I wish women would demand more in a relationship before getting intimate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also I, the immediate PP, am still mocked if people find out I've only had one partner - usually when I mention it online, or mentioned, when I was dating, that I was a virgin. I've thought so much about it, and still don't understand why it's ok to mock someone who (purposeful) limited experience.

It isn't o.k. to mock you but I think that you might come across as a bit holier than thou. There is nothing wrong with being highly selective and holding out for marriage but don't expect to get medals for doing so. You are doing that for you and because it is the right thing for you to do, you aren't doing it to impress anyone else - which is exactly how it should be.

You're just making assumptions about pp. Good job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with most of the immediate PPs. Everyone, male and female, is entitled to have as much sex as they want with as many partners as they want, and should be able to do so without being shamed. The way I read the title of the thread is that OP wishes women would demand more in a RELATIONSHIP before getting intimate. That is, if what the woman wants is a relationship, not a casual hookup, or friends with benefits scenario, it's generally a best practice to actually get to know the person and that they want they same thing (demanding a little more time and commitment) before becoming intimate, so as to avoid disappointment.

This liberal nonsense that you can't "shame" anyone for being slutty is wrong. Of course people are free to shame sluts. There are good reasons why promiscuity is looked down upon. It is immoral. It won't help your physical or mental health. It won't help you build a quality relationship with a man. It doesn't help you build a family. The "silent majority" and wise people understand this.

+1

The idea that anyone should be free to have as many sex partners as you want without being judged or shamed is part of the lie. Of course you will be judged. And shamed. Sorry, but there are consequences to actions.

How does me having 500 sexual partners impact your life in any way? Where the hell do you get off on "shaming.?" It's totally ok to say that not for you and you'd rather have something different, but you absolutely do not get to shame me for it. You really need to look inward and figure out where the anger is coming from.

Well in a way it does impact my life. The diseases spread faster if a lot of people are having a lot of sex partners. Think of it like this. If I go to a place where there is a lot of TB and I get coughed on repeatedly while there then come back home and spread the didease, then others are affected. If a lot of people travel t an area with lots of TB then come back home to many work paces and social gatherings then more people get TB. Get it?

It doesn't actually work that way in educated populations. In educated populations, the more sex partners people have the less lilkely they are to have STDs. The mechanism behind that isn't clear, but it's probably because they are more careful and take more care of their health. They use condoms more consistently and get tested more frequently. People who have fewer partners have more STDS. Again, the mechanism isn't clear but it's probably because they feel "safe" and assume their partner is "safe" and so they don't use condoms and don't get screened as much as they should.

More people should be responsible sluts. It's better for the health of the community.

I have heard something like that before but it is not really true. It is true among gay men, and educated older urban folks, but NOT true among teens of any social background. AND, there are TONS of uneducated people around the DC area. The big bias is that in this generation, the people with few partners tend tone rural and poorly educated, but I have a feeling that will change. HPV has been on the rise in all populations. Even elderly people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The worst thing about this thread is that it exists vis a vis women, but there will likely never be a companion one this lengthy about men and sexuality.

I will start one later this weekend. I have to think about it for a while. I don't want to sound too angry....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with most of the immediate PPs. Everyone, male and female, is entitled to have as much sex as they want with as many partners as they want, and should be able to do so without being shamed. The way I read the title of the thread is that OP wishes women would demand more in a RELATIONSHIP before getting intimate. That is, if what the woman wants is a relationship, not a casual hookup, or friends with benefits scenario, it's generally a best practice to actually get to know the person and that they want they same thing (demanding a little more time and commitment) before becoming intimate, so as to avoid disappointment.

This liberal nonsense that you can't "shame" anyone for being slutty is wrong. Of course people are free to shame sluts. There are good reasons why promiscuity is looked down upon. It is immoral. It won't help your physical or mental health. It won't help you build a quality relationship with a man. It doesn't help you build a family. The "silent majority" and wise people understand this.

+1

The idea that anyone should be free to have as many sex partners as you want without being judged or shamed is part of the lie. Of course you will be judged. And shamed. Sorry, but there are consequences to actions.

How does me having 500 sexual partners impact your life in any way? Where the hell do you get off on "shaming.?" It's totally ok to say that not for you and you'd rather have something different, but you absolutely do not get to shame me for it. You really need to look inward and figure out where the anger is coming from.

Well in a way it does impact my life. The diseases spread faster if a lot of people are having a lot of sex partners. Think of it like this. If I go to a place where there is a lot of TB and I get coughed on repeatedly while there then come back home and spread the didease, then others are affected. If a lot of people travel t an area with lots of TB then come back home to many work paces and social gatherings then more people get TB. Get it?

You are either very uneducated or just don't want to see the distinction. All you have to do is mind your own business. Last time I checked, NONE of the STDs are spread by air. So, no. It doesn't impact you in any way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also I, the immediate PP, am still mocked if people find out I've only had one partner - usually when I mention it online, or mentioned, when I was dating, that I was a virgin. I've thought so much about it, and still don't understand why it's ok to mock someone who (purposeful) limited experience.

It isn't o.k. to mock you but I think that you might come across as a bit holier than thou. There is nothing wrong with being highly selective and holding out for marriage but don't expect to get medals for doing so. You are doing that for you and because it is the right thing for you to do, you aren't doing it to impress anyone else - which is exactly how it should be.

You're just making assumptions about pp. Good job.

Not really. If you are "usually" being mocked, either online or when you go out on dates, there is a (good) chance that you are oversharing about your private sexual past....kwim?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The other problem with having so many partners now is that now your expectations are higher in marriage and the second the sex life starts to have problems, you star to wax nostalgic about past sex partners and your mind starts to wander.

Most of our grandparents had sex with one person in their entire life. They didn't have anything else to compare their current sex life well. Yes, it's better today to have more choice when picking a partner, but there are downsides to that too. And knowing your current partner has slept with X number of people can raise some insecurities as well. And put pressure on you to live up to the standards of those other people your partner was with. It's just all messed up.

That's not been my experience. Peior to DH I had at least a dozen partners. Some casual encounters some in a relationship. I've been married 17yrs and have no illusions as to my past partners and pine over no one. My DH is a catch and is physically possibly more attractive at 45 than whrn I met him at 25.

He married a.sexual woman. I've always enjoyed sex. I've never thought sex was dirty or shameful. By marrying a woman who views sex like I do, he enjoys a sex life much more frequent and varied than most of his friends. A lot of women I k or simply don't like having sex with their husbands. They have major hang upd, major body insecurities, and never really gave themselves permission to treat sex like a pleasure rather than a currency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with most of the immediate PPs. Everyone, male and female, is entitled to have as much sex as they want with as many partners as they want, and should be able to do so without being shamed. The way I read the title of the thread is that OP wishes women would demand more in a RELATIONSHIP before getting intimate. That is, if what the woman wants is a relationship, not a casual hookup, or friends with benefits scenario, it's generally a best practice to actually get to know the person and that they want they same thing (demanding a little more time and commitment) before becoming intimate, so as to avoid disappointment.

This liberal nonsense that you can't "shame" anyone for being slutty is wrong. Of course people are free to shame sluts. There are good reasons why promiscuity is looked down upon. It is immoral. It won't help your physical or mental health. It won't help you build a quality relationship with a man. It doesn't help you build a family. The "silent majority" and wise people understand this.

+1

The idea that anyone should be free to have as many sex partners as you want without being judged or shamed is part of the lie. Of course you will be judged. And shamed. Sorry, but there are consequences to actions.

How does me having 500 sexual partners impact your life in any way? Where the hell do you get off on "shaming.?" It's totally ok to say that not for you and you'd rather have something different, but you absolutely do not get to shame me for it. You really need to look inward and figure out where the anger is coming from.

Well in a way it does impact my life. The diseases spread faster if a lot of people are having a lot of sex partners. Think of it like this. If I go to a place where there is a lot of TB and I get coughed on repeatedly while there then come back home and spread the didease, then others are affected. If a lot of people travel t an area with lots of TB then come back home to many work paces and social gatherings then more people get TB. Get it?

It doesn't actually work that way in educated populations. In educated populations, the more sex partners people have the less lilkely they are to have STDs. The mechanism behind that isn't clear, but it's probably because they are more careful and take more care of their health. They use condoms more consistently and get tested more frequently. People who have fewer partners have more STDS. Again, the mechanism isn't clear but it's probably because they feel "safe" and assume their partner is "safe" and so they don't use condoms and don't get screened as much as they should.

More people should be responsible sluts. It's better for the health of the community.

I have heard something like that before but it is not really true. It is true among gay men, and educated older urban folks, but NOT true among teens of any social background. AND, there are TONS of uneducated people around the DC area. The big bias is that in this generation, the people with few partners tend tone rural and poorly educated, but I have a feeling that will change. HPV has been on the rise in all populations. Even elderly people.

The populations you are pointing out as it being "not true" are excluded by the descriptor "educated." Teens are not educated. Poor people are not educated. Rural people are not educated. It is true for educated and better off groups.

The rest of your post is how you feel.

Confirmation bias is a bitch, but that doesn't make your point true.

The key to preventing STDS is education and access to health care. Shaming does nothing. Abstience does nothing. Limiting the number of partners does nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other problem with having so many partners now is that now your expectations are higher in marriage and the second the sex life starts to have problems, you star to wax nostalgic about past sex partners and your mind starts to wander.

Most of our grandparents had sex with one person in their entire life. They didn't have anything else to compare their current sex life well. Yes, it's better today to have more choice when picking a partner, but there are downsides to that too. And knowing your current partner has slept with X number of people can raise some insecurities as well. And put pressure on you to live up to the standards of those other people your partner was with. It's just all messed up.

Alternatively, people can try partners until they find a partner that they are sexually compatible with and with whom they can spend the rest of their lives I had a dozen partners before DH. I knew what I liked. I knew that DH and I had good sexual compatibility, as well as the rest of the package. I didn't have to settle for bad sex for the rest of my life because I didn't know any better.

DH isn't insecure about my past partners. I'm not insecure about his past partners. We had choices and we chose each other. I had other offers of marriage. I didn't accept them becuase the guy didn't make the grade. DH feels pretty good about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with most of the immediate PPs. Everyone, male and female, is entitled to have as much sex as they want with as many partners as they want, and should be able to do so without being shamed. The way I read the title of the thread is that OP wishes women would demand more in a RELATIONSHIP before getting intimate. That is, if what the woman wants is a relationship, not a casual hookup, or friends with benefits scenario, it's generally a best practice to actually get to know the person and that they want they same thing (demanding a little more time and commitment) before becoming intimate, so as to avoid disappointment.

This liberal nonsense that you can't "shame" anyone for being slutty is wrong. Of course people are free to shame sluts. There are good reasons why promiscuity is looked down upon. It is immoral. It won't help your physical or mental health. It won't help you build a quality relationship with a man. It doesn't help you build a family. The "silent majority" and wise people understand this.

+1

The idea that anyone should be free to have as many sex partners as you want without being judged or shamed is part of the lie. Of course you will be judged. And shamed. Sorry, but there are consequences to actions.

How does me having 500 sexual partners impact your life in any way? Where the hell do you get off on "shaming.?" It's totally ok to say that not for you and you'd rather have something different, but you absolutely do not get to shame me for it. You really need to look inward and figure out where the anger is coming from.

Well in a way it does impact my life. The diseases spread faster if a lot of people are having a lot of sex partners. Think of it like this. If I go to a place where there is a lot of TB and I get coughed on repeatedly while there then come back home and spread the didease, then others are affected. If a lot of people travel t an area with lots of TB then come back home to many work paces and social gatherings then more people get TB. Get it?

It doesn't actually work that way in educated populations. In educated populations, the more sex partners people have the less lilkely they are to have STDs. The mechanism behind that isn't clear, but it's probably because they are more careful and take more care of their health. They use condoms more consistently and get tested more frequently. People who have fewer partners have more STDS. Again, the mechanism isn't clear but it's probably because they feel "safe" and assume their partner is "safe" and so they don't use condoms and don't get screened as much as they should.

More people should be responsible sluts. It's better for the health of the community.

I have heard something like that before but it is not really true. It is true among gay men, and educated older urban folks, but NOT true among teens of any social background. AND, there are TONS of uneducated people around the DC area. The big bias is that in this generation, the people with few partners tend tone rural and poorly educated, but I have a feeling that will change. HPV has been on the rise in all populations. Even elderly people.

The populations you are pointing out as it being "not true" are excluded by the descriptor "educated." Teens are not educated. Poor people are not educated. Rural people are not educated. It is true for educated and better off groups.

The rest of your post is how you feel.

Confirmation bias is a bitch, but that doesn't make your point true.

The key to preventing STDS is education and access to health care. Shaming does nothing. Abstience does nothing. Limiting the number of partners does nothing.

Wrong. It put sex in the dirty category and causes grown married adults to have horrible infrequent sex lives. Particularly impacting women.

[Anonymous]

Hey OP it takes two to tangle. If you want women to be less promiscuous then you need to ask men to be less promiscuous too nn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with most of the immediate PPs. Everyone, male and female, is entitled to have as much sex as they want with as many partners as they want, and should be able to do so without being shamed. The way I read the title of the thread is that OP wishes women would demand more in a RELATIONSHIP before getting intimate. That is, if what the woman wants is a relationship, not a casual hookup, or friends with benefits scenario, it's generally a best practice to actually get to know the person and that they want they same thing (demanding a little more time and commitment) before becoming intimate, so as to avoid disappointment.

This liberal nonsense that you can't "shame" anyone for being slutty is wrong. Of course people are free to shame sluts. There are good reasons why promiscuity is looked down upon. It is immoral. It won't help your physical or mental health. It won't help you build a quality relationship with a man. It doesn't help you build a family. The "silent majority" and wise people understand this.

+1

The idea that anyone should be free to have as many sex partners as you want without being judged or shamed is part of the lie. Of course you will be judged. And shamed. Sorry, but there are consequences to actions.

How does me having 500 sexual partners impact your life in any way? Where the hell do you get off on "shaming.?" It's totally ok to say that not for you and you'd rather have something different, but you absolutely do not get to shame me for it. You really need to look inward and figure out where the anger is coming from.

Well in a way it does impact my life. The diseases spread faster if a lot of people are having a lot of sex partners. Think of it like this. If I go to a place where there is a lot of TB and I get coughed on repeatedly while there then come back home and spread the didease, then others are affected. If a lot of people travel t an area with lots of TB then come back home to many work paces and social gatherings then more people get TB. Get it?

It doesn't actually work that way in educated populations. In educated populations, the more sex partners people have the less lilkely they are to have STDs. The mechanism behind that isn't clear, but it's probably because they are more careful and take more care of their health. They use condoms more consistently and get tested more frequently. People who have fewer partners have more STDS. Again, the mechanism isn't clear but it's probably because they feel "safe" and assume their partner is "safe" and so they don't use condoms and don't get screened as much as they should.

More people should be responsible sluts. It's better for the health of the community.

I have heard something like that before but it is not really true. It is true among gay men, and educated older urban folks, but NOT true among teens of any social background. AND, there are TONS of uneducated people around the DC area. The big bias is that in this generation, the people with few partners tend tone rural and poorly educated, but I have a feeling that will change. HPV has been on the rise in all populations. Even elderly people.

The populations you are pointing out as it being "not true" are excluded by the descriptor "educated." Teens are not educated. Poor people are not educated. Rural people are not educated. It is true for educated and better off groups.

The rest of your post is how you feel.

Confirmation bias is a bitch, but that doesn't make your point true.

The key to preventing STDS is education and access to health care. Shaming does nothing. Abstience does nothing. Limiting the number of partners does nothing.

Wrong. It put sex in the dirty category and causes grown married adults to have horrible infrequent sex lives. Particularly impacting women.

Agree, and the does nothing post was irresponsible. Some people have an agenda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with most of the immediate PPs. Everyone, male and female, is entitled to have as much sex as they want with as many partners as they want, and should be able to do so without being shamed. The way I read the title of the thread is that OP wishes women would demand more in a RELATIONSHIP before getting intimate. That is, if what the woman wants is a relationship, not a casual hookup, or friends with benefits scenario, it's generally a best practice to actually get to know the person and that they want they same thing (demanding a little more time and commitment) before becoming intimate, so as to avoid disappointment.

This liberal nonsense that you can't "shame" anyone for being slutty is wrong. Of course people are free to shame sluts. There are good reasons why promiscuity is looked down upon. It is immoral. It won't help your physical or mental health. It won't help you build a quality relationship with a man. It doesn't help you build a family. The "silent majority" and wise people understand this.

+1

The idea that anyone should be free to have as many sex partners as you want without being judged or shamed is part of the lie. Of course you will be judged. And shamed. Sorry, but there are consequences to actions.

How does me having 500 sexual partners impact your life in any way? Where the hell do you get off on "shaming.?" It's totally ok to say that not for you and you'd rather have something different, but you absolutely do not get to shame me for it. You really need to look inward and figure out where the anger is coming from.

Well in a way it does impact my life. The diseases spread faster if a lot of people are having a lot of sex partners. Think of it like this. If I go to a place where there is a lot of TB and I get coughed on repeatedly while there then come back home and spread the didease, then others are affected. If a lot of people travel t an area with lots of TB then come back home to many work paces and social gatherings then more people get TB. Get it?

It doesn't actually work that way in educated populations. In educated populations, the more sex partners people have the less lilkely they are to have STDs. The mechanism behind that isn't clear, but it's probably because they are more careful and take more care of their health. They use condoms more consistently and get tested more frequently. People who have fewer partners have more STDS. Again, the mechanism isn't clear but it's probably because they feel "safe" and assume their partner is "safe" and so they don't use condoms and don't get screened as much as they should.

More people should be responsible sluts. It's better for the health of the community.

I have heard something like that before but it is not really true. It is true among gay men, and educated older urban folks, but NOT true among teens of any social background. AND, there are TONS of uneducated people around the DC area. The big bias is that in this generation, the people with few partners tend tone rural and poorly educated, but I have a feeling that will change. HPV has been on the rise in all populations. Even elderly people.

The populations you are pointing out as it being "not true" are excluded by the descriptor "educated." Teens are not educated. Poor people are not educated. Rural people are not educated. It is true for educated and better off groups.

The rest of your post is how you feel.

Confirmation bias is a bitch, but that doesn't make your point true.

The key to preventing STDS is education and access to health care. Shaming does nothing. Abstience does nothing. Limiting the number of partners does nothing.

Also, all the health care in the world is NOT going to protect you from a new variant of HPV not covered by a current vaccine. All the antibiotics in the world won't help you with drug resistant strains of chlamydia and gonorrhea.
You post is silly, you're saying that to reduce STDs in the US, first give everyone a college degree and more extensive sex ed, then ask them to run out there and have more sex? Crazy.
I am a doctor and the first way to prevent disease is to avoid it. Of course you have to know about the disease, so yes, more sex ed, but best to avoid it. If someone has MRSA, don't touch, but if you touch, wash. If someone has TB, stay away. And so on.
BTW, to all the "lots of sex" people, not everyone is as "empowered" as you, many women can not say no to persistent men. Maybe that will be the next thread...Men, why do you persist when you know she would rather not?

[Anonymous]

The one who posted about educated people and STDs makes it like a cause and effect. TONS of educated do indeed have STDs and if educated people who have herpes have fewer partners and inform their partners, fewer people would get it.
Silly post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other problem with having so many partners now is that now your expectations are higher in marriage and the second the sex life starts to have problems, you star to wax nostalgic about past sex partners and your mind starts to wander.

Most of our grandparents had sex with one person in their entire life. They didn't have anything else to compare their current sex life well. Yes, it's better today to have more choice when picking a partner, but there are downsides to that too. And knowing your current partner has slept with X number of people can raise some insecurities as well. And put pressure on you to live up to the standards of those other people your partner was with. It's just all messed up.

That's not been my experience. Peior to DH I had at least a dozen partners. Some casual encounters some in a relationship. I've been married 17yrs and have no illusions as to my past partners and pine over no one. My DH is a catch and is physically possibly more attractive at 45 than whrn I met him at 25.

He married a.sexual woman. I've always enjoyed sex. I've never thought sex was dirty or shameful. By marrying a woman who views sex like I do, he enjoys a sex life much more frequent and varied than most of his friends. A lot of women I k or simply don't like having sex with their husbands. They have major hang upd, major body insecurities, and never really gave themselves permission to treat sex like a pleasure rather than a currency.

+1 This mirrors my experience. I enjoy sex, don't use it as a bargaining tool, and initiate often. I don't shame him for having a sex drive. I'm not tempted to cheat because I know what's out there and I chose someone compatible with me on all levels.

[Anonymous]

My body isn't a bargaining chip. Suggesting it should be used as such is offensive.

If you want to abstain, have at it. I'll be enjoying myself.