Anonymous wrote:His body, his choice.

/end thread

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has so many messy af women in it... If you flip the genders, you'd be screaming about how rapey he was for trying to force her into something he didn't want, and how scummy it was of him to blame her, armchair psychoanalyze her, label her an addict or a zealot or both...

Y'all need to learn to center your own agency so that when someone gives you facts you don't like about what they will/won't do in a relationship, you cut your losses and leave instead of wasting your time trying to "figure him out". He said what he said. If it's not for you, it's not for you.

It's. Not. That. Deep.

He admitted to being an addict.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH here. Is third base OK?

I wasn’t a wait until marriage type, but as it happened, the first girl I went all the way with was the one I married.

Still good after more than a decade.

No sex at all. We haven’t even seen each other naked. He doesn’t want any kind of sex. Only kissing. Not even touching.

This makes no sense.

And the reason is not religious or respect- based, but because he previously was a sex addict and/or porn addict and wants to avoid going on a bender again.

Yikes and yikes and yikes.

Bro, this isn't "yikes". It's not for you, and it doesn't sound like it's for OP either, but it's not "yikes" to have limits and clearly express them.

Lotta rape culture evident on this thread.

WTF? It’s “rapey” to want to have an intimate, sexual relationship with your partner? You are off.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has so many messy af women in it... If you flip the genders, you'd be screaming about how rapey he was for trying to force her into something he didn't want, and how scummy it was of him to blame her, armchair psychoanalyze her, label her an addict or a zealot or both...

Y'all need to learn to center your own agency so that when someone gives you facts you don't like about what they will/won't do in a relationship, you cut your losses and leave instead of wasting your time trying to "figure him out". He said what he said. If it's not for you, it's not for you.

It's. Not. That. Deep.

R u still talking about how he said he is celibate?

Or r u talking about how he was a long term sex addict, alcoholic and has had STD scares?

Which ones you minimizing Pp?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has so many messy af women in it... If you flip the genders, you'd be screaming about how rapey he was for trying to force her into something he didn't want, and how scummy it was of him to blame her, armchair psychoanalyze her, label her an addict or a zealot or both...

Y'all need to learn to center your own agency so that when someone gives you facts you don't like about what they will/won't do in a relationship, you cut your losses and leave instead of wasting your time trying to "figure him out". He said what he said. If it's not for you, it's not for you.

It's. Not. That. Deep.

No, the guy is an absolute creep, and women are just helping OP realize that fact.

What's creepy about him saying no? What's creepy about him clearly and honestly communicating his boundaries, directly to her?

That she doesn't like it doesn't make it creepy. That he understands why he drew that boundary doesn't make it creepy.

What's "creepy" is all y'all acting like all men owe you dick on demand, and it's creepy to want to wait. That's creepy af.

Troll sock puppet op again

Anonymous wrote:This thread has so many messy af women in it... If you flip the genders, you'd be screaming about how rapey he was for trying to force her into something he didn't want, and how scummy it was of him to blame her, armchair psychoanalyze her, label her an addict or a zealot or both...

Y'all need to learn to center your own agency so that when someone gives you facts you don't like about what they will/won't do in a relationship, you cut your losses and leave instead of wasting your time trying to "figure him out". He said what he said. If it's not for you, it's not for you.

It's. Not. That. Deep.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If sex is off the table until after marriage, couldn’t you just do anal for now? It works well for many religious couples.

Lol. Like the lot religious peeps

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH here. Is third base OK?

I wasn’t a wait until marriage type, but as it happened, the first girl I went all the way with was the one I married.

Still good after more than a decade.

No sex at all. We haven’t even seen each other naked. He doesn’t want any kind of sex. Only kissing. Not even touching.

This makes no sense.

And the reason is not religious or respect- based, but because he previously was a sex addict and/or porn addict and wants to avoid going on a bender again.

Yikes and yikes and yikes.

Bro, this isn't "yikes". It's not for you, and it doesn't sound like it's for OP either, but it's not "yikes" to have limits and clearly express them.

Lotta rape culture evident on this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe he is gay and just scared to admit it?

He is not gay. He said he used sex a lot as an escape and decided he would celibate until marriage.

wtf OP troll.

What was he escaping from?

How much sex was he previously having, and with whom?

When did this celibacy thing start?

I’m not a troll.

To answer your questions

He said he used sex an escape. When he was happy, bored, or stressed. He slept with a lot of random women. Lots of one night stands and casual sex. He’s cheated. He even slept with married women in the past. He said his body count is 100+. He just did it because it was there.

He had a std scare and that whipped him into shape. Then a family loss. He decided he didn’t want to live his life like that. He decided he wanted to wait for marriage because he made a choice to reserve sex the way god intended. He wants to be in love and do it the right away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This would be an absolute no for me (female). I’ve only slept with 3 people in my life (including DH) but there was no chance I was committing to someone for life w/o sleeping with them (we’ve been happily married for 28 years). People who do this either have:

Religious baggage
Issues with sex

Nope

Most people don't view religion as "baggage".

As someone raised in a puritanical religion, I had a lot of baggage around sex that I had to work through to have a healthy relationship with my husband.

Most religious people aren't raised in a "puritanical" (whatever that means, nowadays) sect.

- except Islam.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has so many messy af women in it... If you flip the genders, you'd be screaming about how rapey he was for trying to force her into something he didn't want, and how scummy it was of him to blame her, armchair psychoanalyze her, label her an addict or a zealot or both...

Y'all need to learn to center your own agency so that when someone gives you facts you don't like about what they will/won't do in a relationship, you cut your losses and leave instead of wasting your time trying to "figure him out". He said what he said. If it's not for you, it's not for you.

It's. Not. That. Deep.

No, the guy is an absolute creep, and women are just helping OP realize that fact.

What's creepy about him saying no? What's creepy about him clearly and honestly communicating his boundaries, directly to her?

That she doesn't like it doesn't make it creepy. That he understands why he drew that boundary doesn't make it creepy.

What's "creepy" is all y'all acting like all men owe you dick on demand, and it's creepy to want to wait. That's creepy af.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there other things you can do without PIV or is all that off the table? Intimacy and pleasure can be had/felt without sex.

Nothing besides kissing. He has found Christ as he says and decided sex is off the table. He doesn’t want to rush marriage because he doesn’t believe in divorce. He wants to make sure he is 100% compatible with whomever he marries.

100% compatibility includes intimacy and pleasure, even if it doesn’t involve PIV.

He’s testing you to see how controllable you are.

Anonymous wrote:This thread has so many messy af women in it... If you flip the genders, you'd be screaming about how rapey he was for trying to force her into something he didn't want, and how scummy it was of him to blame her, armchair psychoanalyze her, label her an addict or a zealot or both...

Y'all need to learn to center your own agency so that when someone gives you facts you don't like about what they will/won't do in a relationship, you cut your losses and leave instead of wasting your time trying to "figure him out". He said what he said. If it's not for you, it's not for you.

It's. Not. That. Deep.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Move on. He's told you he's an addict.

Move on to what? The person you get is usually the best you can do. It's this one, or someone similar, or reconsider a past dealbreaker (wealth, height , gender, age, whatever) or no one.