Men--do you expect women to kiss by date 2? Be honest!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously if you are not having sex by the third date it's time to move on.

Seriously repeating this over and over isn't going to make everyone do it.

NP DH here: mid-40s, married more than 10 years, but when I was dating in my late 20s in the 1990s this was pretty much industry standard from my perspective. Sometimes not intercourse, but either that or a BJ in most cases. Not sure if my experience was an outlier or not, though.

DH here too, and just posted in agreement. I am late 40s and married a while. I'm not sure I'd call this "industry standard" but it's not uncommon. At least some kind of physical interaction. When I was dating I had one or two relationships where it was very clear there were substantial physical sparks - which involved making out - but no sex because she didn't want to rush. I actually held off on sex with the last two women I dated (one of whom is DW) for longer than they expected (single digits of dates though). However, it was very clear there were physical sparks and kissing was involved much much sooner.

Kissing isn't at all on any kind of libertine edge culturally and hasn't been for a few generations; if you don't want to kiss by the 2nd date, then either there is no attraction or you are uncomfortable with intimate physical contact for some other reason, either of which is a reason to end the dating as far as I'm concerned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously if you are not having sex by the third date it's time to move on.

Seriously repeating this over and over isn't going to make everyone do it.

NP DH here: mid-40s, married more than 10 years, but when I was dating in my late 20s in the 1990s this was pretty much industry standard from my perspective. Sometimes not intercourse, but either that or a BJ in most cases. Not sure if my experience was an outlier or not, though.

DH here too, and just posted in agreement. I am late 40s and married a while. I'm not sure I'd call this "industry standard" but it's not uncommon. At least some kind of physical interaction. When I was dating I had one or two relationships where it was very clear there were substantial physical sparks - which involved making out - but no sex because she didn't want to rush. I actually held off on sex with the last two women I dated (one of whom is DW) for longer than they expected (single digits of dates though). However, it was very clear there were physical sparks and kissing was involved much much sooner.

Kissing isn't at all on any kind of libertine edge culturally and hasn't been for a few generations; if you don't want to kiss by the 2nd date, then either there is no attraction or you are uncomfortable with intimate physical contact for some other reason, either of which is a reason to end the dating as far as I'm concerned.

Or you just want to make sure the man is not an axe murderer or a child molester before you kiss him.

[Anonymous]

BS. People are able to hide
These dark sides for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Seriously if you are not having sex by the third date it's time to move on.


Seriously repeating this over and over isn't going to make everyone do it.


NP DH here: mid-40s, married more than 10 years, but when I was dating in my late 20s in the 1990s this was pretty much industry standard from my perspective. Sometimes not intercourse, but either that or a BJ in most cases. Not sure if my experience was an outlier or not, though.


DH here too, and just posted in agreement. I am late 40s and married a while. I'm not sure I'd call this "industry standard" but it's not uncommon. At least some kind of physical interaction. When I was dating I had one or two relationships where it was very clear there were substantial physical sparks - which involved making out - but no sex because she didn't want to rush. I actually held off on sex with the last two women I dated (one of whom is DW) for longer than they expected (single digits of dates though). However, it was very clear there were physical sparks and kissing was involved much much sooner.

Kissing isn't at all on any kind of libertine edge culturally and hasn't been for a few generations; if you don't want to kiss by the 2nd date, then either there is no attraction or you are uncomfortable with intimate physical contact for some other reason, either of which is a reason to end the dating as far as I'm concerned.



Or you just want to make sure the man is not an axe murderer or a child molester before you kiss him.

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Seriously if you are not having sex by the third date it's time to move on.


Seriously repeating this over and over isn't going to make everyone do it.

This thread was a question to men. The consensus of men is that by the third date it's time to shit or get off the pot. No one is saying you must have sex by the third date, but most guys will not consider you a serious option. It has never happen to me. If there is no chemistry on the first date, there will be no second date.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BS. People are able to hide
These dark sides for years.

Some people are. Most can only hide it for a couple months before their illness becomes obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Seriously if you are not having sex by the third date it's time to move on.


Seriously repeating this over and over isn't going to make everyone do it.

This thread was a question to men. The consensus of men is that by the third date it's time to shit or get off the pot. No one is saying you must have sex by the third date, but most guys will not consider you a serious option. It has never happen to me. If there is no chemistry on the first date, there will be no second date.

This may be true for some men, but I think most women will tell you this is not true for most men.

[Anonymous]

Yep most men have a lot of options and will not continue to waste time on a lady who clearly is not into them. They may keep you on the back burner, but the competition for a single guy(with the right resume) is fierce. Don't kid yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BS. People are able to hide
These dark sides for years.

Some people are. Most can only hide it for a couple months before their illness becomes obvious.

This may be true, though I think it's much shorter in most cases. In any event, if you are putting off kissing someone for up to three months to wait and see if they are serial killer crazy, then you have some fear/trust issues of your own - that level of suspicion of people who otherwise appear normal and attractive to you at first is telling...about you. As the PP who said by date 2 a kiss is in order, I would definitely not bother with someone who is that fearful or mistrusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep most men have a lot of options and will not continue to waste time on a lady who clearly is not into them. They may keep you on the back burner, but the competition for a single guy(with the right resume) is fierce. Don't kid yourself.

+1000

you may not like to hear it but it's the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep most men have a lot of options and will not continue to waste time on a lady who clearly is not into them. They may keep you on the back burner, but the competition for a single guy(with the right resume) is fierce. Don't kid yourself.

This is not true at all. It is much much harder for a man to get laid than a woman. Any woman, no matter how old, fat, or ugly, can get laid anytime she wants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep most men have a lot of options and will not continue to waste time on a lady who clearly is not into them. They may keep you on the back burner, but the competition for a single guy(with the right resume) is fierce. Don't kid yourself.

This is not true at all. It is much much harder for a man to get laid than a woman. Any woman, no matter how old, fat, or ugly, can get laid anytime she wants.

I think you missed the point of what he was trying to say. We're discussing dating, not one night stands, which desireable men can find as often as they want to as well.

It is fine to not kiss after a second date, as it is clear way to indicate a lack of interest. An aware man would pick up on that cue and know to move along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If she kisses on the second date, I know she is a slut, and not marriage material. I still kiss her, because she might dry hump on the third date, and then on to second base!

So if I had sex on a second date in 1994, am I not "marriage material"? My husband disagrees, because we've been married for 17 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If she kisses on the second date, I know she is a slut, and not marriage material. I still kiss her, because she might dry hump on the third date, and then on to second base!


So if I had sex on a second date in 1994, am I not "marriage material"? My husband disagrees, because we've been married for 17 years.

If you feed the troll....the troll is happy

[Anonymous]

If anything AIDS/STDs have me less interested in early sex than I would've been back in the good old days (70s/early 80s) ... 3rd date rule seems like an arbitrary and kind of skeevy thing.

I've had sex on first dates and also waited til #2 or 3 or 4 but IMO there's something to be said for teasing it out a bit unless all you want is a quick get your rocks off or short term thing.