being monogamous, who the hell cares?
Alternatively, I wouldn't date someone who had 0 casual partners, but 5 shitty messy long-term relationships--cuz the odds are--I'd be in a shitty long-term relationship.
113
There are VERY few women in the major cities of this country that are worthy for long-term relationships. VERY few. The qualities men look for in women for relationships are the same ones they have always looked for. Fidelity, femininity, generosity. Someone who would be a good wife and mom. These women have not been with more than 5 partners (40 years ago they would have been virgins).
Men's preferences have not changed, but the availability has changed. many more women are sleeping around, making them unsuitable for long-term relationships or marriage. There are women you date and women you fuck.
So the increase in wannabe pickup artists is based on that. Many men either know now, or soon will know, that having a girlfriend, or a wife, is a lose-lose proposition nowadays. If you marry, you are basically a slave to your wife's wishes or your belongings will be taken by force in a divorce. If you have a girlfriend, she will likely cheat on you at will.
Some men are able to get hot sex without relationships. Because of this, caused by the lack of VALUES in young females today, the other men are naturally jealous, and will be working to become like these other men. Fewer and fewer men will settle for marriage, if they have any self-respect. I certainly as hell won't buy a 5 thousand dollar diamond to a woman past her prime, while 10 years ago guys got to bang the hell out of her while buying her nothing at all. It would mean I have no self-respect.
Men's preferences have not changed, but the availability has changed. many more women are sleeping around, making them unsuitable for long-term relationships or marriage. There are women you date and women you fuck.
So the increase in wannabe pickup artists is based on that. Many men either know now, or soon will know, that having a girlfriend, or a wife, is a lose-lose proposition nowadays. If you marry, you are basically a slave to your wife's wishes or your belongings will be taken by force in a divorce. If you have a girlfriend, she will likely cheat on you at will.
Some men are able to get hot sex without relationships. Because of this, caused by the lack of VALUES in young females today, the other men are naturally jealous, and will be working to become like these other men. Fewer and fewer men will settle for marriage, if they have any self-respect. I certainly as hell won't buy a 5 thousand dollar diamond to a woman past her prime, while 10 years ago guys got to bang the hell out of her while buying her nothing at all. It would mean I have no self-respect.
114
In a marriage where both my wife and I are bisexuals, talking about the past has led to some interesting conversations and ideas...
115
Hey Jeff,
Ah the Madonna/Whore complex--an oldie but a goodie. Just when you think it's dead, up it pops out of the ground, like so much gnarly patriarchal wood. Thanks for reviving it.
Misogyny much?
For someone who has such a lowly opinion of women, you sure think we're pretty powerful. We're not only responsible for predatory male sexual behavior but we enslave men via marriage. (Nevermind that marriage was creating as a means for men to secure their wives and offspring as property, but whatever.) Resent us much? And that would be a rhetorical question, because you obviously do.
I'm not going to change your mind. The patriarchal world is a lot more powerful than I am. You're free to live it up, in your world. Just do one favor to women, even though you despise us: If you don't like us, don't marry one of us. Cut to the chase and buy sex from a prostitute--just don't beat the shit out of her or kill her when you're done. That's the best I could hope for in this world from you and other men like you.
Ah the Madonna/Whore complex--an oldie but a goodie. Just when you think it's dead, up it pops out of the ground, like so much gnarly patriarchal wood. Thanks for reviving it.
Misogyny much?
For someone who has such a lowly opinion of women, you sure think we're pretty powerful. We're not only responsible for predatory male sexual behavior but we enslave men via marriage. (Nevermind that marriage was creating as a means for men to secure their wives and offspring as property, but whatever.) Resent us much? And that would be a rhetorical question, because you obviously do.
I'm not going to change your mind. The patriarchal world is a lot more powerful than I am. You're free to live it up, in your world. Just do one favor to women, even though you despise us: If you don't like us, don't marry one of us. Cut to the chase and buy sex from a prostitute--just don't beat the shit out of her or kill her when you're done. That's the best I could hope for in this world from you and other men like you.
116
I was also horrified to find out my 35 year old boyfriend slept with "about 100" women, as he put it, It is a valid concern for many reasons. The thing that really gets to me is the fact that he plowed through these women with no concern for his future. I mean, did it ever occur to him during this time of random partners that the women he ends up spending his life with might be bothered upon learning this? I really don't want to judge him but it is pretty gross behavior and really turns me off.
117
Dude didn't just say that hey my wife has more partners than me. She's got 10 X on him. Would she be so interested in a guy with 200 or 1000 partners?
And if you have second thoughts about not being single then knowing that your partner pretty much wore it out probably won't feel great.
And if you have second thoughts about not being single then knowing that your partner pretty much wore it out probably won't feel great.
118
Dan, I wish you would have told her to leave him, not be his friend and never look back.
And YES, he cheated and she did not.
Plain and simple.
He was supposed be moved out when she got back home – a clear message with no other interpretation then it is over.
After he got her to agree to give him another chance he CHEATED ON HER.
Sorry that is NOT a technicality.
If anything it is worse then cheating pre-breakup.
How can you not see that?
I have little doubt that Cheated On One - was exposed to alcoholism during childhood, Mom, Dad any other very close family member.
Society has taught her she should not tolerate living with a raging alcoholic and the enviable shitty quality of life that goes along with it.
But her past exposure to alcoholism and being forced to accept it as a child has created a deeply ingrained tolerance for the behavior.
We all need justification that hits home emotionally not just analytically to end a relationship we have invested in.
Alcoholism is not enough for her; she needed to believe he truly cheated on her to muster the courage to really leave him.
You fucked this one up. It would not have been a lie to confirm he had in fact cheated on her.
The fact she had to write in to a column for back up justification is evidence that she is a very, very broken woman.
You did not put enough thought into her letter and you lost an opportunity to actually help her instead you probably made it worse.
And YES, he cheated and she did not.
Plain and simple.
He was supposed be moved out when she got back home – a clear message with no other interpretation then it is over.
After he got her to agree to give him another chance he CHEATED ON HER.
Sorry that is NOT a technicality.
If anything it is worse then cheating pre-breakup.
How can you not see that?
I have little doubt that Cheated On One - was exposed to alcoholism during childhood, Mom, Dad any other very close family member.
Society has taught her she should not tolerate living with a raging alcoholic and the enviable shitty quality of life that goes along with it.
But her past exposure to alcoholism and being forced to accept it as a child has created a deeply ingrained tolerance for the behavior.
We all need justification that hits home emotionally not just analytically to end a relationship we have invested in.
Alcoholism is not enough for her; she needed to believe he truly cheated on her to muster the courage to really leave him.
You fucked this one up. It would not have been a lie to confirm he had in fact cheated on her.
The fact she had to write in to a column for back up justification is evidence that she is a very, very broken woman.
You did not put enough thought into her letter and you lost an opportunity to actually help her instead you probably made it worse.
119
I see more of an issue with a man having 100+ partners then a woman.
Women don't have to do anything to get laid, men approach them. So what if she really likes sex that much.
But I would be weary of a male partner with such a high number, his behavior would have to be predatory to get such a high number.
Women don't have to do anything to get laid, men approach them. So what if she really likes sex that much.
But I would be weary of a male partner with such a high number, his behavior would have to be predatory to get such a high number.
120
I'm disturbed by some of the assumptions made by some of the commenters here (especialy Jeff) about women who had a high number of sexual partners. Seriously, that's a lot of crazy assumptions. It's a huge assumption to think just because someone had 100 partners, they're cheaters. It is possible that they did cheat, but is equally possible that they never cheated.
I DON'T think sexual encounters should be only made in the context of a long-term monogamous relationship. For myself, that is what I prefer, but other people can do what they want as long everything's consensual and informed. I would not judge a person's trustworthiness regardless of gender or orientation on the basis of the numbers game alone. What matters is that they can healthily separate casual encounters and long-term relationships and are rather good at the former.
I DON'T think there are "women you fuck" and "women you date", that is incredibly insulting. It's as preposterous as thinking that there are "men you date" and "men you fuck". There are men and women who are capable of having casual encounters in one time of their lives, and having a long-term monogamous faithful relationship in another time of their lives. People can change a lot in their sexual history, and I think it's totally normal.
I DON'T think sexual encounters should be only made in the context of a long-term monogamous relationship. For myself, that is what I prefer, but other people can do what they want as long everything's consensual and informed. I would not judge a person's trustworthiness regardless of gender or orientation on the basis of the numbers game alone. What matters is that they can healthily separate casual encounters and long-term relationships and are rather good at the former.
I DON'T think there are "women you fuck" and "women you date", that is incredibly insulting. It's as preposterous as thinking that there are "men you date" and "men you fuck". There are men and women who are capable of having casual encounters in one time of their lives, and having a long-term monogamous faithful relationship in another time of their lives. People can change a lot in their sexual history, and I think it's totally normal.
121
Stephanie and the other women regarding "nice guy" syndrome:
As a guy I can tell you what the problem is exactly, and why you ought to be scared out of your wits (as I am) in the social implications for this phenomena in aggregate. Particularly if you ever plan to have kids. Your sons are almost guaranteed to end up angry, bitter, and frustrated with women.
The problem is that guys get told the WRONG thing, especially by women, and get ticked off at being lied to, time after time, when they figure it out finally (and then are in no mood to ever be "nice" again much less husband material). "Nice guys" are told by women that stable, steady, emotionally supportive, and decent behavior will win them the girl. In fact it guarantees them losing every time. At best they get an emotionally messed up woman who's run through myriad bad-boys who may have major drug habits, criminality, etc. but have lots and lots of testosterone based aggression, violence, etc. that women find sexy in various degrees based on social class and status. I.E. the criminal bad boy for the waitress and the edgy rock artist with the heroin habit for the grad student.
Reality: men and women approach the matter of past partners radically differently. For a woman, a lot of partners in a man validates his "worthiness" by other women, confirming his high status and high testosterone aggression. For men, it means the woman is that much more inclined to fool around, or be emotionally committed to other guys, or what not. Having the girl after the bad boy is really not having her at all. Not in a way where she's the center of love, affection, and protection for a guy. She's just a meaningless sex partner, who obviously chose the other guy first. This is how men see it and most will admit it when they are honest. This does not mean virginity. This does mean limited sex partners (US average for women is nine, in urban areas it can average 40 or more).
The foundational Western Literature (predating the New Testament) is one giant epic poem told by Homer over .. fighting about a woman. Yes, men do kill over exclusive access to a woman all the time. Ipods and lattes don't change human nature.
Again, having the girl after the bad boy means not really having the girl at all. Every man understands this (if he's honest) and no woman can really get it (unless she has sons).
What has happened is that the pill, condom, rising social power/status/income of women have allowed them to engage in "soft polygamy" like this women, having sex with 100 guys, almost all of whom I'd bet were bar pickups, based on social dominance and testosterone and certainly not on character, stability, and so on.
Human and particularly Western history suggests that pricing lots of guys out of the relationship market is stupid, and women and children get it in the neck eventually. Have a whole bunch of "angry, desperate losers?" Who have been conditioned to failure with women? When has this been something that worked out well?
Women complain in their thirties about how the men they date are not the handsome Alpha winners (off chasing women ten years younger than they are) but their peers. Who they often ignored and have lumber yards on their shoulders. That's the good part. The bad part is the guys who are left out from even that.
Losers always get their pound of flesh, on average. Divorced, or never married guys are not going to be voting for women's and children's issues. They won't even give up a seat to a tired old lady on the subway. Much less come to a woman's defense when she is attacked. Or provide physical rescue during accidents or disaster. I see evidence of this social disaster every day. Heck not one young man at VT thought it worthwhile to risk dying to protect his female classmates. It took an elderly Holocaust survivor and a middle aged Army vet professor to do anything at all.
If that does not scare the heck out of you it should. It does me.
The soft polygamy of lots of urban, professional women chasing the same few guys who win at closing time in bars, is sure to lead to angry, nasty, bitter, petty, revenge taking of one form or another.
NEVER in human history has a large pool of men unattached to women ever worked out well. The men (particularly in groups) have the violence veto, and the ability to buy them off with consumer puffery is coming to an end with the long recession/depression.
Please go ahead and laugh at the losers in the dating/mating game. Now remember you could well have sons. And there is every likelihood that THEY can end up angry bitter "losers" if they don't mature physically earlier than their peers, have high social status, and lots of testosterone. If you have sons you have about at LEAST a 70% chance at least of having sons like that. Since only the genetic AND social lottery winners get to play "Alpha."
More...
As a guy I can tell you what the problem is exactly, and why you ought to be scared out of your wits (as I am) in the social implications for this phenomena in aggregate. Particularly if you ever plan to have kids. Your sons are almost guaranteed to end up angry, bitter, and frustrated with women.
The problem is that guys get told the WRONG thing, especially by women, and get ticked off at being lied to, time after time, when they figure it out finally (and then are in no mood to ever be "nice" again much less husband material). "Nice guys" are told by women that stable, steady, emotionally supportive, and decent behavior will win them the girl. In fact it guarantees them losing every time. At best they get an emotionally messed up woman who's run through myriad bad-boys who may have major drug habits, criminality, etc. but have lots and lots of testosterone based aggression, violence, etc. that women find sexy in various degrees based on social class and status. I.E. the criminal bad boy for the waitress and the edgy rock artist with the heroin habit for the grad student.
Reality: men and women approach the matter of past partners radically differently. For a woman, a lot of partners in a man validates his "worthiness" by other women, confirming his high status and high testosterone aggression. For men, it means the woman is that much more inclined to fool around, or be emotionally committed to other guys, or what not. Having the girl after the bad boy is really not having her at all. Not in a way where she's the center of love, affection, and protection for a guy. She's just a meaningless sex partner, who obviously chose the other guy first. This is how men see it and most will admit it when they are honest. This does not mean virginity. This does mean limited sex partners (US average for women is nine, in urban areas it can average 40 or more).
The foundational Western Literature (predating the New Testament) is one giant epic poem told by Homer over .. fighting about a woman. Yes, men do kill over exclusive access to a woman all the time. Ipods and lattes don't change human nature.
Again, having the girl after the bad boy means not really having the girl at all. Every man understands this (if he's honest) and no woman can really get it (unless she has sons).
What has happened is that the pill, condom, rising social power/status/income of women have allowed them to engage in "soft polygamy" like this women, having sex with 100 guys, almost all of whom I'd bet were bar pickups, based on social dominance and testosterone and certainly not on character, stability, and so on.
Human and particularly Western history suggests that pricing lots of guys out of the relationship market is stupid, and women and children get it in the neck eventually. Have a whole bunch of "angry, desperate losers?" Who have been conditioned to failure with women? When has this been something that worked out well?
Women complain in their thirties about how the men they date are not the handsome Alpha winners (off chasing women ten years younger than they are) but their peers. Who they often ignored and have lumber yards on their shoulders. That's the good part. The bad part is the guys who are left out from even that.
Losers always get their pound of flesh, on average. Divorced, or never married guys are not going to be voting for women's and children's issues. They won't even give up a seat to a tired old lady on the subway. Much less come to a woman's defense when she is attacked. Or provide physical rescue during accidents or disaster. I see evidence of this social disaster every day. Heck not one young man at VT thought it worthwhile to risk dying to protect his female classmates. It took an elderly Holocaust survivor and a middle aged Army vet professor to do anything at all.
If that does not scare the heck out of you it should. It does me.
The soft polygamy of lots of urban, professional women chasing the same few guys who win at closing time in bars, is sure to lead to angry, nasty, bitter, petty, revenge taking of one form or another.
NEVER in human history has a large pool of men unattached to women ever worked out well. The men (particularly in groups) have the violence veto, and the ability to buy them off with consumer puffery is coming to an end with the long recession/depression.
Please go ahead and laugh at the losers in the dating/mating game. Now remember you could well have sons. And there is every likelihood that THEY can end up angry bitter "losers" if they don't mature physically earlier than their peers, have high social status, and lots of testosterone. If you have sons you have about at LEAST a 70% chance at least of having sons like that. Since only the genetic AND social lottery winners get to play "Alpha."
122
I probably had 100 lovers from one night stands to long term relationships so I knew good from bad when I met my husband. My past ( he knew) was never a big deal even though he had gone to bed with fewer than 10 women. He was mature enough to know that that was then and this is now. We've been married 35 years. I chose well. Just gets better and better. So quick freaking out and let it go and make sure your girl friend always thinks she chose well.
Eos
Eos
123
"I DON'T think there are "women you fuck" and "women you date", that is incredibly insulting. It's as preposterous as thinking that there are "men you date" and "men you fuck"."
Well then banshee, you probably are not a man. Because for us, there are. Your analogy holds no merit because men are not divided into those groups. Men are not women, and men are not deemed unworthy of long-term relationships because they have had lots of sex partners (though even here an extreme amount is a red flag). But let me make myself clear - it is not all about the number. A woman with 8 partners can be less suited for a relationship than a woman with 20. It depends on the context, commitment level, etc. But it would be pretty much impossible for any woman with 100 partners to be marriage material. Must suck to be some skank's one hundred first choice in life. A woman with that many partners not only does not take sex seriously (so more likely to cheat), but also has shown a complete lack of regard for her own well-being, physical and emotional. Hello, AIDS?
know-it-all, there is no "patriarchal" world. Women hold all the power in young American society, and men are just beginning to grasp. I certainly don't hate women, and the fact that you accuse of such shows you have no way to refute what I said. There is no way to argue that a man is likely to spend thousands of dollars for a diamond to keep a woman past her prime, while dozens of men got to pound the shit out of her for just the cost of a couple drinks and a short conversation, when she was hotter. Real men have pride.
Well then banshee, you probably are not a man. Because for us, there are. Your analogy holds no merit because men are not divided into those groups. Men are not women, and men are not deemed unworthy of long-term relationships because they have had lots of sex partners (though even here an extreme amount is a red flag). But let me make myself clear - it is not all about the number. A woman with 8 partners can be less suited for a relationship than a woman with 20. It depends on the context, commitment level, etc. But it would be pretty much impossible for any woman with 100 partners to be marriage material. Must suck to be some skank's one hundred first choice in life. A woman with that many partners not only does not take sex seriously (so more likely to cheat), but also has shown a complete lack of regard for her own well-being, physical and emotional. Hello, AIDS?
know-it-all, there is no "patriarchal" world. Women hold all the power in young American society, and men are just beginning to grasp. I certainly don't hate women, and the fact that you accuse of such shows you have no way to refute what I said. There is no way to argue that a man is likely to spend thousands of dollars for a diamond to keep a woman past her prime, while dozens of men got to pound the shit out of her for just the cost of a couple drinks and a short conversation, when she was hotter. Real men have pride.
124
The strength of a relationship isn't based on numbers. I'm a few years older than my girlfriend, yet we have approximately equal numbers. It's fun staying up at night telling stories about "did I ever tell you about the time I had sex in a moving car?" or "did I ever tell you about the threesome I had with two guys?" I like knowing her sexual history, not because it validates me as a lover or because it makes me feel more secure or something. It's just fun to share those details.
Just gotta find someone you can trust. And it's easier than you think.
Just gotta find someone you can trust. And it's easier than you think.
125
I think the advise to COO was right on in noting why she should want to break up with him, but I totally disagree with advising her to stay with him. She should leave him for being in a crappy drama filled relationship (not just the "cheating") and STAY AWAY. Of course they still have feelings for and sexual attraction to each other, but she seemed clear in noting that it was too dramatic/traumatic/etc. They should be friends in a year not a week!
126
Well Jeff, I'm just curious as to why you would categorize women into "date material", and "fuck material", whereas men aren't? I'm not saying people don't do so, but I'm just curious what the rational grounds for this categorization are. I'm a woman who likes both women and men, and I hold identical standards for both genders romantically, so I find that your perspective is completely alien to me and I'm just curious where this all comes from.
So Jeff, what makes a man who'd had 100 partners marriage material, and a women who'd had 100 partners not marriage material? I agree with you that it is not all about the number, you agree that context and commitment level have to be taken into account. But I just don't see why we can throw the context out the window (we know very little from WTF's letter) once his partner hits the 100 number.
Is it not quite plausible that his partner was adventurous during her senior years of high school and her undergrad, but grew out of it and mellowed out into "regular" monogamy after 10 years of crazy boinking and found other stuff to do than boink and become marriage material? I see that as being a plausible scenario for a man, and for a woman, so why do you not see that as a plausible scenario for a woman?
So Jeff, what makes a man who'd had 100 partners marriage material, and a women who'd had 100 partners not marriage material? I agree with you that it is not all about the number, you agree that context and commitment level have to be taken into account. But I just don't see why we can throw the context out the window (we know very little from WTF's letter) once his partner hits the 100 number.
Is it not quite plausible that his partner was adventurous during her senior years of high school and her undergrad, but grew out of it and mellowed out into "regular" monogamy after 10 years of crazy boinking and found other stuff to do than boink and become marriage material? I see that as being a plausible scenario for a man, and for a woman, so why do you not see that as a plausible scenario for a woman?
127
I don't think that Jeff was saying that men can't be catagorized that way, just that men and women think differently. One of the most frustrating things when women (or very pc men for that matter) are rabid about invalidating men's thinking/perspectives is that it just goes no where... we have the word misogyny in the english language for men who hate women, but we do not have a word for the women that get so blue in the face about the fact that the opposite sex is wired differently, and may not be therefore inherently WRONG for having a very different perspective and way of approaching matters of love, lust, sex, and emotional bonding and commitment.
WTF's letter really opened a can of worms, and it's been really interesting to read! I hope he is able to give more form to his perhaps previously vague feelings about the Amy who's gotten around here, there, and everywhere.
Of course it is not impossible for this woman to change her habits and commit, especially if she really likes/loves WTF, but the reality is that you have to become relatively unattached to be with that many men... and as much as I know I'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this, probably pretty damaged.
Every woman I've known who was that promiscuous (5-6 lovers/year) by age 35 was either a drug addict/alcoholic, or really obsessed with their pet dog/cat- it almost as if it was only with animals they could really love and be loved... (I know one that has this really creepy crazylove for her papillon.)
If WTF's partner has a position of status, (how many has Paris Hilton laid?), she will be able to attract/lay really decent men, but keeping them around is a whole different story...
I am not worried about WTF--he might get temporarily swayed/confused by all the pc comments- here and elsewhere- but the human heart is something you, if you're wise, entrust to one who understands how to care for it well.
If not, you've no choice but to learn that love and life are not pc, or fair.
More...
WTF's letter really opened a can of worms, and it's been really interesting to read! I hope he is able to give more form to his perhaps previously vague feelings about the Amy who's gotten around here, there, and everywhere.
Of course it is not impossible for this woman to change her habits and commit, especially if she really likes/loves WTF, but the reality is that you have to become relatively unattached to be with that many men... and as much as I know I'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this, probably pretty damaged.
Every woman I've known who was that promiscuous (5-6 lovers/year) by age 35 was either a drug addict/alcoholic, or really obsessed with their pet dog/cat- it almost as if it was only with animals they could really love and be loved... (I know one that has this really creepy crazylove for her papillon.)
If WTF's partner has a position of status, (how many has Paris Hilton laid?), she will be able to attract/lay really decent men, but keeping them around is a whole different story...
I am not worried about WTF--he might get temporarily swayed/confused by all the pc comments- here and elsewhere- but the human heart is something you, if you're wise, entrust to one who understands how to care for it well.
If not, you've no choice but to learn that love and life are not pc, or fair.
128
i agree. i kinda think skanks should stick together (having made the mistake of trying a serious relationship out with one a few years ago)- they have a different way of relating to other human beings, a different way of dealing with stress and happiness, etc than non skanks.
(it wasn't fun staying more or less celibate for a year or so, just to be sure i had no stds from him to pass on, along with 2-3months of grief and annoyance at myself for being so silly to fall for him)
hopefully WTF will dump this one, in the most kind and compassionate way possible, and see how long it takes her to hook up with one of the many men who have had that many partners~ and find someone who perhaps doesn't share all the same interests and hobbies, but who is different enough to learn from, and similar enough to trust.
(it wasn't fun staying more or less celibate for a year or so, just to be sure i had no stds from him to pass on, along with 2-3months of grief and annoyance at myself for being so silly to fall for him)
hopefully WTF will dump this one, in the most kind and compassionate way possible, and see how long it takes her to hook up with one of the many men who have had that many partners~ and find someone who perhaps doesn't share all the same interests and hobbies, but who is different enough to learn from, and similar enough to trust.
129
Interesting, scary, some hopeful comments. My problem w/ the male-wired Darwinist perspective here is its totalizing tendency to treat all sex and relationships as a pathological compulsion. I'm not saying that the alpha-beta beauty contest isn't a factor in sexual politics, especially from puberty through your twenties. And, historically, I wouldn't dismiss the harmful consequences of an increase in unattached men caused by sexual liberation of women. Nothing has proven more violent and destructive in history than unattached, idle men. But people do evolve as they age, and grow more complex in their desires and needs. They learn, for instance, that making sex 'hot' w/ their partner is more gratifying than chasing 'hot' sex w/ 'new' partners. More importantly, sex, while important, if poeple have any life at all, becomes a component of a gratifying life and relationships, not this be all end all implied in the Alpha-Beta analysis. Taken to its extreme, the mysoginists' talk of "pride" and "manhood," rather than this numbers question being a matter hard-wired into us in evolution, I'd suggest is more a fundamentalist cant of 'losers' in a consumer culture. Stop treating others as objects, and stop hooking up with others whom only regard you as an object. Super high numbers might be some indication of a difficulty to sustain a loving, monogomous relationship but, as somebody else astutely pointed out, low numbers and a history of long, fucked up relationships should be equally alarming, right? Context matters.
130
Someone with 100 partners in the past who has never cheated on anyone has a higher quality context than someone who's only had 2, and been a cheater.
131
Not likely cassie, if someone's cheated once in their life then that's easy to work around. A lot of people learn lessons the hard way after all. But 100 isn't a little mistake-- it's a lifestyle.
You'd be cool with a guy with a 100 ex-fucks? Presumably this hypothetical lover managed this feat without compromising his values like a cheater--no passed out girls, no buying sex with drugs...
The fact is that among stranger readers dumping someone because you don't like their looks is considered de rigeur, but dumping someone because you think their cooch is a disgusting public accommodation is offensive.
To each their own, there's someone out there who will appreciate the girl. Hell there's someone who might even buy that being "chosen" as her 101st sex partner is a compliment.
You'd be cool with a guy with a 100 ex-fucks? Presumably this hypothetical lover managed this feat without compromising his values like a cheater--no passed out girls, no buying sex with drugs...
The fact is that among stranger readers dumping someone because you don't like their looks is considered de rigeur, but dumping someone because you think their cooch is a disgusting public accommodation is offensive.
To each their own, there's someone out there who will appreciate the girl. Hell there's someone who might even buy that being "chosen" as her 101st sex partner is a compliment.
132
My comment to both Neptune and WTF: if you don't want to know the answer, don't ask the question. Obviously it's a bit late to stuff the cat back into the bag, but if things are going well, I know I try not to worry myself with unnecessary information. Has my husband ever cheated on his past partners? I don't know, and as he certainly seems to love me and have been faithful to me thus far, I don't need to know. Some of that could be considered looking the other way, but if everything is going well and precautions have been taken (i.e., STD screening), I say better to let sleeping dogs lie.
133
If someone accomplished those high numbers through dishonest acts of betrayal, then no their record would be a bad one too. But people actually can *gasp* have sex without having to betray someone to do it, and if you've been honest and haven't misled anyone to sleep with them or cheated, the numbers don't say anything about you. Thats the point. A cheater doesn't earn any brownie points for having fewer partners than a good person.
134
Women DO divide men into "those for fucking" and "those for relationships" : the lover/provider dichotomy !
This is what the "nice guy" beta male anger is all about !
The Sexual Revolution "deregulated" the sexual marketplace, revealing women's TRUE sexual desires are for an elite group of men the female brain categorizes as "lovers": men who are high status (cool, popular, famous, tall, macho, etc) Alpha Males. This is why women will fuck alphas without requiring any committment/money/relationships from him at all !
Super-high status (famous) alphas are so sexually attractive to women that such men usually attract groupies; rock stars, pro-athletes, celebrities, politicians can screw hundreds if not thousands of women who expect nothing in return but their cocks.
Women categorize the masses of remaining men as "providers": un-sexy betas who are only good enough for provider based relationships (platonic friendships, committed romantic relationships, monogamy, marriage, etc), or who are ignored altogether (omegas).
This situation creates a lot of envy and rage amongst men, since women are distributing "free" pussy in a highly unfair manner: most of it goes to alpha male lovers especially when women are young/hottest, while starving the masses of average men unless we "pay" for it via provider relationships/marriage, and betas usually only get this "opportunity" when the women get older/less hot/less fertile. And the men who are unable to "pay" (omega males at the bottom of the male hierarchy) are the "unfuckables" women avoid completely and are thus forced into involuntary celibacy - the greatest socio-sexual humiliation of all. These marginalized men are the most likely to suffer from depression, drug addiction, suicidality, etc - and many turn that pain outwards and become stalkers, rapists, serial killers, school/workplace shooters, political/religious extremists, etc.
To summarize: the unintended consequence of the Sexual Revolution is a laissez faire socio-sexual marketplace where there are men who are extremely pussy wealthy (alpha lovers), masses of men who are struggling to hold onto pussy (beta providers) and those at the bottom who are in pussy poverty (omega celibates).
More...
This is what the "nice guy" beta male anger is all about !
The Sexual Revolution "deregulated" the sexual marketplace, revealing women's TRUE sexual desires are for an elite group of men the female brain categorizes as "lovers": men who are high status (cool, popular, famous, tall, macho, etc) Alpha Males. This is why women will fuck alphas without requiring any committment/money/relationships from him at all !
Super-high status (famous) alphas are so sexually attractive to women that such men usually attract groupies; rock stars, pro-athletes, celebrities, politicians can screw hundreds if not thousands of women who expect nothing in return but their cocks.
Women categorize the masses of remaining men as "providers": un-sexy betas who are only good enough for provider based relationships (platonic friendships, committed romantic relationships, monogamy, marriage, etc), or who are ignored altogether (omegas).
This situation creates a lot of envy and rage amongst men, since women are distributing "free" pussy in a highly unfair manner: most of it goes to alpha male lovers especially when women are young/hottest, while starving the masses of average men unless we "pay" for it via provider relationships/marriage, and betas usually only get this "opportunity" when the women get older/less hot/less fertile. And the men who are unable to "pay" (omega males at the bottom of the male hierarchy) are the "unfuckables" women avoid completely and are thus forced into involuntary celibacy - the greatest socio-sexual humiliation of all. These marginalized men are the most likely to suffer from depression, drug addiction, suicidality, etc - and many turn that pain outwards and become stalkers, rapists, serial killers, school/workplace shooters, political/religious extremists, etc.
To summarize: the unintended consequence of the Sexual Revolution is a laissez faire socio-sexual marketplace where there are men who are extremely pussy wealthy (alpha lovers), masses of men who are struggling to hold onto pussy (beta providers) and those at the bottom who are in pussy poverty (omega celibates).
135
Why overthink it? She's a nasty slut (no, that's OK!) and he thinks she'll stay faithful. She's delusional and so is he! Good luck suckers!
136
"This is why women will fuck alphas without requiring any committment/money/relationships from him at all !"
Ah, yes, because men like you will only participate in relationship because you want sex, not because you actually like her!
Ah, yes, because men like you will only participate in relationship because you want sex, not because you actually like her!
137
"How many people have you had sex with?" It's a question that I NEVER answer, and never ask -- I just politely brush it off.
Why?
Because whenever that conversation comes up, one of you is going to say 10 previous lovers and the other is going to say 324 and you're BOTH going to look at each other and say, "What, are you NUTS?"
Why?
Because whenever that conversation comes up, one of you is going to say 10 previous lovers and the other is going to say 324 and you're BOTH going to look at each other and say, "What, are you NUTS?"
138
... this conversation has really degenerated. it reads from oldest to newest like a dinner party where things have gotten so extreme and polarized, that the only people who are left still talking are the really drunk angry people whose spouses are waiting for them with coats on, keys in hand at the door to SHUT UP, and let it go.
WTF- what will you do????? please let us know in 6 mo to a year whether this woman is a skank that a man with any self respect ("alpha male") needs to cut loose, or one of those whores with a heart of gold that make great muses for songs, (but maybe not great life partners for southern boys who don't fuck on the fly so much)
maybe she'll end up a really great friend in the end? or maybe she'll be so vengeful and bitter if/when you find a lover without such a "whatEV" attitude to sex... if you take some space from this woman to reconsider things for a bit, would she allow that from you, all things considered? i think THATS when her true colors are bound to show themselves... and whether it's in the cards for you 2 to keep it going will be crystal clear.
WTF- what will you do????? please let us know in 6 mo to a year whether this woman is a skank that a man with any self respect ("alpha male") needs to cut loose, or one of those whores with a heart of gold that make great muses for songs, (but maybe not great life partners for southern boys who don't fuck on the fly so much)
maybe she'll end up a really great friend in the end? or maybe she'll be so vengeful and bitter if/when you find a lover without such a "whatEV" attitude to sex... if you take some space from this woman to reconsider things for a bit, would she allow that from you, all things considered? i think THATS when her true colors are bound to show themselves... and whether it's in the cards for you 2 to keep it going will be crystal clear.
139
It's amazing how
"logical" but how incredibly OFF beta001 's read!
Some people really believe we are motivated 100% by out most basic, animalistic aspects... but many are not. There is something he, and that mentality is missing that is not worth dissecting or defining in the blogsphere of sagave love.
So we can just smile and pour ourselves another glass of wine at the dinner party and talk about something way more interesting to someone else.
"logical" but how incredibly OFF beta001 's read!
Some people really believe we are motivated 100% by out most basic, animalistic aspects... but many are not. There is something he, and that mentality is missing that is not worth dissecting or defining in the blogsphere of sagave love.
So we can just smile and pour ourselves another glass of wine at the dinner party and talk about something way more interesting to someone else.
140
WTF, I'll write from a perspective of someone not unlike your girlfriend.
I'm in my mid-20s. I've been dating my boyfriend for more than 2 years, and I'm so incredibly in love with him. I hope (and believe) we'll end up together for the long haul. We hadn't been dating for too long when he asked me the numbers question, and I was embarrassed to admit that my number was 4 times his.
The truth was, when I met him, I was finally at a point when I was ready to be in a healthy, committed long-term relationship, and I hadn't been there before. No, I'd never cheated on anyone. But I had been in a number of 6-week to 3-month relationships, all of which failed spectacularly, for several years. I would feel so awful after each one ended that I would go out and sleep around to try to feel better. During that time, I was profoundly unhappy - I had some real demons to battle. I finally got through battling them, and then I met him.
The thing is, when you do really dumb things, you hopefully come out of it having learned something about yourself: what you want and who you want it with. Although I would like to have a different history, it was those mistakes that brought me to a point where I was ready for a real, loving, committed relationship. So in some ways, I'm glad I didn't meet my boyfriend until I did. If I'd met him earlier, I would have been the insecure, immature person that I once was. And honestly, he deserves better than that.
WTF, I hope that you talk to your girlfriend about who made up those 100 partners and how she feels about them. I bet if she was embarrassed to tell you, maybe she's not so proud of it. Ask her what made her decide to stick with just one partner instead of continuing her pattern from the past. Maybe it had something to do with where she was coming from geographically, but more likely it had something to do with where she was coming from mentally and emotionally. I wish you both the best and hope that you come to a place of more understanding.
More...
I'm in my mid-20s. I've been dating my boyfriend for more than 2 years, and I'm so incredibly in love with him. I hope (and believe) we'll end up together for the long haul. We hadn't been dating for too long when he asked me the numbers question, and I was embarrassed to admit that my number was 4 times his.
The truth was, when I met him, I was finally at a point when I was ready to be in a healthy, committed long-term relationship, and I hadn't been there before. No, I'd never cheated on anyone. But I had been in a number of 6-week to 3-month relationships, all of which failed spectacularly, for several years. I would feel so awful after each one ended that I would go out and sleep around to try to feel better. During that time, I was profoundly unhappy - I had some real demons to battle. I finally got through battling them, and then I met him.
The thing is, when you do really dumb things, you hopefully come out of it having learned something about yourself: what you want and who you want it with. Although I would like to have a different history, it was those mistakes that brought me to a point where I was ready for a real, loving, committed relationship. So in some ways, I'm glad I didn't meet my boyfriend until I did. If I'd met him earlier, I would have been the insecure, immature person that I once was. And honestly, he deserves better than that.
WTF, I hope that you talk to your girlfriend about who made up those 100 partners and how she feels about them. I bet if she was embarrassed to tell you, maybe she's not so proud of it. Ask her what made her decide to stick with just one partner instead of continuing her pattern from the past. Maybe it had something to do with where she was coming from geographically, but more likely it had something to do with where she was coming from mentally and emotionally. I wish you both the best and hope that you come to a place of more understanding.
141
Am I the only one who thinks beta001 and whiskey are about to go 'lone wolfy'? Seriously, I don't know if they're the same guy or not but holy shit this is why we need better gun laws.
142
I agree with you, yikes.
Holy shit this thread has brought out the crazy, insecure het guys... the ones that make me gravitate more towards women...
Let's see:
"As a practical matter that many sex partners means any real emotional intimacy through sex and bonding (and hormones released including oxytocin) is simply not in the cards -- human biology does not allow for that many partners (particularly for women) and continued intimacy and emotional attachment."
bullshit. That is hardly biological fact, it is tenuous research. Oh and also, the woman I know women my age with plenty of sex partners who are also plenty good at doing loving monogamy.
"The socio-biological reality is even unattractive looking heterosexual women can get far more sex partners than the average looking heterosexual male, because women are mostly having sex with a small pool of alpha males (upper 20% of all males) - the only men who can equal the numbers women are able to rack up."
Again, bullshit from bitter men. I am a somewhat above-average looking woman and I get rejected by hot men plenty.
"These feelings may not be p.c. but they are the way most guys secretly feel"
You can't speak for all guys. Not all guys feel the same way. Just like not all women are the same way.
"There are VERY few women in the major cities of this country that are worthy for long-term relationships. VERY few. The qualities men look for in women for relationships are the same ones they have always looked for. Fidelity, femininity, generosity. Someone who would be a good wife and mom. These women have not been with more than 5 partners (40 years ago they would have been virgins)."
Have fun with your Stepford Wife. Me and my wicked sense of humor and high IQ will go find someone who will treat me like an equal.
"The problem is that guys get told the WRONG thing, especially by women, and get ticked off at being lied to, time after time, when they figure it out finally (and then are in no mood to ever be "nice" again much less husband material). "Nice guys" are told by women that stable, steady, emotionally supportive, and decent behavior will win them the girl. In fact it guarantees them losing every time. At best they get an emotionally messed up woman who's run through myriad bad-boys who may have major drug habits, criminality, etc. but have lots and lots of testosterone based aggression, violence, etc. that women find sexy in various degrees based on social class and status. I.E. the criminal bad boy for the waitress and the edgy rock artist with the heroin habit for the grad student."
Here's a clue: as a YOUNG woman I like sexy men. Some of them are really nice and respectful, some of them aren't. I'm attracted first to sexiness, and then I'm more likely to STAY with the ones that are nice and respectful (and interesting).
"Sexiness" and "niceness" and "interesting" are not mutually exclusive... you clearly are lacking in the former department (maybe the latter one as well) and this is where your confusion about "what women want" comes from... sorry.
"Every woman I've known who was that promiscuous (5-6 lovers/year) by age 35 was either a drug addict/alcoholic, or really obsessed with their pet dog/cat- it almost as if it was only with animals they could really love and be loved..."
Well and I know women who've had a dozen or two partners and are perfectly good with longterm monogamy, I've also known women who slept around a lot because they have demons. You know what though? Everyone has some emotional problems at some point in their life. (Hell, look at whiskey and beta001... I wouldn't date them, but I'm not going to totally rule out the possibility they will one day be capable of a mutually satisfying relationship with a woman) I think there are a lot of wonderful people who've had shitty things happen to them and have a hard time dealing with romantic relationships for awhile afterwards as a result. But, I think patience and care from a loving partner can totally help people to work through bad experiences. What happened to humanity and compassion in this world, anyway?
More...
Holy shit this thread has brought out the crazy, insecure het guys... the ones that make me gravitate more towards women...
Let's see:
"As a practical matter that many sex partners means any real emotional intimacy through sex and bonding (and hormones released including oxytocin) is simply not in the cards -- human biology does not allow for that many partners (particularly for women) and continued intimacy and emotional attachment."
bullshit. That is hardly biological fact, it is tenuous research. Oh and also, the woman I know women my age with plenty of sex partners who are also plenty good at doing loving monogamy.
"The socio-biological reality is even unattractive looking heterosexual women can get far more sex partners than the average looking heterosexual male, because women are mostly having sex with a small pool of alpha males (upper 20% of all males) - the only men who can equal the numbers women are able to rack up."
Again, bullshit from bitter men. I am a somewhat above-average looking woman and I get rejected by hot men plenty.
"These feelings may not be p.c. but they are the way most guys secretly feel"
You can't speak for all guys. Not all guys feel the same way. Just like not all women are the same way.
"There are VERY few women in the major cities of this country that are worthy for long-term relationships. VERY few. The qualities men look for in women for relationships are the same ones they have always looked for. Fidelity, femininity, generosity. Someone who would be a good wife and mom. These women have not been with more than 5 partners (40 years ago they would have been virgins)."
Have fun with your Stepford Wife. Me and my wicked sense of humor and high IQ will go find someone who will treat me like an equal.
"The problem is that guys get told the WRONG thing, especially by women, and get ticked off at being lied to, time after time, when they figure it out finally (and then are in no mood to ever be "nice" again much less husband material). "Nice guys" are told by women that stable, steady, emotionally supportive, and decent behavior will win them the girl. In fact it guarantees them losing every time. At best they get an emotionally messed up woman who's run through myriad bad-boys who may have major drug habits, criminality, etc. but have lots and lots of testosterone based aggression, violence, etc. that women find sexy in various degrees based on social class and status. I.E. the criminal bad boy for the waitress and the edgy rock artist with the heroin habit for the grad student."
Here's a clue: as a YOUNG woman I like sexy men. Some of them are really nice and respectful, some of them aren't. I'm attracted first to sexiness, and then I'm more likely to STAY with the ones that are nice and respectful (and interesting).
"Sexiness" and "niceness" and "interesting" are not mutually exclusive... you clearly are lacking in the former department (maybe the latter one as well) and this is where your confusion about "what women want" comes from... sorry.
"Every woman I've known who was that promiscuous (5-6 lovers/year) by age 35 was either a drug addict/alcoholic, or really obsessed with their pet dog/cat- it almost as if it was only with animals they could really love and be loved..."
Well and I know women who've had a dozen or two partners and are perfectly good with longterm monogamy, I've also known women who slept around a lot because they have demons. You know what though? Everyone has some emotional problems at some point in their life. (Hell, look at whiskey and beta001... I wouldn't date them, but I'm not going to totally rule out the possibility they will one day be capable of a mutually satisfying relationship with a woman) I think there are a lot of wonderful people who've had shitty things happen to them and have a hard time dealing with romantic relationships for awhile afterwards as a result. But, I think patience and care from a loving partner can totally help people to work through bad experiences. What happened to humanity and compassion in this world, anyway?
143
I agree with you, yikes.
Holy shit this thread has brought out the crazy, insecure het guys... the ones that make me gravitate more towards women...
Let's see:
"As a practical matter that many sex partners means any real emotional intimacy through sex and bonding (and hormones released including oxytocin) is simply not in the cards -- human biology does not allow for that many partners (particularly for women) and continued intimacy and emotional attachment."
bullshit. That is hardly biological fact, it is tenuous research. Oh and also, the woman I know women my age with plenty of sex partners who are also plenty good at doing loving monogamy.
"The socio-biological reality is even unattractive looking heterosexual women can get far more sex partners than the average looking heterosexual male, because women are mostly having sex with a small pool of alpha males (upper 20% of all males) - the only men who can equal the numbers women are able to rack up."
Again, bullshit from bitter men. I am a somewhat above-average looking woman and I get rejected by hot men plenty.
"These feelings may not be p.c. but they are the way most guys secretly feel"
You can't speak for all guys. Not all guys feel the same way. Just like not all women are the same way.
"There are VERY few women in the major cities of this country that are worthy for long-term relationships. VERY few. The qualities men look for in women for relationships are the same ones they have always looked for. Fidelity, femininity, generosity. Someone who would be a good wife and mom. These women have not been with more than 5 partners (40 years ago they would have been virgins)."
Have fun with your Stepford Wife. Me and my wicked sense of humor and high IQ will go find someone who will treat me like an equal.
"The problem is that guys get told the WRONG thing, especially by women, and get ticked off at being lied to, time after time, when they figure it out finally (and then are in no mood to ever be "nice" again much less husband material). "Nice guys" are told by women that stable, steady, emotionally supportive, and decent behavior will win them the girl. In fact it guarantees them losing every time. At best they get an emotionally messed up woman who's run through myriad bad-boys who may have major drug habits, criminality, etc. but have lots and lots of testosterone based aggression, violence, etc. that women find sexy in various degrees based on social class and status. I.E. the criminal bad boy for the waitress and the edgy rock artist with the heroin habit for the grad student."
Here's a clue: as a YOUNG woman I like sexy men. Some of them are really nice and respectful, some of them aren't. I'm attracted first to sexiness, and then I'm more likely to STAY with the ones that are nice and respectful (and interesting).
"Sexiness" and "niceness" and "interesting" are not mutually exclusive... you clearly are lacking in the former department (maybe the latter one as well) and this is where your confusion about "what women want" comes from... sorry.
"Every woman I've known who was that promiscuous (5-6 lovers/year) by age 35 was either a drug addict/alcoholic, or really obsessed with their pet dog/cat- it almost as if it was only with animals they could really love and be loved..."
Well and I know women who've had a dozen or two partners and are perfectly good with longterm monogamy, I've also known women who slept around a lot because they have demons. You know what though? Everyone has some emotional problems at some point in their life. (Hell, look at whiskey and beta001... I wouldn't date them, but I'm not going to totally rule out the possibility they will one day be capable of a mutually satisfying relationship with a woman) I think there are a lot of wonderful people who've had shitty things happen to them and have a hard time dealing with romantic relationships for awhile afterwards as a result. But, I think patience and care from a loving partner can totally help people to work through bad experiences. What happened to humanity and compassion in this world, anyway?
More...
Holy shit this thread has brought out the crazy, insecure het guys... the ones that make me gravitate more towards women...
Let's see:
"As a practical matter that many sex partners means any real emotional intimacy through sex and bonding (and hormones released including oxytocin) is simply not in the cards -- human biology does not allow for that many partners (particularly for women) and continued intimacy and emotional attachment."
bullshit. That is hardly biological fact, it is tenuous research. Oh and also, the woman I know women my age with plenty of sex partners who are also plenty good at doing loving monogamy.
"The socio-biological reality is even unattractive looking heterosexual women can get far more sex partners than the average looking heterosexual male, because women are mostly having sex with a small pool of alpha males (upper 20% of all males) - the only men who can equal the numbers women are able to rack up."
Again, bullshit from bitter men. I am a somewhat above-average looking woman and I get rejected by hot men plenty.
"These feelings may not be p.c. but they are the way most guys secretly feel"
You can't speak for all guys. Not all guys feel the same way. Just like not all women are the same way.
"There are VERY few women in the major cities of this country that are worthy for long-term relationships. VERY few. The qualities men look for in women for relationships are the same ones they have always looked for. Fidelity, femininity, generosity. Someone who would be a good wife and mom. These women have not been with more than 5 partners (40 years ago they would have been virgins)."
Have fun with your Stepford Wife. Me and my wicked sense of humor and high IQ will go find someone who will treat me like an equal.
"The problem is that guys get told the WRONG thing, especially by women, and get ticked off at being lied to, time after time, when they figure it out finally (and then are in no mood to ever be "nice" again much less husband material). "Nice guys" are told by women that stable, steady, emotionally supportive, and decent behavior will win them the girl. In fact it guarantees them losing every time. At best they get an emotionally messed up woman who's run through myriad bad-boys who may have major drug habits, criminality, etc. but have lots and lots of testosterone based aggression, violence, etc. that women find sexy in various degrees based on social class and status. I.E. the criminal bad boy for the waitress and the edgy rock artist with the heroin habit for the grad student."
Here's a clue: as a YOUNG woman I like sexy men. Some of them are really nice and respectful, some of them aren't. I'm attracted first to sexiness, and then I'm more likely to STAY with the ones that are nice and respectful (and interesting).
"Sexiness" and "niceness" and "interesting" are not mutually exclusive... you clearly are lacking in the former department (maybe the latter one as well) and this is where your confusion about "what women want" comes from... sorry.
"Every woman I've known who was that promiscuous (5-6 lovers/year) by age 35 was either a drug addict/alcoholic, or really obsessed with their pet dog/cat- it almost as if it was only with animals they could really love and be loved..."
Well and I know women who've had a dozen or two partners and are perfectly good with longterm monogamy, I've also known women who slept around a lot because they have demons. You know what though? Everyone has some emotional problems at some point in their life. (Hell, look at whiskey and beta001... I wouldn't date them, but I'm not going to totally rule out the possibility they will one day be capable of a mutually satisfying relationship with a woman) I think there are a lot of wonderful people who've had shitty things happen to them and have a hard time dealing with romantic relationships for awhile afterwards as a result. But, I think patience and care from a loving partner can totally help people to work through bad experiences. What happened to humanity and compassion in this world, anyway?
145
I think it's OK to ask how many partners someone had. the answer may surprise/disappoint you, like anything else about the person, but you might as well find out the truth. It can't create incompatibility, although maybe reveal some incompatibility that is already there. Overall, it should help get to know each other, to understand differing values and assumptions you both may be taking for granted.
146
Thank you yikes and em.
I'm glad that beta001 and whiskey posts didn't go unchallenged.
Thanks em for your rational response. What a relief.
yikes: I know what you mean about the lone wolf thing and gun laws. I had a similar reaction to Jeff's post and wrote about it further back.
I'm glad that beta001 and whiskey posts didn't go unchallenged.
Thanks em for your rational response. What a relief.
yikes: I know what you mean about the lone wolf thing and gun laws. I had a similar reaction to Jeff's post and wrote about it further back.
147
Dumb question:
Are there any straight guys over age 40 out there willing to be friends with a gal first, and if it works out, okay, fine?
I have been on my own for the last seven years, and while enjoying my own space suits me quite well, I'm just curious.
I'm not interested in dating, and singles clubs leave me queasy. And if anyone needs to know, I'm currently divorced, childless by choice, and the world's champion plainjane.
Are there any straight guys over age 40 out there willing to be friends with a gal first, and if it works out, okay, fine?
I have been on my own for the last seven years, and while enjoying my own space suits me quite well, I'm just curious.
I'm not interested in dating, and singles clubs leave me queasy. And if anyone needs to know, I'm currently divorced, childless by choice, and the world's champion plainjane.
148
if you're going to go the totally honest route, I think it only really works if you are TOTALLY honest, something not easily achieved unless you were friends who shared everything before starting a relationship. Most people say they want complete honesty in a partner but don't.
149
Plain Jane,
You'd probably do better to place a personal ad in the Stranger rather than to post here looking for a guy. Consider the posts from some of the guys in this thread (see Jeff, beta001 and whiskey). Do you really want to hook up w/ someone who hates women (but won't admit it), who has cobbled together some pseudo-science phrase-ology, ala Cliff Claven, to support his bitter world view?
Yeah, I know, my feminist views are way out of fashion (I don't really give a fuck.) and I'm thinking you're probably not a feminist Plain Jane. Still, those women who aren't feminist still probably don't want to start relationships w/ men who are bitter and angry.
In any case, good luck!
You'd probably do better to place a personal ad in the Stranger rather than to post here looking for a guy. Consider the posts from some of the guys in this thread (see Jeff, beta001 and whiskey). Do you really want to hook up w/ someone who hates women (but won't admit it), who has cobbled together some pseudo-science phrase-ology, ala Cliff Claven, to support his bitter world view?
Yeah, I know, my feminist views are way out of fashion (I don't really give a fuck.) and I'm thinking you're probably not a feminist Plain Jane. Still, those women who aren't feminist still probably don't want to start relationships w/ men who are bitter and angry.
In any case, good luck!
150
Em:
"Holy shit this thread has brought out the crazy, insecure het guys... the ones that make me gravitate more towards women... "
Crazy, insecure, creepy or misogynistic behavior never stops da bad boyz from getting as much pussy/sex/women as they want as long as they are viewed by women to be in-demand cool, popular or dangerous alpha types. In fact, women will excuse and rationalize away his bad behavior ("he's so misunderstood", "he has a hard life", "he's really a sweet guy underneath"). This is the halo effect - where the alpha is ascribed all of these magical qualities, which in actuality he does not possess. This type of guy can usually fuck as many hot girls as he wants while never giving any of them a relationship or even basic respect. He is the type guy women fantasize about in their romance novels and chick flicks, aka female porn.
Bad or misogynistic behavior will only repulse and scare away girls if the guy is viewed to be low-demand/unpopular/uncool type introverted omega male. This is the classic loner type of guy who may've never even been kissed by a girl and may remain a virgin well into his late 20's - if not forever. Due to his low sociosexual value, women will slap him with the reverse halo effect - ascribing him negative qualities he may not actually possess, which they will then cite for his lack of attractiveness, blaming him alone for his situation, and will display none of the empathy or sympathy of the kind they do towards high-status bad boys.
"Again, bullshit from bitter men. I am a somewhat above-average looking woman and I get rejected by hot men plenty."
You are most likely getting rejected by top alphas way out of your range since they have so many hotter women available to fuck. Average guys don't turn down sex offers.
Women's bodies are the reproductive machinery for the human species, and thus women have all of the sexual power. They decide who gets "free" pussy and who does not. Men have no reproductive capacity aside from producing sperm, and thus have little sexual power. Most men view most women as sexy enough for casual sex, but most women view only a few high status men as sexy enough for casual sex.
This means that even a below-average looking/low value woman can have as many sex partners as she wishes, even if some specific alpha won't fuck her that day. And of course the average looking female CAN attract alphas for at least casual sex (one-night-stands, fuck buddies, get pregnant and become his baby momma) even if she can't get him to commit to a relationship.
Men face an entirely opposite situation. Most men are average (betas) who have to struggle to get casual sex from average and even below average women. And beta males certainly would NEVER be able to attract the in-demand hot women for casual sex.
I know of many ugly, obese, introverted women who attract lots of male sex partners, many of whom are relatively popular, fit and handsome. The opposite scenario would NEVER be possible, i.e. the unpopular, introverted fat boy attracting pretty/hot/popular women to his house for sexual fun. In fact such a man would be lucky if there was any woman at all out there willing to fuck him.
"... not all women are the same way."
Most women think the same way, this is why most of them take turns fucking only a few alpha guys, while the rest of the men are left to fight over the scraps.
"Here's a clue: as a YOUNG woman I like sexy men. Some of them are really nice and respectful, some of them aren't. I'm attracted first to sexiness, and then I'm more likely to STAY with the ones that are nice and respectful (and interesting).
"Sexiness" and "niceness" and "interesting" are not mutually exclusive... you clearly are lacking in the former department (maybe the latter one as well) and this is where your confusion about "what women want" comes from... sorry. "
I have no confusion at all about women want. Translation: "sexiness" = socially in-demand alpha male, who women will find "interesting" even though he may be dumb as a rock, and "nice" even if he is abusive. Women are attracted to and objectify men for idealized social personas. They are not attracted to any of the man's real personal or physical qualities detached from the idealized social persona.
Most men lack the genetics and luck neccesary to become alphas. When women look for casual sexual hook-ups where male commitment is not expected they look for alphas. Women can very easily attract men for casual sex who are far above them in sociosexual value. Rock stars fuck their female fans. Supermodels do not fuck their male fans.
"Hell, look at whiskey and beta001... I wouldn't date them, but I'm not going to totally rule out the possibility they will one day be capable of a mutually satisfying relationship with a woman)"
If somehow I magically became a famous and wealthy celebrity today, I would be the same man with the same supposedly unattractive and misogynistic personality - and yet I would have my choice of hot women to fuck and women for romantic relationships and marriage/kids/family, and would be able to have all of this at the same time, because that's how it works for alpha males. Their girlfriends/wives allow them to screw other women because alphas are that attractive in the eyes of all women - even feminist minded women (look at hillary clinton, she knows bill fucks tons of women, yet she doesn't leave because he's a super alpha/ex president, and all of the women he fucks know he's married and will never leave hillary for them but they still fuck him anyway, because he is a super-alpha and that is how super-alphas roll).
"I think there are a lot of wonderful people who've had shitty things happen to them and have a hard time dealing with romantic relationships for awhile afterwards as a result. But, I think patience and care from a loving partner can totally help people to work through bad experiences. What happened to humanity and compassion in this world, anyway?"
None of that shit matters if you're an omega male who can't get a girl, or a beta male who goes through long sexual dry spells, latching onto any girl who comes along who will fuck him. That's not a real committed relationship built on any real choice by the man, but one he makes to avoid sexual starvation and the social humiliation of being a man who "can't get laid". Your cluelessness reveals the level of entitlement women have to sex and relationships, and how oblivious they are to the very different needs and challenges men face.
-beta001
More...
"Holy shit this thread has brought out the crazy, insecure het guys... the ones that make me gravitate more towards women... "
Crazy, insecure, creepy or misogynistic behavior never stops da bad boyz from getting as much pussy/sex/women as they want as long as they are viewed by women to be in-demand cool, popular or dangerous alpha types. In fact, women will excuse and rationalize away his bad behavior ("he's so misunderstood", "he has a hard life", "he's really a sweet guy underneath"). This is the halo effect - where the alpha is ascribed all of these magical qualities, which in actuality he does not possess. This type of guy can usually fuck as many hot girls as he wants while never giving any of them a relationship or even basic respect. He is the type guy women fantasize about in their romance novels and chick flicks, aka female porn.
Bad or misogynistic behavior will only repulse and scare away girls if the guy is viewed to be low-demand/unpopular/uncool type introverted omega male. This is the classic loner type of guy who may've never even been kissed by a girl and may remain a virgin well into his late 20's - if not forever. Due to his low sociosexual value, women will slap him with the reverse halo effect - ascribing him negative qualities he may not actually possess, which they will then cite for his lack of attractiveness, blaming him alone for his situation, and will display none of the empathy or sympathy of the kind they do towards high-status bad boys.
"Again, bullshit from bitter men. I am a somewhat above-average looking woman and I get rejected by hot men plenty."
You are most likely getting rejected by top alphas way out of your range since they have so many hotter women available to fuck. Average guys don't turn down sex offers.
Women's bodies are the reproductive machinery for the human species, and thus women have all of the sexual power. They decide who gets "free" pussy and who does not. Men have no reproductive capacity aside from producing sperm, and thus have little sexual power. Most men view most women as sexy enough for casual sex, but most women view only a few high status men as sexy enough for casual sex.
This means that even a below-average looking/low value woman can have as many sex partners as she wishes, even if some specific alpha won't fuck her that day. And of course the average looking female CAN attract alphas for at least casual sex (one-night-stands, fuck buddies, get pregnant and become his baby momma) even if she can't get him to commit to a relationship.
Men face an entirely opposite situation. Most men are average (betas) who have to struggle to get casual sex from average and even below average women. And beta males certainly would NEVER be able to attract the in-demand hot women for casual sex.
I know of many ugly, obese, introverted women who attract lots of male sex partners, many of whom are relatively popular, fit and handsome. The opposite scenario would NEVER be possible, i.e. the unpopular, introverted fat boy attracting pretty/hot/popular women to his house for sexual fun. In fact such a man would be lucky if there was any woman at all out there willing to fuck him.
"... not all women are the same way."
Most women think the same way, this is why most of them take turns fucking only a few alpha guys, while the rest of the men are left to fight over the scraps.
"Here's a clue: as a YOUNG woman I like sexy men. Some of them are really nice and respectful, some of them aren't. I'm attracted first to sexiness, and then I'm more likely to STAY with the ones that are nice and respectful (and interesting).
"Sexiness" and "niceness" and "interesting" are not mutually exclusive... you clearly are lacking in the former department (maybe the latter one as well) and this is where your confusion about "what women want" comes from... sorry. "
I have no confusion at all about women want. Translation: "sexiness" = socially in-demand alpha male, who women will find "interesting" even though he may be dumb as a rock, and "nice" even if he is abusive. Women are attracted to and objectify men for idealized social personas. They are not attracted to any of the man's real personal or physical qualities detached from the idealized social persona.
Most men lack the genetics and luck neccesary to become alphas. When women look for casual sexual hook-ups where male commitment is not expected they look for alphas. Women can very easily attract men for casual sex who are far above them in sociosexual value. Rock stars fuck their female fans. Supermodels do not fuck their male fans.
"Hell, look at whiskey and beta001... I wouldn't date them, but I'm not going to totally rule out the possibility they will one day be capable of a mutually satisfying relationship with a woman)"
If somehow I magically became a famous and wealthy celebrity today, I would be the same man with the same supposedly unattractive and misogynistic personality - and yet I would have my choice of hot women to fuck and women for romantic relationships and marriage/kids/family, and would be able to have all of this at the same time, because that's how it works for alpha males. Their girlfriends/wives allow them to screw other women because alphas are that attractive in the eyes of all women - even feminist minded women (look at hillary clinton, she knows bill fucks tons of women, yet she doesn't leave because he's a super alpha/ex president, and all of the women he fucks know he's married and will never leave hillary for them but they still fuck him anyway, because he is a super-alpha and that is how super-alphas roll).
"I think there are a lot of wonderful people who've had shitty things happen to them and have a hard time dealing with romantic relationships for awhile afterwards as a result. But, I think patience and care from a loving partner can totally help people to work through bad experiences. What happened to humanity and compassion in this world, anyway?"
None of that shit matters if you're an omega male who can't get a girl, or a beta male who goes through long sexual dry spells, latching onto any girl who comes along who will fuck him. That's not a real committed relationship built on any real choice by the man, but one he makes to avoid sexual starvation and the social humiliation of being a man who "can't get laid". Your cluelessness reveals the level of entitlement women have to sex and relationships, and how oblivious they are to the very different needs and challenges men face.
-beta001
151
Beta001, Jeff, Whiskey - yeesh. Guys like you still exist? No wonder you bitch about women. With your kunckle-dragging attitudes, I guarantee you aren't getting any.
152
The most amusing part about reading some of the comments by men who are pretty pissed-seeming about some women being able to sleep with lots of men (and more importantly that they weren't able to be a part of that behavior) is that the real issue isn't even touched upon.
YOU ARE NOT DESERVING OF THESE THINGS SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU WERE BORN!
Lose the attitude. You are not owed it by society to have sex/a wife/a girlfriend; it is not in the contract when you were born; you are not owed it by women, in general or in particular; you probably would have been bundled off to war and killed early in your youth had you been born into to most cultures anyway - specifically to be rid of all those 'extra' males - or sold into indentured servitude - so be grateful that not having lots of sex is your biggest problem. Not everyone will be the president, the CEO, the alpha, the Olympic athlete. I will never run a 5-minute mile; you will never be an alpha male. Accept where you are in life or make yourself useful as cannon fodder, but - until you figure out what you have to offer to someone so they will either sleep with you or be a companion to you (wife or girlfriend), it probably won't happen. It's not that there's a limited supply of sex and the alpha males are taking it all, but rather that most rational adult women will not sleep with someone who has a Madonna/Whore complex when there's so many men that don't have that -alpha and beta. Not to mention, if you're not an alpha male, you may need to be a bit more flexible about who you choose and who chooses you - you probably aren't going to be able to put a list together and have the supermodel-looks, generous, monogamous, feminine, let-me-cook-you-dinner-and-be-upstairs-waiting-for-you, intelligent, educated, well-traveled, classy do-all-the-chores-before-you-get-home, from-the-right-type-of-family, low-sexual-partners, etc., etc. woman just fall into your lap and then stay there - that doesn't really happen to the alpha males and it probably will not happen for you, since you offer fewer rewards in response to such "perfection", if you believe in that. Those rigid ideals about appropriate "types" are going to get in the way of long-term satisfaction and feeling comfortable. Not to mention, the whole discussion is a very high school idea - the 'cool kids' and the 'nerds', which wasn't really appropriate even in HS I thought, and certainly isn't as an adult. It's like waking up one day and hoping to be in competition with the Hiltons or the Kennedys. One simply needs to do the best with one's own life - if something is lacking, you can only change yourself and your reactions - all others should be considered 'fixed' and immutable.
Plus, any woman worth her salt knows that only god can help a woman who chooses to be with someone who believes it is their right to have sex, a relationship, companionship, etc. because they exist and that is the road to abuse and a very rough relationship.
As for the 'women only sleep with alpha male' hypothesis: some women prefer beta males. During the time before monogamy set in (going on 5-years with a wonderful beta male - who does has a much much lower number than me), it was only a couple times I slept with "alpha" men - as an alpha myself, it was just too much work having one too many leaders, even for something as simple as a one-night stand. So I preferred the betas - more fun, less work - and have settled down with one who is gorgeous, kind, caring, interesting, intelligent, educated, well-traveled, [insert good quality here]. Is he going to someday morph into a 'great provider'? No probably not. That's probably going to be me and he seems pretty okay with that. Am I ever going to be as nice and generous as he is, however good those qualities would be to have it seems some days? No, probably not. But I'm pretty okay with that as well. And accepting that we can't all be the 'ideal' (I write this believing it's pretty stupid to link genitals and traits that are more ambiguous) makes life a lot easier to take - not to mention gives one a much, much better sense of humor with which a potential mate (both long-term and short-term) can be wowed! Just a hint.
More...
YOU ARE NOT DESERVING OF THESE THINGS SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU WERE BORN!
Lose the attitude. You are not owed it by society to have sex/a wife/a girlfriend; it is not in the contract when you were born; you are not owed it by women, in general or in particular; you probably would have been bundled off to war and killed early in your youth had you been born into to most cultures anyway - specifically to be rid of all those 'extra' males - or sold into indentured servitude - so be grateful that not having lots of sex is your biggest problem. Not everyone will be the president, the CEO, the alpha, the Olympic athlete. I will never run a 5-minute mile; you will never be an alpha male. Accept where you are in life or make yourself useful as cannon fodder, but - until you figure out what you have to offer to someone so they will either sleep with you or be a companion to you (wife or girlfriend), it probably won't happen. It's not that there's a limited supply of sex and the alpha males are taking it all, but rather that most rational adult women will not sleep with someone who has a Madonna/Whore complex when there's so many men that don't have that -alpha and beta. Not to mention, if you're not an alpha male, you may need to be a bit more flexible about who you choose and who chooses you - you probably aren't going to be able to put a list together and have the supermodel-looks, generous, monogamous, feminine, let-me-cook-you-dinner-and-be-upstairs-waiting-for-you, intelligent, educated, well-traveled, classy do-all-the-chores-before-you-get-home, from-the-right-type-of-family, low-sexual-partners, etc., etc. woman just fall into your lap and then stay there - that doesn't really happen to the alpha males and it probably will not happen for you, since you offer fewer rewards in response to such "perfection", if you believe in that. Those rigid ideals about appropriate "types" are going to get in the way of long-term satisfaction and feeling comfortable. Not to mention, the whole discussion is a very high school idea - the 'cool kids' and the 'nerds', which wasn't really appropriate even in HS I thought, and certainly isn't as an adult. It's like waking up one day and hoping to be in competition with the Hiltons or the Kennedys. One simply needs to do the best with one's own life - if something is lacking, you can only change yourself and your reactions - all others should be considered 'fixed' and immutable.
Plus, any woman worth her salt knows that only god can help a woman who chooses to be with someone who believes it is their right to have sex, a relationship, companionship, etc. because they exist and that is the road to abuse and a very rough relationship.
As for the 'women only sleep with alpha male' hypothesis: some women prefer beta males. During the time before monogamy set in (going on 5-years with a wonderful beta male - who does has a much much lower number than me), it was only a couple times I slept with "alpha" men - as an alpha myself, it was just too much work having one too many leaders, even for something as simple as a one-night stand. So I preferred the betas - more fun, less work - and have settled down with one who is gorgeous, kind, caring, interesting, intelligent, educated, well-traveled, [insert good quality here]. Is he going to someday morph into a 'great provider'? No probably not. That's probably going to be me and he seems pretty okay with that. Am I ever going to be as nice and generous as he is, however good those qualities would be to have it seems some days? No, probably not. But I'm pretty okay with that as well. And accepting that we can't all be the 'ideal' (I write this believing it's pretty stupid to link genitals and traits that are more ambiguous) makes life a lot easier to take - not to mention gives one a much, much better sense of humor with which a potential mate (both long-term and short-term) can be wowed! Just a hint.
153
WTF-do you think you, or your love, can heal this woman of certain demons or traumas?
I just see so much of that- very sweet men who are drawn to very dark, heavy women... usually he is about a decade younger, very strong and mature for his age, and she is this bitchy, resentful, emotionally retarded human being who happens to have very large breasts and qualities that impress the guy's family and make him feel like he is on the right track.
Which part of you is most attracted to this woman- the boy, or the man?
I just see so much of that- very sweet men who are drawn to very dark, heavy women... usually he is about a decade younger, very strong and mature for his age, and she is this bitchy, resentful, emotionally retarded human being who happens to have very large breasts and qualities that impress the guy's family and make him feel like he is on the right track.
Which part of you is most attracted to this woman- the boy, or the man?
154
beta001:
Step back a minute and get perspective. Sheesh, I thought I wrote lengthy posts.
Maybe it's just this thread but you come off as very angry. Any woman with an ounce of self esteem (yep, some of us actually have it, in spite of everything, including bullshit like this) is going to think twice about getting involved w/ someone who cannot manage their anger. Don't know if that describes you, but it's not difficult to jump to that conclusion based on your posts.
You could couch your frustration in an argument about women being attracted to alpha males, but being female and a feminist (shudder, gasp) I'm inclined to believe that's a load of crap. People tend to cite examples from the animal kingdom to back up this argument, but there are also examples indicating that females prefer non-dominant males--not just bonobos.
And while I don't care to piss you off further (really, I don't though it's probably too late), I can't help thinking that your notions about sex, relationships and women, and not women themselves that are causing you to suffer.
Based on your posts, your concept of sex seems to boil down to: women have it, men want it, women dole it out to those they deem worthy, based on how "alpha" (powerful, charismatic) they appear to be. As if a woman's vagina (you'd say "pussy," I'd say cooter because it sounds better, and since I have one, I get to win here) is some kind of a holy grail or golden box or something that you won't get because you're not enough of a jerk to be an alpha male.
Such a view in turn fosters an extremely negative view of women, as if the woman who will or won't deign to "give you some" is a cruel gate keeper (dig my ghostbusters metaphor) or cumbersome packaging you have to rip through to get to what you really want.
Not all women (note my use of the word "women," and not "girls"--as if being full grown is some kind of threat, but I digress) are wedding planning, Lifetime channel, sex-phobes who won't engage sex w/out trickery. I sure ain't. Might seem strange to consider, but some women are willing to engage in sexual acts w/ men they like (like meaning: feel comfortable around, have interests in common w/).
Instead of seeing sex as a battle of wills in which you have to wrest a woman's cooter away from her as a reward, why not look at it as a possible conclusion of an interaction where there's physical attraction, genuine interest and basic decency.
More...
Step back a minute and get perspective. Sheesh, I thought I wrote lengthy posts.
Maybe it's just this thread but you come off as very angry. Any woman with an ounce of self esteem (yep, some of us actually have it, in spite of everything, including bullshit like this) is going to think twice about getting involved w/ someone who cannot manage their anger. Don't know if that describes you, but it's not difficult to jump to that conclusion based on your posts.
You could couch your frustration in an argument about women being attracted to alpha males, but being female and a feminist (shudder, gasp) I'm inclined to believe that's a load of crap. People tend to cite examples from the animal kingdom to back up this argument, but there are also examples indicating that females prefer non-dominant males--not just bonobos.
And while I don't care to piss you off further (really, I don't though it's probably too late), I can't help thinking that your notions about sex, relationships and women, and not women themselves that are causing you to suffer.
Based on your posts, your concept of sex seems to boil down to: women have it, men want it, women dole it out to those they deem worthy, based on how "alpha" (powerful, charismatic) they appear to be. As if a woman's vagina (you'd say "pussy," I'd say cooter because it sounds better, and since I have one, I get to win here) is some kind of a holy grail or golden box or something that you won't get because you're not enough of a jerk to be an alpha male.
Such a view in turn fosters an extremely negative view of women, as if the woman who will or won't deign to "give you some" is a cruel gate keeper (dig my ghostbusters metaphor) or cumbersome packaging you have to rip through to get to what you really want.
Not all women (note my use of the word "women," and not "girls"--as if being full grown is some kind of threat, but I digress) are wedding planning, Lifetime channel, sex-phobes who won't engage sex w/out trickery. I sure ain't. Might seem strange to consider, but some women are willing to engage in sexual acts w/ men they like (like meaning: feel comfortable around, have interests in common w/).
Instead of seeing sex as a battle of wills in which you have to wrest a woman's cooter away from her as a reward, why not look at it as a possible conclusion of an interaction where there's physical attraction, genuine interest and basic decency.
155
responding to WTF's letter, NOT this "alpha-beta-omega male" debate which has some of the females very lit up...
It is an option to be take a break from sex when, as em says, one can't deal with romantic relationships for awhile... I just personally feel leery about people who cannot abstain...
I know we are here in Dan savage's column, where the 'a' word practically = Pat robertson- esque maniacal ignorance. But the truth is, it's a VERY valuable experience to have, at LEAST as valuable as any encounter with another, no matter how hot, or prolific, or prolifically hot.
to me, THAT is where the red flag is, not in the one zero zero...
so, no matter her age, 'liberation' or whatever- a person who has not had deep experiences with solitude is generally not going to be a good match for someone who has.
By serial monogamist- do you mean you have NEVER NOT been in sexual/romantic relationship? If this is the case, maybe you two are peas in a pod...
It is an option to be take a break from sex when, as em says, one can't deal with romantic relationships for awhile... I just personally feel leery about people who cannot abstain...
I know we are here in Dan savage's column, where the 'a' word practically = Pat robertson- esque maniacal ignorance. But the truth is, it's a VERY valuable experience to have, at LEAST as valuable as any encounter with another, no matter how hot, or prolific, or prolifically hot.
to me, THAT is where the red flag is, not in the one zero zero...
so, no matter her age, 'liberation' or whatever- a person who has not had deep experiences with solitude is generally not going to be a good match for someone who has.
By serial monogamist- do you mean you have NEVER NOT been in sexual/romantic relationship? If this is the case, maybe you two are peas in a pod...
156
Wow... just checked back in to these comments...
I'm not surprised that men like beta, whiskey, and jeff exist... but I'm surprised to see them here in Savage Love. They're the sort that usually end up hiring mail-order brides to pretend to be their misogynist fantasy (until that magic moment when the women can get citizenship and file for divorce comes along).
Here's a wake-up call... (most)women these days aren't looking for a "provider." We don't want your thousands-of-dollars-ring.
What we (might) want is someone to have fun with, a companion, or just someone to share the road...
I am pretty amazed at the 1950s-Americana-style concepts that keep popping up here, of good-girls and sluts... the assumption that everyone is looking to "catch" a spouse. What no one seems to be mentioning, in the context of having sex with many people, is that there isn't necessarily a one-night-stand or monogamous relationship dichotomy.
Most of the people I had sex with, back when I was younger, were *friends* as well as lovers. Not saying I never had a one-night-stand, but generally, I'd be disappointed if a friendship didn't come out of sex. These were people I'd see around, hang out with, and sometimes have sex with. Nowadays many of us have developed long-term relationships, even married. I'm certainly not in touch with everyone I knew when I was a teenager. But I still am friends (although no longer lovers) with many of those ~100 people I mentioned earlier!
Never once has all this alpha-beta, blah, blah madonna/whore crapola become a factor in my life, or the lives of my friends. Like I said - I know there're guys (and gals) with that sort of attitude out there - and I (and all sensible people) avoid them like the psychologically-warped plague that they are. (Maybe THAT's why they're not gettin' any!)
More...
I'm not surprised that men like beta, whiskey, and jeff exist... but I'm surprised to see them here in Savage Love. They're the sort that usually end up hiring mail-order brides to pretend to be their misogynist fantasy (until that magic moment when the women can get citizenship and file for divorce comes along).
Here's a wake-up call... (most)women these days aren't looking for a "provider." We don't want your thousands-of-dollars-ring.
What we (might) want is someone to have fun with, a companion, or just someone to share the road...
I am pretty amazed at the 1950s-Americana-style concepts that keep popping up here, of good-girls and sluts... the assumption that everyone is looking to "catch" a spouse. What no one seems to be mentioning, in the context of having sex with many people, is that there isn't necessarily a one-night-stand or monogamous relationship dichotomy.
Most of the people I had sex with, back when I was younger, were *friends* as well as lovers. Not saying I never had a one-night-stand, but generally, I'd be disappointed if a friendship didn't come out of sex. These were people I'd see around, hang out with, and sometimes have sex with. Nowadays many of us have developed long-term relationships, even married. I'm certainly not in touch with everyone I knew when I was a teenager. But I still am friends (although no longer lovers) with many of those ~100 people I mentioned earlier!
Never once has all this alpha-beta, blah, blah madonna/whore crapola become a factor in my life, or the lives of my friends. Like I said - I know there're guys (and gals) with that sort of attitude out there - and I (and all sensible people) avoid them like the psychologically-warped plague that they are. (Maybe THAT's why they're not gettin' any!)
157
... so it sounds like according to NYC gal, that if someone doesn't have a certain amount of sex, or who doesn't enjoy sleeping around enough to "achieve" the ~100~ then they are psychologically warped?
158
The girl lived in New York And has slept with over a hundred guys, so obviously she was a prostitute. You cant pay your rent by sheer will. Just another poor girl that fell by the wayside trying to fulfill her dreams of moving to a big city and being a success.
159
The health issues are valid points and the other things are called "sowing your wild oats". At the time of our experiences, we were all hopefully making good choices, with maybe some youthful mistakes thrown in for being young and having to learn what we were doing. "Numbers" can add up fast without seeming like you went wild or anything. Our pasts cannot be changed. WTF needs to get over his insecurities and enjoy the fact that he has a person that is in control of and knows her body well enough to have great sex as he mentions in his first sentance. Isn't it better to be with someone who knows what they are doing?
160
camille4reel, if you read what I wrote, I clearly said that people who buy into this "alpha-male, beta-male" concept, or the "madonna-whore complex" are psychologically warped, NOT that people who haven't had much sex, or who don't like sex, are psychologically warped (the ones who don't like sex are just mystifying - but to each their own!).
I'm just saying, if you happen to live in a place where there's a decent group of cool, sex-positive people of both genders, who enjoy each other's company and friendship, a lot of sex is likely gonna happen.
And I find the sort of guys (and gals too - see the letter in Dan's column this week) who regard sex not as something fun between two (or more) people who enjoy each other's company, but as this "reward" to be "given", or something to "trick" women into "putting out" - well, they're just creepy.
morrie, I'm not sure if you are referring to my post or the original letter, but both of us lived in NYC, and you obviously didn't read my earlier post, where I specified that I have never had sex "for any reason other than fun or love" - so there's no reason she shouldn't have had similar experiences. (Rent-stabilized apartments rock!)
And, btw, the whole "fall by the wayside" comment is an example of the "creepy" I mentioned earlier - haven't we gotten over the concept of "fallen" women yet? News flash: after two people have sex, a woman has not "lost" anything, and a man has not "gotten" anything - hopefully two people have had fun!
I'm just saying, if you happen to live in a place where there's a decent group of cool, sex-positive people of both genders, who enjoy each other's company and friendship, a lot of sex is likely gonna happen.
And I find the sort of guys (and gals too - see the letter in Dan's column this week) who regard sex not as something fun between two (or more) people who enjoy each other's company, but as this "reward" to be "given", or something to "trick" women into "putting out" - well, they're just creepy.
morrie, I'm not sure if you are referring to my post or the original letter, but both of us lived in NYC, and you obviously didn't read my earlier post, where I specified that I have never had sex "for any reason other than fun or love" - so there's no reason she shouldn't have had similar experiences. (Rent-stabilized apartments rock!)
And, btw, the whole "fall by the wayside" comment is an example of the "creepy" I mentioned earlier - haven't we gotten over the concept of "fallen" women yet? News flash: after two people have sex, a woman has not "lost" anything, and a man has not "gotten" anything - hopefully two people have had fun!
161
Wondering whether Miss 100 is capable of abstaining, and the fact that this is a very valuable experience to have had (not to mention sooo attractive in another person! and I mean the ability to be discerning, for all you who are going to want to lump me in with the repressed and psychologically warped for expressing this.)
That is SUCH a great point, and it's about to get buried in the reactivity and holier-than-thou banter that most of this posting is shrouded in.
(even you NYC gal- what with your Special Group of *Friends* with no hang ups, issues with intimacy, and "cool" compatibility, ETC.)
What I hear in WTF's concern and "feelings" expressed in the original letter to Dan is a sense that 100 is just a bit much for a discerning individual of either gender, which is MORE THAN VALID.
(and he specifically says SHE is way into their sex life, which is like, duh! it sounds like a good possibility she is a nympho, so of course she is!)
I agree that, although I love Dan's response,(sex positive and slut savvy as usual!) -
I agree that 100 is a bit MUCH, for ANY age, and that I don't see where the big compliment to WTF is...?... Dan is assuming a LOT by thinking that the "next!" (and moving) on was largely done by her, and not the by 100 guys, for perhaps good reason. (Please refrain from deciding/assuming, (then flying into typing reaction) that I am saying that ONLY women are affected by having so many partners, and sleeping around with SO MANY *friends*- this is nothing to do with a madonna/whore dichotomy, or with targeting women specifically. People who act one way (fuck just about anyone within arms length every time you feel wee bit lonely or dissatisfied) but decide that a very desirable trait another is one who is choosier or more discerning are HIPPOCRATES and the world is full of them in every area, not just sex
More...
That is SUCH a great point, and it's about to get buried in the reactivity and holier-than-thou banter that most of this posting is shrouded in.
(even you NYC gal- what with your Special Group of *Friends* with no hang ups, issues with intimacy, and "cool" compatibility, ETC.)
What I hear in WTF's concern and "feelings" expressed in the original letter to Dan is a sense that 100 is just a bit much for a discerning individual of either gender, which is MORE THAN VALID.
(and he specifically says SHE is way into their sex life, which is like, duh! it sounds like a good possibility she is a nympho, so of course she is!)
I agree that, although I love Dan's response,(sex positive and slut savvy as usual!) -
I agree that 100 is a bit MUCH, for ANY age, and that I don't see where the big compliment to WTF is...?... Dan is assuming a LOT by thinking that the "next!" (and moving) on was largely done by her, and not the by 100 guys, for perhaps good reason. (Please refrain from deciding/assuming, (then flying into typing reaction) that I am saying that ONLY women are affected by having so many partners, and sleeping around with SO MANY *friends*- this is nothing to do with a madonna/whore dichotomy, or with targeting women specifically. People who act one way (fuck just about anyone within arms length every time you feel wee bit lonely or dissatisfied) but decide that a very desirable trait another is one who is choosier or more discerning are HIPPOCRATES and the world is full of them in every area, not just sex
162
I don't really care that WTF's girlfriend has had 100 partners.
I would need more information than just that number to weigh in about whether or not she'd be a good partner (to address points others have brought up such as whether she'd be faithful or stable, for example). Like other posters have said, the period of time over which she slept w/ 100 people would make a difference.
Here I'll state the obvious: As with any (and I mean any, regardless of their sexual history) partner, it's important to know that they take care of themselves (i.e. practice safe sex, get medical attention when they need it, etc.). Having 100 partners does not, in and of itself, indicate that a partner hasn't taken care of herself/himself.
Posters have leapt to various conclusions about WTF's girlfriend based on minimal information, i.e. that she's unstable, a "nympho" (there's no such thing as nymphomania, although some people can be sexually compulsive), a born cheater, indiscriminate.
I'd be more inclined to jump to conclusions if WTF had complaints about her current behavior or indicated that she's mistreating him in some way. If there are problems there, WTF isn't saying anything or giving anything away inadvertantly.
Hey lupefromtheblock: The world is not full of "HIPPOCRATES" because he died many centuries ago. You know, he was the ancient physician, author of the hippocratic oath "first do no harm," yadda, yadda, yadda. (If that's an intentional misspelling, all I can say is: Geez, lay off the amphetamines when you're writing.) We are all hypocrites, however, in some way or another, but there's nothing here to suggest anything hypocritical in WTF's girlfriend's behavior.
I would need more information than just that number to weigh in about whether or not she'd be a good partner (to address points others have brought up such as whether she'd be faithful or stable, for example). Like other posters have said, the period of time over which she slept w/ 100 people would make a difference.
Here I'll state the obvious: As with any (and I mean any, regardless of their sexual history) partner, it's important to know that they take care of themselves (i.e. practice safe sex, get medical attention when they need it, etc.). Having 100 partners does not, in and of itself, indicate that a partner hasn't taken care of herself/himself.
Posters have leapt to various conclusions about WTF's girlfriend based on minimal information, i.e. that she's unstable, a "nympho" (there's no such thing as nymphomania, although some people can be sexually compulsive), a born cheater, indiscriminate.
I'd be more inclined to jump to conclusions if WTF had complaints about her current behavior or indicated that she's mistreating him in some way. If there are problems there, WTF isn't saying anything or giving anything away inadvertantly.
Hey lupefromtheblock: The world is not full of "HIPPOCRATES" because he died many centuries ago. You know, he was the ancient physician, author of the hippocratic oath "first do no harm," yadda, yadda, yadda. (If that's an intentional misspelling, all I can say is: Geez, lay off the amphetamines when you're writing.) We are all hypocrites, however, in some way or another, but there's nothing here to suggest anything hypocritical in WTF's girlfriend's behavior.
163
to the first commenter --
I love your sex positiveness, but your math is way off. For her to have slept with 100 guys averaging 5 partners a year, she would have gotten started 20 years ago. I shudder the thought...
I love your sex positiveness, but your math is way off. For her to have slept with 100 guys averaging 5 partners a year, she would have gotten started 20 years ago. I shudder the thought...
165
I do not think lupefromtheblock was commenting on hypocritical behavior on the part of WTF's girlfriend, but on people who live one way, but highly value or prize another way of life (ie, guys who sleep around, but adore or fetishize women who do not.) (That was how I read it, anyway, i could be wrong.)
I have to say that I would wonder if this person- and yes, based on the number- had been a sexual compulsive, or addict at any point. And that would give me some 'feelings" too. I am female, and straight, and if by boyfriend of a year told me that he had slept with 100 people, I would definitely have some "feelings"- so his goes beyond the gender, at least for some.
My feelings would be concern for my health, since STDs are very real, and as cited a couple of times- condoms are not 100 percent protection for some of them, namely herpes. I would also wonder if he harbors some profound insecurities, or other demons that fuel addictive behavior. And I would wonder what the fuck- why he felt the need for that many partners, because i consider myself an extremely sex positive, sensual and sexual person, who has been quite experimental (a couple of threesomes, and a foursome, as well as a lot of fun, creative 1on1 activity,) and that would be still be about 10x more than me, too.
WTF is probably wondering wtf- as in how, why, and whether she, and now he, are ok. I think that is very valid. And perhaps that is what lupefromtheblock, and peache were conveying the value of the ability to abstain... I would word it differently, but I have to say I totally agree with WTF's concerns.
I wish him and his girlfriend wellness and clarity.
I have to say that I would wonder if this person- and yes, based on the number- had been a sexual compulsive, or addict at any point. And that would give me some 'feelings" too. I am female, and straight, and if by boyfriend of a year told me that he had slept with 100 people, I would definitely have some "feelings"- so his goes beyond the gender, at least for some.
My feelings would be concern for my health, since STDs are very real, and as cited a couple of times- condoms are not 100 percent protection for some of them, namely herpes. I would also wonder if he harbors some profound insecurities, or other demons that fuel addictive behavior. And I would wonder what the fuck- why he felt the need for that many partners, because i consider myself an extremely sex positive, sensual and sexual person, who has been quite experimental (a couple of threesomes, and a foursome, as well as a lot of fun, creative 1on1 activity,) and that would be still be about 10x more than me, too.
WTF is probably wondering wtf- as in how, why, and whether she, and now he, are ok. I think that is very valid. And perhaps that is what lupefromtheblock, and peache were conveying the value of the ability to abstain... I would word it differently, but I have to say I totally agree with WTF's concerns.
I wish him and his girlfriend wellness and clarity.
166
Is it just me or does anyone else have trouble listening to the podcasts? I swear, some of the most interesting callers are fucking mumbling! And I sooo want to hear the juicy details. So I blast my speakers =) and then feel silly when Dan says "SEX" or "FUCKING!" (loud and clear) and everyone around me can hear.
So i love reading these blogs.
Dan, any chance you could get the tech-savy-at-risk-youth to transcribe the podcasts? Just think, you could reach a whole new audience of deaf people =)
So i love reading these blogs.
Dan, any chance you could get the tech-savy-at-risk-youth to transcribe the podcasts? Just think, you could reach a whole new audience of deaf people =)
167
If a man asks me that question, it's a dealbreaker, as I can no longer trust him to the see and experience my uninhibited sexual self.
Just asking the question reveals that the questioner STILL ascribes to the whore-madonna view of womanhood: either you're a slut or a virginal virtuous ...vamp. (Sorry, just playing with alliteration.) People who enjoy debating what "number" is the line between whore and madonna are NOT WORTHY of any woman's wild side. It matters not her age, or how many men she's fucked/loved/blown/whatever -- UNLESS you believe that freely expressing one's sexual desires is immoral.
AND, by the way, most of the years I was "sleeping" with many men were the years before I truly came into my body. I only started having fewer partners once I emobodied (instead of just stating) the belief that I own my body and that I am the only person with a right to say what I do with it. If I have any concern about someone(male or female) having a high number of past lovers, it would be whether or not all of those decisions were empowered ones, or not.
Morality be damned. All of you who judge anyone - especially a woman -- on their sexual history need a few more years reading Mr. Savage's marvelously liberated column.
Just asking the question reveals that the questioner STILL ascribes to the whore-madonna view of womanhood: either you're a slut or a virginal virtuous ...vamp. (Sorry, just playing with alliteration.) People who enjoy debating what "number" is the line between whore and madonna are NOT WORTHY of any woman's wild side. It matters not her age, or how many men she's fucked/loved/blown/whatever -- UNLESS you believe that freely expressing one's sexual desires is immoral.
AND, by the way, most of the years I was "sleeping" with many men were the years before I truly came into my body. I only started having fewer partners once I emobodied (instead of just stating) the belief that I own my body and that I am the only person with a right to say what I do with it. If I have any concern about someone(male or female) having a high number of past lovers, it would be whether or not all of those decisions were empowered ones, or not.
Morality be damned. All of you who judge anyone - especially a woman -- on their sexual history need a few more years reading Mr. Savage's marvelously liberated column.
168
Priceless: This situation creates a lot of envy and rage amongst men, since women are distributing "free" pussy in a highly unfair manner. -beta001
LOL Highly unfair as if one is owed a good unattached fucking.
You want to fuck a hot chick in this oh so unfair world - work for it.
After all that unfair pussy slinging bitch surely spent mountains of time dolling herself up to look so hot, maybe even a substantial investment such a fake breast.
A monthly investment of around 30-60 to keep her hair pretty, oh the boring and spendy trips to the nail salon. Ass loads of coin on skin products, regular dermatologist visits.
You want a fair shot at getting some of that.
Try taking your lazy ass to the gym instead of sitting your sorry ass bitching at the computer.
Try working harder at your career.
Don't be the pussy at the restaurant who won't tel the waiter the over cooked steak she got needs to go back.
Point is most 'hot' woman are not their selves - they put a huge amount of effort into it.
Why would they be attracted to some whiny bitch like you?
You want to compare men to woman you are the equivalent of a 300 lb woman with a butch haircut bitching that she could never get a hottie like Brad Pitt.
LOL Highly unfair as if one is owed a good unattached fucking.
You want to fuck a hot chick in this oh so unfair world - work for it.
After all that unfair pussy slinging bitch surely spent mountains of time dolling herself up to look so hot, maybe even a substantial investment such a fake breast.
A monthly investment of around 30-60 to keep her hair pretty, oh the boring and spendy trips to the nail salon. Ass loads of coin on skin products, regular dermatologist visits.
You want a fair shot at getting some of that.
Try taking your lazy ass to the gym instead of sitting your sorry ass bitching at the computer.
Try working harder at your career.
Don't be the pussy at the restaurant who won't tel the waiter the over cooked steak she got needs to go back.
Point is most 'hot' woman are not their selves - they put a huge amount of effort into it.
Why would they be attracted to some whiny bitch like you?
You want to compare men to woman you are the equivalent of a 300 lb woman with a butch haircut bitching that she could never get a hottie like Brad Pitt.
169
Ok so I cab totaly dig the 100 thing and I am only 30. and am now in a 5yr relationship. still get tested just for cause sake and came into this on a totaly open door he asks I will tell but he has also accepted that what happened befor him is my buisness and if he judges it well then we will see where that goes. As for there being something wrong with a chick who likes sex there isn't if it was a dude who had that many partners not many folks would think much about it.
170
Avictor:
"Priceless: This situation creates a lot of envy and rage amongst men, since women are distributing "free" pussy in a highly unfair manner. -beta001
LOL Highly unfair as if one is owed a good unattached fucking."
Women (even ugly, low-status, unemployed women) and alpha males are ENTITLED to FREE fucking. What makes the rest of the men so inferior that we have to "pay" (with relationships, dates, money, marriage etc), get so much less, or get nothing at all ?
"You want to fuck a hot chick in this oh so unfair world - work for it."
Free love was supposed to be free, that's what the feminists and the sexual revolutionaries said. They said they were against capitalism and status seeking "bad boy" dominant men, yet that is the only type of man the so-called "modern woman" wants to fuck -while the good, less dominating, more egalitarian non-status seeking men (the type of men who helped women achieve their rights, btw) are spit on.
I never said I expected to fuck hot chicks. I said that there is severe unfairness in the modern mating market where all of the free pussy (hot or not) only goes to a few men, while the rest are left to fight like rats over the crumbs.
"After all that unfair pussy slinging bitch surely spent mountains of time dolling herself up to look so hot, maybe even a substantial investment such a fake breast.
A monthly investment of around 30-60 to keep her hair pretty, oh the boring and spendy trips to the nail salon. Ass loads of coin on skin products, regular dermatologist visits.
You want a fair shot at getting some of that."
Are you shitting me ? It's sooo easy for even ugly, fat, low-status, unemployed women to get sex. All they have to do is put on some cheap makeup, cheap clothes and jiggle it around and loads of guys will fuck her.
For men to get free sex, women expect them to ACHIEVE status, popularity, machismo, alpha - a success object - which is WAY more difficult, time consuming, expensive, dangerous to ACHIEVE than just prancing around and "looking pretty".
"Try taking your lazy ass to the gym instead of sitting your sorry ass bitching at the computer."
I'm in average shape, average looks and smart enough that it shouldn't be this hard to get FREE sex from average "empowered" women. If alpha males and women don't have to pay and get easy free sex, then hell no I should not have to "pay" to fuck some average or below average woman. I rather just jerk to porn (where all of the women are ultra-hot) or wait til prostitution becomes legal. Then the price of vagina will drop on the open market thus reducing women's sense of sexual superiority.
"Try working harder at your career. Don't be the pussy at the restaurant who won't tel the waiter the over cooked steak she got needs to go back."
Huh? I thought all of you modern womyn were supposed to be empowered, equal, be able to make your own money and stand up for yourselves ? I shouldn't have to to get some some high status career, be tall, alpha, macho just to get some sex. Pay for your own damn dinner (pay for mine too, men have paid for your shit for centuries, time to pay us back) and stand up to the waiter yourself (why should I risk getting my ass kicked for some entitled skank I just want to fuck ?). You're supposed to be equal, remember ? Oh, I see, it's that good ole feminist "I'll claim equality when it works for me, then I'll claim tradition when it works for me." Sorry, that game is over. We younger men grew up under feminism and can see through all of it's lies.
"Why would they be attracted to some whiny bitch like you?"
Ahh, the good ole "emasculation shame game". Wasn't feminism supposed to value more sensitive, non-gendered, feminine qualities in men ? Oh yeah, that too was just a trick to get us to support your agenda.
(Hey, if I was a rich or famous whiny "bitch" I'd have hot women lining up to jump my cock no problem. I mean, c'mon, hot women line up to fuck infamous creepy ugly serial killers simply because they are on the teevee and considered dangerous).
-beta001
More...
"Priceless: This situation creates a lot of envy and rage amongst men, since women are distributing "free" pussy in a highly unfair manner. -beta001
LOL Highly unfair as if one is owed a good unattached fucking."
Women (even ugly, low-status, unemployed women) and alpha males are ENTITLED to FREE fucking. What makes the rest of the men so inferior that we have to "pay" (with relationships, dates, money, marriage etc), get so much less, or get nothing at all ?
"You want to fuck a hot chick in this oh so unfair world - work for it."
Free love was supposed to be free, that's what the feminists and the sexual revolutionaries said. They said they were against capitalism and status seeking "bad boy" dominant men, yet that is the only type of man the so-called "modern woman" wants to fuck -while the good, less dominating, more egalitarian non-status seeking men (the type of men who helped women achieve their rights, btw) are spit on.
I never said I expected to fuck hot chicks. I said that there is severe unfairness in the modern mating market where all of the free pussy (hot or not) only goes to a few men, while the rest are left to fight like rats over the crumbs.
"After all that unfair pussy slinging bitch surely spent mountains of time dolling herself up to look so hot, maybe even a substantial investment such a fake breast.
A monthly investment of around 30-60 to keep her hair pretty, oh the boring and spendy trips to the nail salon. Ass loads of coin on skin products, regular dermatologist visits.
You want a fair shot at getting some of that."
Are you shitting me ? It's sooo easy for even ugly, fat, low-status, unemployed women to get sex. All they have to do is put on some cheap makeup, cheap clothes and jiggle it around and loads of guys will fuck her.
For men to get free sex, women expect them to ACHIEVE status, popularity, machismo, alpha - a success object - which is WAY more difficult, time consuming, expensive, dangerous to ACHIEVE than just prancing around and "looking pretty".
"Try taking your lazy ass to the gym instead of sitting your sorry ass bitching at the computer."
I'm in average shape, average looks and smart enough that it shouldn't be this hard to get FREE sex from average "empowered" women. If alpha males and women don't have to pay and get easy free sex, then hell no I should not have to "pay" to fuck some average or below average woman. I rather just jerk to porn (where all of the women are ultra-hot) or wait til prostitution becomes legal. Then the price of vagina will drop on the open market thus reducing women's sense of sexual superiority.
"Try working harder at your career. Don't be the pussy at the restaurant who won't tel the waiter the over cooked steak she got needs to go back."
Huh? I thought all of you modern womyn were supposed to be empowered, equal, be able to make your own money and stand up for yourselves ? I shouldn't have to to get some some high status career, be tall, alpha, macho just to get some sex. Pay for your own damn dinner (pay for mine too, men have paid for your shit for centuries, time to pay us back) and stand up to the waiter yourself (why should I risk getting my ass kicked for some entitled skank I just want to fuck ?). You're supposed to be equal, remember ? Oh, I see, it's that good ole feminist "I'll claim equality when it works for me, then I'll claim tradition when it works for me." Sorry, that game is over. We younger men grew up under feminism and can see through all of it's lies.
"Why would they be attracted to some whiny bitch like you?"
Ahh, the good ole "emasculation shame game". Wasn't feminism supposed to value more sensitive, non-gendered, feminine qualities in men ? Oh yeah, that too was just a trick to get us to support your agenda.
(Hey, if I was a rich or famous whiny "bitch" I'd have hot women lining up to jump my cock no problem. I mean, c'mon, hot women line up to fuck infamous creepy ugly serial killers simply because they are on the teevee and considered dangerous).
-beta001
171
I had significantly more partners than my last boyfriend and he gave me a ton of grief about it, both telling me that I must not use enough discrimination when choosing partners and, at the same time, he wants to have the freedom to sleep with more people. That special combination of judgment and double standard on his part started to really wear on me and my self esteem, so I DTMFA.
172
Using a person's number of past sex partners as an indicator of likely future restlessness/unfaithfulness is stupid.
Would simply knowing how many cars, or apartments, or roommates, or pets a person has had in the past give any meaningful indication how likely they are to ditch, fuck over, or "betray" their current ones?
Sure, it's good to know if someone has a history of wrecking cars, trashing apartments, burning roommates or neglecting pets, but counting alone doesn't say anything about that one way or another. Someone who owned scores of cats could be a saintly animal rescuer or a serial mutilator.
Yes, it's important to be safe and tested. But, allowing for very rare exceptions involving addictive/compulsive behavior, freaking over a comparison of someone's past-partner count to your own is all about YOU and your insecurities, not them and their "wantonness." If you let it wreck a good thing, you're the one with the relationship issues.
Would simply knowing how many cars, or apartments, or roommates, or pets a person has had in the past give any meaningful indication how likely they are to ditch, fuck over, or "betray" their current ones?
Sure, it's good to know if someone has a history of wrecking cars, trashing apartments, burning roommates or neglecting pets, but counting alone doesn't say anything about that one way or another. Someone who owned scores of cats could be a saintly animal rescuer or a serial mutilator.
Yes, it's important to be safe and tested. But, allowing for very rare exceptions involving addictive/compulsive behavior, freaking over a comparison of someone's past-partner count to your own is all about YOU and your insecurities, not them and their "wantonness." If you let it wreck a good thing, you're the one with the relationship issues.
173
The number of people you've slept with is private and is no one's business but your own.
Years ago I told a boyfriend how many men I'd slept with and he was shocked and a little freaked out. After we broke up he told me he thought he'd try and "catch up" with me.
Since then I've never told anyone I've dated how many people I've slept with. I'm happily married now for 6 years and I have no idea how many women he's slept with and he has no idea how many men I've slept with. It's in the past and doesn't matter.
The whole discussion reeks of judgment and morality... how many people is too many? 1? 5? 20?
Years ago I told a boyfriend how many men I'd slept with and he was shocked and a little freaked out. After we broke up he told me he thought he'd try and "catch up" with me.
Since then I've never told anyone I've dated how many people I've slept with. I'm happily married now for 6 years and I have no idea how many women he's slept with and he has no idea how many men I've slept with. It's in the past and doesn't matter.
The whole discussion reeks of judgment and morality... how many people is too many? 1? 5? 20?
174
I still think there is a difference between judgement, and discernment... I highly doubt someone who has had 100 sexual partners has been very discerning, regardless of their gender. I know, I know- it's not pc or perfectly fair to voice that. If it were the man who had had 100 partners, and the woman who was having "feelings" I really doubt people would be charging at her for being so "judgmental" and "insecure," or implying she is being archaic or moralistic. C"MON! get REAL!
I would love to see what happens to this relationship-- if WTF, (m or f) was a friend of mine, I would roll my eyes, say "time will tell..." and slip him/her the phone number of a clinic that does same day STD testing.
I would love to see what happens to this relationship-- if WTF, (m or f) was a friend of mine, I would roll my eyes, say "time will tell..." and slip him/her the phone number of a clinic that does same day STD testing.
175
What matters about numbers.
As long as you can look at your number, whether it be 1 or 100, and understand what it means for you today in regards to future relationships and sex partners then there is no problem.
What has happened in our past is what makes us who we are today. Therefore, it is ridiculous to say that numbers don't matter, and the past is the past.
WTF is reasonably concerned. The girl he was dating had a whole life he knew nothing about, and now he doesn't know how to deal with it. There is nothing wrong with that.
What would be wrong, is if he felt ashamed to feel this way, or ashamed to talk to his girlfriend about it with whom he was previously having a great relationship. Likewise it would be wrong for the girlfriend to to feel ashamed about it and/or refuse to talk about it with him.
If she cannot embrace herself, including her past, why should he? Why should he continue seeing someone who cannot accept who she is enough to acknowledge her pasts effect on her future.
Without knowing about her past (especially any negative situations) he will never really be able to be there for her in the future.
Best Case Scenario: Had many monogamous relationships or a stint as a wild child. By knowing he can accept this as her past, be happy for who she is now and get on with it.
Worst Case Scenario: Her story is less than puritan (sex slave, nymphomaniac, gang bang, prostitute). He needs to know incase she develops problems with intimacy or negative approach to relationship so that he can do what he can to help her (help her find a counselor).
As long as you can look at your number, whether it be 1 or 100, and understand what it means for you today in regards to future relationships and sex partners then there is no problem.
What has happened in our past is what makes us who we are today. Therefore, it is ridiculous to say that numbers don't matter, and the past is the past.
WTF is reasonably concerned. The girl he was dating had a whole life he knew nothing about, and now he doesn't know how to deal with it. There is nothing wrong with that.
What would be wrong, is if he felt ashamed to feel this way, or ashamed to talk to his girlfriend about it with whom he was previously having a great relationship. Likewise it would be wrong for the girlfriend to to feel ashamed about it and/or refuse to talk about it with him.
If she cannot embrace herself, including her past, why should he? Why should he continue seeing someone who cannot accept who she is enough to acknowledge her pasts effect on her future.
Without knowing about her past (especially any negative situations) he will never really be able to be there for her in the future.
Best Case Scenario: Had many monogamous relationships or a stint as a wild child. By knowing he can accept this as her past, be happy for who she is now and get on with it.
Worst Case Scenario: Her story is less than puritan (sex slave, nymphomaniac, gang bang, prostitute). He needs to know incase she develops problems with intimacy or negative approach to relationship so that he can do what he can to help her (help her find a counselor).
176
This is awesome! I had this very talk with my boyfriend the other day (except I'm nowhere near 100!) I've had a lot more guys than he's had girls-- and he feels a little weird about that. I think it's an insecurity issue... or maybe just not wanting to picture your girlfriend with other people.
But what i would have loved to have been able to communicate to him is how fortunate I feel, having worked my way through so many situations that didn't work out, to find him. Because he is perfect for me- and better than the rest. And I'm the position to know that and appreciate him all the more, because i have the experience of being with other guys.
But what i would have loved to have been able to communicate to him is how fortunate I feel, having worked my way through so many situations that didn't work out, to find him. Because he is perfect for me- and better than the rest. And I'm the position to know that and appreciate him all the more, because i have the experience of being with other guys.
177
I just reread the comments. Some guy named Jeff posted this:
"I certainly as hell won't buy a 5 thousand dollar diamond to a woman past her prime, while 10 years ago guys got to bang the hell out of her while buying her nothing at all. It would mean I have no self-respect. "
There's a problem with this attitude. Jeff is equating a relationship with a woman (another human being) to something you barter and sell. You can't put a pricetag on your relationship. You don't measure the quality of a woman according to how many sexual partner's she's had... if you do that... she isn't a person to you- she's a thing.
It shouldn't matter who she's been with before. If he loves her and wants to be with her-- and if she loves and wants to be with him... that's all that should matter in terms of a relationship between them.
To assume that a man is cheapened by his inability to buy you things... or that a woman is cheapened by her lack of sexual "purity"... that cheapens love.
The truth is, there's nothing wrong with casual sex. The girl probably had a lot of casual sex. Casual is sex is fun, but... essentially meaningless. it's not a relationship. A relationship is based on mutual respect and trust. It's only in a relationship that you share a significant part of yourself with someone.
So, while those other fellows may have enjoyed a few passing moments of pleasure with her... Obviously, they didn't have access to what her boyfriend has access to- her real self. And that is worth a lot more than a thousand dollar diamond!
Grow up, Jeff. Join us here in the current century.
"I certainly as hell won't buy a 5 thousand dollar diamond to a woman past her prime, while 10 years ago guys got to bang the hell out of her while buying her nothing at all. It would mean I have no self-respect. "
There's a problem with this attitude. Jeff is equating a relationship with a woman (another human being) to something you barter and sell. You can't put a pricetag on your relationship. You don't measure the quality of a woman according to how many sexual partner's she's had... if you do that... she isn't a person to you- she's a thing.
It shouldn't matter who she's been with before. If he loves her and wants to be with her-- and if she loves and wants to be with him... that's all that should matter in terms of a relationship between them.
To assume that a man is cheapened by his inability to buy you things... or that a woman is cheapened by her lack of sexual "purity"... that cheapens love.
The truth is, there's nothing wrong with casual sex. The girl probably had a lot of casual sex. Casual is sex is fun, but... essentially meaningless. it's not a relationship. A relationship is based on mutual respect and trust. It's only in a relationship that you share a significant part of yourself with someone.
So, while those other fellows may have enjoyed a few passing moments of pleasure with her... Obviously, they didn't have access to what her boyfriend has access to- her real self. And that is worth a lot more than a thousand dollar diamond!
Grow up, Jeff. Join us here in the current century.
178
Thanks Green. Your post is even more sensible than mine. I just REALLY tire of the attitude that being ultra liberal with how one distributes the energy of one's libido is such a great thing to be. As anonymous says, "it's meaningless." But what anonymous doesn't say, is that meaningless is NOT necessarily fun, and that developing some healthy self awareness, (and the self control that comes with that) can be.
179
I'm 25 and my number is at 53. I'm faithful in relationships but when I'm not I don't mind having a little fun. Dan's advice is spot on. I've been told "I can't stop thinking about the X# guys before me." It's not like that at all. Drop it and realize she wants to be with you, not them.
180
It's interesting to me that Dan, as well as some of the commenters--especially promiscuous women-- are assuming that it's HIS insecurity/male pride that is the issue in WTF's letter original letter. That really does not strike me as the case here. Do you really think it's that hard for an even remotely attractive woman to get laid? These people are acting like he is threatened because she is OhSoPowerful because...???...help me on this one... It's not a particularly threatening quality. It doesn't mean that her sexual prowess is all that exquisite. I have been with very promiscuous women and unfortunately, I have not found any of them to be particularly sensitive, creative, intuitive lovers... just willing and able. (ie, average.)
If it were me, I would just feel alarmed for many of the reasons the more sensible posts site- it's nothing to do with thinking that she is a filthy dirty whore, that her precious purity has been tarnished, I do not have the boring madonna /whore complex... it would just a bit of a WOAH, okay- WTF??? why did you feel the need to have that much casual (so yes, meaningless) sex? And I would of course wonder where I fit into that picture.
A year is a good point to start asking oneself those questions, because that's when most couples have enough time with each other to start to consider the viability of a relationship.
If it were me, I would just feel alarmed for many of the reasons the more sensible posts site- it's nothing to do with thinking that she is a filthy dirty whore, that her precious purity has been tarnished, I do not have the boring madonna /whore complex... it would just a bit of a WOAH, okay- WTF??? why did you feel the need to have that much casual (so yes, meaningless) sex? And I would of course wonder where I fit into that picture.
A year is a good point to start asking oneself those questions, because that's when most couples have enough time with each other to start to consider the viability of a relationship.
RSS
Twitter
Comments (180) RSS