Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Nothing is free. You gotta give to get. If you're living your dreams in a poly relationship, part of the price is that most folks aren't in to that. If your natural mode is to be up front - be up front. Nothing's stopping you.
That being said, Dan's advice is wrong: Nobody's entitled to shit. If you fuck someone a few times, they're not entitled to exclusivity or really anything that they haven't asked for. As long as you're dealing with a past-college aged person, if they want to cruise through, not ask questions, and assume that the other person (you) is on their page without any communication regarding that - I'd probably argue you're doing them a favor. Everyone needs to learn that responsibility lies with the bearer of the consequences - the golden rule of nature. When the consequences are "I got my feelings hurt because the guy i was fucking was fucking someone else"... well, the stakes don't get too much lower.
Everyone's been dumped. Everyone's had that one-night-turns-into-three-night stand only to find out that the person isn't "up for anything serious right now". Be responsible to yourself to live up to your own ethics, and roll with it.
I recently went on a date like this - a guy only told me he was in a relationship already on the date after the second round of drinks. I will not see him again and he was thoroughly scolded. No. Do not lie. Relationship status is a very important piece of information. And if you lie by omission you're still a liar.
Lol, writing about them is not being in them, and heâs not interested in them beyond âspeed seductionâ techniques.
Does that person even care about their âextracurricularsâ after theyâre finished with sex?
@1: âThat being said, Dan's advice is wrong: Nobody's entitled to shitâ
Youâre always such a classy person.
...and Dan for the lose. I'm sorry, but "I am already in a (open) relationship" is not something you fucking soft-walk a new paramour through. Ever. You disclose that of all things up front. If you're on tinder/okcupid, you put it in plain english in your profile near the top where people can read it.
Most people aren't poly, most people in this country have never even considered being in an open relationship, and springing that shit on the third date / after making out means that basically every interaction you've had up until that point was made under what were almost certainly, from the perspective of your date, completely false pretenses.
And yeah: I'm a poly guy who occasionally trawls okc/tinder, and I understand that putting that fact up front absolutely craters your response rate. But suck it up, buttercup: that's the cost of being a non-garbage human being. And the good news is that the ones you do write you back are way more likely to stick around.
I'm really not interested in being the person that helps someone overcome their prejudices. I've tried that already, I have enough stress in life as it is, and even in a best case, you'll have that extra layer of stress to deal with for as long as it takes--even years.
Besides, I want experienced partners who don't need to be taught everything. More to the point, I want mutual enthusiasm. I do understand that it can be hard to speak up, if you are young and dealing with guilt / shame issues or something, but really, the alternative (being silent) is far worse.
Conversely, which should be asked about at each stage?
Dan's answers have usually been on the second-ish date but before sex so the non-normative date has a chance to make a connection without getting their hooks in too deeply. I think his strongest argument for not making the first date a confessional nor an interrogation is to demonstrate emotional intelligence. Early over-sharing is off-putting, but I think there is an obligation to correct any misconceptions as soon as you are aware of them.
SHOP, why do I get the sense that you're temped to withhold your relationship status until after you've had sex with a woman because your girlfriend is so easily able to acquire new sex partners, while you have had to work really hard with little success. If that reality of an open relationship is getting you down then speak to your girlfriend about that fact. Don't try to even the score by misleading women into having sex.
If you don't disclose your relationship status up front, you are a total shithead. End of story.
No, just be honest and up front folks. If she is not interested in being in a relationship with a guy with a girlfriend, then why in god's name would you waste her time? And if you want just to get laid and meet others who are more than likely to be OK with it, then take the time to join sex clubs or kink/swinger scenes, join fetlife, all that.
If I went out on three fucking dates with a guy and there was chemistry and THEN he revealed he had a girlfriend, I think in the moment I might pour my beer in his face. Not because I care if he's in an open relationship, but because he's been deliberately avoiding telling me about himself for three fucking dates and meanwhile choosing his words to not reveal the details about his life priorities and his daily life and his years of long term relationship with current girl- and this would make me feel lied to and misled. Just tell people in the beginning and accept the fact that you don't get everything you want out of life.
Dan's advice here is better than a PUA but I still think it sucks.
Unless you are explicitly looking for a one time / NSA casual hookup and the girl is too and you both know this, in which case in my opinion it shouldn't matter what you tell her.
But that's not what he's asking, as far as I can tell. He's asking about dating other women, and the answer to that is- tell them immediately, post it in your profile, and if you want to increase chances of meeting people cool with alt lifestyles, join groups where you can do that. And if this makes it harder for you to get side pussy, too fucking bad. You aren't entitled to it.
The best way to show someone that open or poly people can be trustworthy is to set a good example: be honest with them from the very beginning regardless of their reaction. Stringing them along for three dates is an excellent way to reinforce their suspicions.
SHOP, why donât you ask your girlfriend what she thinks? Iâm sure when you two went over the ground rules about how to go about your open relationship without being assholes to eachother or other people this might have come up. Even as just a matter of curiosity, like âhoney, Iâm posting this ad/went on a date/whatever, and it occurs to me that I never really know the best time to mention you. What do you do?â
She might have some good advice.
Though as I said, he's correct about hook ups and one night stands though. It's alright to do that without mentioning the relationship, though if you end up exchanging contact info afterwards then you need to tell them immediately. In real life, there isn't a hard and fast rule of when to bring it up when you are meeting people spontaneously - it's sometimes a nuanced area if you are meeting someone and just going to bed or if you are meeting someone and then it looks like you might be really getting to know one another, and as Dan says, lots of one -night stands turn into longer things. You've got to play it by ear, but my own feeling is that if you end up talking a lot (rather than just moving quickly towards the physical) and the talking is more than just flirting, then you'll notice that you are actively avoiding mentioning details about your life even though the other person is sharing. If you find that this is the general tone of hte conversation (that the other person is talking about real shit and you are trying to answer basic questions about daily life without mentioning your spouse) then you are more than likely in a situation in which you are being an asshole if you don't either mention your relationship status or make it clear that you are seeking something NSA. Both things can be game enders, and you just have to accept that.
Honest question, do people really date like we are discussing- going out three times with someone just for conversation, etc, without having sex? Is this common among 20-somethings without kids? Just curious.
That I couldn't/didn't immediately accept it with no reservations was a rule-out for her. She'd been keeping track, I think it was 57 guys, with whom it had been an issue. Apparently, since XX% of Americans have mental health issues, I was supposed to already come to terms with these ramifications before dating anyone. I suspect she used it as an excuse to avoid getting hurt - this way, she could be pissed off and detach before she was very emotionally invested.
My gripe about under-sharing revolves around lesbians coming out to me after the 10th date. WTF is up with that? One considered herself questioning, another did not. Should I feel complimented that they considered me as a possibility at all or annoyed that they were flirtatious for so long without disclosing a seemingly relevant fact?
I have nothing so dramatic as that to share. Once when I was a young waitress, a guy I was closing bar with asked me if I wanted to go have coffee afterwards- it was 3AM but we were young so I went. Within a few minutes of sitting down, he told me that he had five children from three women. Two of them were twins. He had pictures of all five of them that he showed me. This was in the days before cell phones were common, so he literally opened up his wallet and showed me one by one, pics of all his kids. I was 18 or 19. He couldn't have been older than 25 himself. You can bet that was as far as that date went for sure.
Several friends and I were on Tinder a while back and of course we all compared notes. Seattle is not a big town and I was (perhaps naively) shocked at the number of people we encountered that I knew were in relationships (some openly poly, most not). The most memorable one was a guy my friend matched with who I knew through work. I knew he and his wife had just had a child and it turns out they are indeed poly, but he didn't mention that in his profile, so I made the (pretty reasonable under the circumstances, I think) assumption that he was a cheating piece of shit. What I'm saying here is that not disclosing can come back and bite you in the ass. And polyamory is all about honesty, right? Isn't it best to error on the side of honesty?
And for the "You don't owe people shit" line of thought: it's true. You don't. You are perfectly free to be an asshole. But if you want to live in a world where people are decent to each other, you start with yourself.
<3
Like, this is how you think? That there are no other ways of approaching something as common as divulging your current relationship status? This so foreign to you?
You donât launch into some interrogation for fuck sake. You just say something simple like âhi, I just want to let you know Iâm in an open relationship. What do you think about that!â
Is that so hard? Christ.
Because a policy of early honesty about your being in pre-existing relationship(s) is tantamount to badgering them to demand to know who theyâre currently fucking?
Whoooo doggies.
Some people do care that youâre married or in multiple committed-but-open relarionships, and hurting them by omission is more PUA and that gross culture around it than âethical slutâ.
All people are saying is that consideration for the other party is a good thing.
current relationship model & status, parenthood status, communicable diseases, safer sex practices, birth control / abortion considerations, and any required kinks.
I think the others you brought up and anything else that's important should get mentioned before you say "I love you."
Dan has mentioned how we present our better selves while dating and then, if we stay together, have to up our game to comply with the sales pitch. So, yeah, the things that aren't / can't be changed should be brought up earlier. While maybe, just maybe (but probably not), one would give up booze or learn to pick up their shit as the "price of admission" for the right person and those disclosures can wait a bit.
One night stand? I don't need to know.
Long-term, no-strings attached sex? Not sure I care, but I'd expect that the info would be passed on casually early on and would be put off if it wasn't.
But if we're going into it with the possibility of a relationship? I need to know up front. If we meet online, you need to tell me before we even agree to meet for the first time. If we meet organically, I want to know on our first date, or at the very least before we make our second...but I'd be suspicious.
As far as I'm concerned, one would have to go out the way to avoid mentioning a significant other over the course of a date. That's lying and the last thing I want is to end up in a three-way drama triangle.
I think maybe it's a bit of an asshole thing to say.
Anyone else care to comment on that?
I cannot figure out how to bridge the gap though. There are just so many emotional landmines cause I can't just lay out the situation up front, it's just too public. In my experience a lot more women are open to a casual relationship with a married guy if they don't have to tell everyone they know. And there's no causal way to say... "So... I'm married but my wife lets me date people, isn't that great?" that I have figured out yet. (If anyone happens to read this and have any ideas, let me know.)
And Dan's (implied) advice would seem just terribly hurtful to this person if we hit it off at all because of the palpably thick chemistry I mentioned before. Heck, even asking for a number and probably having to see her again in public afterwards in this situation seems like a kinda shitty thing to do. But not saying something when we're both so obviously attracted to each other also seems shitty. And I cannot avoid her.
Here are some awkward suggestions for you:
"Yeah it is a beautiful day, my wife's boyfriend said it was a great year for triffid blossoms"
"I'm having a great day, my girlfriend and wife just won gold for the three-legged race in the Naruto Cosplay Olympics"
"I'm fine thanks, my wife has a date tonight so i'm going to pick up some baked penguins and watch a question time in parliament marathon"
"Can't chat long, I'm off to the Poly And Definitely Looking End-Of-Financial-Year Fancy-Dress Ball, ciao!"
or give her your social medias, in which you have pictures of your happy wife and also advocacy / awareness posts about poly?
Requiring instant acceptance and understanding would be a red flag for me, I'd wish them well and not see them again.
Is I'll see how I feel about it after three months of dating what people say to sober addicts or people who have recently had cancer treatment?
I understand his reluctance, but him being upset about her rejecting him for saying "I don't know if I can handle being with someone who is chronically ill" seems off, no? I'm not saying he's obligated, it's his delivery that's problematic.
Chase @13: Hear, hear.
Been over this ground before but I agree with the commenters that Dan's "third date" advice is too late. If you have a profile, put it on your profile. The moment you realise that you might want to get sexual with them, you need to tell them of this huge potential dealbreaker. You'll only scare off the women you should scare off, ie, the women who don't want to date a partnered man such as yourself. If that means most single women won't fuck you, too bad.
If you want to go out with her, you'd have to ask her out, presumably. So why not say, "Hey, I find you really attractive. Would you ever be interested in dating someone who's poly? If so, are you free for dinner this weekend?"
It is REALLY hard to be deeply emotionally involved with a person with a mental illness. I was willing to go there for my husband, because I loved him before anyone realized how sick he was. I'm willing to go there for my daughter, because, again, I love her.
Some random almost-stranger who I was willing to have coffee with? Not so much.
Someone who says "Yeah, sure, fine, I'm totally on board with wherever your illness takes us!" to someone they barely know is either unaware of what they're signing up for, or lying, or otherwise full of shit.
And yes, I realize that this is very hard on the emotionally and mentally vulnerable person.
I would suggest a basic strategy of "friends first", so that a potential romantic interest gets a chance to see how wonderful she is, and how well she usually handles her challenges, and, basically, what they're in for. Date people she already knows through work, or clubs or friends groups.
Because it's also bad for a vulnerable person to learn to care about and depend on someone who said right off "Yeah, it's fine, I'm here for you" who fades at the first sign of real trouble - who was just blowing smoke, or who didn't realize how hard things could get.
EmmaLiz and others @ various points above: what about one night stands/NSAs that donât stay âcontainedâ though? People often go in intending no strings and then find one/more of them do want strings.
How much fun will breaking your relationship status to the other at that point be? Also, if you thought you had a one-time NSA with someone and then found theyâd made you party to their cheating, leaving you open to all sorts of drama, would it really feel fair enough theyâd not disclosed?
Correction your paragraph 2: If you're the hook-up-ee, your conquest was not "cheating." That's what "open relationship" means.
Your daughter will likely be in this situation, what would you recommend her say to a guy who said this to her?
Keep in mind it's pretty hard to avoid having relationships with people who are mentally ill because it's so common. So either this guy had specifically avoided mentally ill people on purpose, no one had ever trusted him enough to tell him (why?), or he'd dated mentally ill people before who hadn't gotten treatment when they needed it and/or lied about it, which it seems would have been what he would have preferred.
As you found out, a three month trial period where he's deciding to reject her based solely on her illness or not, isn't even remotely enough time. It wouldn't have saved you from being in a relationship with either your husband or to daughter. It's meaningless.
Like agony @43, I've had a family member with a mental illness. A serious one involving return visits to a psyche ward, over several yrs, until there was a big change in their living environment, with loving support, and they got their meds right. Which over time, because of this healing lifestyle, they have been able to reduce the dosage of. No hospital stays for yrs. They are very careful with their life now, no drugs, very little alcohol, avoiding extreme stressful situations.
The way David's friend reacted to his caution, which is all it sounds like it was, was to close things down. Even throw out the number of men who, like David, wouldn't unconditionally accept her, wherever her behaviour goes. Is she the sort of person to suddenly stop her meds, is that why she returns to the psyche ward. This person, did she say I'm working on this issue and I've already got xyz in place to manage myself? Doesn't sound like it. The mind/ brain, like the body, though wounded, can heal, to a degree. Did this lady friend of David's point to how she's moving ahead, etc. or did she throw a tantrum because like the other forty odd men, David wouldn't promise her total acceptance in that moment.
David was entirely reasonable in asking for time to get to know her before making that commitment. My guess is that few of those 58 guys would have gone out on date two with this women. Why? Because someone who has a history of psychiatric problems requiring hospitalization and who believes she may encounter similar problems in the future has a medical problem that serious enough that most people would rule out dating. David was doing something most people would not do, and if you think that is nothing, I donât think you appreciate how people choose life partners. Most people would rule out someone with a known serious medical problem.
As for whether this woman was well enough to date, I think that is a question for her psychiatrist to answer. But there are no doubt people with mental illnesses who should be focused on their mental and physical health rather than on finding a dating partner.
Unless you meet someone online and it's absolutely clear that it's a one night stand, the time to disclose open relationship status is before you even meet in person. It's before you even get the emotional investment that comes with emailing back and forth. Let her know the moment she has any reason to think you might be interested in her even if that's before she might be thinking she could return the interest. If she likes the open relationship status, fine, nothing lost. If she's not fine, you've saved her thinking there's one more pondscum man out there.
Anyway, it's not even, really, so much a question of what is the right thing to do, but rather a question of what will actually happen.
And my feeling is that anyone who is able to meet her standards of how quickly to say "Yes, count me in" is likely to not be a very good partner. She's applying a test that will fail reasonable, calm, centered people who don't get immediately caught up in the romance of a situation - the kind of person who actually does better in a challenging relationship. And those who pass her test are most likely either swept away by the image of themselves as wonderful supportive helpers, or just out and out bullshitters who will tell her what she wants to hear to shut her up.
A especially vulnerable person should, indeed, take extra care of herself, but this is a bad way to do that.
It's not throwing a tantrum to decline to date someone who is unsure they can support someone who gets sick.
What you describe as dealing w/ doesn't sound like this person's situation at all. They had an acute situation and got treatment (most people refuse to get treatment in large part due to stigma, which is arguably worse re: relationship prospect). She was doing better but needed him to know there was a possibility of it happening again because she needed to know if he's the type to run bc of sickness. He says he might be. She declines to get into a relationship with someone who can't be there for a partner. This is reasonable.
It is not rare to be hospitalized for mental health problems. It is rare to divulge. It should be obvious to everyone, from your reactions, as to why.
Someone who goes inpatient when sick is responsible w/ their illness. There is nothing in his description that indicates she was not well enough to date, that is something people are assuming about her when they hear the very scary (1/5 of the population will experience it this year, including possibly you) mental illness diagnosis.
If she is well enough to date, but has this history, why is it unreasonable for her to 1) inform him ASAP and 2) not get emotionally attached to someone who is saying they aren't able to be there for a partner?
What he is saying to her is: I don't trust you to assess your own well being and so I can't date you for real until I'm sure you aren't a monster. But that's true for everyone when they are starting to date someone, anyone at all. The difference here, the only difference, is she is open about her health, and he is upset that she is, and also upset that she doesn't consider his "let's see where this goes before I can decide if I like you enough to accept you in spite of your condition" as being the same as "let's see where this goes like all dating does".
Again, if you had a cancer diagnosis in your past, recovered but were at risk of remission, would you reject someone as a dating prospect if they told you they weren't ok with that? Take the stigma out of it and see how it sits with you.
"I believe David presumed she would be healthy during that time" That isn't why he wants a trial period.
She is not asking for a time commitment, he's the one doing that.
"Most people would rule out someone with a known serious medical problem." I haven't met anyone who would. Because at some point it is highly likely you or your partner will develop one. If you are the kind of person who intends to leave your partner if they get sick, that's the kind of thing you really need to inform people about on the first date.
"She's applying a test that will fail reasonable, calm, centered people who don't get immediately caught up in the romance of a situation - the kind of person who actually does better in a challenging relationship."
Are you the kind of person who runs away when someone gets sick? isn't an unreasonable question.
"And those who pass her test are most likely either swept away by the image of themselves as wonderful supportive helpers, or just out and out bullshitters who will tell her what she wants to hear to shut her up. "
Or they're people who, like the vast majority of the population, have supported someone w/ mental illness before and aren't going to break up with someone merely for being sick with a pretty common illness (1/5 of total US w/ diagnosable mental illness this year, 1/25 hospitalized). Or, they're someone w/ mental illness currently or in their past who wouldn't be scared off.
Do people really turn down dating others just bc they've had a history of illness that might recur? Is this a thing? I mean, I get turning down dating people w/ children bc you don't want to parent, but fear of maybe an illness? People run away?
@5 is bang-on.
You also keep misstating what David was saying, as well as minimizing the factual information that this woman relayed. You realize that 59 guys passed on hearing this information from this woman (not the story your telling yourself, but her story). Given that, and what youâve heard from everyone else here, your views are in a distinct minority.
Poly goes on your dating profile, or a mention of your S.O. happens on or before your first date. If you wait until the third date to tell me you have an S.O., I'm ordering the steak (cooked more than you like it done) and an $80 bottle of wine, then "leaving to the washroom" and not coming back. When you text me in 30 minutes to be like "wtf, did you leave?" I'll text back "Oh, did I fail to mention that I was walking out as soon as I ordered all that stuff? Well, I figured it wasn't something I needed to tell you up front."
Ex: I adopt a young healthy dog from the pound. We play frisbee together. We bond together. I forgive my dog for that time he snapped at me. My dog forgives me for that time I left him inside too long without a walk. The years go by. His veterinary bills become greater as he gets older. I pay them because I honor my commitment to take care of my dog for as long as he can have a good life. I do not feel a need to pay the veterinary bills for my neighbor's dog down the road nor any of the other dogs in the pound. Paying the bills would better those dogs' lives too. I don't feel the least guilty about abandoning them.
Ex: I marry when we're both young and healthy. We vow to love, honor, and respect. He stays by me when I go through some bad post-partum depression-- 3 times. I stay by him when he falls into a bad depression after losing his job. I would be an absolute rat if I wiped my hands clean of him the first time he got sick, mentally or otherwise. And yet, I don't feel a responsibility to every guy out there who gets laid off. Same for ones who are in bad motorcycle accidents and every other bad thing that can befall anyone. No guilt whatsoever.
It seems like the the woman David dated in 17 was trying to game the system somehow to her advantage or to rush things that can't be rushed. She made it sound like she was honorably disclosing and feeling out whether her potential long term relationships could be trusted. (Rather like the folks who make potential dog adopters fill out forms to make sure they won't abandon dogs when they get tired of them.) Instead, I think she was doing as David gathered-- breaking things off before they got started to save herself from the possibility of being hurt.
None of us know whether we can commit to a specific person until we've had time to know if we want to commit to that person. I know that's circular, but it's very much the state of the world. That's the system we've got, and there's no getting around that.
1. Here degree matters. I have taken antidepressants myself. But there is a vast difference between being depressed on anxious and being intutionalized.
2. I was married to a man with severe depression and anxiety. Of course, he refused treatment until after I dumped him. I don't regret it, not one little bit. I was tired of carrying 70 % of the weight with a man who refused to get help. I won't get involved with a person like that again.
3. Just as sure as I have a right to my non-negotiables, other people do as well. We might think their positions are unreasonable or a bad call, but that is NOT our decision. Perhaps the MI lady was on a path that would lead her away from being in a relationship but that is her call.
The lady in 17 isn't wrong for having a dealbreaker, but her attitude *as described* sounds pretty demanding and shitty: it's one thing to say, sorry, if you can't put up with this, this isn't for me, and another to get pissed off and rant about the number of guys who've said no and the percentage of people who blah blah blah. If you have dealbreaker-level unusual needs, it seems childish to get mad when other people aren't up for meeting them: save the ranting for your diary. No, not the online one.
Sorry, didn't mean to push anyone's buttons quite so much. You ascribe an awful lot of emotions and intentions to me that weren't/aren't what I was feeling. I've gone back and reread my post @17 many times, and I have trouble possibly interpreting them as my feeling "spiky", looking for "brownie points", "thinking (my) response was generous" nor did I "back out".
"saying he has no idea, will prob bail" was not what I was feeling and contrary to my description, "I expected it to be a few months (as in 1 or 2 months, not an ultimatum at 3 months) as I got my head around that to the point that it would be become a so-what aspect of the relationship - something I knew we'd be rolling the dice on, together, and deal it with if it arose. Not a rule-out. I think I'll be fine with."
It wasn't exactly the issue the OP brought up - that of the oversharing itself. I was fine with what she disclosed and when. Kudos to her for that. This wasn't a first blind date. We'd known each other and eyed each other in a social group for months before dating. It was her expectation / requirement that I immediately (or ideally prior to the disclosure?) process it that struck me as certainly her right but perhaps unwise and likely to weed out almost all 20-something guys. I can imagine people having gotten there already - someone who'd had serious MI themselves, been in relationship with someone who had, or who worked in the field. That wasn't me on that early date, but it was someone I expected to become and tried to express that. Being twice as old now, having had bigger ups and downs and having had friends and exes been through many different ringers including mental illness, terminal cancer, cancer that likely will be terminal, and death of child or spouse, I'd accept a lot of things more easily and quickly than I did in my 20's.
LOL. Most Lesbians would kill for my dating "success". I've thought a lot about the "risk factors" on my end - that I'm attracted to smart, strong, capable, outdoorsy women and a lot of straight women are SO considerate of fragile male egos that they don't let their expertise and competence shine. I'm also pretty clueless that anyone is attracted to me, so the subtle flirtations of straight woman go over my head, while if some pre- or closeted- or questioning-lesbian expresses appreciation that I took her hiking or showed her how to do a valve job on her '82 Plymouth, I mistakenly think there's potential there.
I'm still friends with most of them, but when I ask "what was the attraction from your end?" I get non-answers. Feminist - check. Didn't put moves on them. Didn't pressure them for sex. Was happy going on hiking and skiing trips with them. I, with crappy gaydar, was hoping for more, but they weren't treating it as completely platonic either.
Coming out in the 70s and 80s was a lot harder. Was I the "one last try" and when it didn't work, they could follow their true desires with more certainty? I'm curious who Dan dated before coming out to himself - what kind of girl was most tolerable as he imagined Barry Gibb during PiV sex?
Great examples, Fichu @70.
"David clearly stated he needed time to get to know this woman for a few months to determine whether or not he could commit to a long-term relationship."
Isn't that a sensible strategy for ANY relationship?
There's no way that David did or said anything wrong.
How do you know if someone is the sort of person to bail at the first sign of inconvenience without first giving them a chance at a committed relationship first?
The folks at the dog pound don't want to adopt dogs out to people who are going to abandon them at the first snap. The mentally ill woman rightfully doesn't want to get involved with someone who's going to run away if and when she has another episode that lands her in the mental ward.
You can't, of course, really get a good idea of what someone would do without getting to know them well. But it seems to me that someone who wants to know what they're in for before committing is more likely to be someone who then honours his commitment, than someone who goes right to "Yup, sure, no problem".
My life experience has been that people who are very quick with the "you can count on me" are the ones who can't be counted on. If someone says "Let me think about it", gets more information, and then says "Yes" - that's usually someone who actually does plan to stick around. Anyone who has spent much time in volunteer organizations has probably had the same experience, and it tends to hold for other situations, too.
And not to get all new-agey about it, but I think there is something to male versus female energy or style, quite apart from gender and orientation. If a girl is more confident, assertive and outgoing - behaviors considered more "masculine" - does she look like the best option for the gay boy who can't imagine dating guys yet? Does a guy who can talk about feelings and show a little empathy, attract more pre-lesbians who haven't figured out that they can get all that and more in curvier packaging?
I mean, seriously: Bull fucking shit. When we finally have our meet-cute and go on a date (trust me: the rom-com featuring two adversarial internet commenters who meet-cute is in the works, basically You've Got Mail 2.0), raise your hand if you would feel like a bad person for failing to meet my standards of ethical behavior. If your hand is up, well, touche. Otherwise...
And now the new shtick is showing up two days later in order to have the last word.
Endurance and passion aside, is this something you implement in other areas of your life?
Looks like you forgot to log into your Breitbart account.
Oh, wait, âits a joke, lighten up snowflakes!â or whatever.
@84: âWhat's the difference in the 'honesty' between being compelled to divulge your current relationship status with the rest of your sexual history?â
A person is entitled as a fellow human to the information that will let them make an informed decision as to your relationship status, and case-by-case basis other factors of your life.
But whether you are in a committed relationship is a big deal breaker that does them absolutely no good to keep to yourself, and deceiving them on that after a few get to know you dates (and leaving it off your dating profile!) does trend towards garbage person.
You should aim for better versus all the things you feel entitled to.
Thereâs another human on the other side of the dating app, and if youâre getting skepticism about yourself initially, itâs not even just probably because someone else attempted several stunts on them in the past.
The difference is the past vs the future.
My past is mine. You have nothing to do with my past. You didn't know me then; any decisions I may have made had absolutely nothing to do with you.
My future, should we continue to see each other, is potentially our future. You hope to have a place in that future. So my situation with any other people I may be currently involved with does have an effect on the future you are hoping to share with me, and therefore, you are entitled to know about them.
If I had a one-night stand last night and intend never to see the person again, arguably that doesn't affect our future. If I was at home with the partner whom I'm living with, that definitely affects our future.
I'd turn your "honesty entitlement" on its head and state that any women you date are entitled to know that you are judgmental about past lovers. Perhaps you should be obligated to state that up front, in case it is a dealbreaker for them. Because your slut-shaming them for things they did before they even met you will definitely affect any potential future.
Perhaps he does already!
As far as why I'm angry, it's because a bunch of people are arguing for a standard they'd NEVER hold themselves to and would argue is inappropriate. It's whatever's convenient today is the truth, and tomorrow had a new truth, and whomever disagrees is obviously damaged. One, sick you. It's the same bully shit from when I was 7. I was too weak to resist it then, so now I tell people who haven't been forced to grow out of it exactly what I think of their nonsense.
But it is and we do, so illustrating your personal slutshamey hangups doesnât make you look any better.
Your unhinged rant about who people have fucked others IN THE PAST came wholly unrelated to anything weâve been speaking about.
@90. Fichu. Yes--we may agree all round and just have slightly different ways of approaching the same issues. The woman with mental illness is entitled to know her partner isn't going to bail at the first sign of trouble. This entitlement could be felt especially acutely if she suffers from intermittent patterns of illness. There's another question, to do with how she determines whether her partners will up-sticks and run--but this is more about judgement or procedural skill than a matter of strong and justified feeling.
@92 - I find the distinction between past and present to be completely immaterial and arbitrary. The difference is degree and not kind. I'm sure you don't want to get into a debate over exactly how long ago 'counts' or not. What if was 3 days ago, compared to 12? Or 40 days? Or 3 years? It's obviously a stupid debate, which is neatly solved by "my sex life is not your business, person I swiped-right on" regardless of when.
@87 Because "acting decently towards each other" is a myth, to fool suckers into letting themselves be taken advantage of. Notice how the argument is always "here's how other people should be more decent to me" rather than "here's how I can be more decent to other people"? That's not a coincidence. Many folks here is arguing that it's the right thing to divulge while reacting in horror to the concept that someone might ask the very question.
That is the exact opposite of what has been said in this thread. I'm sorry you have been hurt.