I was seen multi dating by the guy I like more

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the men posting on this thread sound like bitter nerds who can't get laid.

Are we equating "getting laid" with value and worth again?

Because then the guys who have 10-12 kids with 8-10 women must be the least bitter, healthiest people out there.

I think that poster means they're angry that they aren't getting laid and directing that anger at an online persona.

Right, and they see rejection by women as a reflection of their self-worth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's nothing pushy or controlling about ASKING for something. And if she thought it was too much or too soon, then that's fine-- she's not the girl for him. You have nothing to lose when you ask for what you want.

+1

My DH and I talked about exclusivity early on. I had assumed we were exclusive. It wasn't until he brought it up that I realized I made an assumption, just like Guy 1. I certainly didn't sleep with him until after the exclusivity talk. But then again, I am the steroetypical girl you marry, while OP is the one you F@#$.

-happily married and I enjoy sex with my DH of 10 yrs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This girl is the epitome of everything that keeps getting discussed over and over. Wants to take things slowly with guy 1, but immediately has sex with guy 2 and guy 3.

Same scenario, different woman, over and over and over. If guy 1 has brains, he will run.

You know, I'm not sure why he'd run. Maybe if his ego was bruised. But he could also take this opportunity to be clearer about what it is he wants here, instead of assuming that this woman in her 20s is home knitting on Friday nights that they don't have plans together.

There's nothing wrong with having sex. There's nothing wrong with enjoying sex. There's nothing wrong with also wanting a relationship. And to hell with the slut-shaming around here from a bunch of prim pearl-clutchers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's nothing pushy or controlling about ASKING for something. And if she thought it was too much or too soon, then that's fine-- she's not the girl for him. You have nothing to lose when you ask for what you want.

+1

My DH and I talked about exclusivity early on. I had assumed we were exclusive. It wasn't until he brought it up that I realized I made an assumption, just like Guy 1. I certainly didn't sleep with him until after the exclusivity talk. But then again, I am the steroetypical girl you marry, while OP is the one you F@#$.

-happily married and I enjoy sex with my DH of 10 yrs.

You're contradicting yourself here. If the "woman you marry" and "woman you fuck" are 2 different women, then why is your husband having sex with you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This girl is a replica of everything that keeps getting discussed over and over by the same lonely nerds. Wants to take things slowly with guy 1, but immediately has sex with guy 2 and guy 3.

Same scenario, different woman, over and over and over. If guy 1 has brains, he will run.

Fixed that for you!

[DanielG]

Anonymous wrote:

You're contradicting yourself here. If the "woman you marry" and "woman you fuck" are 2 different women, then why is your husband having sex with you?

I took it as:

The woman you would marry (and of course have sex with)
The woman you fuck (and only fuck. Never would you marry this girl. Damaged goods).

[Anonymous]

Using the term "damaged goods" to describe a person is wrong. It's sexist. I will forever regard you as stupid and bitter and read your posts accordingly.

[DanielG]

Anonymous wrote:Using the term "damaged goods" to describe a person is wrong. It's sexist. I will forever regard you as stupid and bitter and read your posts accordingly.

Damaged goods is sexist?

Because both men and women can be labeled as damaged goods.

You take online forums just a little too serious. Especially because I was trying to clarify something for someone. Not talking down to the OP.

[Anonymous]

DanielG wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Using the term "damaged goods" to describe a person is wrong. It's sexist. I will forever regard you as stupid and bitter and read your posts accordingly.

Damaged goods is sexist?

Because both men and women can be labeled as damaged goods.

You take online forums just a little too serious. Especially because I was trying to clarify something for someone. Not talking down to the OP.

People shouldn't be valued by their sexual history. Your certainly welcome to say and believe whatever you want, but know it makes you look like an idiot.

[DanielG]

Anonymous wrote:
People shouldn't be valued by their sexual history. Your certainly welcome to say and believe whatever you want, but know it makes you look like an idiot.

You are welcome to quote me where I said that I am using the term damaged goods because of sexual history.

Good job putting words in my mouth though.

[Anonymous]

DanielG wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
People shouldn't be valued by their sexual history. Your certainly welcome to say and believe whatever you want, but know it makes you look like an idiot.

You are welcome to quote me where I said that I am using the term damaged goods because of sexual history.

Good job putting words in my mouth though.

You used that phrase in describing a woman who's only good for fucking. You were talking about her personality? Um, sure you were.

[Anonymous]

I think that poster was referring to your comment at 13:38

[Anonymous]

I get it. I once dated a guy and after our second date I found out he was also dating at least one other girl. I shouldn't have cared, but I want a guy to like me so much when we go out that he can't even think about going on a date with somebody else. He was a great guy and had good long term potential, but I just couldn't bring myself to not be #1 and to date somebody who wasn't totally crazy about me. Oh well. My loss, but that's the way I work.

I have no doubt that if the sexes were reversed here that nobody would have a problem with OP's behavior. Her only mistake was being seen out with the other guy.

[DanielG]

Anonymous wrote:

You used that phrase in describing a woman who's only good for fucking. You were talking about her personality? Um, sure you were.

You are reading WAYYY too much in to that statement.

[DanielG]

Anonymous wrote:I get it. I once dated a guy and after our second date I found out he was also dating at least one other girl. I shouldn't have cared, but I want a guy to like me so much when we go out that he can't even think about going on a date with somebody else. He was a great guy and had good long term potential, but I just couldn't bring myself to not be #1 and to date somebody who wasn't totally crazy about me. Oh well. My loss, but that's the way I work.

I have no doubt that if the sexes were reversed here that nobody would have a problem with OP's behavior. Her only mistake was being seen out with the other guy.

I think the only 'mistake' is the fact she didn't have a crystal ball to read #1's mind about his feelings. That is just the way the world works. You live and learn.

If it affects her, maybe next time she'll be more open hoping to avoid such a situation again.

No harm. No foul.