My 39 y.o. gym trainer is looking for a husband, with no success on dating apps

[Anonymous]

Hey guys, i'm writing from my husband's yacht to let you know how sad I am about this acquaintance of mine who cleans my house and rides public transit to my Beverly Hills mansion every day. In case you haven't noticed, she's from a very different class and not very white. Unlike me who's had five children over the last 20 years, all of in private school, she's very old and childless, with no cash for botox. She's looking for a husband, but her market value is one third of mine. I wanna tell her to stick to ex-alcoholics, wife beaters and men below 5'10, but she won't listen. What should I do to remind her to stay in her place?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kind of man who sleeps with a woman "too soon" and gets a bad impression of her is not the kind of man who's worth pursuing. He's the kind of man who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Women who make men like this wait just to get their "respect" don't respect themselves either, if they did, they wouldn't "save" themselves for men like this.

Didn't it cross your mind that women who don't sleep with each man they meet just want to get to know the man first? With so many guys lying on apps about STDs, marital&relationship status, it makes sense to wait a month or two until he starts showing red flags. It's not a guarantee of anything, of course, but critical sh..t usually comes up after couple months, in my experience

Did you read my comment or just quoted it? I'm specifically talking about women who dely sex to avoid causing a bad impression on men, not about women who dely sex for other reasons.

As for your STD comment, everyone should be tested before sex REGARDLESS of how much you wait.

Once a woman opens her mouth about a copy of STD results including herpes, guys who are in just for sex simply disappear. It could be the way to weed out for OPs friend. But if she’s that used to sleeping around, she probably just can’t keep herself from doing it, and thus is not capable of conscious relationships and analyzing her risks before sleeping with anyone

Plenty of people who sleep around have no problem to keep themselves from doing it, very few people are actual sex addicts. Other people are perfectly capable and aware of the risks, but take them anyways, the same way they take other risks in their lives such as skiing or driving at night in unknown areas.

I used to have casual sex between relationships and before I met my husband. I asked for STD tests and those that didn't want them were out. I had no problem establishing relationships when I found men I was interested in. We have no idea what's going on with OP's trainer, as most of the OP seems to be a disapproval post of the trainer's perceived behavior rather than anything concrete.

Your logics makes no sense. Casual sex implies that your partner sleeps with others as well. Asking for STD test is redundant in that case: they can get HSV2 and othe deceases from one night stands and still infect you. Of course people who don’t have multiple STDs prefer non-casual sex! It’s not like all these f..ks are going to pay my medical insurance deductibles or explain genital herpes for me to my future partners. The occurrence of HPV related throat cancers in men over 60 yo is growing. It’s a torturous death
I don’t get get it how people can be that clueless and careless

I'm not clueless, but you seem extremely naive. Condoms and avoiding oral sex greatly reduces your chances of contracting an STD and casual sex doesn't need ti be ongoing. On the other hand, monogamous relationships aren't necessarily monogamous as a significant percentage of people cheat. People don't generally use protection in monogamous relationships either. Making a man wait doesn't magically protect you from STDs and considering how most of the pressure to avoid casual sex falls on women don't be surprised if the man you're making wait isn't holding himself to the same standards as many women hold themselves to. I know plenty of cases of women who, as far as I know never had casual sex, but ended up with infections because the man they made wait had STIs and never got tested, or eventually got one because they weren't being faithful.

Read Reddit on how women or men got genital herpes from one and single encounters off Tinder while using condoms. Yes, you can't protect yourself from partner cheating completely, but at least you know a man who waits for a few dates and prepared to share the tests is not a pig seeking immediate lay. Women having ONS with guys on apps are nuts. There is extremely adverse selection - men rush with sex for that specific reason, usually they do have an infection that's easily transmittable even with condoms. All of them "go down" on women. Absolutely all men I met on dates asked if they could offer this to me on date 2-3.

Reddit is not a substitute for data. Women's risk of getting herpes from an infected partner is around 8.9 times out of 10,000 sex acts. Source: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/ipsrh/2001/12/condoms-reduce-womens-risk-herpes-infection-do-not-protect-men
Note that condom use consistency was very low in this sample. The chances of getting herpes is very low when condoms are used properly and consistently.

Of the men who offered to go down on you on the 2-3 date, did you keep dating them?
Plenty of men who wait if the woman asks them to didn't wait with all women, the fact that they're offering you sex is a sign of this. It's ridiculous to think one is protecting women by expecting them to wait when the men they entered in a relationship with are free to have ONSs. It's almost as STDs aren't the real issue here and that gender expectations are.

Even if STD risk is low I don’t take it for ONS. I did keep dating some of these men, yes. It’s a mutual decision when to intimate, I don’t care what other women tell him.
Women catch STDs easier than men, the consequences could be infertility, cervical cancer or limited ability to date in the future. Men, to the opposite, are often asymptomatic carriers. There is a physical difference between men and women that justifies why women should be more selective if they want to preserve their health and fertility. It has nothing to do with feminism and genders equality to have ONS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kind of man who sleeps with a woman "too soon" and gets a bad impression of her is not the kind of man who's worth pursuing. He's the kind of man who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Women who make men like this wait just to get their "respect" don't respect themselves either, if they did, they wouldn't "save" themselves for men like this.

Didn't it cross your mind that women who don't sleep with each man they meet just want to get to know the man first? With so many guys lying on apps about STDs, marital&relationship status, it makes sense to wait a month or two until he starts showing red flags. It's not a guarantee of anything, of course, but critical sh..t usually comes up after couple months, in my experience

Did you read my comment or just quoted it? I'm specifically talking about women who dely sex to avoid causing a bad impression on men, not about women who dely sex for other reasons.

As for your STD comment, everyone should be tested before sex REGARDLESS of how much you wait.

Once a woman opens her mouth about a copy of STD results including herpes, guys who are in just for sex simply disappear. It could be the way to weed out for OPs friend. But if she’s that used to sleeping around, she probably just can’t keep herself from doing it, and thus is not capable of conscious relationships and analyzing her risks before sleeping with anyone

Plenty of people who sleep around have no problem to keep themselves from doing it, very few people are actual sex addicts. Other people are perfectly capable and aware of the risks, but take them anyways, the same way they take other risks in their lives such as skiing or driving at night in unknown areas.

I used to have casual sex between relationships and before I met my husband. I asked for STD tests and those that didn't want them were out. I had no problem establishing relationships when I found men I was interested in. We have no idea what's going on with OP's trainer, as most of the OP seems to be a disapproval post of the trainer's perceived behavior rather than anything concrete.

Your logics makes no sense. Casual sex implies that your partner sleeps with others as well. Asking for STD test is redundant in that case: they can get HSV2 and othe deceases from one night stands and still infect you. Of course people who don’t have multiple STDs prefer non-casual sex! It’s not like all these f..ks are going to pay my medical insurance deductibles or explain genital herpes for me to my future partners. The occurrence of HPV related throat cancers in men over 60 yo is growing. It’s a torturous death
I don’t get get it how people can be that clueless and careless

I'm not clueless, but you seem extremely naive. Condoms and avoiding oral sex greatly reduces your chances of contracting an STD and casual sex doesn't need ti be ongoing. On the other hand, monogamous relationships aren't necessarily monogamous as a significant percentage of people cheat. People don't generally use protection in monogamous relationships either. Making a man wait doesn't magically protect you from STDs and considering how most of the pressure to avoid casual sex falls on women don't be surprised if the man you're making wait isn't holding himself to the same standards as many women hold themselves to. I know plenty of cases of women who, as far as I know never had casual sex, but ended up with infections because the man they made wait had STIs and never got tested, or eventually got one because they weren't being faithful.

Read Reddit on how women or men got genital herpes from one and single encounters off Tinder while using condoms. Yes, you can't protect yourself from partner cheating completely, but at least you know a man who waits for a few dates and prepared to share the tests is not a pig seeking immediate lay. Women having ONS with guys on apps are nuts. There is extremely adverse selection - men rush with sex for that specific reason, usually they do have an infection that's easily transmittable even with condoms. All of them "go down" on women. Absolutely all men I met on dates asked if they could offer this to me on date 2-3.

Reddit is not a substitute for data. Women's risk of getting herpes from an infected partner is around 8.9 times out of 10,000 sex acts. Source: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/ipsrh/2001/12/condoms-reduce-womens-risk-herpes-infection-do-not-protect-men
Note that condom use consistency was very low in this sample. The chances of getting herpes is very low when condoms are used properly and consistently.

Of the men who offered to go down on you on the 2-3 date, did you keep dating them?
Plenty of men who wait if the woman asks them to didn't wait with all women, the fact that they're offering you sex is a sign of this. It's ridiculous to think one is protecting women by expecting them to wait when the men they entered in a relationship with are free to have ONSs. It's almost as STDs aren't the real issue here and that gender expectations are.

Even if STD risk is low I don’t take it for ONS. I did keep dating some of these men, yes. It’s a mutual decision when to intimate, I don’t care what other women tell him.
Women catch STDs easier than men, the consequences could be infertility, cervical cancer or limited ability to date in the future. Men, to the opposite, are often asymptomatic carriers. There is a physical difference between men and women that justifies why women should be more selective if they want to preserve their health and fertility. It has nothing to do with feminism and genders equality to have ONS.

Thanks for proving my point. Everybody with at least two working cells understands that no matter how much a woman abstains from ONSs, she's still at risk of catching an STD if she's dating and eventually having unprotected sex with men who have ONSs, not to mention that higher expectations for women is exactly what makes men irresponsible. Expecting "selectivity" from women but not from men doesn't really work. You're not really selective or any better than the women who have casual sex, because you end up in relationships with the same kind of man these women are sleeping with, and unlike the women who use protection since they know it's a ONS, you might not even be doing that if you're in a relationship.

Having ONSs might have nothing to do with gender equality, but cra*ping on women who do while being perfectly fine with dating men who do the same under the guise of selectivity when all the data points to the fact that chances of STD are very low even for women when protection is used comes off as sexist and dishonest at worst and idiotic at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kind of man who sleeps with a woman "too soon" and gets a bad impression of her is not the kind of man who's worth pursuing. He's the kind of man who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Women who make men like this wait just to get their "respect" don't respect themselves either, if they did, they wouldn't "save" themselves for men like this.

Didn't it cross your mind that women who don't sleep with each man they meet just want to get to know the man first? With so many guys lying on apps about STDs, marital&relationship status, it makes sense to wait a month or two until he starts showing red flags. It's not a guarantee of anything, of course, but critical sh..t usually comes up after couple months, in my experience

Did you read my comment or just quoted it? I'm specifically talking about women who dely sex to avoid causing a bad impression on men, not about women who dely sex for other reasons.

As for your STD comment, everyone should be tested before sex REGARDLESS of how much you wait.

Once a woman opens her mouth about a copy of STD results including herpes, guys who are in just for sex simply disappear. It could be the way to weed out for OPs friend. But if she’s that used to sleeping around, she probably just can’t keep herself from doing it, and thus is not capable of conscious relationships and analyzing her risks before sleeping with anyone

Plenty of people who sleep around have no problem to keep themselves from doing it, very few people are actual sex addicts. Other people are perfectly capable and aware of the risks, but take them anyways, the same way they take other risks in their lives such as skiing or driving at night in unknown areas.

I used to have casual sex between relationships and before I met my husband. I asked for STD tests and those that didn't want them were out. I had no problem establishing relationships when I found men I was interested in. We have no idea what's going on with OP's trainer, as most of the OP seems to be a disapproval post of the trainer's perceived behavior rather than anything concrete.

Your logics makes no sense. Casual sex implies that your partner sleeps with others as well. Asking for STD test is redundant in that case: they can get HSV2 and othe deceases from one night stands and still infect you. Of course people who don’t have multiple STDs prefer non-casual sex! It’s not like all these f..ks are going to pay my medical insurance deductibles or explain genital herpes for me to my future partners. The occurrence of HPV related throat cancers in men over 60 yo is growing. It’s a torturous death
I don’t get get it how people can be that clueless and careless

I'm not clueless, but you seem extremely naive. Condoms and avoiding oral sex greatly reduces your chances of contracting an STD and casual sex doesn't need ti be ongoing. On the other hand, monogamous relationships aren't necessarily monogamous as a significant percentage of people cheat. People don't generally use protection in monogamous relationships either. Making a man wait doesn't magically protect you from STDs and considering how most of the pressure to avoid casual sex falls on women don't be surprised if the man you're making wait isn't holding himself to the same standards as many women hold themselves to. I know plenty of cases of women who, as far as I know never had casual sex, but ended up with infections because the man they made wait had STIs and never got tested, or eventually got one because they weren't being faithful.

Read Reddit on how women or men got genital herpes from one and single encounters off Tinder while using condoms. Yes, you can't protect yourself from partner cheating completely, but at least you know a man who waits for a few dates and prepared to share the tests is not a pig seeking immediate lay. Women having ONS with guys on apps are nuts. There is extremely adverse selection - men rush with sex for that specific reason, usually they do have an infection that's easily transmittable even with condoms. All of them "go down" on women. Absolutely all men I met on dates asked if they could offer this to me on date 2-3.

Reddit is not a substitute for data. Women's risk of getting herpes from an infected partner is around 8.9 times out of 10,000 sex acts. Source: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/ipsrh/2001/12/condoms-reduce-womens-risk-herpes-infection-do-not-protect-men
Note that condom use consistency was very low in this sample. The chances of getting herpes is very low when condoms are used properly and consistently.

Of the men who offered to go down on you on the 2-3 date, did you keep dating them?
Plenty of men who wait if the woman asks them to didn't wait with all women, the fact that they're offering you sex is a sign of this. It's ridiculous to think one is protecting women by expecting them to wait when the men they entered in a relationship with are free to have ONSs. It's almost as STDs aren't the real issue here and that gender expectations are.

Even if STD risk is low I don’t take it for ONS. I did keep dating some of these men, yes. It’s a mutual decision when to intimate, I don’t care what other women tell him.
Women catch STDs easier than men, the consequences could be infertility, cervical cancer or limited ability to date in the future. Men, to the opposite, are often asymptomatic carriers. There is a physical difference between men and women that justifies why women should be more selective if they want to preserve their health and fertility. It has nothing to do with feminism and genders equality to have ONS.

Thanks for proving my point. Everybody with at least two working cells understands that no matter how much a woman abstains from ONSs, she's still at risk of catching an STD if she's dating and eventually having unprotected sex with men who have ONSs, not to mention that higher expectations for women is exactly what makes men irresponsible. Expecting "selectivity" from women but not from men doesn't really work. You're not really selective or any better than the women who have casual sex, because you end up in relationships with the same kind of man these women are sleeping with, and unlike the women who use protection since they know it's a ONS, you might not even be doing that if you're in a relationship.

Having ONSs might have nothing to do with gender equality, but cra*ping on women who do while being perfectly fine with dating men who do the same under the guise of selectivity when all the data points to the fact that chances of STD are very low even for women when protection is used comes off as sexist and dishonest at worst and idiotic at best.

It is idiotic to think that all men in LTR are engaging in ONS in parallel to “main” relationship. Or that people don’t use protection while in a relationship. It’s the same as stating no man is capable of commitment even for a short period but women are, which is simply untrue. The level of care between partners in actual relationship or cohabilitation is somewhat different from someone just dating around. It’s proven by CDC that increasing your number of partners increases chances of STD - as simple as that. You are trying to prove something opposite

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey guys, i'm writing from my husband's yacht to let you know how sad I am about this acquaintance of mine who cleans my house and rides public transit to my Beverly Hills mansion every day. In case you haven't noticed, she's from a very different class and not very white. Unlike me who's had five children over the last 20 years, all of in private school, she's very old and childless, with no cash for botox. She's looking for a husband, but her market value is one third of mine. I wanna tell her to stick to ex-alcoholics, wife beaters and men below 5'10, but she won't listen. What should I do to remind her to stay in her place?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kind of man who sleeps with a woman "too soon" and gets a bad impression of her is not the kind of man who's worth pursuing. He's the kind of man who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Women who make men like this wait just to get their "respect" don't respect themselves either, if they did, they wouldn't "save" themselves for men like this.

Didn't it cross your mind that women who don't sleep with each man they meet just want to get to know the man first? With so many guys lying on apps about STDs, marital&relationship status, it makes sense to wait a month or two until he starts showing red flags. It's not a guarantee of anything, of course, but critical sh..t usually comes up after couple months, in my experience

Did you read my comment or just quoted it? I'm specifically talking about women who dely sex to avoid causing a bad impression on men, not about women who dely sex for other reasons.

As for your STD comment, everyone should be tested before sex REGARDLESS of how much you wait.

Once a woman opens her mouth about a copy of STD results including herpes, guys who are in just for sex simply disappear. It could be the way to weed out for OPs friend. But if she’s that used to sleeping around, she probably just can’t keep herself from doing it, and thus is not capable of conscious relationships and analyzing her risks before sleeping with anyone

Plenty of people who sleep around have no problem to keep themselves from doing it, very few people are actual sex addicts. Other people are perfectly capable and aware of the risks, but take them anyways, the same way they take other risks in their lives such as skiing or driving at night in unknown areas.

I used to have casual sex between relationships and before I met my husband. I asked for STD tests and those that didn't want them were out. I had no problem establishing relationships when I found men I was interested in. We have no idea what's going on with OP's trainer, as most of the OP seems to be a disapproval post of the trainer's perceived behavior rather than anything concrete.

Your logics makes no sense. Casual sex implies that your partner sleeps with others as well. Asking for STD test is redundant in that case: they can get HSV2 and othe deceases from one night stands and still infect you. Of course people who don’t have multiple STDs prefer non-casual sex! It’s not like all these f..ks are going to pay my medical insurance deductibles or explain genital herpes for me to my future partners. The occurrence of HPV related throat cancers in men over 60 yo is growing. It’s a torturous death
I don’t get get it how people can be that clueless and careless

I'm not clueless, but you seem extremely naive. Condoms and avoiding oral sex greatly reduces your chances of contracting an STD and casual sex doesn't need ti be ongoing. On the other hand, monogamous relationships aren't necessarily monogamous as a significant percentage of people cheat. People don't generally use protection in monogamous relationships either. Making a man wait doesn't magically protect you from STDs and considering how most of the pressure to avoid casual sex falls on women don't be surprised if the man you're making wait isn't holding himself to the same standards as many women hold themselves to. I know plenty of cases of women who, as far as I know never had casual sex, but ended up with infections because the man they made wait had STIs and never got tested, or eventually got one because they weren't being faithful.

Read Reddit on how women or men got genital herpes from one and single encounters off Tinder while using condoms. Yes, you can't protect yourself from partner cheating completely, but at least you know a man who waits for a few dates and prepared to share the tests is not a pig seeking immediate lay. Women having ONS with guys on apps are nuts. There is extremely adverse selection - men rush with sex for that specific reason, usually they do have an infection that's easily transmittable even with condoms. All of them "go down" on women. Absolutely all men I met on dates asked if they could offer this to me on date 2-3.

Reddit is not a substitute for data. Women's risk of getting herpes from an infected partner is around 8.9 times out of 10,000 sex acts. Source: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/ipsrh/2001/12/condoms-reduce-womens-risk-herpes-infection-do-not-protect-men
Note that condom use consistency was very low in this sample. The chances of getting herpes is very low when condoms are used properly and consistently.

Of the men who offered to go down on you on the 2-3 date, did you keep dating them?
Plenty of men who wait if the woman asks them to didn't wait with all women, the fact that they're offering you sex is a sign of this. It's ridiculous to think one is protecting women by expecting them to wait when the men they entered in a relationship with are free to have ONSs. It's almost as STDs aren't the real issue here and that gender expectations are.

Even if STD risk is low I don’t take it for ONS. I did keep dating some of these men, yes. It’s a mutual decision when to intimate, I don’t care what other women tell him.
Women catch STDs easier than men, the consequences could be infertility, cervical cancer or limited ability to date in the future. Men, to the opposite, are often asymptomatic carriers. There is a physical difference between men and women that justifies why women should be more selective if they want to preserve their health and fertility. It has nothing to do with feminism and genders equality to have ONS.

Thanks for proving my point. Everybody with at least two working cells understands that no matter how much a woman abstains from ONSs, she's still at risk of catching an STD if she's dating and eventually having unprotected sex with men who have ONSs, not to mention that higher expectations for women is exactly what makes men irresponsible. Expecting "selectivity" from women but not from men doesn't really work. You're not really selective or any better than the women who have casual sex, because you end up in relationships with the same kind of man these women are sleeping with, and unlike the women who use protection since they know it's a ONS, you might not even be doing that if you're in a relationship.

Having ONSs might have nothing to do with gender equality, but cra*ping on women who do while being perfectly fine with dating men who do the same under the guise of selectivity when all the data points to the fact that chances of STD are very low even for women when protection is used comes off as sexist and dishonest at worst and idiotic at best.

It is idiotic to think that all men in LTR are engaging in ONS in parallel to “main” relationship. Or that people don’t use protection while in a relationship. It’s the same as stating no man is capable of commitment even for a short period but women are, which is simply untrue. The level of care between partners in actual relationship or cohabilitation is somewhat different from someone just dating around. It’s proven by CDC that increasing your number of partners increases chances of STD - as simple as that. You are trying to prove something opposite

I never said all men engage in ONSs while being in LTRs, but significant share of men (and women) cheat or have STDs they're unaware of before they enter a relationship, that's why I find the expectation that women abstain from ONSs but not men ridiculous.

I'm also aware that the higher the number of partner the higher the chances of catching an STD, but this applies to both genders, not just women. Furthermore, a big share of sexually active individuals does not use protection consistently. Consistent protection decreases chances of STDs a lot even among promiscuous individuals. Sex workers is places where this practice is regulated have lower rates of STDs than the non-sex working population. Calling women dumb for having ONSs instead of calling both men and women dumb for having unprotected sex is stupid and tells me once again that STDs aren't the problem here or else you would also be calling stupid the people having sex in LTRs with no protection and no previous test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kind of man who sleeps with a woman "too soon" and gets a bad impression of her is not the kind of man who's worth pursuing. He's the kind of man who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Women who make men like this wait just to get their "respect" don't respect themselves either, if they did, they wouldn't "save" themselves for men like this.

Didn't it cross your mind that women who don't sleep with each man they meet just want to get to know the man first? With so many guys lying on apps about STDs, marital&relationship status, it makes sense to wait a month or two until he starts showing red flags. It's not a guarantee of anything, of course, but critical sh..t usually comes up after couple months, in my experience

Did you read my comment or just quoted it? I'm specifically talking about women who dely sex to avoid causing a bad impression on men, not about women who dely sex for other reasons.

As for your STD comment, everyone should be tested before sex REGARDLESS of how much you wait.

Once a woman opens her mouth about a copy of STD results including herpes, guys who are in just for sex simply disappear. It could be the way to weed out for OPs friend. But if she’s that used to sleeping around, she probably just can’t keep herself from doing it, and thus is not capable of conscious relationships and analyzing her risks before sleeping with anyone

Plenty of people who sleep around have no problem to keep themselves from doing it, very few people are actual sex addicts. Other people are perfectly capable and aware of the risks, but take them anyways, the same way they take other risks in their lives such as skiing or driving at night in unknown areas.

I used to have casual sex between relationships and before I met my husband. I asked for STD tests and those that didn't want them were out. I had no problem establishing relationships when I found men I was interested in. We have no idea what's going on with OP's trainer, as most of the OP seems to be a disapproval post of the trainer's perceived behavior rather than anything concrete.

Your logics makes no sense. Casual sex implies that your partner sleeps with others as well. Asking for STD test is redundant in that case: they can get HSV2 and othe deceases from one night stands and still infect you. Of course people who don’t have multiple STDs prefer non-casual sex! It’s not like all these f..ks are going to pay my medical insurance deductibles or explain genital herpes for me to my future partners. The occurrence of HPV related throat cancers in men over 60 yo is growing. It’s a torturous death
I don’t get get it how people can be that clueless and careless

I'm not clueless, but you seem extremely naive. Condoms and avoiding oral sex greatly reduces your chances of contracting an STD and casual sex doesn't need ti be ongoing. On the other hand, monogamous relationships aren't necessarily monogamous as a significant percentage of people cheat. People don't generally use protection in monogamous relationships either. Making a man wait doesn't magically protect you from STDs and considering how most of the pressure to avoid casual sex falls on women don't be surprised if the man you're making wait isn't holding himself to the same standards as many women hold themselves to. I know plenty of cases of women who, as far as I know never had casual sex, but ended up with infections because the man they made wait had STIs and never got tested, or eventually got one because they weren't being faithful.

Read Reddit on how women or men got genital herpes from one and single encounters off Tinder while using condoms. Yes, you can't protect yourself from partner cheating completely, but at least you know a man who waits for a few dates and prepared to share the tests is not a pig seeking immediate lay. Women having ONS with guys on apps are nuts. There is extremely adverse selection - men rush with sex for that specific reason, usually they do have an infection that's easily transmittable even with condoms. All of them "go down" on women. Absolutely all men I met on dates asked if they could offer this to me on date 2-3.

Reddit is not a substitute for data. Women's risk of getting herpes from an infected partner is around 8.9 times out of 10,000 sex acts. Source: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/ipsrh/2001/12/condoms-reduce-womens-risk-herpes-infection-do-not-protect-men
Note that condom use consistency was very low in this sample. The chances of getting herpes is very low when condoms are used properly and consistently.

Of the men who offered to go down on you on the 2-3 date, did you keep dating them?
Plenty of men who wait if the woman asks them to didn't wait with all women, the fact that they're offering you sex is a sign of this. It's ridiculous to think one is protecting women by expecting them to wait when the men they entered in a relationship with are free to have ONSs. It's almost as STDs aren't the real issue here and that gender expectations are.

Even if STD risk is low I don’t take it for ONS. I did keep dating some of these men, yes. It’s a mutual decision when to intimate, I don’t care what other women tell him.
Women catch STDs easier than men, the consequences could be infertility, cervical cancer or limited ability to date in the future. Men, to the opposite, are often asymptomatic carriers. There is a physical difference between men and women that justifies why women should be more selective if they want to preserve their health and fertility. It has nothing to do with feminism and genders equality to have ONS.

Thanks for proving my point. Everybody with at least two working cells understands that no matter how much a woman abstains from ONSs, she's still at risk of catching an STD if she's dating and eventually having unprotected sex with men who have ONSs, not to mention that higher expectations for women is exactly what makes men irresponsible. Expecting "selectivity" from women but not from men doesn't really work. You're not really selective or any better than the women who have casual sex, because you end up in relationships with the same kind of man these women are sleeping with, and unlike the women who use protection since they know it's a ONS, you might not even be doing that if you're in a relationship.

Having ONSs might have nothing to do with gender equality, but cra*ping on women who do while being perfectly fine with dating men who do the same under the guise of selectivity when all the data points to the fact that chances of STD are very low even for women when protection is used comes off as sexist and dishonest at worst and idiotic at best.

It is idiotic to think that all men in LTR are engaging in ONS in parallel to “main” relationship. Or that people don’t use protection while in a relationship. It’s the same as stating no man is capable of commitment even for a short period but women are, which is simply untrue. The level of care between partners in actual relationship or cohabilitation is somewhat different from someone just dating around. It’s proven by CDC that increasing your number of partners increases chances of STD - as simple as that. You are trying to prove something opposite

I never said all men engage in ONSs while being in LTRs, but significant share of men (and women) cheat or have STDs they're unaware of before they enter a relationship, that's why I find the expectation that women abstain from ONSs but not men ridiculous.

I'm also aware that the higher the number of partner the higher the chances of catching an STD, but this applies to both genders, not just women. Furthermore, a big share of sexually active individuals does not use protection consistently. Consistent protection decreases chances of STDs a lot even among promiscuous individuals. Sex workers is places where this practice is regulated have lower rates of STDs than the non-sex working population. Calling women dumb for having ONSs instead of calling both men and women dumb for having unprotected sex is stupid and tells me once again that STDs aren't the problem here or else you would also be calling stupid the people having sex in LTRs with no protection and no previous test.

No I didn't call promiscuous people dumb. I do consider it unsafe for women to engage in ONS on 1-2 dates due to high percentages of adverse selection of men on the apps. The issues could be criminal intent, hidden marital or relationship status (who wants to be shot by a crazy wife!). I would look for a good friend or a colleague that I know if I was looking for ONS.
Also, promiscuity doesn't result in pair bonding: OPs friend behaves in a way that's not encouraging pair bonding. Instead of getting to know a man as a person, whether he's a good match based on his habits, interests, common goals etc, she just jumos in bed with dozens of guys. She is not allowing herself a time to learn more about any of them, and possibly build a connection. Long term relationships are built like friendships - it is just as much or even more so social than sexual side of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kind of man who sleeps with a woman "too soon" and gets a bad impression of her is not the kind of man who's worth pursuing. He's the kind of man who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Women who make men like this wait just to get their "respect" don't respect themselves either, if they did, they wouldn't "save" themselves for men like this.

Didn't it cross your mind that women who don't sleep with each man they meet just want to get to know the man first? With so many guys lying on apps about STDs, marital&relationship status, it makes sense to wait a month or two until he starts showing red flags. It's not a guarantee of anything, of course, but critical sh..t usually comes up after couple months, in my experience

Did you read my comment or just quoted it? I'm specifically talking about women who dely sex to avoid causing a bad impression on men, not about women who dely sex for other reasons.

As for your STD comment, everyone should be tested before sex REGARDLESS of how much you wait.

Once a woman opens her mouth about a copy of STD results including herpes, guys who are in just for sex simply disappear. It could be the way to weed out for OPs friend. But if she’s that used to sleeping around, she probably just can’t keep herself from doing it, and thus is not capable of conscious relationships and analyzing her risks before sleeping with anyone

Plenty of people who sleep around have no problem to keep themselves from doing it, very few people are actual sex addicts. Other people are perfectly capable and aware of the risks, but take them anyways, the same way they take other risks in their lives such as skiing or driving at night in unknown areas.

I used to have casual sex between relationships and before I met my husband. I asked for STD tests and those that didn't want them were out. I had no problem establishing relationships when I found men I was interested in. We have no idea what's going on with OP's trainer, as most of the OP seems to be a disapproval post of the trainer's perceived behavior rather than anything concrete.

Your logics makes no sense. Casual sex implies that your partner sleeps with others as well. Asking for STD test is redundant in that case: they can get HSV2 and othe deceases from one night stands and still infect you. Of course people who don’t have multiple STDs prefer non-casual sex! It’s not like all these f..ks are going to pay my medical insurance deductibles or explain genital herpes for me to my future partners. The occurrence of HPV related throat cancers in men over 60 yo is growing. It’s a torturous death
I don’t get get it how people can be that clueless and careless

I'm not clueless, but you seem extremely naive. Condoms and avoiding oral sex greatly reduces your chances of contracting an STD and casual sex doesn't need ti be ongoing. On the other hand, monogamous relationships aren't necessarily monogamous as a significant percentage of people cheat. People don't generally use protection in monogamous relationships either. Making a man wait doesn't magically protect you from STDs and considering how most of the pressure to avoid casual sex falls on women don't be surprised if the man you're making wait isn't holding himself to the same standards as many women hold themselves to. I know plenty of cases of women who, as far as I know never had casual sex, but ended up with infections because the man they made wait had STIs and never got tested, or eventually got one because they weren't being faithful.

Read Reddit on how women or men got genital herpes from one and single encounters off Tinder while using condoms. Yes, you can't protect yourself from partner cheating completely, but at least you know a man who waits for a few dates and prepared to share the tests is not a pig seeking immediate lay. Women having ONS with guys on apps are nuts. There is extremely adverse selection - men rush with sex for that specific reason, usually they do have an infection that's easily transmittable even with condoms. All of them "go down" on women. Absolutely all men I met on dates asked if they could offer this to me on date 2-3.

Reddit is not a substitute for data. Women's risk of getting herpes from an infected partner is around 8.9 times out of 10,000 sex acts. Source: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/ipsrh/2001/12/condoms-reduce-womens-risk-herpes-infection-do-not-protect-men
Note that condom use consistency was very low in this sample. The chances of getting herpes is very low when condoms are used properly and consistently.

Of the men who offered to go down on you on the 2-3 date, did you keep dating them?
Plenty of men who wait if the woman asks them to didn't wait with all women, the fact that they're offering you sex is a sign of this. It's ridiculous to think one is protecting women by expecting them to wait when the men they entered in a relationship with are free to have ONSs. It's almost as STDs aren't the real issue here and that gender expectations are.

Even if STD risk is low I don’t take it for ONS. I did keep dating some of these men, yes. It’s a mutual decision when to intimate, I don’t care what other women tell him.
Women catch STDs easier than men, the consequences could be infertility, cervical cancer or limited ability to date in the future. Men, to the opposite, are often asymptomatic carriers. There is a physical difference between men and women that justifies why women should be more selective if they want to preserve their health and fertility. It has nothing to do with feminism and genders equality to have ONS.

Thanks for proving my point. Everybody with at least two working cells understands that no matter how much a woman abstains from ONSs, she's still at risk of catching an STD if she's dating and eventually having unprotected sex with men who have ONSs, not to mention that higher expectations for women is exactly what makes men irresponsible. Expecting "selectivity" from women but not from men doesn't really work. You're not really selective or any better than the women who have casual sex, because you end up in relationships with the same kind of man these women are sleeping with, and unlike the women who use protection since they know it's a ONS, you might not even be doing that if you're in a relationship.

Having ONSs might have nothing to do with gender equality, but cra*ping on women who do while being perfectly fine with dating men who do the same under the guise of selectivity when all the data points to the fact that chances of STD are very low even for women when protection is used comes off as sexist and dishonest at worst and idiotic at best.

It is idiotic to think that all men in LTR are engaging in ONS in parallel to “main” relationship. Or that people don’t use protection while in a relationship. It’s the same as stating no man is capable of commitment even for a short period but women are, which is simply untrue. The level of care between partners in actual relationship or cohabilitation is somewhat different from someone just dating around. It’s proven by CDC that increasing your number of partners increases chances of STD - as simple as that. You are trying to prove something opposite

I never said all men engage in ONSs while being in LTRs, but significant share of men (and women) cheat or have STDs they're unaware of before they enter a relationship, that's why I find the expectation that women abstain from ONSs but not men ridiculous.

I'm also aware that the higher the number of partner the higher the chances of catching an STD, but this applies to both genders, not just women. Furthermore, a big share of sexually active individuals does not use protection consistently. Consistent protection decreases chances of STDs a lot even among promiscuous individuals. Sex workers is places where this practice is regulated have lower rates of STDs than the non-sex working population. Calling women dumb for having ONSs instead of calling both men and women dumb for having unprotected sex is stupid and tells me once again that STDs aren't the problem here or else you would also be calling stupid the people having sex in LTRs with no protection and no previous test.

No I didn't call promiscuous people dumb. I do consider it unsafe for women to engage in ONS on 1-2 dates due to high percentages of adverse selection of men on the apps. The issues could be criminal intent, hidden marital or relationship status (who wants to be shot by a crazy wife!). I would look for a good friend or a colleague that I know if I was looking for ONS.
Also, promiscuity doesn't result in pair bonding: OPs friend behaves in a way that's not encouraging pair bonding. Instead of getting to know a man as a person, whether he's a good match based on his habits, interests, common goals etc, she just jumos in bed with dozens of guys. She is not allowing herself a time to learn more about any of them, and possibly build a connection. Long term relationships are built like friendships - it is just as much or even more so social than sexual side of it.

I've known men who hooked up with women who turned out to be in relationships with unstable men. I've read about men getting robbed at gun point or with the use of drugs by their female ONSs or their accomplices. Sure, it's less common, but not unsafe. Someone who cares about women's safety and recognizes women might be at a higher risk would still discourage ONSs among men as well, but this isn't what you or the poster(s) before you are doing.

Everyone bonds differently. For some women sex is part of the process, for other women sex doedn't determine the bond. Other women know early on if a guy is someone they're not interested in getting to know any further so the sex with him is just casual fun. I mean, the men you date didn't seem to have a problem bonding with you, why you expect women to have a problem bonding with men?

I just find your arguments incredibly dishonest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kind of man who sleeps with a woman "too soon" and gets a bad impression of her is not the kind of man who's worth pursuing. He's the kind of man who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Women who make men like this wait just to get their "respect" don't respect themselves either, if they did, they wouldn't "save" themselves for men like this.

Didn't it cross your mind that women who don't sleep with each man they meet just want to get to know the man first? With so many guys lying on apps about STDs, marital&relationship status, it makes sense to wait a month or two until he starts showing red flags. It's not a guarantee of anything, of course, but critical sh..t usually comes up after couple months, in my experience

Did you read my comment or just quoted it? I'm specifically talking about women who dely sex to avoid causing a bad impression on men, not about women who dely sex for other reasons.

As for your STD comment, everyone should be tested before sex REGARDLESS of how much you wait.

Once a woman opens her mouth about a copy of STD results including herpes, guys who are in just for sex simply disappear. It could be the way to weed out for OPs friend. But if she’s that used to sleeping around, she probably just can’t keep herself from doing it, and thus is not capable of conscious relationships and analyzing her risks before sleeping with anyone

Plenty of people who sleep around have no problem to keep themselves from doing it, very few people are actual sex addicts. Other people are perfectly capable and aware of the risks, but take them anyways, the same way they take other risks in their lives such as skiing or driving at night in unknown areas.

I used to have casual sex between relationships and before I met my husband. I asked for STD tests and those that didn't want them were out. I had no problem establishing relationships when I found men I was interested in. We have no idea what's going on with OP's trainer, as most of the OP seems to be a disapproval post of the trainer's perceived behavior rather than anything concrete.

Your logics makes no sense. Casual sex implies that your partner sleeps with others as well. Asking for STD test is redundant in that case: they can get HSV2 and othe deceases from one night stands and still infect you. Of course people who don’t have multiple STDs prefer non-casual sex! It’s not like all these f..ks are going to pay my medical insurance deductibles or explain genital herpes for me to my future partners. The occurrence of HPV related throat cancers in men over 60 yo is growing. It’s a torturous death
I don’t get get it how people can be that clueless and careless

I'm not clueless, but you seem extremely naive. Condoms and avoiding oral sex greatly reduces your chances of contracting an STD and casual sex doesn't need ti be ongoing. On the other hand, monogamous relationships aren't necessarily monogamous as a significant percentage of people cheat. People don't generally use protection in monogamous relationships either. Making a man wait doesn't magically protect you from STDs and considering how most of the pressure to avoid casual sex falls on women don't be surprised if the man you're making wait isn't holding himself to the same standards as many women hold themselves to. I know plenty of cases of women who, as far as I know never had casual sex, but ended up with infections because the man they made wait had STIs and never got tested, or eventually got one because they weren't being faithful.

Read Reddit on how women or men got genital herpes from one and single encounters off Tinder while using condoms. Yes, you can't protect yourself from partner cheating completely, but at least you know a man who waits for a few dates and prepared to share the tests is not a pig seeking immediate lay. Women having ONS with guys on apps are nuts. There is extremely adverse selection - men rush with sex for that specific reason, usually they do have an infection that's easily transmittable even with condoms. All of them "go down" on women. Absolutely all men I met on dates asked if they could offer this to me on date 2-3.

Reddit is not a substitute for data. Women's risk of getting herpes from an infected partner is around 8.9 times out of 10,000 sex acts. Source: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/ipsrh/2001/12/condoms-reduce-womens-risk-herpes-infection-do-not-protect-men
Note that condom use consistency was very low in this sample. The chances of getting herpes is very low when condoms are used properly and consistently.

Of the men who offered to go down on you on the 2-3 date, did you keep dating them?
Plenty of men who wait if the woman asks them to didn't wait with all women, the fact that they're offering you sex is a sign of this. It's ridiculous to think one is protecting women by expecting them to wait when the men they entered in a relationship with are free to have ONSs. It's almost as STDs aren't the real issue here and that gender expectations are.

Even if STD risk is low I don’t take it for ONS. I did keep dating some of these men, yes. It’s a mutual decision when to intimate, I don’t care what other women tell him.
Women catch STDs easier than men, the consequences could be infertility, cervical cancer or limited ability to date in the future. Men, to the opposite, are often asymptomatic carriers. There is a physical difference between men and women that justifies why women should be more selective if they want to preserve their health and fertility. It has nothing to do with feminism and genders equality to have ONS.

Thanks for proving my point. Everybody with at least two working cells understands that no matter how much a woman abstains from ONSs, she's still at risk of catching an STD if she's dating and eventually having unprotected sex with men who have ONSs, not to mention that higher expectations for women is exactly what makes men irresponsible. Expecting "selectivity" from women but not from men doesn't really work. You're not really selective or any better than the women who have casual sex, because you end up in relationships with the same kind of man these women are sleeping with, and unlike the women who use protection since they know it's a ONS, you might not even be doing that if you're in a relationship.

Having ONSs might have nothing to do with gender equality, but cra*ping on women who do while being perfectly fine with dating men who do the same under the guise of selectivity when all the data points to the fact that chances of STD are very low even for women when protection is used comes off as sexist and dishonest at worst and idiotic at best.

It is idiotic to think that all men in LTR are engaging in ONS in parallel to “main” relationship. Or that people don’t use protection while in a relationship. It’s the same as stating no man is capable of commitment even for a short period but women are, which is simply untrue. The level of care between partners in actual relationship or cohabilitation is somewhat different from someone just dating around. It’s proven by CDC that increasing your number of partners increases chances of STD - as simple as that. You are trying to prove something opposite

I never said all men engage in ONSs while being in LTRs, but significant share of men (and women) cheat or have STDs they're unaware of before they enter a relationship, that's why I find the expectation that women abstain from ONSs but not men ridiculous.

I'm also aware that the higher the number of partner the higher the chances of catching an STD, but this applies to both genders, not just women. Furthermore, a big share of sexually active individuals does not use protection consistently. Consistent protection decreases chances of STDs a lot even among promiscuous individuals. Sex workers is places where this practice is regulated have lower rates of STDs than the non-sex working population. Calling women dumb for having ONSs instead of calling both men and women dumb for having unprotected sex is stupid and tells me once again that STDs aren't the problem here or else you would also be calling stupid the people having sex in LTRs with no protection and no previous test.

No I didn't call promiscuous people dumb. I do consider it unsafe for women to engage in ONS on 1-2 dates due to high percentages of adverse selection of men on the apps. The issues could be criminal intent, hidden marital or relationship status (who wants to be shot by a crazy wife!). I would look for a good friend or a colleague that I know if I was looking for ONS.
Also, promiscuity doesn't result in pair bonding: OPs friend behaves in a way that's not encouraging pair bonding. Instead of getting to know a man as a person, whether he's a good match based on his habits, interests, common goals etc, she just jumos in bed with dozens of guys. She is not allowing herself a time to learn more about any of them, and possibly build a connection. Long term relationships are built like friendships - it is just as much or even more so social than sexual side of it.

I've known men who hooked up with women who turned out to be in relationships with unstable men. I've read about men getting robbed at gun point or with the use of drugs by their female ONSs or their accomplices. Sure, it's less common, but not unsafe. Someone who cares about women's safety and recognizes women might be at a higher risk would still discourage ONSs among men as well, but this isn't what you or the poster(s) before you are doing.

Everyone bonds differently. For some women sex is part of the process, for other women sex doedn't determine the bond. Other women know early on if a guy is someone they're not interested in getting to know any further so the sex with him is just casual fun. I mean, the men you date didn't seem to have a problem bonding with you, why you expect women to have a problem bonding with men?

I just find your arguments incredibly dishonest.

The men I date didn’t sleep with dozens of women a year. Mostly these were people out of prior marriages or long term relationships. Sure, they had ONS prior or perhaps as they were getting to know me. But I avoided men behaving obviously promiscuous, with prior extreme promiscuous behaviors based on their own feedback from dating, or those unavailable on weekends because that would prevent my relationship building with them. People (both men and women) looking for LTR don’t have time for multiple casual sex partners. Time is most valuable resource and it’s ticking way faster for women, if they want a child with a man. It’s just reality. Try to date in your 40s as a women with goal to have the first child ! The ratio of available men to women for family creation crumbles after age 35, particular in large urban centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kind of man who sleeps with a woman "too soon" and gets a bad impression of her is not the kind of man who's worth pursuing. He's the kind of man who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Women who make men like this wait just to get their "respect" don't respect themselves either, if they did, they wouldn't "save" themselves for men like this.

Didn't it cross your mind that women who don't sleep with each man they meet just want to get to know the man first? With so many guys lying on apps about STDs, marital&relationship status, it makes sense to wait a month or two until he starts showing red flags. It's not a guarantee of anything, of course, but critical sh..t usually comes up after couple months, in my experience

Did you read my comment or just quoted it? I'm specifically talking about women who dely sex to avoid causing a bad impression on men, not about women who dely sex for other reasons.

As for your STD comment, everyone should be tested before sex REGARDLESS of how much you wait.

Once a woman opens her mouth about a copy of STD results including herpes, guys who are in just for sex simply disappear. It could be the way to weed out for OPs friend. But if she’s that used to sleeping around, she probably just can’t keep herself from doing it, and thus is not capable of conscious relationships and analyzing her risks before sleeping with anyone

Plenty of people who sleep around have no problem to keep themselves from doing it, very few people are actual sex addicts. Other people are perfectly capable and aware of the risks, but take them anyways, the same way they take other risks in their lives such as skiing or driving at night in unknown areas.

I used to have casual sex between relationships and before I met my husband. I asked for STD tests and those that didn't want them were out. I had no problem establishing relationships when I found men I was interested in. We have no idea what's going on with OP's trainer, as most of the OP seems to be a disapproval post of the trainer's perceived behavior rather than anything concrete.

Your logics makes no sense. Casual sex implies that your partner sleeps with others as well. Asking for STD test is redundant in that case: they can get HSV2 and othe deceases from one night stands and still infect you. Of course people who don’t have multiple STDs prefer non-casual sex! It’s not like all these f..ks are going to pay my medical insurance deductibles or explain genital herpes for me to my future partners. The occurrence of HPV related throat cancers in men over 60 yo is growing. It’s a torturous death
I don’t get get it how people can be that clueless and careless

I'm not clueless, but you seem extremely naive. Condoms and avoiding oral sex greatly reduces your chances of contracting an STD and casual sex doesn't need ti be ongoing. On the other hand, monogamous relationships aren't necessarily monogamous as a significant percentage of people cheat. People don't generally use protection in monogamous relationships either. Making a man wait doesn't magically protect you from STDs and considering how most of the pressure to avoid casual sex falls on women don't be surprised if the man you're making wait isn't holding himself to the same standards as many women hold themselves to. I know plenty of cases of women who, as far as I know never had casual sex, but ended up with infections because the man they made wait had STIs and never got tested, or eventually got one because they weren't being faithful.

Read Reddit on how women or men got genital herpes from one and single encounters off Tinder while using condoms. Yes, you can't protect yourself from partner cheating completely, but at least you know a man who waits for a few dates and prepared to share the tests is not a pig seeking immediate lay. Women having ONS with guys on apps are nuts. There is extremely adverse selection - men rush with sex for that specific reason, usually they do have an infection that's easily transmittable even with condoms. All of them "go down" on women. Absolutely all men I met on dates asked if they could offer this to me on date 2-3.

Reddit is not a substitute for data. Women's risk of getting herpes from an infected partner is around 8.9 times out of 10,000 sex acts. Source: https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/ipsrh/2001/12/condoms-reduce-womens-risk-herpes-infection-do-not-protect-men
Note that condom use consistency was very low in this sample. The chances of getting herpes is very low when condoms are used properly and consistently.

Of the men who offered to go down on you on the 2-3 date, did you keep dating them?
Plenty of men who wait if the woman asks them to didn't wait with all women, the fact that they're offering you sex is a sign of this. It's ridiculous to think one is protecting women by expecting them to wait when the men they entered in a relationship with are free to have ONSs. It's almost as STDs aren't the real issue here and that gender expectations are.

Even if STD risk is low I don’t take it for ONS. I did keep dating some of these men, yes. It’s a mutual decision when to intimate, I don’t care what other women tell him.
Women catch STDs easier than men, the consequences could be infertility, cervical cancer or limited ability to date in the future. Men, to the opposite, are often asymptomatic carriers. There is a physical difference between men and women that justifies why women should be more selective if they want to preserve their health and fertility. It has nothing to do with feminism and genders equality to have ONS.

Thanks for proving my point. Everybody with at least two working cells understands that no matter how much a woman abstains from ONSs, she's still at risk of catching an STD if she's dating and eventually having unprotected sex with men who have ONSs, not to mention that higher expectations for women is exactly what makes men irresponsible. Expecting "selectivity" from women but not from men doesn't really work. You're not really selective or any better than the women who have casual sex, because you end up in relationships with the same kind of man these women are sleeping with, and unlike the women who use protection since they know it's a ONS, you might not even be doing that if you're in a relationship.

Having ONSs might have nothing to do with gender equality, but cra*ping on women who do while being perfectly fine with dating men who do the same under the guise of selectivity when all the data points to the fact that chances of STD are very low even for women when protection is used comes off as sexist and dishonest at worst and idiotic at best.

It is idiotic to think that all men in LTR are engaging in ONS in parallel to “main” relationship. Or that people don’t use protection while in a relationship. It’s the same as stating no man is capable of commitment even for a short period but women are, which is simply untrue. The level of care between partners in actual relationship or cohabilitation is somewhat different from someone just dating around. It’s proven by CDC that increasing your number of partners increases chances of STD - as simple as that. You are trying to prove something opposite

I never said all men engage in ONSs while being in LTRs, but significant share of men (and women) cheat or have STDs they're unaware of before they enter a relationship, that's why I find the expectation that women abstain from ONSs but not men ridiculous.

I'm also aware that the higher the number of partner the higher the chances of catching an STD, but this applies to both genders, not just women. Furthermore, a big share of sexually active individuals does not use protection consistently. Consistent protection decreases chances of STDs a lot even among promiscuous individuals. Sex workers is places where this practice is regulated have lower rates of STDs than the non-sex working population. Calling women dumb for having ONSs instead of calling both men and women dumb for having unprotected sex is stupid and tells me once again that STDs aren't the problem here or else you would also be calling stupid the people having sex in LTRs with no protection and no previous test.

No I didn't call promiscuous people dumb. I do consider it unsafe for women to engage in ONS on 1-2 dates due to high percentages of adverse selection of men on the apps. The issues could be criminal intent, hidden marital or relationship status (who wants to be shot by a crazy wife!). I would look for a good friend or a colleague that I know if I was looking for ONS.
Also, promiscuity doesn't result in pair bonding: OPs friend behaves in a way that's not encouraging pair bonding. Instead of getting to know a man as a person, whether he's a good match based on his habits, interests, common goals etc, she just jumos in bed with dozens of guys. She is not allowing herself a time to learn more about any of them, and possibly build a connection. Long term relationships are built like friendships - it is just as much or even more so social than sexual side of it.

I've known men who hooked up with women who turned out to be in relationships with unstable men. I've read about men getting robbed at gun point or with the use of drugs by their female ONSs or their accomplices. Sure, it's less common, but not unsafe. Someone who cares about women's safety and recognizes women might be at a higher risk would still discourage ONSs among men as well, but this isn't what you or the poster(s) before you are doing.

Everyone bonds differently. For some women sex is part of the process, for other women sex doedn't determine the bond. Other women know early on if a guy is someone they're not interested in getting to know any further so the sex with him is just casual fun. I mean, the men you date didn't seem to have a problem bonding with you, why you expect women to have a problem bonding with men?

I just find your arguments incredibly dishonest.

The men I date didn’t sleep with dozens of women a year. Mostly these were people out of prior marriages or long term relationships. Sure, they had ONS prior or perhaps as they were getting to know me. But I avoided men behaving obviously promiscuous, with prior extreme promiscuous behaviors based on their own feedback from dating, or those unavailable on weekends because that would prevent my relationship building with them. People (both men and women) looking for LTR don’t have time for multiple casual sex partners. Time is most valuable resource and it’s ticking way faster for women, if they want a child with a man. It’s just reality. Try to date in your 40s as a women with goal to have the first child ! The ratio of available men to women for family creation crumbles after age 35, particular in large urban centers.

Casual sex partners aren't long term partners. People who have casual sex often do so opportunistically. They go on a date and if sex is available they take it and move on. If someone can cheat in a relationship with multiple partners then it's not hard to believe that someone who's in the early stages of dating can have multiple casual partners as well. You said it yourself that some of your partners might have been having ONSs as they were getting to know you. I wouldn't take OP's "dozens of partners" literally either. Not many people have that many partners and most of those who do accumulate them over many years.

That said, if the trainer is 39, childless and unmarried, chances are there have been other issues at play that have very little to do with her supposed promiscuity. Almost all promiscuous men and women I know who wanted to settle settled. It might even be that the trainer doesn't truly want to settle at all and pushing the whole thing as far back as she can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:80 a year is not at all unreasonable for her.

Does this mean 80 partners per year? $80k annual salary? $80k salary requirement for her partners?

Anonymous wrote:she is from Brazil, and ... dating almost exclusively black guys. ... She is from a lower SE class

She need to focus her search on eligible men. Men need a certain income to get married and support a family. There are plenty of affluent African-Americans in D.C. But on average, incomes and marriage rates are lower in that community. Also, an immigrant might have less in common with Americans. She is indiscriminately dating men in a large age range and needs to screen better.

Anonymous wrote:And once men realize they're nothing special, they check out immediately. ... she is hooking up with guys too soon.

Men can tell when a woman is easy and not selective. She is reasonably pretty and fit, and gets a lot of dates. Men see her phone is blowing up with texts and dick pics, and hear her stories of men she dated. She is not invested and committed to any of these dates. When men realize that they are part of a large crowd of casual partners, then they opportunistically "hit it and quit it".

She should screen better on age/occupation and relationship history. She needs online men to write more or phone to get this information and prove they are interested. She should wait until the third date for sex. This will weed out many men. If she is going to have sex, then she should do it with relationship potential.