Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always tried to date 3 men at a time until one is almost certain to propose.

It is such a waste of time to date serially. If you need to break off with one or if they break off with you, it is so much easier when you have two others going. If one does not work out, then you have to start from scratch. So I always dated and been intimate with 3 men at a time. It is small enough number that you can manage to meet with all of them once a week.

Until I was pretty sure that DH was going to propose I was dating two other men. There is no need to talk about exclusivity. It is better not discussed at all.

Your DH proposed when you weren't dating exclusively? What an idiot. Literally a cuck.

He probably didn't know and he just assumed she was being faithful like he was.

I can't imagine what guy would propose to a woman who would only make time for him once a week. OP thinks she was being clever but all she did was dilute the quality of her pool to someone who was, at best, cuck-like.

OP here: there is a lot of other options in between of sleeping with 3 men till one proposes and exclusivity after a few dates.

My question was rather - why men who are not exclusive themselves expect women to be exclusive to them ? So they can f…k multiple chicks without condoms?

And what’s the way around this for a woman. I think I’ll be more secretive without being explicit about seeing other men. Will be saying “out with a friend”, “at a gym” etc. Kind of what all the men are doing

I pretty much gave you this advice before the thread got hijacked. If you aren’t exclusive, if he’s not your boyfriend, he doesn’t really have a right to know details. And if someone pushes, you can turn it into a DTR conversation if you want (“you seem very interested in my whereabouts considering we aren’t exclusive. Should we discuss that?”)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always tried to date 3 men at a time until one is almost certain to propose.

It is such a waste of time to date serially. If you need to break off with one or if they break off with you, it is so much easier when you have two others going. If one does not work out, then you have to start from scratch. So I always dated and been intimate with 3 men at a time. It is small enough number that you can manage to meet with all of them once a week.

Until I was pretty sure that DH was going to propose I was dating two other men. There is no need to talk about exclusivity. It is better not discussed at all.

Your DH proposed when you weren't dating exclusively? What an idiot. Literally a cuck.

He probably didn't know and he just assumed she was being faithful like he was.

I can't imagine what guy would propose to a woman who would only make time for him once a week. OP thinks she was being clever but all she did was dilute the quality of her pool to someone who was, at best, cuck-like.

You would be surprised how many A-type men are actually enjoying being cucks. And even want that ….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always tried to date 3 men at a time until one is almost certain to propose.

It is such a waste of time to date serially. If you need to break off with one or if they break off with you, it is so much easier when you have two others going. If one does not work out, then you have to start from scratch. So I always dated and been intimate with 3 men at a time. It is small enough number that you can manage to meet with all of them once a week.

Until I was pretty sure that DH was going to propose I was dating two other men. There is no need to talk about exclusivity. It is better not discussed at all.

Your DH proposed when you weren't dating exclusively? What an idiot. Literally a cuck.

He probably didn't know and he just assumed she was being faithful like he was.

I can't imagine what guy would propose to a woman who would only make time for him once a week. OP thinks she was being clever but all she did was dilute the quality of her pool to someone who was, at best, cuck-like.

OP here: there is a lot of other options in between of sleeping with 3 men till one proposes and exclusivity after a few dates.

My question was rather - why men who are not exclusive themselves expect women to be exclusive to them ? So they can f…k multiple chicks without condoms?

And what’s the way around this for a woman. I think I’ll be more secretive without being explicit about seeing other men. Will be saying “out with a friend”, “at a gym” etc. Kind of what all the men are doing

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always tried to date 3 men at a time until one is almost certain to propose.

It is such a waste of time to date serially. If you need to break off with one or if they break off with you, it is so much easier when you have two others going. If one does not work out, then you have to start from scratch. So I always dated and been intimate with 3 men at a time. It is small enough number that you can manage to meet with all of them once a week.

Until I was pretty sure that DH was going to propose I was dating two other men. There is no need to talk about exclusivity. It is better not discussed at all.

Your DH proposed when you weren't dating exclusively? What an idiot. Literally a cuck.

He probably didn't know and he just assumed she was being faithful like he was.

I can't imagine what guy would propose to a woman who would only make time for him once a week. OP thinks she was being clever but all she did was dilute the quality of her pool to someone who was, at best, cuck-like.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sleeping with more than one person is totally gross whether you’re male or female. Ewwww

Sleeping with 3 men, one after the other four months each in a year is fine, according to you. But sleeping with the same 3 men interspaced for the same 1 year is somehow wrong! [Yes, totally correct, that is wrong.]

It is so much easier to compare and solidify your choice when you are dating 3 men and you are dumping the lowest ranked choice as soon as you find a better one. This is by far the most efficient and least stressful way compared to the time when I was dating one person at a time.

It's gross and disgusting, and you will find that men have choices, too. The "better ones" are not going to commit to you.

I don't understand what you find gross about this. I am expecting men to do the same thing as well. It simply makes finding compatible partners more efficient.

I think I slept with fewer men than average as a result of dating three men simultaneously. It takes time to really get to know a person, often 2-3 years. There is only a small window between age 24-28 where you can get the best man possible in your life. If you date one at a time, you have a shot at 2-3 at most. Whereas I was able to date 8 men during the same period and got to know them really well.

Were you meeting all of their friends and families as their girlfriend, or getting to the point of engagement without that? Did you pick one to bring to work or other social events, or bring no one, or deal with your coworkers thinking you were weird or cheating? These are things that people who are non-monogamous have to sort out, but they're not things anyone opts into for the reasons you're giving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it so (so) rare to find a man that I’m dying to sleep with that I don’t keep looking once I find one.

As a very fit, pretty woman who is aging well and financially set who isn’t looking for a husband- I take lovers and take them fully meaning I stop looking when I find one I want to spend time with.

So I haven’t experienced the double standard as the men I’ve dated have wanted to be wxclusive and so have I. We test and ditch condoms.

Good for you. I experienced that men continued seeing others even AFTER asking for exclusivity. They would just do it to ditch condoms and get their d..k
wet. I therefore ask for condoms for at least first month AND for STD test

More than Stds, you need to worry about consequences of hereafter

Not really if we are talking about late 40s women. But UTIs, HPV, herpes, ureaplasma etc can be still transmitted months after. Ditching condoms for someone you just met is very risky for women health

The herpes one is especially tricky. Condoms can’t always guard against transmission, especially if the female has an outbreak on her genitals.

Yep, a lot of infected women on the apps with genital herpes. I’m bi so I know from previewing female profiles. And men would do anything to avoid testing; they perform oral sex on women without checking, anal without a protection etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it so (so) rare to find a man that I’m dying to sleep with that I don’t keep looking once I find one.

As a very fit, pretty woman who is aging well and financially set who isn’t looking for a husband- I take lovers and take them fully meaning I stop looking when I find one I want to spend time with.

So I haven’t experienced the double standard as the men I’ve dated have wanted to be wxclusive and so have I. We test and ditch condoms.

Good for you. I experienced that men continued seeing others even AFTER asking for exclusivity. They would just do it to ditch condoms and get their d..k
wet. I therefore ask for condoms for at least first month AND for STD test

More than Stds, you need to worry about consequences of hereafter

Not really if we are talking about late 40s women. But UTIs, HPV, herpes, ureaplasma etc can be still transmitted months after. Ditching condoms for someone you just met is very risky for women health

The herpes one is especially tricky. Condoms can’t always guard against transmission, especially if the female has an outbreak on her genitals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sleeping with more than one person is totally gross whether you’re male or female. Ewwww

Sleeping with 3 men, one after the other four months each in a year is fine, according to you. But sleeping with the same 3 men interspaced for the same 1 year is somehow wrong! [Yes, totally correct, that is wrong.]

It is so much easier to compare and solidify your choice when you are dating 3 men and you are dumping the lowest ranked choice as soon as you find a better one. This is by far the most efficient and least stressful way compared to the time when I was dating one person at a time.

It's gross and disgusting, and you will find that men have choices, too. The "better ones" are not going to commit to you.

I don't understand what you find gross about this. I am expecting men to do the same thing as well. It simply makes finding compatible partners more efficient.

I think I slept with fewer men than average as a result of dating three men simultaneously. It takes time to really get to know a person, often 2-3 years. There is only a small window between age 24-28 where you can get the best man possible in your life. If you date one at a time, you have a shot at 2-3 at most. Whereas I was able to date 8 men during the same period and got to know them really well.

I’m a proponent of starting it non-exclusive, but it puzzles me how you were able to navigate the logistics with all 3 in these 2-3years ? Didn’t they know where you had been, asked questions? Knew each other ? Why you were refusing exclusivity with one of them ? Because none of the men wanted it, or you wanted to sleep with others ? Usually to get to know someone young people start spending a lot of dats together - for example, stay at their respective places overnight Thursday through Sunday. You never wanted to spend as much time with one person, to get to know them, let’s say, in 3 months ? I can’t imagine the logistics of bringing my cosmetics to 3 different men’s places 3 days each week. Or were they long distance relationships so you only saw them when in town ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sleeping with more than one person is totally gross whether you’re male or female. Ewwww

Sleeping with 3 men, one after the other four months each in a year is fine, according to you. But sleeping with the same 3 men interspaced for the same 1 year is somehow wrong! [Yes, totally correct, that is wrong.]

It is so much easier to compare and solidify your choice when you are dating 3 men and you are dumping the lowest ranked choice as soon as you find a better one. This is by far the most efficient and least stressful way compared to the time when I was dating one person at a time.

It's gross and disgusting, and you will find that men have choices, too. The "better ones" are not going to commit to you.

I don't understand what you find gross about this. I am expecting men to do the same thing as well. It simply makes finding compatible partners more efficient.

I think I slept with fewer men than average as a result of dating three men simultaneously. It takes time to really get to know a person, often 2-3 years. There is only a small window between age 24-28 where you can get the best man possible in your life. If you date one at a time, you have a shot at 2-3 at most. Whereas I was able to date 8 men during the same period and got to know them really well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't sleep with more than one man at a time.

And I don't sleep with a man unless he agrees to be exclusive with me and has shown me std testing.

A man might sleep with a woman whose sleeping around...but he's unlikely to marry her.

Ok he’ll br exclusive with you. For 2 weeks. So he can ditch condoms. And he’ll he still sleeping with others. This is what men do

+1

The holier than thou attitude of women who “insist on inclusivity.”

Yeah, that’s a great idea, in theory.

He’ll just agree and cheat on you.

Make sure you are interesting, have your own life, and are good in bed. Take care of yourself. That’s what keeps them interested. Not a pledge to someone when he has a blue b*lls.

Agree: I am not relying on my "gut feeling" when it gets to my health and safety. There are nice, honest men out there, but also many players. I am not ditching condoms unless he's really present in my life for a long time, I feel that he cares for me as a person and not just interested in sex

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't sleep with more than one man at a time.

And I don't sleep with a man unless he agrees to be exclusive with me and has shown me std testing.

A man might sleep with a woman whose sleeping around...but he's unlikely to marry her.

Ok he’ll br exclusive with you. For 2 weeks. So he can ditch condoms. And he’ll he still sleeping with others. This is what men do

+1

The holier than thou attitude of women who “insist on inclusivity.”

Yeah, that’s a great idea, in theory.

He’ll just agree and cheat on you.

Make sure you are interesting, have your own life, and are good in bed. Take care of yourself. That’s what keeps them interested. Not a pledge to someone when he has a blue b*lls.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men are so fragile, most of them. If they could handle the truth, you could be honest. They had integrity themselves, you could be honest. But you can’t, because obviously they want to pretend you’re a virgin while they go whoring around.

If you are having sex outside of marriage then you are whoring around. Doesn’t matter if it’s with one person or more than one. Sex outside marriage is a huge sin

Thanks for the newsflash from the 1950s. Oh, wait, no. No, it never was a huge sin! Or a sin at all!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sleeping with more than one person is totally gross whether you’re male or female. Ewwww

Sleeping with 3 men, one after the other four months each in a year is fine, according to you. But sleeping with the same 3 men interspaced for the same 1 year is somehow wrong!

It is so much easier to compare and solidify your choice when you are dating 3 men and you are dumping the lowest ranked choice as soon as you find a better one. This is by far the most efficient and least stressful way compared to the time when I was dating one person at a time.

My grandmother who was born in 1907 and died a long time ago was always saying “a single woman should have 3 lovers”! She married twice, and did well both times. Lived with her second husband, my grand father, till he died.

Yes, that was my principle when single. A pair and a spare. Keeps you from fixating on any of them inappropriately.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always tried to date 3 men at a time until one is almost certain to propose.

It is such a waste of time to date serially. If you need to break off with one or if they break off with you, it is so much easier when you have two others going. If one does not work out, then you have to start from scratch. So I always dated and been intimate with 3 men at a time. It is small enough number that you can manage to meet with all of them once a week.

Until I was pretty sure that DH was going to propose I was dating two other men. There is no need to talk about exclusivity. It is better not discussed at all.

Your DH proposed when you weren't dating exclusively? What an idiot. Literally a cuck.

I’m not PP, but both myself and many women I know wasted years on men who said they’d propose and never did. With my ex, I told him I was dating for marriage and he agreed, I waited 2 years for a ring, pressured him for an additional year (and he kept promising “it’s coming soon!”) then finally broke up. 3 years of my life wasted.

I think it’s very smart for women to continue dating other men until engaged. Even if you give a man a 2 year deadline, by that point you’re extremely emotionally entangled and it’s hard to just end things. Better to keep your options open and not get attached to one person.

Yes, in all these 19th century novels women had several suitors and were going out with all of them freely until one proposes.

They weren't having sex though. In fact, having sex with even ONE man before marriage would be unacceptable unless it immediately resulted in marriage (if necessary, at gunpoint). A woman who had sex with three men would be a social outcast, thrown out into the street to starve or work in a brothel.

Actually, the number of children born out of wedlock was exactly the same in 19th century as it is now. And number of kids born less than 9 months from the wedding date. There was a research done in UK based on birth records: women had sex before marriage just the same.

I’d like to see the citation for that.

I have more for you: French revolutionary thinkers supported the idea of free sex choices for women. So did the communists in USSR: the concept of “liberated Soviet woman” is well known. The state propaganda was targeted at women education, sports and career achievements rather than marriage.

https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/atc/1724.html


https://monthlyreview.org/2020/02/01/sex-and-socialism/

You said: “ Actually, the number of children born out of wedlock was exactly the same in 19th century as it is now.”

Where is the citation for that?

I will correct that to “conceived out of wedlock”. There was indeed a UK study by church birth records that showed babies were born way earlier than they should be if sex was had after marriage

Kind of a big error in thought and argument.

Since a lot of babies were born out of wedlock (registered marriages and birth records were the prerogative of middle and upset class) , the magnitude of sex outside marriage is even larger. It’s just impossible to assess as there are no comparable records to analyze all births against marriages

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always tried to date 3 men at a time until one is almost certain to propose.

It is such a waste of time to date serially. If you need to break off with one or if they break off with you, it is so much easier when you have two others going. If one does not work out, then you have to start from scratch. So I always dated and been intimate with 3 men at a time. It is small enough number that you can manage to meet with all of them once a week.

Until I was pretty sure that DH was going to propose I was dating two other men. There is no need to talk about exclusivity. It is better not discussed at all.

Your DH proposed when you weren't dating exclusively? What an idiot. Literally a cuck.

I’m not PP, but both myself and many women I know wasted years on men who said they’d propose and never did. With my ex, I told him I was dating for marriage and he agreed, I waited 2 years for a ring, pressured him for an additional year (and he kept promising “it’s coming soon!”) then finally broke up. 3 years of my life wasted.

I think it’s very smart for women to continue dating other men until engaged. Even if you give a man a 2 year deadline, by that point you’re extremely emotionally entangled and it’s hard to just end things. Better to keep your options open and not get attached to one person.

Yes, in all these 19th century novels women had several suitors and were going out with all of them freely until one proposes.

They weren't having sex though. In fact, having sex with even ONE man before marriage would be unacceptable unless it immediately resulted in marriage (if necessary, at gunpoint). A woman who had sex with three men would be a social outcast, thrown out into the street to starve or work in a brothel.

Actually, the number of children born out of wedlock was exactly the same in 19th century as it is now. And number of kids born less than 9 months from the wedding date. There was a research done in UK based on birth records: women had sex before marriage just the same.

I’d like to see the citation for that.

I have more for you: French revolutionary thinkers supported the idea of free sex choices for women. So did the communists in USSR: the concept of “liberated Soviet woman” is well known. The state propaganda was targeted at women education, sports and career achievements rather than marriage.

https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/atc/1724.html


https://monthlyreview.org/2020/02/01/sex-and-socialism/

You said: “ Actually, the number of children born out of wedlock was exactly the same in 19th century as it is now.”

Where is the citation for that?

I will correct that to “conceived out of wedlock”. There was indeed a UK study by church birth records that showed babies were born way earlier than they should be if sex was had after marriage

Kind of a big error in thought and argument.

Not really, “testing the suitors” was real. And some of those babies probably were not fathered by the husbands…. Just sayin.