Fwiw, I always assumed when dating that we (the guy and me) were not exclusive until we discussed it. Usually after a few dates. I distinctly remember having the conversation with my now husband. It was really early, I remember thinking, date two. He said that he didn't expect me to be exclusive but he would be. I agreed to the exclusivity.

So my anecdotal data.

While I find lw to be an insufferable prig, it is entirely possible he has been to france, tried the secret sauce, gone up the yellow river, and just didn't like it.

I won't do anal, a pretty common kink. I roll that out as soon as we roll into bed. I tried it and didn't like it. I won't do any excrement/urine play because that is. .. no. For me. I don't need to travel down that river.

I think people should accept that other people have different values. Not everyone needs to visit France and the failure to do so does not render them less worthy or less interesting or less rounded. I have a friend who never left the area, grew up, went to school, etc. here. I admire her deep connections, particularly among her family. Radically different than my own, but I am thankful she gave this perpetual outsider access to her own formidable and expansive social network.

So my assumptions? To respect a person enough to accept their preferences and decisions, including whether they classify as vanilla. I am not their mother; I refuse to tell then to try it, they might like it.

Fwiw, I always assumed when dating that we (the guy and me) were not exclusive until we discussed it. Usually after a few dates. I distinctly remember having the conversation with my now husband. It was really early, I remember thinking, date two. He said that he didn't expect me to be exclusive but he would be. I agreed to the exclusivity.

So my anecdotal data.

Sorry bizarre double post

It really depends on what the context is.

A drunken grope at a party should not lead a typical adult to believe they were now going steady. It might, however, reasonably prompt a conversation about intentions. Do we both happen to be in the market for monogamous life partners? If so, is this a step on the way of determining whether we might be that person for one another? Has the answer already been determined to be No? The conversation might be something like:

A: "I was married for a while. Never again. I really really like being single."
B: "I get that."

Or possibly:
A: "My *friend just moved to another country. I was very sad about it but now I'm very available."
B: "I'm glad I could keep you company last night."

If you meet someone on eHarmony though, and started having sex after a couple of dates, a reasonable person might expect that their partner, being a pro-monogamy person, isn't having sex with anyone else. If that isn't the case, the onus is on the person with multiple sexual partners to speak up.

@99. Fan. That's funny. I remember in my adolescence days, we girls would wear padded bras. I did it for a little while, then realized it would just cause ultra confusion when I finally got with a guy.

Ms Horse - Agreement with 104 (and half a point to you for it), confusion about 103/105. Would he have seen other people if you hadn't agreed to his exclusivity? And how would that have been assured of being effected, given that (as we've seen from a variety of LWs) seeing other people is not something that can be achieved simply through willing so - unlike not seeing other people?

But I thank you for reminding me of Torch Song Trilogy: "If I have to accept that you're seeing other people, then you have to accept that I'm not!"

@108: The scorpion pepper analogy is so poop as well, if we're going for food he's proud and smug of living a life sans-salt. Sure it's sustenance, but of an eat to live not live to eat variety.

@109: Really, anyone who gets annoyed that they've been trickered by bras, spanx, makeup, etc is a huge tosser to begin with that'd find other reasons to complain that the woman in front of them didn't match up with some bullshit expectation.

@107: Oh, true. For me, eHarmony falls a little under "dating the Amish", though. ;P Like, you go on a conservative dating site, you kinda know what you're getting into (or who you're not). OKC or CL I think are a bit more "you're not In A Relationship just because you're fucking on occasion", whereas if you're on EH or ChristianMingle or whatever, that's a whole other deal.

And if you have to see this person again regularly--co-worker, friend-of-a-friend, blah blah blah--you really should be up-front about what you're looking for and what you're not, in terms of both sex and relationships. Otherwise it's kind of mean to them, and/or you risk a whole lot of awkwardness.

Chiming in very late to say about the LW that they sound kinda judgey. Hey, you do you; I'll do me, & then I'll find others who wanna do me, haha. But something about their tone sounds off to me. Either they have reading comprehension failure - illustrated by Dan rolling out some examples of doing exactly what the LW claims Dan *doesn't* do - or, they really look down on kinky people, are tired of them, something.

Speaking of tone..IDK what's up w/ Mr. Eudaemonic overall. He & I have only conversed a couple of times. One time, if I am recalling this correctly, I said I am a feminist & he came at me with a list of problems with feminists, like, "people assume women are never wrong", "what about male rape victims" & other things of that nature. Since in fact I believe that stale gender roles are just as bad for men as they are for women, I took the time to explain my POV. & he said my view was rare or something. I don't remember clearly the resolution of the conversation, but there seemed to be some sort of grudging approval there.

After reading a bunch of Mr. Eudaemonic's other postings, it became clear he'd had a horrible experience / set of experiences w/ a previous female partner (he talked about this, I apologize for not remembering what SLLOTD it was in response to). That's terrible. I hope he has gotten or is getting counseling & support. Clearly one of the problems there was that due to the genders of the parties involved in that situation, he felt he wouldn't be believed..or worse, maybe he tried to tell someone, & wasn't believed.

Although I have a lot of sympathy for Mr. Eudaemonic - & hope he IRL lives up to his name, is conducive to happiness or actively seeks happiness - I've noticed that he gets into bitter arguments with some other Sloggers. The times I have noticed that happening, it's been with female-identified Sloggers. Now, I don't read here as often as I did before, so I could have the wrong of that. Someone who's a more frequent Slogger plz. feel free to LMK if I'm remembering accurately.

The point of this is: there's plenty of you I've disagreed with, politely, even heatedly, about various things, without feeling that there was inherent disrespect exchanged. When Mr. Eudaemonic was questioning me about my feminism as stated, it felt different to me; I felt like I was being cross-examined or grilled. Feelings are subjective, & that might not have been his intent, but that's how it felt. My from-very-far-away read on his interactions with some of us on Slog gives me the impression he seeks to "score" (not sexually) or have the last word with a certain type of more aggressive, self-declared feminist woman online, when he wasn't able to get that justice in his real life.

IDK.

I had a horrible, abusive 14-year relationship. Terrorizing, stalking, the ex trashed my career, tried to sic the cops on me after I left, the works. (Sadly part of it's Google-able, so I'll never get away from that bit.) And for a couple of years after that, guys in general had to go through way more "screening" than girls before I could befriend or trust them. I also have become an advocate for victims (of all genders) of domestic violence. My kinda non-stop going on about that - & other issues I'm passionate about - turned some people off, & even cost me a couple of friends. I started seeing a much better therapist than the first time I tried to work through it all & now I'm a little less knee-jerk about my male friends. That feels good. I still get kinda ragey from time to time, but I have to remind myself that not all male persons are responsible for what happened to me. Some of the biggest allies in my life are guys, now.

IDK if my experience has anything in common with Mr. Eudaemonic's, or what kinda help he's sought IRL. So, Mr. E, if I'm selling you short or making assumptions, I apologize. But I have to confess that your anger / angry interactions with some of the Sloggers here has been part of why I've been quiet more lately. When Seattleblahs was trolling, clearly he was just..from planet troll, & liked to amuse himself by kicking a liberal hornet's nest. But Mr. E, you seem like a combination of a skeptic by nature & someone who has some stuff to work on / work through. If by saying so I rouse your anger in my direction, oh well, but I couldn't let another argument go by & not say something about these observations.

I've come to think of Slog, over the years, as a group of pals - old & new - who met by reading Dan's words but hang out to shoot the shit out of our of appreciation for the various users of the forum. Like a salon full of long-distance friends. I've learned a lot from folks here w/ different locations & lifestyles than myself. I'd like to see the mostly-approachable vibe of Slog continue.

..& now, I think another cup of tea. Have a lovely week, you all..

Lovely description Eva, ' Like a salon full of long distant friends' who sometimes disagree.
I'm not sure what happened to Mr E specifically. I think it was a female abusing/ raping him. That he continues to slog it out here, also amazes me. He sure has got enough feedback that many here find his verbally abusive rants, unacceptable. And yes, it's mostly with strong women that he appears to draw his sword. He's tiresome and unpredictable, and one can only hope he is doing some therapy.
Hope you enjoyed your cuppa.

@112. it was mainly for my feelings of presenting myself as I am that I didn't continue with wearing a padded bra.
I don't see any point of hiding my true body, to myself or anyone else. Nothing to do with others' reactions.

@114: "One time, if I am recalling this correctly, I said I am a feminist & he came at me with a list of problems with feminists, like, "people assume women are never wrong", "what about male rape victims" & other things of that nature."

It's really bizarre when they ape what they believe "feminism" is about, but it always turns out to be Glenn Beckish rants, not insight and empathy for men.