Anonymous wrote:Women who are responsible and level-headed know that there are dangers associated with having sex with strangers. A woman who will sleep with someone she just met is likely to be impulsive, attention-seeking, and needy. It's not about libido. I would worry equally about a woman who's really into walking down dark alleys at night or riding a motorcycle without a helmet.

Anonymous wrote:I am a guy. I hate the term "Good Girl" when describing women.

A good girl is the 10 yo who does the dishes.

Anonymous wrote:Female here (married, so not asking for myself, just curious). In my circle of friends, a guy has just started dating a woman. While talking about her with us, the guys agreed that it's a bit concerning that she has invited him over to her place because that's slutty, but she hasn't yet slept with (or even kissed) him which is a very good sign. General consensus is that any girl who would sleep with a guy within the first few dates isn't dating material, and that ideally they should wait anywhere form a few weeks to a few months.

Now, maybe my logic is flawed, but to me it seems like if you will only date women who can go without sex for several weeks, you end up with a girlfriend or wife who can go without sex for several weeks. And surprise, most of these guys I know who are with "good girls" are also unhappy in sexless LTR/marriages.

So I'm trying to understand the appeal of a woman who really isn't that into sex. To me, if you want an exciting sex life while married, you should go for women who are eager for it, rather than the mythical Madonna-like woman who has zero interest in men until you come along. Not saying that women who are sleeping around with multiple people are ideal (I wouldn't date a man like that), but if the chemistry and attraction are there, what's wrong with a woman who wants to enjoy sex early on? Why does that automatically exclude a woman from being taken seriously?

She'll be eager to have sex with him once the relationship is established.

Anonymous wrote:Female here (married, so not asking for myself, just curious). In my circle of friends, a guy has just started dating a woman. While talking about her with us, the guys agreed that it's a bit concerning that she has invited him over to her place because that's slutty, but she hasn't yet slept with (or even kissed) him which is a very good sign. General consensus is that any girl who would sleep with a guy within the first few dates isn't dating material, and that ideally they should wait anywhere form a few weeks to a few months.

Now, maybe my logic is flawed, but to me it seems like if you will only date women who can go without sex for several weeks, you end up with a girlfriend or wife who can go without sex for several weeks. And surprise, most of these guys I know who are with "good girls" are also unhappy in sexless LTR/marriages.

So I'm trying to understand the appeal of a woman who really isn't that into sex. To me, if you want an exciting sex life while married, you should go for women who are eager for it, rather than the mythical Madonna-like woman who has zero interest in men until you come along. Not saying that women who are sleeping around with multiple people are ideal (I wouldn't date a man like that), but if the chemistry and attraction are there, what's wrong with a woman who wants to enjoy sex early on? Why does that automatically exclude a woman from being taken seriously?

Anonymous wrote:I'm a good girl and very into sex with DH, and other serious boyfriends I've had, but not into sex with guys I don't know well. Just for me, unless I already knew a date fairly well through real life (from work, through a group of friends, a volunteer activity), I would not feel relaxed and turned on by them enough by the 3rd date to have sex with them. If someone else enjoys sex with people earlier, that's totally fine as well. But I don't think your correlation between "won't put out early" and "doesn't like sex" is correct at all.

Anonymous wrote:Female here (married, so not asking for myself, just curious). In my circle of friends, a guy has just started dating a woman. While talking about her with us, the guys agreed that it's a bit concerning that she has invited him over to her place because that's slutty, but she hasn't yet slept with (or even kissed) him which is a very good sign. General consensus is that any girl who would sleep with a guy within the first few dates isn't dating material, and that ideally they should wait anywhere form a few weeks to a few months.

Now, maybe my logic is flawed, but to me it seems like if you will only date women who can go without sex for several weeks, you end up with a girlfriend or wife who can go without sex for several weeks. And surprise, most of these guys I know who are with "good girls" are also unhappy in sexless LTR/marriages.

So I'm trying to understand the appeal of a woman who really isn't that into sex. To me, if you want an exciting sex life while married, you should go for women who are eager for it, rather than the mythical Madonna-like woman who has zero interest in men until you come along. Not saying that women who are sleeping around with multiple people are ideal (I wouldn't date a man like that), but if the chemistry and attraction are there, what's wrong with a woman who wants to enjoy sex early on? Why does that automatically exclude a woman from being taken seriously?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

General consensus is that any girl who would sleep with a guy within the first few dates isn't dating material, and that ideally they should wait anywhere form a few weeks to a few months.

I don't know any guys who think like that. General consensus is, if she doesn't put out by the third date, she is wasting your time and you should move on.

Yeah, are these guys gay? My wife and I were very busy by the third date.

Think of all the other guys she was busy with by the third date. Or do you think you were special?
Enjoy your HPV and herpes.

Anonymous wrote:Female here (married, so not asking for myself, just curious). In my circle of friends, a guy has just started dating a woman. While talking about her with us, the guys agreed that it's a bit concerning that she has invited him over to her place because that's slutty, but she hasn't yet slept with (or even kissed) him which is a very good sign. General consensus is that any girl who would sleep with a guy within the first few dates isn't dating material, and that ideally they should wait anywhere form a few weeks to a few months.

Now, maybe my logic is flawed, but to me it seems like if you will only date women who can go without sex for several weeks, you end up with a girlfriend or wife who can go without sex for several weeks. And surprise, most of these guys I know who are with "good girls" are also unhappy in sexless LTR/marriages.

So I'm trying to understand the appeal of a woman who really isn't that into sex. To me, if you want an exciting sex life while married, you should go for women who are eager for it, rather than the mythical Madonna-like woman who has zero interest in men until you come along. Not saying that women who are sleeping around with multiple people are ideal (I wouldn't date a man like that), but if the chemistry and attraction are there, what's wrong with a woman who wants to enjoy sex early on? Why does that automatically exclude a woman from being taken seriously?