Sexclusivity: Why Women Should Make Men Wait for Sex

loveu-podcast-episode-43

Holding out for sex is not about holding out until marriage, tricking him into a relationship or trying to keep him around. On the contrary, it’s about taking enough time to assess whether your guy is truly boyfriend-worthy rather than sex-worthy. Tune in to this important Love U Podcast to ensure you never get “used” by a man for sex ever again.

More on why women should make men wait for sex.

Click here to sign up for my Love U 2-week free trial.


Watch: YouTube

Enjoy the podcast? Please leave a short review on iTunes by clicking “View in iTunes” and then “Ratings and Reviews.”

Join our conversation (198 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.

Comments:

  1. 1
    KK

    I don’t see how anyone could disagree with this.

    Around the 22:00 mark, where Evan throws up his hands and says, “Okay, embrace your feminine wholeness. What do you want from me”? LOL. Made me giggle. 🙂

    1. 1.1
      Michelle H.

      That made me laugh out loud, too!  It was perfect.

  2. 2
    Deb M.

    Evan, thank you for caring…by reminding us to love ourselves and why we are worth it. It’s about attaining that ‘quality’ we all want when we are looking for lasting love. We all want someone who will love us for us. This advice helps determine that.

  3. 3
    Marcie

    SUCH solid advice! I have been back and forth with this myself, and casual sex NEVER feels good  when you don’t hear from him or it’s just a lame texting thing (which is most of the time). Btw, Evan’s show on texting was another solid piece of advice. I simply cannot be a throw-away woman, it’s not in alignment with who I am (no matter how absolutely sex-starved I am). Having sex too soon establishes you (in his mind) as something he didn’t have to earn or work for. It shows him that your self-worth is low.

    I’ve thought a lot about this and come to realize that so often what I’m really wanting is touching, closeness, maybe kissing NOT sex. It can be hard to differentiate (much like dehydration and real hunger feel similar in my line of work as a breakthrough health mentor) but it’s totally different. Humans (and especially women) NEED to be touched. We need reminders that we are appealing and desirable. We confuse these needs with our sexual needs (which are part of the equation too).

    So I am trying to really tune into the difference, and let myself flirt and have some touching or even kissing without it going any further (and then regretting it).

    And then there’s the whole trap of stopping the emotional growth of a relationship because physical intimacy gives a false sense of knowing someone. Without the allure of sex, it seems like for a man the motivation to know who you are is really dampened.

    I love your practical insights and advice, Evan!

  4. 4
    Kitty

    I agree with making a guy wait (though its can a mental torture when you’re horny as hell), but does it have to be until he’s your boyfriend? The turning over in the morning to know that he’s yours his great. I made a few guys wait 3 weeks to a month but that was because I wasn’t ready (all in my early 20’s), though I had some turmoil with them I guess..they didn’t ask for exclusivity until like 6 months of dating. One guy kept saying he didn’t want a girlfriend and it wasn’t until we were apart over the Christmas holidays that he wanted to be my boyfriend. I’d been sleeping with him on off for 2 months.

  5. 5
    Nissa

     
    I’m with Evan on this one. He’s not judging women for having sex. He’s not promising a guarantee. But it’s a good rule of thumb for discovering character.
     
    Three things this brought up. One, I think men have an idea about ‘investing’ in a relationship that women don’t see or understand. I don’t think women get that if a man is not emotionally invested, he won’t see it as a relationship, no matter how much time you spend together or if you are having sex. It’s an utterly different thing. I don’t think women think like this. In general, for a woman, if you are having intimacy or having sex, it’s a relationship. This why women’s feelings tend to get hurt even when the guy “hasn’t promised anything”. It’s because in spite of no promises, the woman already saw it as a relationship.
     
    Two, if someone offers a great deal of something right away (whether it’s help, cash, a marriage proposal or sex), it can’t possibly be related to the person to whom they are offering it. It takes time to get to know someone. So those offers are inherently a self-serving behavior. I’d imagine that’s a turn off for most people.
     
    Three, what constitutes intimacy? Evan is sort of (and reasonably so) using intercourse as the general stopping point of “too much physical intimacy to share with a non-boyfriend”. I’m just pretty sure that that’s not MY personal stopping point. Oral sex still feels pretty dang intimate to me. So does being naked in general. On the other hand, we share intimacy of hugs, kisses and touch with many non-partner people in our lives. I’d guess the personal “stopping point” may be somewhere on a spectrum. I’d say it’s worth the time for each of us to locate our personal stopping point, before we reach that awkward moment.
     

  6. 6
    Henriette

    I’d love to hear from some of our male posters, on this topic.

    1. 6.1
      Chance

      I think Evan’s podcast was near-perfect, but I don’t think that I agree with the nature of some of the comments on this thread.  The only thing that I would emphasize is that women should ensure that they understand the trade-offs before making their choice.  If a woman opts for “sexclusivity”, then she significantly reduces her probability of being disappointed, but she also reduces her pool of potential suitors, which are primarily the men who have the most options (i.e., the men whom women inherently desire the most).  A woman is obviously taking more of a risk if she chooses the alternative, but she also maximizes her pool of potential suitors.

       

      As I have indicated above, I think the primary driver that dictates whether or not a man is willing to wait for sex is his amount of options.  I don’t really think it has anything to do with his character.  As it relates to the men who choose to walk away, there are some with good character, bad character, and everything in between.  Same with the pool of men who are willing to wait.  A woman’s value to a man beyond the sexual generally manifests after she has been sexual so there is a distinct possibility that a number of the men who choose to walk away could have actually been excellent partners in the long run.

      1. 6.1.1
        CaliforniaGirl

        I think Evan’s point is that women will reduce the amount of potential heartbreak and disappointment if they wait to have sex after a guy has committed. That a guy who is really interested will wait and there are less chances that he will disappear. I think each woman should choose what works the best for her and if she is constantly disappointed and heartbroken, she should change her tactics and Evan is just offering the tactic that works best for majority of women.

        I never waited for commitment to have sex, all my serious relationships, including marriage, started with sex on a second or third date and I just enjoyed knowing the guy for the next few months and you can always see if he is serious about you or not. And if he disappears, well, life happens, I had a good time, new experiences and new feelings. Usually, from my experience, if you are in a good mood, laughing, listening to him, feminine and soft, men will not disappear that much and if they do, you know that you were the best yourself and there is nothing you can do.

        Evan’s “No man is real until he is your boyfriend” is exactly what every woman should carve in her brain and repeat it to herself  every time she starts to overthink the situation. And even when he is your boyfriend, he can break up with you any time. There is nothing permanent in life and if you live it just enjoying the ride, being thankful for new experiences and emotions, thinking that there are some women who don’t get men’s attention at all, stuck in bad marriages or relationships but you are single, independent and free and have options and possibilities? What can be better than that?

        1. Chance

          “I think Evan’s point is that women will reduce the amount of potential heartbreak and disappointment if they wait to have sex after a guy has committed. That a guy who is really interested will wait and there are less chances that he will disappear. I think each woman should choose what works the best for her and if she is constantly disappointed and heartbroken, she should change her tactics and Evan is just offering the tactic that works best for majority of women.”

           

          Agreed.  That is actually what I am getting at.  However, men who have multiple options are less likely to become fixated on one particular target, and as a result, are more likely to walk away from a woman who prefers to wait until she is exclusive to have sex.  Neither party is wrong in their choices.  I am just emphasizing that there is a price associated with each choice a woman makes (sexclusivity = less return potential, non-sexclusivity = greater risk of disappointment).

        2. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          However, men who have multiple options are less likely to become fixated on one particular target

          If a woman becomes fixated on one particular target, it doesn’t mean she doesn’t have options. It means that’s the option she wants, and the others pale by comparison. Instead of grabbing at the lesser options, she may wait until another really great option shows up. The likelihood she would have 3 great options of equal value show up at one time is low.

        3. Chance

          Hi Emily,

           

          I agree with you, but men and women are not the same in this regard.  I don’t think men are biologically wired to be nearly as heavily invested in ensuring that they have identified the best possible mate early on in the “dance”.  For men, I would argue that the best possible mate can be discovered through liberal sampling and observing how these women behave over an extended period of time.

      2. 6.1.2
        Emily, the original

        Chance,

        I think the primary driver that dictates whether or not a man is willing to wait for sex is his amount of options.

        What does that mean, exactly, “his amount of options”? That after breaking off things with one woman because she’s making you wait for sex, you have at least one other woman in your life who is definitively, unequivocally down to do it? Because if “having options” means there are other women you could ask out, you have no idea if they’ll say yes to either a date or to sex.

        1. Fromkin

          Yes, it might be better to start from scratch if the woman the guy is dating has taken an apparent vow of chastity. It also might be better to enjoy peace and quiet alone, if there’s no sex as a glue.

        2. Sum Guy

          True.

          As an older guy (50) with many options; let me put it this way, I don’t need to e-mail women on dating sites (although I do) as plenty of hot and interesting women my age, and even those younger (that’s under 40 to me), e-mail me.  I’ll be honest, I’m flattered by the younger ones but the few dates I’ve had with those under 40 felt no intellectual connection to, so didn’t even try to sleep with them, even when it looked very possible.

          Yes, what I am really after is a connection, not just sex.  I will happily wait for sex if I feel that connection could be there; someone who could be a true partner and companion in my life.  What that entails, however, is she needs to take me out and woo me as much as I take her out and woo her.

        3. Chance

          Hi Emily,

           

          “What does that mean, exactly, “his amount of options”? That after breaking off things with one woman because she’s making you wait for sex, you have at least one other woman in your life who is definitively, unequivocally down to do it?”

           

          Pretty much.  When I was dating, I was often dating multiple women simultaneously.  If one option preferred to wait, it was pretty easy to have sex with another option.

           

        4. Emily, the original

          Hi Chance,

          When I was dating, I was often dating multiple women simultaneously.  If one option preferred to wait, it was pretty easy to have sex with another option.

          That sounds like casual dating  ??   That you hadn’t narrowed it down to someone you really liked? For me, I identity who I like really like pretty early on in the process. If that person doesn’t like me, I may hook up with another option I’m not as interested in, but I keep that pretty casual and short-lived …  But I haven’t done that in about 2  1/2 years because, in all honesty, once you get in the room with someone you are half-interested in, the experience isn’t all that great.

      3. 6.1.3
        Henriette

        Thanks for answering, @Chance.  I understand what you’re saying, but I’m not sure I’ve seen it play out like that in real life.  I know some “high value” men who have many options when it comes to women.  Since sex with attractive females is fairly easy for them to get whenever they want, they don’t mind waiting around a reasonable amount of time for a woman who actually interests them.  Of course, they need to know she’s taking things slow not as a rejection of him but because she’s a bit selective, and they won’t wait around forever (who would?!)  If anything, it’s the “lower value” guys who tend to push for sex faster and leave if they don’t get it quickly, bc they’re a bit desperate.  Just my own experience and observation… I thank you for sharing yours, too 🙂

        1. KK

          Henriette said,

          “If anything, it’s the “lower value” guys who tend to push for sex faster and leave if they don’t get it quickly, bc they’re a bit desperate”.

          Yep.

        2. Shaukat

          “If anything, it’s the “lower value” guys who tend to push for sex faster and leave if they don’t get it quickly, bc they’re a bit desperate”.

          Not at all true. In fact, ‘lower value’ desperate guys are often so grateful just to get attention from a semi-attractive woman, they’d likely be content with a hug and a kiss on the cheek for months without pushing for sex.

          It’s true that the ‘high value’ guys will wait (a reasonable amount of time) for sex with a woman they’re very interested in, but that decision is independent from how they act with other women who they don’t view as having anything to offer apart from sex. In other words, if a man pushed for sex quickly and then walks away when he’s told she requires commitment first, it’s not because he’s desperate. It’s because he probably considers her to be boring or unattractive in every other capacity and doesn’t want a relationship with her.

          In fact, it’s interesting to read comments by posters like Stacy2 stating that “men are the shallower gender”, etc, when she states elsewhere that it’s very expensive to date her, that men must meet her income threshold, that a man being friends with an ex or having a picture somewhere of her is a deal breaker, and on and on. Then she scratches her head wondering why all her relationships fail.

          Also, women don’t care  ‘about how smart, accomplished, brainy, educated, athletic, and overall amazing’ a man is either, unless he passes her looks/chemistry test. All those things listed are just icing on the cake for both men and women. As Henriette stated, neither gender really has the monopoly on shallowness.

        3. Shaukat

          “If anything, it’s the “lower value” guys who tend to push for sex faster and leave if they don’t get it quickly, bc they’re a bit desperate”.

          Not at all true. In fact, ‘lower value’ desperate guys are often so grateful just to get attention from a semi-attractive woman, they’d likely be content with a hug and a kiss on the cheek for months without pushing for sex.

          It’s true that the ‘high value’ guys will wait (a reasonable amount of time) for sex with a woman they’re very interested in, but that decision is independent from how they act with other women who they don’t view as having anything to offer apart from sex. In other words, if a man pushed for sex quickly and then walks away when he’s told she requires commitment first, it’s not because he’s desperate. It’s because he probably considers her to be boring or unattractive in every other capacity and doesn’t want a relationship with her.

          In fact, it’s interesting to read comments by posters like Stacy2 stating that “men are the shallower gender”, etc, when she states elsewhere that it’s very expensive to date her, that men must meet her income threshold, that a man being friends with an ex or having a picture somewhere of her is a deal breaker, and on and on. Then she scratches her head wondering why all her relationships fail.

          Also, women don’t care  ‘about how smart, accomplished, brainy, educated, athletic, and overall amazing’ a man is either, unless he passes her looks/chemistry test. All those things listed are just icing on the cake for both men and women. As Henriette stated, neither gender really has the monopoly on shallowness.

        4. Emily, the original

          Shaukat,

          In other words, if a man pushed for sex quickly and then walks away when he’s told she requires commitment first … it’s because he probably considers her to be boring or unattractive in every other capacity and doesn’t want a relationship with her.

          Just out of curiosity, how many dates will a man go on before he gives up if all he wanted was sex? To me, if I make it to a third or fourth date with someone, things are going really well. Meaning, I really like the man. I’m not going to continue to go on dates with someone just to have sex. If sex was my only motivation, I would have thrown the option out a lot earlier in the process.

        5. Stacy2

          Shaukat:

          Also, women don’t care  ‘about how smart, accomplished, brainy, educated, athletic, and overall amazing’ a man is either, unless he passes her looks/chemistry test.

          You are failing to see the forest through the trees here. Ask yourself what are the components of “chemistry” ? For women, chemistry IS how “smart, accomplished, brainy. educated, athletic” the guy is. Or at least this is the biggest component of female “chemistry”. For men its “does she have big boobs” or something. That is their “chemistry”. I can’t help but quote Whitney Cummings on this subject who put it perfectly. Isn’t it interesting that to this day the only people who can get away with telling the truth are the comedians? Anyway:
          Cause you remember there was a rumor going around for a while that men like strong women? People would say that. They’d be like, “Men like strong women. Men like independent, strong women.” Yeah, no they don’t. Okay, I’ve seen porn. Men like Asian schoolgirls with duct tape over their mouths. That’s what men like. Literally, in porn they have categories you can pick from. There’s a menu on the side. It’s like, “girl-on-girl, college girls,” there’s no “CEO”.
           

        6. Henriette

          @Shaukat – I clarified that I wrote about my own personal experiences; I can accept that your personal experience may differ.  I can assure you that the “low value” men I’ve known have been more touchy and sensitive about rejection than the high-value guys.  As a result, when I’ve let a high value guy know I’m taking my time to know him, he takes me at face value, whereas the low value guy will assume that this is code for, “I have no interest in you” (because, so few women are interested in him) and high-tails it out of there so he won’t experience rejection yet again.

          Which is ideal, for my purposes.  I don’t sleep with men quickly, and this tends to winnow the wheat from the chaff.  Guys who are deeply insecure or secure but not really interested leave, and secure guys who are interested, stick around.  Yay!

        7. Chance

          Hi Henriette,

           

          Thanks for your response.

           

          “Since sex with attractive females is fairly easy for them to get whenever they want, they don’t mind waiting around a reasonable amount of time for a woman who actually interests them.”

           

          I will agree with this statement.  However, I think most men who have options will only do this for a small percentage of women, and unfortunately, it often is the case that the reason for this is the woman is exceptionally attractive (sometimes it’s for other, less shallow, reasons).  Also, they may be very well dating, and having sex with, other women in the meantime.

           

          At any rate, I wasn’t try to throw a new wrinkle into the conversation with my original point.  In fact, Evan made the point in his podcast that men who have other options will eventually move on.  I was just adding emphasis to that point by noting that women are best served to fully understand the trade-offs associated with their choices.

           

          The one theme in the comments section that I expected to see (and it came to fruition) was that men who choose to move on are somehow bad or “low value”.  I would argue that this is the result of “sour grapes” mental justifications.  True, many of these men would absolutely not be compatible partners (or even interested in being partners at all), but there are some – perhaps many – who could be good partners.

        8. Shaukat

          For women, chemistry IS how “smart, accomplished, brainy. educated, athletic” the guy is. Or at least this is the biggest component of female “chemistry”.

          That, I’m afraid, is exactly the fallacy we need to dispense with, because perpetuating this myth doesn’t do men or women any favors. Those qualities can enhance and add to pre-existing chemistry, but they won’t make up for non-existent chemistry in the absence of attraction. If you don’t think this true, try a little exercise. Try to find women who are a solid ‘8’ who are dating men who possess all those qualities you just listed but who look like Danny DeVito (no offense to him, he’s a good actor). I guarantee you won’t find many, unless the dude’s also a billionaire.

        9. Stacy2

          Try to find women who are a solid ‘8’ who are dating men who possess all those qualities you just listed but who look like Danny DeVito

          It’s easier than you think.

          Tina Fey & whatever her husband name

          Salman Rushdie and Padma Lakshmi

          Kellyane Conway & George Conway (https://www.everipedia.com/george-t-conway-iii/30120906/)

          And why on earth would we exclude billionaires? What is that if not the ultimate accomplishment and ability? On that note I’d through in Melania.

           

           

        10. Emily, the original

          Shaukat,

          For women, chemistry IS how “smart, accomplished, brainy. educated, athletic” the guy is. Or at least this is the biggest component of female “chemistry”.

          That, I’m afraid, is exactly the fallacy we need to dispense with, because perpetuating this myth doesn’t do men or women any favors. Those qualities can enhance and add to pre-existing chemistry, but they won’t make up for non-existent chemistry in the absence of attraction.

          Bingo. All those other qualities just add to the chemistry a woman feels for a man. They don’t create it.

        11. KK

          Even though Shaukat hates me, I agree with this:

          For women, chemistry IS how “smart, accomplished, brainy. educated, athletic” the guy is. Or at least this is the biggest component of female “chemistry”.

          That, I’m afraid, is exactly the fallacy we need to dispense with, because perpetuating this myth doesn’t do men or women any favors. Those qualities can enhance and add to pre-existing chemistry, but they won’t make up for non-existent chemistry in the absence of attraction”.

          Not sure about the solid 8 with the Danny Devito’s though. I’ve seen it a lot in real life and in Hollywood.

        12. Emily, the original

          KK

          Not sure about the solid 8 with the Danny Devito’s though. I’ve seen it a lot in real life and in Hollywood.

          Then he’s compensating with something else … money, fame, etc. She doesn’t have a visceral sense of attraction when looking at him … like OMG I have to have this guy.

        13. GoWiththeFlow

          Shaukat,

          That brings up another uncomfortable truth:  Women can physically have sex with men they don’t find physically attractive.  She may feel that other qualities he has are more than compensate for lack of attraction.

          I’m in no way saying this is common behavior.  At it’s core the basis of feminism and throwing off “the patriarchy” is being able to make our own choices and not have them made for us, i.e. arranged marriages and having to marry to get out of the parent’s house.  Being able to marry for love instead of regarding marriage as an economic transaction first, is a huge advance in human happiness.

        14. Shaukat

          @Stacy2,

          Are you serious? You just named celebrities. And I seriously doubt that the women who are attracted to unattractive billionaires view their wealth as a symbol of accomplishment. Otherwise unattractive, creative, starving artists would be doing just as well.

          If you’re saying that fame and wealth can compensate for looks then that doesn’t exactly support your earlier claim that men are the more superficial gender. All you’re saying is that women can be superficial in a different domain.

        15. KK

          Shaukat said, “If you’re saying that fame and wealth can compensate for looks then that doesn’t exactly support your earlier claim that men are the more superficial gender. All you’re saying is that women can be superficial in a different domain”.

          It doesn’t actually dispute it either. If a man is wealthy enough, he’ll chase younger, more beautiful women. Superficial? Yes.

          If a younger, beautiful woman is chased by an older, unattractive, much wealthier man, and she eventually decides to give him a chance. Is she superficial? Not necessarily. Women don’t pursue. Men do. Although I am sure some women would jump at the shot to marry for money alone, many aren’t interested and have to be wooed heavily.

        16. Shaukat

          @KK

          I never stated that women are generally more superficial than men; my point was that neither gender can really claim the high ground in that area. Obviously both men and women factor in far more than looks when entering into a LTR.

          Also KK, I don’t hate you at all (I don’t know you personally) I just find some of your views on dating and sex to be infuriating.

        17. Stacy2

          @ Shaukat:

          That, I’m afraid, is exactly the fallacy we need to dispense with, because perpetuating this myth doesn’t do men or women any favors. Those qualities can enhance and add to pre-existing chemistry, but they won’t make up for non-existent chemistry

          @Emily:

          Bingo. All those other qualities just add to the chemistry a woman feels for a man

          So, ladies – are you saying you can actually feel “chemistry” with a man who’s physically attractive but is lacking in all other respects such as intelligence or any sort of purpose or accomplishment in life? Could you feel “chemistry” with someone straight out of the Jersey Shore cast or something? Really?? Personally I am turned on by non-physical attributes in a man. I like them smart. I like them to be somebody. I don’t care if they have a body of a greek god. In my experience, physical attractiveness has about zero correlation to how good in bed they are either so why even care about it at all?

        18. Henriette

          I’m with Stacy2 in that good looks and a fine body don’t do much for me.  Honestly.  I can gaze at a beautiful man, see that he’s gorgeous, but feel no stirrings.  It’s humour, intelligence (not necessarily formal education or even “book smarts”), a steadiness of character and intensity that make my knees knock, every time.  I’ve had several boyfriends who my pals labelled ugly, and maybe I thought they were, too, when I first clapped eyes on them… but by the time we were exclusive I’d forgotten about anything but how crazy I was for them.  *shrug*  To each her own.

        19. Emily, the original

          Stacy2,

          So, ladies – are you saying you can actually feel “chemistry” with a man who’s physically attractive but is lacking in all other respects such as intelligence or any sort of purpose or accomplishment in life?

          The “immediate chemistry” feeling is based on a hormonal explosion. You don’t have a lot of control over who affects you like that. But that feeling can be increased or decreased with all the other qualities that are important — intelligence, humor, character, etc. Chemistry can die very quickly (as in several minutes) in absence of the other things.

           

        20. KK

          Shaukat said:

          “It’s true that the ‘high value’ guys will wait (a reasonable amount of time) for sex with a woman they’re very interested in, but that decision is independent from how they act with other women who they don’t view as having anything to offer apart from sex. In other words, if a man pushed for sex quickly and then walks away when he’s told she requires commitment first, it’s not because he’s desperate. It’s because he probably considers her to be boring or unattractive in every other capacity and doesn’t want a relationship with her”.

          How is this not a win, win for women?

          Furthermore, this insistence that high value men do this and desperate men do that is faulty. Why? Because, I’m sure ALL men consider THEMSELVES high value, but as we all know, this simply isn’t true. I’m just not sure why it would matter if a woman you’re not interested in, considers you one or the other.

    2. 6.2
      Eamon

      This is what I posted previously on the Facebook comments section of this blog:

      “I’ve heard about cases where women feel like unless they have sex first, they won’t ever be asked out. While I personally have zero moral objections to when people have sex, and certainly wouldn’t not have sex before we were officially going out, I’d definitely respect that wish if it were to be the woman’s that I’d just started dating. Setting some initial boundaries definitely sets the tone for the rest of the relationship whilst providing a fairly accurate guage with regards to whether or not he’ll be agreeable to respecting these and other important relationship aspects from the females perspective of comfort and happiness. So long as he’s fairly clear about the timeline of things, if he’s a decent guy he’ll wait a little while. On behalf of all guys, just make sure to reward him for being patient once you are an item! *smiley face*

    3. 6.3
      mgm531

      As a male follower of this blog I normally agree with most of what Evan says, but I’m not jibing with him on this one.  Because in my mind forcing a man to wait to have sex until he has ‘committed’ doesn’t really solve anything and very often will lead to the man feeling frustrated and manipulated.  I know I certainly would.  For most men, and I would think for most women, sex is a very big part of a loving relationship.  Being such an important aspect to a relationship wouldn’t it be ideal to determine if there is sexual chemistry and compatiblity before making a commitment?  Using sex to force commitment to me is manipulative and only offers a false sense of security to women that are looking for a no-risk way to prevent heart break.  But does it really offer no risk?  After all, a liar, a player or just plain deperate man can promise ‘commitment’ and still disappear after having sex.  So what does the waiting to have sex until ‘commitment’ really solve?  Not really much of anything.  In the end it comes down to same thing it always does, character.  And a man of good character and self worth will not appreciate being told to wait to have sex until some sort of arbitrary ‘commitment’ promise is made.

      1. 6.3.1
        Prospect

        I think it’s about a woman doing what is right for her.  if she has strong, yet flexible boundaries, then she has sex at a time that is right for her and that will vary with each woman.

        You have the choice to stay or leave to find someone compatible to be with.

  7. 7
    ScottH

    It’s sound advice to me.

    Honestly, what is there to disagree with?

  8. 8
    Claudia

    The first one is “Having sex too soon establishes you (in his mind) as something he didn’t have to earn or work for. It shows him that your self-worth is low”. It really sounds to me as if my only worth, the only highest value I have to offer is sex and not my brain for instance!! It sounds like he has to earn my willingness to have sex?? what?? I am more valuable than the limbic desire of sex which is natural. And if a man thinks that my highest value is sex, or because I gave up too early he establishes me in a low ranked position, because the highest milestone (in his mind) is reached; then he is not as smart as I expected.

    And this links with the other piece of comment “Without the allure of sex, it seems like for a man the motivation to know who you are is really dampened”…again whaaat?? So your motivation to know my inner self is somehow attached to the sex desire? how on earth is that possible? I mean if men are always telling that woman are not able to make a difference between pure sex and emotional attachment and you men say that you are proudly able to do so.. then this sounds pretty contradictory!! So come on! I don’t want for me a man whose mind is so socially constructed in such a way that he feels his interest is reduced afterwards sex.  Acknowledge that this is a social construction; one thing (knowing a person) doesn’t have to be attached to physical attraction! they can interact but not cancel each other. Again if a man cannot sit down and think about it, and he goes by life happily accepting this fact because at some point of his life he was told to do that way, then he is not smart enough to keep track of some extra valuable assets in any person … ANY.  Because, then probably he will instantly blur his interest on knowing a person not only by sex desire but also by any other prejudgment that is crossing his mind. And this is the point “prejudgment”: you are being told as a man that a girl that gives up too early does not value herself, and you took the fact for granted as a biblic statement without arguing about that!! without asking yourself about the truth behind the statement, have you ever asked if this is true? If a girl really feels she doesn’t value herself just because having sex? And not because she has learned it, again because someone else told her to feel like that? So, I don’t like those men that accept typical statements without questioning them and what is worse taking the statement for granted.

    The last comment I want to debate on is the following: “…if someone offers a great deal of something right away (whether it’s help, cash, a marriage proposal or sex), it can’t possibly be related to the person to whom they are offering it. It takes time to get to know someone. So those offers are inherently a self-serving behavior”… Well, a lot of prejudgement behind. I want to highlight two aspects. The first one is related to the concept of great deal. The statement assumes that sex is in the package of great deals (like cash, help, and other let’s say items) but this assumption is again a social construction. Sex provided by females is placed very high in men’s mind but by doing so it automatically puts a value in someone’s else “item”…have you thought about this? Because cash, help and other items are not attached to my body and sex is attached to MY body, why do you put a value on something that is not yours? It is up to me to put the value I want and this is not necessarily the same value among girls, you have to be aware of that, and it’s our own right to put our own value to sex, and it doesn’t make me less valuable person if I put a medium value for sex, if you enlarge the value in your eyes it is your issue not mine! Do you get it? And if you as a man are expecting only girls which value sex more than any other personal asset, well then you have a high risk to get as a partner just the dumb submissive girl…it’s not the rule but you run that risk.

    The second aspect is about the piece “it (the sex offer, or the cash ofer… the item offer) can’t possibly be related to the person to whom they are offering it” again this is an assumption. And what if I am a really good person that wants to offer cash(sex)? Ok it’s not the rule but it may happen. And in the case it happens and you think it is a “self serving behaviour” which means she is offering it only to satisfy herself… what is wrong with that? I mean how this attitude should mean exactly that I don’t want your time to know me. It sounds like if I offer some good clothes to a poor person I implicitly am saying to that person “please take the clothes but don’t ask my name don’t do it, don’t ask me where I work, don’t look at me!!” Huh?? Eh?? …Giving value to sex is not direct or inversely related to my worthiness it is in your socially constructed men’s mind but not in mine. And if you have any doubts then ask!! It is ethical to ask. I mean if someone offers you a high amount of cash, wouldn’t you think twice before accepting it? Wouldn’t you think that either is a good person or she is trying to pass on some black market money and maybe you get involved in some criminal action just by receiving it?? Then you will ask? Or not?? So shouldn’t you act the same way with sex?? Then ask!! And act upon your ethical principles to receive it! Ok ok, I forgot that your mind is so social constructed that “a man is a stupid if he doesn`t take immediately the free sex”. You see what I mean? Those are the men I don’t want. So, whenever it happens and I offer sex I am assessing you, everytime I accept having sex with a man I am taking my personal test on him. On his prejudgements, on his intellingence, on his capacity of arguing with himself those stupid social constructed statements. If you are able to pass the exam then you can go on, if not you don’t deserve my attention. (of course every girl has her time to take this assessment, sometimes it happens at the second date, sometimes after a month it depends on the chemistry and trust you gain it can go fast or it can never happen).

    1. 8.1
      Stacy2

      It really sounds to me as if my only worth, the only highest value I have to offer is sex and not my brain for instance!! 

      Oh sweetie, and you’re only now realizing this? Haven’t you heard time and again (on this blog and elsewhere) that men don’t care about how smart, accomplished, brainy, educated, athletic, and overall amazing you are? They only care about how you make them feel. Yes, men in general are the shallower gender. I am yet to meet a man who’d be turned on by anything other than looks.

      1. 8.1.1
        KK

        @Stacy2,

        Men that are interested in a relationship care about much more than just sex.

        1. Stacy2

          Oh I agree. I just don’t think its any of the things that i listed, or “a woman’s brain” as Claudia wanted. In my experience, men only care most about how they feel next to a woman. You can be an amazing person but if you don’t stoke his ego and don’t make him feel “needed” and all that crap he’s gonna dash sooner than later. This is why this blog exists. Because so many amazing women have a hard time figuring it out (plus side? once you’ve figured it out it’s a piece of cake. ask him to change a light bulb and send him a few cheesy text messages and – he feels “needed” and “appreciated”).

          And then, depending on a guy’s stage in life and background, they may through in a few other things such as “will she be a good mother” or “is she jewish” etc.

        2. CaliforniaGirl

          @Stacy2,

          sometimes I think if it’s even worth going through all those games and rules, do that because it will show a man how important he is or don’t do that because you might seem needy and will scare him off. Most men I know and knew in my life didn’t want a smart intelligent woman, they wanted submissive sex toy and if she didn’t like something, she was jealous and needy. I lived in Silicon Valley before and knew a lot of guys who made money from tech companies. The moment they had the money, they would divorce their “old” wives, who were supporting them, sometimes even financially, while those guys worked on their new startup ideas and had new, young and dumb girlfriends or if they held a big position and needed a wife to look good for media, they’d just have a mistress or even few ones. I can bet that most men, the moment they are given a lot of money, will dump their wives and girlfriends just to go with this busty blond chick they are drooling over on the street. So, the bottom line is enjoy your life, enjoy men, don’t allow them to make you feel bad and remember you can always can have a dog, who will love you forever. Because men will never do.

           

           

      2. 8.1.2
        Eamon

        I’m turned on by good looks, but my gosh am I turned off by flaws in character.  I would not date a hot girl whose ethics/values don’t align with mine.

        1. Chance

          Agree.  The reasons that I chose to be with my partner were not based on looks.  It was her character, intelligence, and fiscal responsibility (which, I guess, is really a component of one’s character).

           

          The stereotype is that men are more shallow than women, but I would say that men and women are equally shallow.  However, they obviously are shallow about different things.

        2. Henriette

          I agree with you, @Chance.  Neither sex has a monopoly on shallowness.

      3. 8.1.3
        ScottH

        “I am yet to meet a man who’d be turned on by anything other than looks.

        Well, this man has noticed that a woman can become a lot more attractive when he likes her.  And a beautiful woman can become quite ugly if he doesn’t like her because she’s not nice.

        I recently met an average-looking woman who was spectacular in so many ways.  She was really nice, nice to be with, kind and incredibly generous, affectionate, and very accomplished.   She became a lot better looking the more I knew her but even then, looks didn’t matter, just like looks didn’t matter with the objectively beautiful women I dated previously.  They become very unattractive when the crazy comes out.

      4. 8.1.4
        Stacy2

        @CaliforniaGirl

        So true. About Silicon Valley too. It’s gotten really bad now i think, total revenge of the nerds on steroids. They are even worse than your garden variety NY douchebags.

        I also like how men always stress that they like a girl who’s “nice to be with”. I know exactly what they mean by “nice”, lol. Hot, easy and dumb just enough to never challenge them in any way possible but still be able to function. Men looove that woman.

        1. Chance

          Actually, Stacy2, it really means they just prefer to be around someone who isn’t insufferable and doesn’t treat them like they’re stupid.

        2. ScottH

          hardly was she easy and dumb enough to never challenge in any way….

          she probably makes a lot more $$ than you do, if I need to speak in your language.  and she has no minimum salary requirement either.

      5. 8.1.5
        Sum Guy

        Don’t know about that Stacy2.

        Educated, brainy, athletic, amazing women make me feel great.  Smart is sexy.  Educated and able to engage in a vigorous conversation, challenge my assumptions, even (and especially) if she is just playing devil’s advocate…I’m all hers :).

        Men are pretty easy to turn on.  An educated brainy woman will turn it up for me, big time.  Also no matter how hot you are, if you are shallow, vapid or vacuous, you will turn me off big time even if you are coming on to me.

        There is certainly a minimum of looks (as there are for women) but you’d be surprised what that is, far “lower” than most women think.  The women who have turned me on the most, are not the best looking by media standards (which are bullshit) or even by my own purely physical preferences.  Nor are the most beautiful women I’ve been with the best in bed, far from it.

        In my experience, only assholes and insecure guys are turned on only by looks.

      6. 8.1.6
        Claudia

        Although english is not my mother tongue I take care of every little piece of text I write, and that’s why I wrote in purpose “for instance” . Of course I am aware almost nobody (even me) wants the smartest person in the world who cares of that? As I once listened from an old england lady “once you realize he is kind and gentle, keep it!!” That’s enough! However, of course the ultimate cause of how we make feel each other, if I make him smile, or make him feel the way he is, (and viceversa) resides finally in our brains, probably this is what I am referring to. That I have more to give than just sex, and that’s that ability of make him feel that way. If a man gets blured by sex considering this the final milestone and decides not to assess these other qualities you mentioned he can walk away, I don’t need him.

      7. 8.1.7
        Theo

        I agree, men are turned on by looks, youth, and fertility. Remember that sexual relations have the biological purpose of reproduction. Evolution has hard wired a male instinct to mate with healthy, fertile, strong women that are capable of nurturing children.

        However, men need more than that to start a serious relationship; a decent education, kindness, emotional warmth, support, etc. He needs a connection and chemistry.

        If a guy thinks a woman is physically attractive but feels she cannot meet his other requirements for a long term commitment he might still try to have sex with her because sex is not easily accesible for most men at the pace they prefer — men want sex every day!

        1. claudia

          yep I agree with you there is a mixture of reproduction purpose and more than that indeed.

          But, it’s funny how all the comments are so men cetered, nobody thinks about girls who also want sex cyclically (which is worse because if you want sex everyday your chances to meet with a girl and have chemistry and probably have nice sex are higher!!)…( I am not talking about hook ups, Iam not into that)  We girls are cyclical so we want sex depending on our cycle, I discovered myself that is three humped shaped curve  with three set of days in a cycle. But it leaves us in a bad possition because again as a biologist I know that there  are a lot of sexual transmited disseasses that are acquired even with the use of a condom… so I have to make a match between the time I know that guy, my capacity to assesss him and match interests ( know the way he smells the way he smiles, the way he thinks, etc)…(probably at the third date I have enough info.. probably after one or two months) and then finally make a match with my cycle!! really is very tough for us! 🙁

    2. 8.2
      GoWiththeFlow

      Men will appreciate a woman’s intelligence, sense of humor, accomplishments and other personality and character traits AFTER other standards have been met.  First is attractiveness.  Second is how enjoyable her company is.  Third is kindness and compatibility.

      Women really do themselves a huge disservice if they expect men will consider them as potential mates by the same rank order list that women evaluate men.  You can’t fight thousands of years of biological selection and social conditioning in a 75 year life span.  Rest assured though, once you are a man’s special someone, your brains will be appreciated as part of the total package that is you.

      1. 8.2.1
        Emily, the original

        GoWiththeFlow,

        Women really do themselves a huge disservice if they expect men will consider them as potential mates by the same rank order list that women evaluate men.

        But don’t women do men a disservice by reinforcing the idea that their attractiveness isn’t all that important to us? Certainly there are women who filter for attraction first … and go from there

        1. GoWiththeFlow

          Emily,

          I think there’s a difference between being physically good looking and attractive.

          A physically gorgeous man who initially makes my heart flutter may become completely unattractive to me if he starts talking and ugliness and stupidity comes out.  Conversely I have met men who were physically plain, but they became more attractive to me because of their character and personality.  A great sense of humor and being able to put a woman at ease more than compensates for a big nose or thinning hairline.

          So yes, women want men they find attractive, but attractiveness is more than physical looks.  So I don’t think women telling men that their looks aren’t everything is doing a disservice to men.

        2. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          Conversely I have met men who were physically plain, but they became more attractive to me because of their character and personality.

          So then did you become attracted to them? Enough that you would have sex with them? Attraction, at least for me, can grow or diminish based on personality and compatibility, but an initial base level has to be there from the beginning. Attractiveness and attraction are two different things. I’m not attracted to every attractive man there is.

        3. GoWiththeFlow

          Emily,

          “So then did you become attracted to them? Enough that you would have sex with them?”

          Yes.  I have gone from neutral to can’t keep my hands off of him.  I had two LTRs that developed this way.

        4. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          Yes.  I have gone from neutral to can’t keep my hands off of him. 

          How long did that take? Did he start out at the same neutral level? What motivates you to want to go on the date if you feel neutral at the start?

      2. 8.2.2
        Stacy2

        I agree. It’s just that this realization makes it really hard to have any respect for men as a group. I know I have less and less of it as I go along. It’s like, so I’ve spent 10 years making myself into this amazing, accomplished, sophisticated person, and guess what – it does make me a better partner from the **practical standpoint** – but all men care about is how well I can stroke their egos, about their damn “feelings” and all this fluff. I realized its no different than any personal marketing. If I could sell myself to an Ivy League school’s admission officers and then to top firms in my space, I can sure “sell” myself to men. But do I respect them? No.

        I really long for a man who’s strong enough to not need this constant validation, fluff and ego stroking and can appreciate a woman who’s a challenge, who’s his equal, a true partner who wants to do amazing things together and level up in life (kind of like the couple from the first season of the House of Cards). Somebody I can respect. So far no dice… Now excuse me I have to go write a cheesy “miss you honey” text to my boyfriend.

         

        1. KK

          Disturbing.

        2. ScottH

          Stacy- have you read the Attached book?  I’d love to hear your take on it.

        3. ScottH

          A true partner like the couple from House of Cards?  Isn’t that couple getting divorced and didn’t he cheat on her, and her on him?  (I didn’t watch the last season but the 2nd to last ended up with her bailing.)  When an ex-gf bailed on me because she wanted a relationship like in a certain song, all I could do was roll my eyes and gladly move on.  This is real life, not fiction.

          You have a high minimum salary requirement for a guy and then complain about him needing his ego stroked?  And you think the only thing men want are beautiful women?  And then you don’t respect men?

          The amateur psychologist in me is fascinated by your perspective.  Did you ever think of just looking for a kind decent guy who is financially stable and who cherishes you?  I know there aren’t many like that out there but when you factor in your minimum salary requirement and his lack of need for emotional support, the number asymptotically goes to zero pretty quickly.

        4. Stacy2

          Scott:

          yes a read that book and I had a hard time relating that theory to my practical experience. For example, i was at the time dating a man who showed all the signs of “secure” attachment style as it was laid out in the book (which is supposed to b e the holy grail i believe), yet I never felt quite “secure” in the relationship with him. That relationship turned out to be one of the biggest disappointments of my romantic life – despite showing all the right signs that person was never in love with me, and never was really truly emotionally available – as subsequent events of his and mine lives revealed… Re-examining other relationships from the perspective of the attachment styles the book describes, I find very little “predictive value” so to speak in its classification.

          As far as the House of Cards goes, i only watched a few episodes of season one so I am not sure if they turn out to be god awful people at the end or what – these are fictional characters after all. I was trying to reference a dynamic of a true “power couple” – which is what I would like to have for myself. But i am beginning to think that power couples are just as fictional, unicorns.. Oh well.

        5. Callie

          As the resident House of Cards expert 😉 (or at least the only person here who seems to have watched all the seasons) . . .

          They had an open relationship, so no it wasn’t cheating, they were aware of the other people in their lives. But yes, things did go downhill for a while when he stopped respecting her and put her dreams behind his. Once he realised that the two of them could both pursue their dreams at the same time and that they were better at accomplishing that together than apart, once he remembered why he loved her, they got back together and now are stronger than ever. And still have their open relationship.

          I actually really get where Stacy is coming from in that reference. There is a ton of mutual respect especially in Season 1 between the two of them. Sure they are horrible people, but they love each other and support each other and really really respect each other. It’s an oddly healthy relationship despite the two of them being less than healthy morally 🙂 . But since they did have their share of troubles in later seasons I always return to the Addams’ as a solid example of a quality relationship. Morticia and Gomez have such a loving and respectful relationship. No power imbalance, they listen to each other, they think the other person is amazing, they do things for each other. It’s a really great example of a working marriage on television, especially since most examples of marriage on television are really quite terrible.

        6. FG

           
          Your avowed lack of respect for men as a group is your own. And may indicate far more about who you meet, what you do and where than be a reflection on the men themselves. And even, to some degree, who YOU are.
           
          “…and can appreciate a woman who’s a challenge, who’s his equal, a true partner who wants to do amazing things together and level up in life” sounds wonderful, but I wonder as to the actual meaning. Does it mean, as a challenge, that you’re impossible to bear? A shrew to be preferably side-stepped?
          A permanent PMS case? Or already now into menopausal mood swings?
           
          Who makes the “his equal, true partner” call? FYI, the man does. You may want a free-pass to “equal”, but depending on the man you meet, you may or may NOT deserve it! But yes, you are deeply offended when you don’t get your own validation, regardless.

          Do amazing things! Like what? I, for one, I don’t have a need to climb Mt Everest.
          “Level up in life” to what? Better car, bigger house, better neighborhood, more bling, designer shoes and purses, better country or golf club, a sailboat, or are you actually an actor in the corridors of power? Few of those, and of that tiny group, many who imagine themselves the burning wick when they are but the tallow to be consumed in the power acquisition process.
           
          Sophistication? How do you define it? Read Dante? Kafka? Frost? Chomsky? Or is it a Keeping Up w The Kardashians mode, where Louis Vuitton must surely be the pinnacle of sophistication? If a definition of sophistication involves the VISIBLE as opposed to unseen, you seek SOCIAL validation. By people you don’t even care about! Where have you been? Aside from Jamaica? How many languages do you speak?
           
          How old are you? Your comment seems short on wisdom and long on wishful thinking! What matters? The real stuff!?! Things that actually MATTER. Freedom. Happiness. Love. Wild or tender committed intimacy.  
           
          Jack Nicholson, playing the OCD romance-novel writer Melvin Udall, had a wonderful line in As Good As It Gets, when to the question “How do you write women so well?” he replies “I think of a man, and I remove reason, and accountability!” Love that line, as SOME women cringe and some women crack up! If you cringe, it is that you recognize yourself. Are you BOTH rational and accountable?
           
          Ego-stroking set aside, as we all like a little of that from time to time, what do YOU bring to the table? “Alright, honey”, let’s take that ride together! Net worth: $1M+ range, but subtract any inheritance or moneys accrued through divorce settlement(s). Education: hopefully in a worthwhile area (gender studies don’t count). BSc, and accepted in PhD which I never pursued. What’s your number? Let’s say IQ… 120? 130? 140? At 140+, you can play. You’ll still lose, but you can play J    Looks? I’m a decent 7. Some gals push it to 8. I’m handsome to a subset.
           
          You unfortunately sound like a seriously embittered gal who may have left your best opportunities go by without seizing them, while hunting for better. Women bought into a scenario that is not theirs. There are reasons for this; namely social engineering. Women who dedicate themselves to their family feel a LOT more accomplished and far happier. Or so report a number of surveys.
           
          And THAT is my opinion on lack of respect!
           

        7. KK

          FG,

          Agreed!

          I especially liked this comment: “Jack Nicholson, playing the OCD romance-novel writer Melvin Udall, had a wonderful line in As Good As It Gets, when to the question “How do you write women so well?” he replies “I think of a man, and I remove reason, and accountability!” Love that line, as SOME women cringe and some women crack up! If you cringe, it is that you recognize yourself”.

          Why can’t we just laugh at ourselves and our differences? The qualities that I admire in men are the same qualities that can sometimes drive me up the wall. Who cares? Laugh about it. Life is short! Let’s love and laugh and enjoy it.

        8. Sum Guy

          The kind of man you are looking for is out there, after I saw that you wanted to be a power couple.  They are not unicorns but not sure if they are what you imagine.  The power couple we may all know (IMHO) are the Clintons.  The dynamic there is pretty much what I’ve seen in life.

          Having worked with and been friends with power couples (yes I have that academic and business success background like you) I can say there are two kinds, known each other since high school or not.  The former are the more stable and loving, the later are pure transactional relationships.

          In all cases the men had affairs, in fact they considered it normal and their right (if of the second type of power couple).  A quick aside, in the first type of couple he keeps her around because he feels he can trust her since he’s known her before he was anybody.

          An important point for such relationships, people are kept around only as long as they meet a need.  These kind of guys don’t need validation or ego stroking, of course not they have more than enough ego.   They don’t want your emotions, they want what you can do for them.  So you better look smoking, do what they want in bed, have money, and make them look good at parties and social situations to help them advance their career.  No matter what you do though, they will cheat on you in the end.  It won’t mean anything, in that they won’t replace you if you are helping them advance their career.  You can still get that rush of “leveling up” with them though.

          That dynamic certainly exists, not sure how to best find those men.  At any age over 30 I doubt you would find them single.  Professional conferences is probably your best bet.

        9. Prospect

          You want a soul mate. He wants a wife/girlfriend.

      3. 8.2.3
        Claudia

        Sadly enough for you, I am a biologist …and let me tell you something.  In fact, there is something called microevolution, and phenotypic plasticity adaptive mechanisms which occur in very short time lifespan.  Therefore, there are ways for people to adapt to the new requirements and point of views females have nowadays.   Sometimes men seem to be stucked in the 20th century. Those mechanisms are especially useful when talking about behaviour which is a mixture of genomic and environmental-social determination.  So genes are not totally involved in the expression of behaviour, there are thousands of examples in animals showing this plasticity from one year to another (get a rapid google scholar search on “animal use of social information”), and therefore I would expect that the so-called “most evolved species” would be able to do the same. What a shame if we are not able to do that!! (especially being a species that have a complex communication system as an extra asset).

        Secondly, regarding to your first paragraph, I totally agree with that, we do exactly the same assessment. My point is that your first package (which is attractiveness, enjoyable company, kindness and compatibility) gets blurred and automatically destroyed if she “gives up too early”. I’ve seen it countless times!! and that’s what I am saying, why on earth would a guy decide to stop assessing my kindness or compatibility just because I got laid by the third date? So men say they are able to separate sex from emotions and when it comes to sex and your first package (which are actually emotions) a man automatically attach one to the other?? and what is worse cancel each other?? huh?? Really, oh my dear men!! In this century you have to realize that actually you were more complicated than women.. and now I am wondering: to what extent, women become complicated as a result of your complication!!… Probably at some point at the beginning we are just as simple as any creature in the world.

        1. KK

          Claudia,

          As a biologist, I’d guess you’re aware of oxytocin. I don’t think it’s a real great idea to go around having indiscriminate sex with mere strangers. One of those reasons is oxytocin. Is it a great idea to feel “bonded” to a stranger? Wouldn’t it make more sense to get to know someone before you “bond” with them?

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          Claudia,

          Since in a subsequent comment you stated that men seem to be a century behind in how they regard relationships and women, it seems that “microevolution” is not at work here.  Considering that most of the changes we talk about on this blog evolved over the last 200 years, that is half an eye blink in human evolutionary terms, it’s going to take awhile for men and women to be on the same page.  And really, lots of children are still being born under your men-are-in-the-20th-century-women-are-in-the-21st-century, so it’s not exactly maladaptive, where microevolution (rapid evolutionary change) would be required only if the survival of a species is at stake.

      4. 8.2.4
        Stacy2

        @FG

        You sure ask a lot of question. Rest assured that I bring just enough advanced degrees, languages spoken (English is not even my first), books read to the table. My doctor can also certify that I have at least 10 fertile years ahead of me, and you will forgive me for not disclosing my networth here, right? LOL

        But I’d like to answer one of your questions in greater detail.

        Does it mean, as a challenge, that you’re impossible to bear?

        Well my dear it depends on how you define “impossible to bear”? If you state over dinner that Turkey is a member of EU and I say that it is not – would your ego be able to bear that? What if there were other people present at that dinner? Would that make you angry? Or would you not care? You see, what we find impossible to bear is often the reflection of ourselves more than the other person. Ponder on that in between your Kafka readings.

        1. FG

          @ Stacy2

          “I bring just enough advanced degrees” Three things about advanced degrees: income has been trending downwards significantly for advanced degrees over the past 20 year, the value or validity of advanced degrees has been declining as well (dated a PhD gal once, one-time deal. Read her thesis out of curiosity, really good high-school work. She was unemployed), and accumulating them may mean you spent so much time studying instead of doing, which may show up as a frightening gap in your execution ability.

          “languages spoken (English is not even my first)” welcome to my club!

          “My doctor can also certify that I have at least 10 fertile years ahead of me” Did you know a pregnancy at 35+ used to be called geriatric? Only reason why the term was altered? Political correctness.

          “If you state over dinner that Turkey is a member of EU and I say that it is not – would your ego be able to bear that? What if there were other people present at that dinner? Would that make you angry? Or would you not care?” Geopolitical and economic topics? Love ’em. No Turkey is not in EU, and its potential membership has been a bone of contention for quite a while now! 🙂  And Crimea has nto been annexed by Russia instead of the mass media trope / propaganda.
          That being said, my ego would do quite well, if that is our topic, I assume others are present, and no, I would not care. There IS a caveat: if you were to actually insult, ridicule, or pile it on, you would not like the result.

          Stop dating childish men. Or if you like dating guys not up to your level, is it because you can then disrespect them and feel superior?

          Back on ACTUAL topic, sex is mutually beneficial and fun to both men and women. If not, there is no point in dating as it really needs to be part of the package. We agree on “no need for immediacy”, but I would add “as long as there is some visible progress”. Who came up with the ultra simple rule: if by end of date #2 you’re not even seriously smooching, BAIL!
          Dated a number of intelligent professional women. For a number of them, sexuality seems sorely repressed. Inhibitions set aside, and making exception of what Zappa sung about in Catholic Girls, there may be a genie in the bottle, but I don’t (or no longer) have a lifetime to coax the crazy wild genie out!

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          “‘My doctor can also certify that I have at least 10 fertile years ahead of me’ Did you know a pregnancy at 35+ used to be called geriatric? Only reason why the term was altered? Political correctness.”

          I went to med school in the early 1990’s and the term “geriatric pregnancy” was never used.  And that was way before the term “political correctness” came into vogue.  Also, homosexuality used to be classified as a mental illness.  It isn’t any more because it’s scientifically untrue.  Maybe just like referring to the pregnancy of a 35 year old as being “geriatric” has no basis in science.

          As far fertility prospects in women, evan has a good blog post on that.  Link is at the bottom.  Take home here is that the huge majority of women in their late thirties (older than 35) will be able to conceive a child on their own.

          This makes evolutionary sense.  Women who had more fertile years had more children, so those genes got passed down through the generations.  Researchers looking into aging have found a link between women who have had a child naturally in their 40s and increased overall lifespan.  Their theory is that their reproductive system was aging at a slower rate and this was likely true of their other organ systems.  A woman who has a healthy lifestyle can protect her reproductive organ system just like she can protect her cardiovascular system.  Also long term use of birth control pills will preserve the number of eggs a woman has.  Thus a 40 year old who has been on OCPs for 20 years has more eggs, and a greater chance of a successful natural conception or IVF, than a woman who has never been on the pill.

          So I wouldn’t dismiss what Stacy2’s OB/Gyn told her about what her chances of conceiving in the future are as “political correctness” in an attempt to get in a dig at Stacy2.  Her doctor knows Stacy’s age, family history, and health status and it’s her/his role to give Stacy medically and scientifically sound advice.

      5. 8.2.5
        claudia

        yep that’s what I mean… 200 hundred years available and we should be ashamed then! please, take note that I am referring only to this prejudgement that “a woman who gets laid too soon doesn’t value herself” this is the socially constructed phrase which I am claiming to “evolve” in men’s brain. Of course, as another coment highlights I am also aware of oxitocine!! that’s why in my case I wait until I get to know some special features of him, his way of walk his smell, his expression matching some specific circumstances in life, how he rolls his eyes when impressed, his hands,.. his reaction to topics I have interest on, and I can continue. All those features will give me confidence and make oxitocine production a bit more successfull and not leaving me with the stupid feeling of just getting laid and bye bye!!  But, you men have to be aware that in some cases this assessment of all these features may take two months or just few days!! seriously it may happen and you don¡t have to judge myself about my value as a person if I just had a nice connection in my brain and was able to assess this too fast that I was ready to produce the correct amount of oxitocine and bond you (and of course I will not ask you “hey! are we in the same level? that would be like a turn off for me!”). This has nothing to do with my self worth as a woman. And that is what I am requesting from brain’s man !! evolve!! think out of the box and out of that stupid statement that if I get laid too soon I am not relationship material… Just think that it may happen that a good girl was able to assess radiply a men to feel she is ready for that and feeel the desire. And if you have any doubt then ask!! (ok, again I forgot you are socially told to have sex if it is offered… and we come back again to my claim of evolve your brain. to not be affected by previously socially constructed statements and think by yourself)

    3. 8.3
      Sum Guy

      Well said Claudia, well said.

      I agree that a lot of what Mark says assumes a certain social construct, not one that drives me or most people I know (or want to date), but can accept it does drive a lot of people he is talking to.

      1. 8.3.1
        Claudia

        Thank you Sum Guy!!

        I think it’s time to change the paradigm… The problem relies on the fact that most of women of my generation were raised as 21th century females:  we are stronger, we do not depend on a guy financially, we don’t need your emotional support (we need you to be there emotionally but we can support ourselves), we don’t need men to change the bulb come on!! and with technology we don’t even need men for babies!! (ok that’s an extreme but an extra factor indeed). We were raised like that and unfortunately our moms keep on raising guys for the 19th century!! They want to be needed, to feel strong , to give support and meanwhile we are like.. uh?? It’s ok to be shallow nobody wants to get into political discussions or mystical trips, but come on too shallow as in the 19th century is too much!!

        I’ve found a very deep diference on the guys raised in north europe. Unfortunately, I am not attracted to blondies but they have been raised correctly. They don’t care about feel “needed” they put themselves in a position which makes you feel equal. They don’t give importance if you “give up too soon”, they don’t go into chase and hide games, They are direct and although it’s a bit less romantic, it is easier to deal with. You want to go out with him say yes and it will be ok (here in latinamerica you have to say no even if you want to say yes!! and I am like what the fuck???) If I want to go out I go out , if I want to have sex I do it!! what’s the problem? A european guy will still be interested in me and will not judge me, and if at some point he is not interested anymore it will be because something on my personality and he wil tell it, and good bye.. Simple!! thats’ it!..

        1. FG

           
          @Claudia
          Interesting.
           
          The issue is NOT about getting laid on the third date. 3rd 5th 10th date? By date 5, assuming REAL dates, not just “we met for 1 hour”, assuming we actually DID things together, went places, shared meals, it should be a relationship. Usually by (real) date 2, you have a good sense as to whether or not it will fly, sail, stay afloat, work out! If and when you DO have sex / intercourse / whatever with your date, and your date leaves thinking “Wow! Really good starfish impression!”, meaning thank you, but sexual interaction was at best bland, which would be great for some guys but not for others, his desire to pursue may be compromised. Or you may be too lively. Or demonstrate too little / too much experience. This may be a point at which the guy takes inventory for a stop or go assessment, and that balance sheet, unless you’re in the 18-20 wild oats phase, NEVER relies solely on sexual performance or lack thereof. Many elements, such as projecting into the future or “do I feel it?” come into play. Not “am I in love?”, but rather “might I fall in love with this person?”.
          Remember Starkist tuna? The bit about “tuna that tastes good, not tuna with good taste”? I have bailed on gals for lacking class, but also for not tasting good, and I’ll leave that one to your vivid imagination.

          Consider this: Fabulously Fenomenal mentions a lame excuse for a after-sex guy’s skipping out. With sex OUT OF THE WAY, the guy now sees more clearly. He’s not driven (solely) by libidinous desire, but weighs long-term possibilities. We rarely have a debriefing on failed “budding relationships”. Know why? People find them hard to digest. Not enough capital invested to warrant the effort. You may hurt the other person’s feelings. Etc, etc.  The guy’s “lame excuse” may often indicate he doesn’t know himself: he is incapable of verbalizing the underlying causes to no longer feeling the attraction. Or the guy finally saw you the next morning w/o makeup and felt like wailing like a banshee!!! Probably not, but it’s not something you want to tell a gal. In passing, there was magazine published with female pornstars with and without makeup. Proof that makeup is really good packaging! We use other forms. Clothing, verbal forms, places we hangout can pass for marketing and packaging. The guy may find you vulgar (you curse like a sailor when you’re in bed), or too tame (HE likes to cuss in bed but you shushed him because it makes you uncomfortable, etc, etc.) and it cramps his so-called style. Or at breakfast, in spite of where you met, he discovered you have the tastes of a peasant. Or vice versa. DO NOT in any of the previous presume that focusing on the guy’s opinion makes reversal impossible.
           
          Some gals seem to suffer from “phone allergy”: I myself WANT to meet face to face, but also like to spend some minimum time conversing beforehand. If a woman and a man have nothing to say to one another over the course of 15 minutes, it does not bode well for future meeting interaction.
           
          If your mother indeed raised a 21st century daughter, which seems to be the case, don’t you think she ALSO would have raised a 21st century son in the same fashion?
          You lament the “not the girl you will marry, but she was ok for a dance” attitude? That one is deeply set. It will NOT change, because it is usually (albeit not always) a good standard. And it has nothing to do with shaming, or a double-standard or some evil patriarchal system.
          You mention Latin America, a strong Catholic bastion, ingrained values, and a happy-go-lucky attitude in parallel. There is a surface veneer, and there is wild party all at once. Weird contrasts!
           
          As to “most of women of my generation were raised as 21th century females:  we are stronger, we do not depend on a guy financially, we don’t need your emotional support (we need you to be there emotionally but we can support ourselves), we don’t need men to change the bulb come on!!”, a few thoughts.
          Stronger? Than women who came before you? You are sorely misinformed. You are thinking of the petty flowers of pretty society? Because the women I knew, aunts, grandmothers, my own mother, were, in my opinion, an order of magnitude tougher than current women. They each had their own quirky and sometimes amusing traits (as do you, or myself, for that matter), but don’t you imagine for a second that your age group is better in any way than their respective generations. Don’t buy into the narrative of the defenseless women of years gone by! They would roll over you without batting an eyelid.
          Depend on guy financially:: GOOD to hear! I’ve worked hard to repeal and alter the laws affecting divorce. Kids are a different matter, but for couples, woman gets what she put in, guy, same. No evening of scores or accounts. What’s your is yours, and what’s mine is mine! No “what’s mine is now yours”
          Emotional support: depends on the woman. That is your own personal call. You do not need our emotional support when everything is coming up roses. Wait ‘til the going gets tough. This single topic alone could only be resolved in volumes of divergent discussions.

        2. Sum Guy

          More agreement 🙂  I guess I have the northern European male view, sleeping with me on the first date (or even “sooner” than advised by some folks) doesn’t lower or change how I view a woman.  She likes me, I like her we both like sex, cool.  I try not to read too much into.  An aside though, I not big on first date sex myself, the times it happened…well just young and not a good idea from how I view myself.

          I agree that not interested in a 19th, or frankly 1950’s view of being strong or needed as a man.  Sure I want to feel like a man and impress here, but don’t need it to be through her dependency on me for day-to-day life.  That kind of dependency is a turn off for me.  I want someone who holds her own in life, because together we can focus on the greater stuff.  I’m not adverse to typical human dependency, you’re better at something than I am an you help me, and vice versa.  Or when someone is going through a tough time you support them.  Simple.

           

          The push-pull, chase games, pure BS to me, and frankly seem to be childish and insecure.  You like me and want to pull me in, I’ll reciprocate if I like you and pull me in.  You push me away (and don’t give a **** if it is some test only) I’ll figure you are an adult who knows there mind and what they want (after all that’s the only kind of person I’m really interested in) I will move away.  Not going to chase you.  Approaching things this way has served me well, it is when I followed the advice of those who say “if she pushes it is a way of saying pull her in” that I’ve met with woe.

           

        3. KK

          FG is a smart man:

          “Stronger? Than women who came before you? You are sorely misinformed. You are thinking of the petty flowers of pretty society? Because the women I knew, aunts, grandmothers, my own mother, were, in my opinion, an order of magnitude tougher than current women. They each had their own quirky and sometimes amusing traits (as do you, or myself, for that matter), but don’t you imagine for a second that your age group is better in any way than their respective generations. Don’t buy into the narrative of the defenseless women of years gone by!”

          My Danish grandmother was 4’11”. One look from her could fill you with fright. 🙂 Her mother died when she was 12 and she was expected to raise her younger siblings. When her father remarried and had more children, she was expected to help raise those children also. She knew how to cook dinners completely from scratch. She knew how to wring a chicken’s neck, pluck it’s feathers, then cook it for dinner. She knew how to wash laundry by hand and hang it on a clothesline. I could go on and on… But you get the point. She was a kind, loving, amazing woman with a bit of movie. Strong? Absolutely! All 4 foot 11 inches of her. 🙂

        4. KK

          MOXIE not movie.

           

        5. GoWiththeFlow

          KK,

          Your comments made me smile.  Every time we get a comment about how Eastern European women are so much more feminine than American women and how they live to serve their men, I crack up.  My my EE grandmother and great-grandmothers were smart, resourceful, and tough!  They had to be to immigrate to a new country and learn a new language and social and political systems, all while working, and bearing and raising children.

      2. 8.3.2
        KK

        GWTF,

        Awww, glad that made you smile. 🙂

        To add to what FG was saying, the men from that generation were a lot tougher too! I can only imagine what they’d think of some of our modern day ideals. “You mean that boy let you buy his dinner? Metrosexual??? Skinny jeans for guys??? You sure he even likes women? Sex? He can have sex, when he marries you!” LOL, I can hear it now.

         

  9. 9
    KK

    “As I have indicated above, I think the primary driver that dictates whether or not a man is willing to wait for sex is his amount of options.  I don’t really think it has anything to do with his character”.

    Flawed logic 101.

    The primary driver that dictates whether or not a man is willing to wait for sex is if he thinks she is WORTH waiting for, if she is possibly ‘relationship material’, etc.

    1. 9.1
      sophia

      It “may” have to do with his character.

      It “may” have to do with his available options.

      It likely has to do with his age and attained wisdom. Or lack thereof.   😉

      1. 9.1.1
        Chance

        Hi Sophia, I think there is a relationship between age and options, though.  Most men probably don’t experience a “Rock Star 60s” phase 😉

      2. 9.1.2
        KK

        Haha!

        Lack of wisdom, flawed logic…

        Tom-Ā-to, Tom-AH-to…  😉

    2. 9.2
      Fromkin

      “Relationship material ” is a woman with a certain minimum level of intellectual curiosity, some table manners, a good heart, a todo list, who wants me around and whose company I enjoy, and a libido.

       

      1. 9.2.1
        Claudia

        have a superlike to your comment, in fact those are the kind of quality men that smart women look for. Not the men that define the “relationship material” just based on the fact she gave up too soon and concluding she does not respect herself… bullshit!!

      2. 9.2.2
        Jennybird

        Fromkin, here I am. Tell me where you live. 🙂

      3. 9.2.3
        Claudia

        Jennybird I saw him fist!! LOL!!

        1. Fromkin

          No, women my age are holding out for the One, not me. But, 80% of success is showing up, right? If you want a relationship to work, you gotta show up for all the relationship stuff. You need to make time, and you need to want to do the exclusive-relationship, physical part. My own Miss Relationship Material didn’t think in terms of “worth waiting for”. More “in for a penny in for a pound”.

  10. 10
    Fabulously Fenomenal

    I am in full agreement. This is a concept that I have chosen to practice for a while now; since there have been a few ( like 3) relationships that have come out of using this line of thinking. While I am in full agreement with the benefits to this method, as quite a few potential upsets have been avoided, I do believe there is one caveat……guys that will play the part until they’ve secured the sex and then give a poor excuse to break the relationship and leave; unless it’s just me,

    In my current “committed relationship”, I informed him of not desiring sex until I was in a relationship. Our initial connection was strong and we did end up starting a relationship a few weeks later….my concern lies in the fact that I no longer feel that concept/method is a fool-proof as I would desire. Why? Now, 8 months in today, I don’t feel any real love – just unappreciated and undervalued. The only time I’ve given any physical affection is when I can tell he wants sex, and even then I am expected to initiate (so I DON’T); I catch him staring at other women that he has befriended on Facebook; and he shows absolutely NO consideration of me, and regularly will do something for a friend before me!!! I know this sounds terrible, but I find myself not giving him the boot, yet, because he’s only been here 2 years and so I rationalize some things as cultural differences…….but I see his good friends and mentors treating and speaking of their woman in a high manner. An issue does not exist about me not informing him of these things, I am very VOCAL, expressing myself and my feelings in the best way to be understood and not blaming……but, I am tired of rehashing to voice the same concerns and nothing is improving.

    Excuse me, I understand this isn’t the forum to voice my relationship issues, but I will say that I am in agreement with this “sexclusivity”, but its also about taking the sifting process a step further, even after a “relationship” begins. Unfortunately, you never truly know a person’s true motive for doing something; no matter how open and easy the communication was in the beginning.

    1. 10.1
      Stacy

      You need to LEAVE. Stop making excuses for him and do not fall into the trap that you won’t be able to find someone better. He does not value you enough. It is better to be alone than be in a sub par relationship with someone who does not meet your needs.  You are getting nothing out of this. Do not stay with a man because of your fantasy of his false potential. The longer you stay, the harder it will be because your investment will grow. And, the longer you stay, the longer it will take for you to find someone who will appreciate you. The heart is deceitful. Stop listening to yours right now and use your head.

  11. 11
    Sum Guy

    Agree with Mark’s advice but you need to realize that high values guys also have fears of being used, mainly as a source of free dinners and entertainment.  A woman who is truly looking to see if we connect, and who wants to see if I am genuine, has also to be genuine herself.  That is, she needs to show me she is interested in me as a person, that my company is what she wants not the lifestyle I can provide.  So if she is really into me and honest, she will take me out and try to woo me, as much as I take her out and try to woo her.   

    An aside around 13:49 Mark mentions “going down on you” as somehow not sex.  Despite what an ex-president would have you believe, oral sex is sex.

    1. 11.1
      Emily, the original

      Sum Guy,

      that my company is what she wants not the lifestyle I can provide.

      Other men have made similar comments on this blog on other posts. I am baffled by it. I have never once accepted a date with someone because of his lifestyle. Have you dated many women who have? I’m not saying it doesn’t happen.

      Dating is difficult and stressful. Most women take a certain level of care with their appearance for a date … hair, makeup, etc. That all takes time. As does showing up and making conversation, acting engaged. It can be draining. I can’t imagine going through all that just to have a dinner at a fancy restaurant. If it was someone I wasn’t genuinely interested in, I’d rather eat Taco Bell and watch my crime shows at home.

       

      1. 11.1.1
        Sum Guy

        Hi Emily,

        I’ve date a few women like this, but avoid it as much as I can.

        I see where you’re coming from and agree, but I think we are looking for a genuine connection.  There are others who are just looking for a ticket in dating.   With men, it seems to be that just want sex guy; with women just want what you can provide materially.

        I think some men confuse woman who are just not interested in them with those who only want to be wined and dined.  It’s a handy emotional defense against the idea that she just didn’t find you interesting.

        My original post here was not about after 2 or 3 dates (where the guy pays) she is not interested in you; it was more a piece of advice to women who want to go out on 6-12 dates, or more, before they decide on the sexual question.  I’m all for going slow but there are ways to do it that won’t make a high value man wonder if you  are just stringing him along.

        That I’d say is the biggest thing, building trust.  Sex is important but a high value man has no problem finding someone to sleep with, if that is all he wanted.  The problem is finding someone you can connect to and trust, and from there sex (when it does happen) will be better.

        1. Nissa

          Isn’t the easy answer just to ask the woman directly, “Do you see us together more that just casually?” or even “Am I the kind of guy you want for a connection?” That’s the point of those dates – to spend them asking her questions and observing her behavior so that you know the answer. I think it’s a fallacy to say that dating has to be ‘wined and dined’. A woman who is interested in you will have just as much fun walking along the beach, feeding the ducks, visiting the dog pound or dog park, watching the free movie in the park with a bottle of inexpensive wine, going to the local Farmer’s market, or going together to a free meetup.

          This just tells me that if you aren’t feeling connection and trust, then you aren’t feeling it, and the absence of sex is an irrelevant factor.

    2. 11.2
      judy

      Sum Guy 11 – Your comment made me really sad.  Sure, there must be women out there who use men for free dinners and entertainment, the same way as there are men who just see women for sex.

      Both sexes need to feel interesting and kind.

      For me, the sex is an intimate thing and when you wait for the man, it’s because you truly want to have sex with him and not just any man (that’s easy – enough men out there who just want a shag and enough women too to be fair).

      1. 11.2.1
        Sum Guy

        Hi Judy,

        It is sad, but you hit the nail on the head; this is jus some women (not all by far in my experience) as there are some men who just want sex.

        I’ll mention my original purpose on the comments was to help women who are asking what they are hoping are high value men to wait on sex.  I’d guess 6-8 weeks from Mark’s description.  All well and good, very good.

        I wanted to provide some insight that this kind of waiting can come across as stringing a man along and how to make sure that it doesn’t.  It’s really very simple, you take him out from time to time and woo him from time to time.  A gold digger (for want of a better word) won’t do that.

        My comments may all be for naught as I can’t see a high value guy, or woman for that matter, dating for 6-8 weeks or even more than 3 or 4 dates if they do not find the other person’s company very, very enjoyable.  Now the hard part for women (I’m guessing) is he just being charming to get in my pants, and the hard part of the guy is she just being fun because of this wonderful meal and outing we are on.  A guy just looking fro sex isn’t going to wait 6 weeks (or more precisely just see one person those 6 weeks) and a gold digger (again for want of a better word) isn’t going to be down with paying every other date, or even doing “mundane” things together as a date.

         

        1. Emily, the original

          Sum Guy,

          I wanted to provide some insight that this kind of waiting can come across as stringing a man along and how to make sure that it doesn’t.  It’s really very simple, you take him out from time to time and woo him from time to time …

           I can’t see a high value guy, or woman for that matter, dating for 6-8 weeks or even more than 3 or 4 dates if they do not find the other person’s company very, very enjoyable.

          I totally agree with all your points. If I make it to date 3 or 4 with a man, I really like him. I usually offer to chip in for part of date 2 and cover all of date 3. There have been men who have commented on this blog on other posts about their frustration with taking a woman out multiple times, paying for the dates and then being told by the woman “she’s not feeling it.” It shouldn’t take but a date or 2 to figure out if you feel an attraction and if sex is at least a possibility in the future.

  12. 12
    Tron Swanson

    I’ll respectfully disagree with Evan on this.

    Full disclosure: I’m a man, and I no longer do serious relationships. “Sexclusivity” wouldn’t work on me…because I don’t date. Men tend to respond to incentives, and men like me are increasingly oping out of dating entirely. Instead, we “hang out” or “Netflix and chill” or whatever you want to call it. IMHO, all “sexclusivity” will do is antagonize the genuine, relationship-seeking men who haven’t given up on dating yet. It gives them a new incentive (or lack thereof) to deal with. So maybe they’ll respond by committing, or maybe they’ll give up on the woman in question, or dating altogether. It could just create more players.

    I speak from experience; one of the reasons I gave up on relationship stuff was because women made me wait for sex. In my experience, that’s always a bad sign.

    In short, don’t hold men’s sex lives hostage, ladies. It just might backfire on you. Frankly, I feel bad for the genuine relationship-seeking guys. While they’re getting tested by women, I’m avoiding those tests, because I avoid dating.

    1. 12.1
      KK

      Tron,

      Whether you realize it or not, you just reinforced everything Evan has said. Thank you for the real- life example of what we’re wanting to avoid.

      1. 12.1.1
        Stacy2

        I was just thinking the same thing. God I wish they legalized prostitution in this country. Too many sexually frustrated men out there who have nothing to offer to a decent woman and yet feel that they’re entitled to their “sex life” on demand. At least there would be a legal solution for them and they wouldn’t be out there trying to trick normal women into NSA sex.

        1. Shaukat

          First, prostitution is legal in this country for all intents and purposes. No man who wants to get a prostitute would have trouble finding one, especially if he makes a decent salary. Most men don’t go that route because it’s a waste of money, unfulfilling, and unnecessary.

          Secondly, no one feels ‘entitled’ to anything, and most of the time women aren’t getting ‘tricked’ when they choose to have sex before a commitment.

        2. Chris

          Nothing to offer, But they can afford prostitution. That’s money not going to you babe..

        3. Chance

          @Shaukat.  Agree.  The funny thing is that it’s often hardest to see what’s right under our noses.  The most common forms of prostitution in North America are perfectly legal, and they are present within the context of dating and marriage (not saying that dating and marriage inherently involve prostitution… just that this is where it’s most commonly observed).

           

          Now, despite the misandry that has flourished on this thread, I predict that we will see the usual suspects waddle out of the hen house to peck me in the arse for this comment hehe.

           

           

        4. KK

          I’ve only seen misandry by one commenter. But if that’s your idea of flourishing, hmmm…

          But this gem, “I predict that we will see the usual suspects waddle out of the hen house to peck me in the arse for this comment hehe”, sounds a tad mysoginistic to me. The usual suspects see through your bullshit and ignorance. Your goal is to get a response as you’ve stated before by fighting back against women. Winner alert! LOL 

          I hear there’s a new blog for retired ladies who enjoy sharing their knitting techniques. Maybe you should go on over there and tell them how they’re doing it all wrong and they all suck; even though (shocker) you don’t knit. Kinda like here. You don’t have any desire to get married and know nothing about it. Your time will be just as well spent.

      2. 12.1.2
        Tron Swanson

        Actually, no, I didn’t reinforce anything. As I said, I don’t date. Yeah, there’s a growing number of guys like me, but we won’t be chased off by this strategy. That’s because we’re bypassing dating and relationships altogether.

        Let’s say that a woman demands sexclusivity. I believe that there are four possible outcomes:

        1. The guy ends up forming a serious, loving relationship with her.

        2. The guy lets himself be pressured into committing to her. Not because he’s manipulative, but because he likes her, he wants sex, and he doesn’t mind the “boyfriend” label. He absolutely intends to form a relationship with her…just not as much as she might want.

        3. The guy is manipulative and lies about his intentions in order to get sex.

        4. The guy is like me (except he’s dating) and he says “nope” and vanishes.

        So, four possible outcomes, and three of them are bad. Men like me aren’t punished or chased off by this strategy. No, you’re just punishing a bunch of normal, relationship-seeking guys, along with the odd player who’s paying for a bunch of chaste dates for some reason.

        I’ve known women who had very strict standards for men that wanted to be in a relationship with them. The trick is to avoid the relationship part; they have sex with me while applying a different set of standards to men they’re serious about.

        1. Not Jerry

          So, you ruled out #1?

          You are not looking for the person you are supposed  to wake up next to for the next 30 years. You are nowhere. What are you doing here?

          I also don’t date, or only as long as it takes to find that person. I don’t at all hide that is my goal. To find that person.

        2. Callie

          Wait. I don’t get it. You just said with option 4 that a guy like you would vanish. That’s actually what the woman wants. She wants the guys like you to reveal yourselves and go away.

          Honestly your list of possibilities sounds good to me. I mean 2 isn’t ideal, but that’s more on the guy for not putting up his own boundaries than on the woman. And 3 obviously is a risk, but it’s always a risk, people being manipulative. That’s something that happens in all manifestations.

          So basically what you are saying is if a woman wants someone to exclusively have sex only with her and is looking for a committed relationship she will either find that person, or someone manipulative, or someone who’ll go away because he doesn’t want that. As sucky as manipulative person is, that’s a known risk, so really . . . this sounds like exactly what the woman should be doing.

          Thank you for reinforcing that.

      3. 12.1.3
        mgm531

        KK,

        Whether you realize it or not, you just reinforced the self-fullfilling prophecy of ‘sexclusivity’ many women impose on men.  This prophecy dictates that ‘good men’ will willing wait for sex until some arbitray commitment or sexclusivity condition is met and those that don’t are by default, not good men.  This logic is patently false.  There are plenty of good men that don’t like to be manipulated into promising to abide by some arbitrary condition just as there are plenty of liars, players and desperate men that WILL agree to an arbitrary commitment condition just to get laid.  Which leads me to once again argue that sexclusivity and commitment conditions don’t real reslve anything and just provides a false sense of security for women.

        1. Chance

          Agree.  I think the sour grapes effect is influencing women’s opinions of men who choose to walk away in these situations.  If a man chooses to walk away, then he must not be a good man, or he’s a “low value”/”low quality” man, etc.  It’s akin to shooting an arrow, painting a target around where it hits, and calling it a “bullseye”.

        2. KK

          I disagree completely.

          But hey…. If easy women are your thing or the best you can do for yourself, go for it. But if you think you are protecting yourself from the possibility of being manipulated just because a woman will screw you on your first encounter… ha!

          Doesn’t affect me or any other woman who wants an adult relationship, with you know, an adult.

        3. KK

          Maybe I should have broken it down for you:

          “Whether you realize it or not, you just reinforced the self-fullfilling prophecy of ‘sexclusivity’ many women impose on men”.

          How does anyone “impose” anything? If you aren’t interested, walk away. Simple. No one is forcing anything on you.

          “This prophecy dictates that ‘good men’ will willing wait for sex until some arbitray commitment or sexclusivity condition is met and those that don’t are by default, not good men”.

          How so? Who knows if someone is a ‘good man’ after 1 date or 3 dates?  That would take a considerable amount of time, unless it’s obvious from the start he’s not a ‘good man’. That’s not the issue. The issue is whether he’s interested or not. So, let’s say, he appears to be a good man, but you let him know you only have sex in a committed relationship. He bails. He might donate half his income to the homeless and rescue abandoned puppies and kittens. If he’s not interested, it doesn’t really matter. He’s not relationship material for YOU.

          “There are plenty of good men that don’t like to be manipulated into promising to abide by some arbitrary condition just as there are plenty of liars, players and desperate men that WILL agree to an arbitrary commitment condition just to get laid”.

          Good men have a basic understanding of women. They value women. They know a woman needs time to get to know them before they’ll consider a relationship, which will include sex. There is no manipulation in this. It’s about a woman’s need for love and commitment.

          Yes, liars and players exist. I argued this point with Evan. It doesn’t change the fact that waiting to have sex greatly reduces the number of liars and players.

          “Which leads me to once again argue that sexclusivity and commitment conditions don’t real reslve anything and just provides a false sense of security for women”.

          It weeds out the worst from the get- go and increases a woman’s odds of getting what she wants. A relationship with a quality man who wants the same thing.

        4. mgm531

          @KK,

           

          Who said anything about forcing a woman to have sex on the first date?  Or the second, third or fourth date?  Or at all?  All I said is that forcing a man to jump though a hoop to enter your ‘no fly zone’ is just a manipulative way to give yourself a false sense of security that won’t prevent the liars, players or deperate men to tell you what you want to hear to get in your pants.  So what does a commitment sexclusivity pledge really reslove?  Again, NOTHING!  At best it gives yourself the self satisfaction of proving to yourself that you are ‘virtuous’ prize to be won and at worst it’s a manipulative insult to good, mature men that don’t appreciate having to play games at this stage of their lives.

        5. mgm531

          KK,

          Wow…your self righteousness exudes from your pores.

          Good luck with your silly games in finding a mate.  I have a feeling your going to need it.  I’m out.

        6. KK

          “Who said anything about forcing a woman to have sex on the first date?  Or the second, third or fourth date?  Or at all”?

          Ummm, what??? Not me.

          You do realize “forcing a woman to have sex” is rape, right?? I don’t remember that being part of the discussion.

          “All I said is that forcing a man to jump though a hoop to enter your ‘no fly zone’ is just a manipulative way to give yourself a false sense of security that won’t prevent the liars, players or deperate men to tell you what you want to hear to get in your pants”.

          Again, you mention “force”. What??? Do women typically “force” you to do things? What are you talking about?

          “So what does a commitment sexclusivity pledge really reslove?  Again, NOTHING!  At best it gives yourself the self satisfaction of proving to yourself that you are ‘virtuous’ prize to be won and at worst it’s a manipulative insult to good, mature men that don’t appreciate having to play games at this stage of their lives”.

          I disagree. So does Evan and many other people who understand women.

    2. 12.2
      GoWiththeFlow

      “In short, don’t hold men’s sex lives hostage, ladies.”

      It’s too bad you can’t view it from the other side.  You missed the reasoning that Evan gave as to why “sexclusivity” is a good practice for many women:  They get emotionally hurt when they have casual sex.  She wants to wait for sex until she’s more sure of a man’s interest level in her (beyond sex) because she’s protecting her heart.

      There have been comments on this site, by men, about how men will possibly wait for one woman to have sex with, while all the while the are screwing other women they have no relationship interest in.  What these men may not see behind the scenes is that a certain number of these women they are having NSA sex with may end up feeling humiliated, sad, and hurt when they realize a man they thought they were growing a relationship with really only wanted the sex.

      Evan’s advice helps to weed some of these guys out and thus avoid a lot of heartache for a woman who wants a true emotional connection with sex.  Further extrapolating Evan’s viewpoint, it’s not about whether a man who wants NSA sex is good or bad, it’s about whether individually he will be a good match for the woman who wants sex as part of a relationship.

      It’s not game playing or forcing a man to jump through hoops.  The woman is defining what her needs are.  If a man’s needs are different–he wants sex but no relationship–then he can walk away.

    3. 12.3
      Prospect

      And yet a lot of men will look down upon a woman who has sex with them too early.  There’s a lot of conflict and contradictions around female sexuality.

      Ultimately a woman has to do what is right for her; it’s not about holding a man’s sex life to hostage.  It’s not about you, actually.  You are free to leave and find someone more sexually compatible to you.  And then both of you are better off because of it.

  13. 13
    fleurdl

    Goodness, Stacy2, it’s not kind of me to criticize, but your negativity is kind of a drag.  Do you really think there are hordes of men out there “trying to trick normal women into NSA sex”?  Seriously.

  14. 14
    KK

    “I think the sour grapes effect is influencing women’s opinions of men who choose to walk away in these situations.  If a man chooses to walk away, then he must not be a good man, or he’s a “low value”/”low quality” man, etc.  It’s akin to shooting an arrow, painting a target around where it hits, and calling it a “bullseye”.

    Sour grapes, huh? What do you care if you dump a woman and she thinks you’re a jack ass? Or if she thinks you’re a great guy who just isn’t compatible? What normal person would care? Sounds like a whole lot of projection.

     

  15. 15
    KK

    I stand by my first comment. Not sure how any reasonable person could disagree with Evan’s video. I think ScottH agreed. Some of the other regular male commenters have been silent. And yet, a couple of our regular male commenters disagree. (And a few new ones). Shocker! The same misogynistic trope over and over again. Sigh…

    And all the dissenting opinions sound the same… “But I really LIKE NSA sex!! **stomps feet**waaaah!!!** Not fair! You mean womynz are trying to control me! If you don’t screw me as soon as I’M ready, I’ll just find someone who will, you and your standards be damned! You controlling harpie! You bad. I good”.**stomps feet again**

    Hilarious!

     

    1. 15.1
      Stacy2

      Nicely put, KK! 🙂

    2. 15.2
      Tron Swanson

      “If you disagree with me on this, you’re unreasonable”…people who think that are generally unable to maintain long-term relationships, no? That position doesn’t sound very reasonable to me. If we’re now defining “misogyny” as “disagreeing with a woman on a given issue,” well, I can see why so many women are having problems finding men.

      Also, I didn’t see any whining or feet-stomping in my or the others’ comments; perhaps you can point it out?

      As for “womynz” (???) trying to control us…that’s what sexclusivity is about, is it not? Using sex to extort men into forming a relationship with you? For the record, though, I choose to not let myself be controlled.

      I see no problem with either approach. If women want commitment and don’t get it, they should move on. If men want sex and don’t get it, they should move on.

      1. 15.2.1
        Stacy2

        Using sex to extort men into forming a relationship with you?

        That’s just such a dumb statement. Sorry. It is not possible to “extort a relationship”. Extortion implies that something bad could happen to the non-compliant party, which in this case would be what? Oh horror, you wouldn’t be able to have NSA sex? Which you weren’t entitled to to beging with? Huh?

        This isn’t an extortion, this is fair bargaining. Woman wants relationship, you want sex, if you don’t agree on the terms of the bargain you each walk away. Simple as that.

        1. Tron Swanson

          I agree, men aren’t entitled to sex. Likewise, women aren’t entitled to a man’s time, attention, money, or respect.

          On the other hand, if you can’t see how “not having sex” equates to something bad happening, well, I feel sorry for your future husband.

          Any alleged “entitlement” isn’t what makes it extortion. What makes it extortion is the issue of supply versus demand. Women can set the terms and be strict, knowing that other men will always come along and ask them out/pursue them. You’re negotiating from a stronger position. Men, on the other hand…by opting out, I’ve made things much more difficult for myself. When I set strict terms, I know that women won’t pursue me. It’s easy to be Strong and Empowered when you know that there’s countless guys out there who are willing to flatter you and pay for your meals. It’s a little tougher when you’re in a man’s position.

          A parting thought: what if your negotiating positions weakens, over time? What if the current anti-commitment trends continue to grow, and your dating pool shrinks as you become older and less attractive? Maybe then you’ll get to find out what it’s like to be on the other side.

        2. Stacy2

          if you can’t see how not having sex” equates to something bad happening, well, I feel sorry for your future husband.

          Sorry dude, but you so conveniently dropped the NSA part? I said – “Not having NSA sex”. And yes, my “future husband” would NOT be having NSA sex.

      2. 15.2.2
        Not Jerry

        Tron Swanson said:
        sexclusivity is about
        controlling us?

        Nah.
        If you are not looking for an actual mate, then you ought not look where there are people who are looking for an actual mate. Rule that out.

        Tindr might be perfect for you. Or maybe not, I never tried. it.

        Lots of women are looking for an actual exclusive relationship, and lots are not. Lots of women are just looking for food and entertainment. I avoid those.
        Lots of men too.

        You have to be able to weed the wrong ones FOR YOU out.
        It’s not really about sex.
        The podcast is about sex, but I would encourage anyone who wants a real long term partner to focus on goals. Sex is just the icing on the cake if you find that person, assuming that a longterm mate is your goal.

        So many people don’t recognize that.
        If I cannot rule her in as at least a possible longterm exclusive mate, I don’t agree to meet at all.  I have gotten in trouble on dating sites when I wouldn’t meet a woman right away. True story. I was “too slow”.  No problem with that.  That’s intentional.

        As EMK said, it’s only about a week, barring other issues.  Like I’m out of town until the 17th.

        Like everything in life, if you don’t have a focus on what you want to achieve, how will you recognize success?

        1. Tron Swanson

          Sex is far more than just icing on the cake, IMHO. It’s a core part of being compatible.

          I’m no longer looking for a serious relationship, but if I were, sexclusivity would make me run screaming in the opposite direction. I wouldn’t wait for sex any more than I’d wait to have a conversation with the person, because both are equally important.

  16. 16
    KK

    ““If you disagree with me on this, you’re unreasonable”…people who think that are generally unable to maintain long-term relationships, no”?

    Yes, which perfectly explains why you’ve opted out. Caveat… there’s also common expectations in behavior in civilized society. If you’re the odd man out, by definition you are unreasonable. Simple solution: Date reasonable people.

    “As for “womynz” (???) trying to control us…that’s what sexclusivity is about, is it not? Using sex to extort men into forming a relationship with you”.

    No, it isn’t. You’ve completely misunderstood. It’s about wanting to be loved and respected and not treated like a disposable toy. Men that want a relationship don’t need extortion. Exclusivity gives you better odds in ensuring a man actually wants a relationship.

    “If women want commitment and don’t get it, they should move on. If men want sex and don’t get it, they should move on”.

    Agreed.

  17. 17
    FG

    @GoWithTheFlow

    Ever tried this sign of the times called Gaggle? No! Gurgle? No! Google!

    So Google “geriatric pregnancy”> 674,000 results

    I’m tempted to ask in which 3rd world country you completed med school,  but I would do so only to pull your leg! Geriatric pregnancies are not much of an issue in 3rd world countries. They are swamped with teenage pregnancies 🙂

    1. 17.1
      GoWiththeFlow

      I did.  All lay articles.  No scientific or medical links.  Terms change as biological processes are understood and incorporated into medical practice.

      And on the contrary, women in 3rd world countries have high levels of pregnancies at advanced maternal age.  Lots of pregnancies throughout the fertile years is what happens when there is poverty, no birth control, and women have little autonomy over their lives.  When I did a medical trip to an impoverished Latin American country, it was typical for a 40 year old woman to come to clinic carrying an infant and to be a G12 P9 A3.  (Since you’re fond of the Gaggle, Gurgle, Google, you can look that up.)

      But you miss the larger point:  You were trying to get a sexist age-based dig in at Stacy2, that can be summed up as “You’re old, infertile, and thus useless!”

      “Ever tried this sign of the times called Gaggle? No! Gurgle? No! Google!”

      “I’m tempted to ask in which 3rd world country you completed med school,  but I would do so only to pull your leg!”

      Your passive-aggressiveness disguised as humor really detracts from the logical arguments you make.

      1. 17.1.1
        Stacy2

        GoWiththeFlow: 

        Gotta love mansplaining … of fertility issue no less. Makes my day every time.

        1. Chance

          I know… it’s like the womansplaining that goes on in those pregger classes…

        2. FG

          The way I see it, you’re a client for the expert, not the expert!

          The experts are obgyns and similar. And before the mid 80s, they were ALL men. Thus, a lot of mansplaining had to be done in med school. Being a woman in this fertility context gives you zero advantage 🙂

        3. Stacy2

          The way I see it, you’re a client for the expert, not the expert!

          Neither are you. Being that you’re also not even a client for an expert, and not even a subject, and get most of your “knowledge” from non-scientific articles you find on google, what you are doing is mansplaining. Quite a bit different from actual teaching that has been going on in med schools. Since google is the only thing you seem to be an expert in, you may also use it to actually look up the meaning of the term “mansplaning” – you’ll look a bit more erudite

        4. FG

          Trust me darlin’, when the gals first showed up in med school, what they got WAS mansplaining. The professors were unused to a female student clientele, and unhappy with that development.

        5. GoWiththeFlow

          FG,

          OB/Gyn is a completely female dominated field.

          Stacy did consult an expert about her fertility health, her gynecologist.

        6. Stacy2

          @FG: what they got WAS mansplaining.

          Are you trying to say that male professors in med school back in the day were incompetent, or what? Cause mansplaning by definition is done by someone who’s not an expert on the subject (but thinks that he is, because you know.. men know best). Or have you lost your ability to use google too?

          https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/mansplaining-definition-history

      2. 17.1.2
        FG

        Ahhhhh, shucks. You girls are no fun!

        And you demean what fun we can have in chick flicks that gals have us poor souls watch (Bridget Jones’s Baby) when Emma Thompson actually uses the term.

        The old term HAS been replaced with Advanced Maternal Age. A concern that remains valid for women 35+.

        As to the in/fertility of any woman here, I assure you, we horible men don’t care one bit! Save perhaps in terms of empathy. Passive-aggressive empathy. lol

        Keep on gurglin’ with your gaggle 🙂

    2. 17.2
      Stacy2

      @ FG:

      Since you’re so found of google, you can also use it to look up such things as AMH, AFC and FSH. You know, scientifically acceptable medical tests that doctors today use to measure individual fertility of their patients. Again, you will excuse me i hope for not posting my test results. LOL

      1. 17.2.1
        FG

        What strikes me, in that context, is that your biological clock is ticking so hard that the alarm is going off. Thus, a gamut of medical tests to verify your eventually and inevitably dwindling fertility?

        Most readers, perhaps making exception of other women who empathize with your motherhood quandary, care little or nothing about your fertility or lack thereof. A solid LTR partner might. Or he might be fairly happy the pregnancy roulette is no longer in play.

        In the context of “making men wait for sex”, and with a smile, don’t make them wait TOO long!

        1. Stacy2

          So now that you have somewhat eradicate your illiteracy in the area of human reproduction, you may want to reflect on why you’re bothered so much by my comments that you persist with your (quite pathetic) digs. My testing was done to rule me out as a problem in what turned out to be my ex’s fertility issue. Which is standard protocol, which you would know if you ever came close to actually creating a family, rather than trolling women on web-sites. Adios, my mgtow trolling friend.

  18. 18
    Stacy

    A man that is of high value and who has many options will only wait for sex with a woman of significantly higher value. And, most will still probably have sex on the side with women they deem as lower value. However, it shouldn’t matter. Women should not let the level of value of the man determine who she will sleep with.  Evan is right.  When you wait, you are protecting your heart.  Who cares if a man of ‘high value’ leaves? Because if he does, he didn’t see you as having enough high value yourself. It’s a win win. It annoys me when women claim that they can have sex anyway because their value is not within the sex itself. Of course it isn’t but it’s about what is more effective. Life is not fair. Men think a certain way (obviously there are exceptions to the rule but on AVERAGE, men think differently than women and that also pertains to intimacy).  But ALL of us value what we earn as opposed to what is easily given. It is human nature.  Use it to your advantage. It’s not that complicated.  Hold out on sex until he invests in you. It is the better strategy period. I do not see how anyone can argue with this.

    1. 18.1
      Stacy2

      I think a lot of men simply can’t comprehend this issue because sex in and of itself is of high value to them. The comments like “oh you may miss out on sex with a high value man if you don’t put out fast! ” make me chuckle. Apparently, they really do think that sex with a “high value” man whatever that may mean is something women would put a lof of value on.

      1. 18.1.1
        KK

        Exactly! Not to mention, men probably have a much different definition of what “high value” means. Men think if another man is physically attractive and can easily date or sleep with very attractive women (or more likely, women in general), he must be high value. Whereas, for women, being attractive is only a starting point. Is he successful, charming, kind, easy to talk to, funny, and fun to be with? Ok, great. He’s dateable. Relationship material? Add character, compatibility, generosity, good communication skills, and relationship oriented to the list. Attractive and / or successful alone… no dice.

      2. 18.1.2
        Chance

        I don’t think any guy is saying that the problem is that a woman will miss out on sex with a high-value man.  Rather, a woman could miss out on a relationship with a high-value man that she desires.

        1. Stacy2

          I think a woman missing out on a relationship with a high value man due to not putting out while he sleeps aroundwith other women happened about zero times.

        2. KK

          Are you saying women should have sex before they’re ready to have sex, and hope it works to their advantage? LOL.

          By your ‘logic’, the inverse is also true. A man could easily miss out on a great relationship with a high quality woman if he insists on sex before she’s ready.

          I have yet to hear any woman EVER say, “Gosh! I really blew it!!! I should have had sex with John and he never would’ve dumped me!”

          If a man is truly high value, and he is pursuing a woman he is very interested in, he won’t have an issue waiting to have sex until she’s comfortable. I’m not saying some made up time period. I’m saying whenever she is comfortable. Period.

          A lot of women, even very sexual women, only enjoy sex when a connection has already been established.

           

        3. Stacy

          But Chance, that is the issue….a man who can’t seem to wait to.have sex until.he invests in the woman should never be perceived as high value (from a woman”s standpoint). And, a man will wait if he sees the woman as worth it. Again, he won’t wait because he was either in it only for the sex or because he doesn’t think she’s worth it.  If he cant ‘put up’ with no intercourse for a couple of months to have sex, then he thinks either too highly of himself or too lowly of her.  Either way, good riddance. His ‘high value’ is now irrelevant.

        4. Chance

          Hi Stacy, thanks for your response.  I understand what you’re saying, and again, I do not disagree with the choice to abstain from sex until you’re exclusive.  I realize that many women need a man to wait until they are exclusive before they begin to have sex.  However, when one begins to use this as a qualification for determining whether or not a man is “high value”, then he/she is making necessity a virtue.

        5. SS

           

          Evan has actually said the opposite of this, ” when one begins to use this as a qualification for determining whether or not a man is “high value”, then he/she is making necessity a virtue.”  You continuously want to seem to argue for the man that wants to have it all.   I think he is trying to say that a man realizes that a woman wants things also, and least amoung them is feeling badly after intimacy.

      3. 18.1.3
        Sum Guy

        I guess it depends on how much you value sex.  The idea is to find someone who values it the same as you.  There are certainly men that don’t put much value on it as you hear from women who do and wonder what is up with these guys.

        Sex is a important part of a relationship to me, and have no problem finding women who also value you it as well, read enjoy it immensely and believe in it’s bonding power.

        I think when people say high value man they mean someone who as the other characteristics you want that you can connect to emotionally and intellectually.  It does make certain assumptions that may not fit everyone here.

        1. Catherine Taber

          I’m just scrolling through this thread to read all of your remarks Sum Guy. I agreed with everything you have said.

    2. 18.2
      FG

      Setting aside romantic notions best entertained in the 19th century, or perhaps all the way to mid 20th, what exactly do you mean by “invest in you”?

      Unless the man is a pathetic wimp, he will not actually fall in love with you unless he HAS sex with you. He would be a fool to otherwise expose himself emotionally. Granted, as I’ve detailed earlier in this page, it will not guarantee he WILL fall in love with you. From “guy likes you” to “guy loves you”, there is a large gap. And sex fits somewhere within that gap, as do other things, admittedly.

      Fein and Schneider published The Rules back in ’95. All good warlords should be aware of the opponent’ s plan, and love is war! So I did read their take on things. And I was flabbergasted, amused, puzzled, and unimpressed. Manipulation is a dangerous tool, and a solid recipe for disaster. Don’t sell something you are not! The buyer will eventually figure it out. Not only that, if operating (dating) within a limited circle or toying with unsuspecting, unexperienced poor schmucks, it may actually work. And when the guy figures out who you really are, or when he realizes he was manipulated, it’s OVER!

      If you’re dating A man (singular, as opposed to a rodeo), he’s invested to some degree. How far he will go depends on who he is, not what you want. How he feels, and how he responds to you. Any semblance of mind-games will net you a “Ditch! Next!”. No time for nonsense.

      This does not advocate any specific timing, like sex on 3rd, 5th or whatever date. If we’re not kissing by the end of the 2nd date, I’m out! Not enough chemistry to fuel this budding relationship. Reasonable, I think. Age also plays a role. Not the same dates in our 20s, 30s or beyond. I would expect to have some private time fairly quickly. Her place or mine? No matter. Private does not equal naked.

      You are right about the win-win. If things are not going to go anywahere, in terms of relationship, any early ditching is a time-saver. We can never generalize, but we face varied scenarios: city/rural, age (20s, 30s, 40s, 50s), sophistication, personality types, etc. My reaction when I was 22 to a gal who might say she only ever dated 2 guys before meeting me is different than in my 50s.

      So! Care to provide us with some details on your train of thought?

      As to Stacy2’s comment in 18.1, and what she does put value on or not, it almost sounds as though you don’t like sex. Not a problem. Some men are more or less asexual. Advertise as such. Maybe you love affection, closeness, but not intimacy or the act per say. Spare all the others, though. Oh, and freeze some eggs while happily fertile lol

      1. 18.2.1
        Stacy

        FG,
         
        Let me point out a few errors of your input.
         
        1.     Noone is advocating that a man should fall in love before you have sex with him.
        2.     Noone is advocating not being intimate/showing affection with a man one is interested in. Stop looking at situations always in the extreme. It is never either sex or no sex…there are a lot of in betweens that can physically display interest without a penis penetrating a woman.
         
        Now that we have that out of the way, I am not sure what being manipulated has to do with anything.  Because a man is dating a woman does NOT mean he is investing. So you are absolutely wrong in that regard.  There are so many situations where I can prove this.  Some men profess to dating you but you only hear from them twice a week and you only see them once a week, etc…….when a man invests, he spends time with you to truly get to know you…courts you/takes you out, calls you and actually have conversations…as a result, a connection starts to build. 
        In this day and age of online dating where people’s attention spans are shorter than an inch, it is BEST that a woman has sex after there is proof of an emotional and physical display of investment from the man…nothing manipulative about a woman not wanting to end up f***** the 60 men she may have met online this year.  Also, sex bonds women…it does not bond men in the same way.  If a man invests, he is more likely to want to commit and the sexual experience would not be the only destination.  It is in a woman’s best interest to do this as it is in your best interest to convince women that they should not be looking out for their best interest. Then I ask you FG, who is REALLY the manipulative one here?
         
        To reiterate, it is in a woman’s best interest to decide that before she gives her body to a man, that she would like to know that they are actually working on a relationship.  

        1. Sum Guy

          “Also, sex bonds women…it does not bond men in the same way.  ”

          Careful with the broad brush and gender stereotypes there.

          I believe sex does not bond the manipulative, transactional basically what we call low value dating partners.  From the female gold digger type to the male player type.

          I’ll say that just because you have engaged in NSA sex doesn’t, make you low value.

          Sex, IMO, does serve as a bond for both high value men, and high value women.  It may be different, certainly, but for men a great sex life can balance out other things in the relationship that they may not like.  It’s part of the whole package in a relationship, in my mind the easier part because if you have a strong connection you can work on your sex life to make it exactly what you both want.

          Having sex with someone you love is far better than just sex, and high value men want that; yet, just like women they can fear giving themselves up to it because if she doesn’t feel the same way you get hurt.  You may never say it or show it, but you get hurt none the less.

      2. 18.2.2
        KK

        “Unless the man is a pathetic wimp, he will not actually fall in love with you unless he HAS sex with you”.

        Unless a woman is pathetic, she will not have sex with you unless he HAS asked for commitment and exclusivity.

        “He would be a fool to otherwise expose himself emotionally”.

        She would be a fool to otherwise expose herself emotionally.

      3. 18.2.3
        Yet Another Guy

        Are you certain that you are fifty-something? I am 55 years old, and you sound fairly immature to me.  Sexual intercourse is only one form of intimacy.  Affection is also intimacy.  Intimacy is any act where one allows another to touch him/her in a way that is reserved for lovers.  Touch is how humans bond.  Intimate touch is how lovers bond.  Touch infers trust.  Intimate touch infers a much higher level of trust.

      4. 18.2.4
        SS

         

         

        Manipulation is a dangerous tool, and a solid recipe for disaster. Don’t sell something you are not! The buyer will eventually figure it out. Not only that, if operating (dating) within a limited circle or toying with unsuspecting, unexperienced poor schmucks, it may actually work. And when the guy figures out who you really are, or when he realizes he was manipulated, it’s OVER!”

         

        Well, there goes NSA.  Not sorry to see that go.

  19. 19
    Shaukat

    To reiterate, it is in a woman’s best interest to decide that before she gives her body to a man, that she would like to know that they are actually working on a relationship.  

    This is the kind of sentiment that I find truly baffling, at least outside of a television show like 90210 or the ‘Gilmore Girls’ (which might say something about the level of sophistication of the posters making such arguments).

    A woman isn’t ‘giving’ her body to a man during sex; sex isn’t an exchange in which something is handed over or bartered, it’s an act two people engage in for pleasure. I understand the rationale of Evan’s strategy of ‘sexclusivity,’ and I have no problem with a woman waiting for a commitment before sex if that’s what she wants. However, the zeal with which some female commentators are arguing that this is a sacred rule that every decent or valuable woman follows, and the contempt being heaped on men and women who don’t mind having sex before  affirm commitment is troubling.

    Maybe it’s a generational thing, but honestly the most confident and emotionally stable women I’ve met are the ones who don’t require a firm commitment before sex. And that actually intuitively makes sense. After all, if the possibility of a man not committing after sleeping with you is so traumatic for some of you ladies that it might cause a complete emotional breakdown or lead you to contemplate suicide, then you should probably engage in some serious self-reflection, because you may have deeper issues.

    1. 19.1
      Stacy

      Shaukat,

      You are putting words in my mouth. I never slut shamed women.  If a woman can bang a man on the first date and walk away unscathed, it does not make her low value and more power to her.  Noone said that all ‘decent’ women need to wait to have sex. You are assuming here.  However, most women would not enjoy casual random sex even if it ends up being pleasurable in the moment.  The after effects tend to be the downside. And you are going to the extreme talking about suicide and emotional breakdowns.*rolling my eyes*

      All I am saying is, women tend to not feel GOOD when she has sex too soon without knowing the guy.  And the side effect of doing this randomly over and over again with the men not wanting something more over and over again can take a huge emotional toll after awhile. The only way to reduce this risk is by creating space for emotional investment on both sides. Again, I don’t see how this could possibly be taken negatively.

    2. 19.2
      KK

      Shaukat said,

      “Maybe it’s a generational thing, but honestly the most confident and emotionally stable women I’ve met are the ones who don’t require a firm commitment before sex. And that actually intuitively makes sense”.

      That is by far one of the biggest crocks I’ve ever read on here! Seriously? LOL.

      Have you ever looked at the hot vs crazy scale? It’s a chart and it’s in good fun, but there’s some truth to it. The hotter the woman, the crazier. While that’s certainly not true, we’ve all seen real life examples of this. Why do you think that is? I’ll tell you why. Because a young girl that’s very attractive will start getting hit on by lots of guys, sometimes much older guys, before she’s even in junior high. And this very high levual of sexual attention continues year after year. So what, right? A girl with high self esteem let’s it roll off her back, but one with low self esteem is going to take up all these boy’s offers and become very promiscuous. It usually continues into adulthood. And when a woman sees her sexuality as her only value, it screws her up. Do you really think porn starts and strippers have high self esteem? Give me a break, dude!

      1. 19.2.1
        KK

        And before I’m accused of thinking in extremes, I’m not. The point is highly promiscuous women are not the definition of being highly emotionally stable. So, if a woman sleeps with you very soon, it’s unlikely she does so because you’re such a stud. It’s much more likely, that’s what she always does with everyone.

      2. 19.2.2
        Shaukat

        And when a woman sees her sexuality as her only value, it screws her up.

        I agree with this statement, but you’ve thrown in another variable which I never mentioned and is actually irrelevant to the issue being discussed. You’re conflating “objectively” hot with low self-esteem and then correlating both with sex before commitment. It’s true very attractive women will sometimes associate their sexuality with their primary value, but that doesn’t always translate into ‘promiscuous’ sex. I’ve met women like this, and once I even dated one for six months, and it was the most volatile, miserable relationship of my life. She was possessive, jealous, insecure, associated her appearance with her intrinsic worth, and yet she took pride in the fact that she only had sex in committed relationships.

        In other words, a woman can be objectively hot, average looking, or even below average looking, have sex outside of commitment, and still be confident. A lack of confidence can lead to indiscriminate sex, but it’s a symptom of low self-esteem, and there are many other symptoms as well. For example, there are many women who associate sexuality with feelings of guilt and shame, don’t have sex for such reasons, and are also massively insecure. So your response missed the point of my post.

        1. KK

          No. I do get your point:

          “Maybe it’s a generational thing, but honestly the most confident and emotionally stable women I’ve met are the ones who don’t require a firm commitment before sex. And that actually intuitively makes sense”.

          I just don’t agree with it.

          “You’re conflating “objectively” hot with low self-esteem and then correlating both with sex before commitment”.

          Not at all. I just gave an example of WHY “some” very attractive women behave badly. I do not in any way, think they are in the majority. The same thing could be said about “some” unattractive women that think there’s only one way to get a man’s attention.

          My point, is that “most” emotionally healthy, confident women DO NOT have sex without commitment. As a man, you have ZERO insight into conversations that take place between women. I do. I can tell you that many women who APPEAR confident and together go into freak out mode if they have sex too early on. I’ve fielded many of those calls from friends and the guy has NO CLUE she was ever freaked out.

        2. CaliforniaGirl

          I have sex usually on a second/third dates but I am very picky whom I have sex with. If I am attracted physically and intellectually, I’ll have sex to see if we are compatible there. You can’t always tell from the first time but you can see the potential. My girlfriend recently dated a guy who was great, she decided to wait with sex because she didn’t want to ruin it. After I think 6 weeks they had sex and it was awful. She liked him already and tried second time. It was awful as well. She was upset that she wasted all this time and got attached to him and continued to date him. She wasted 6 months of her life because eventually she couldn’t take it anymore and broke up with him.

          @KK,

          So, if a woman sleeps with you very soon, it’s unlikely she does so because you’re such a stud. It’s much more likely, that’s what she always does with everyone.”

          So, if I sleep with a guy I like on a second date but he is 20th guy I dated and did not have sex with any of them, does it also mean I do it with everyone? Because I will have sex with you early if you are a stud, not because I do it with everyone.

        3. KK

          @CaliforniaGirl,

          That depends. How old are you? 40? When did you first have sex? 20? So, if you’re having sex on a second / third date (only with guys you like) and moving on to the next guy or having short term relationships with some, you could easily have sex with 10 guys a year. 20 years equals 200 sex partners. So, no, I don’t feel that #201 should feel any more special than #182 or #65.

    3. 19.3
      Stacy2

      Maybe it’s a generational thing, but honestly the most confident and emotionally stable women I’ve met are the ones who don’t require a firm commitment before sex.

      It’s not a “generational thing” though very young/college girls may be more prone to such behavior due to simple lack of experience (that changes quickly). I am not sure how this would “intuitively” make sense to you, but my guess is whatever you’re thinking is wrong. As a woman, I can see why you would think that these women were “most emotionally stable”. They were most likely not into you and never saw you as anything other than a sex partner during a dry spell. Hence, they did not require commitment (you were not partner material), they came off as “emotionally stable” (because they had no feelings for you and were not investing) and most likely dumped you the moment somebody in the ballpark of “partner material” came along. Am I close?

      1. 19.3.1
        KK

        @Stacy2,

        Excellent point! This is true also!

      2. 19.3.2
        Shaukat

        Am I close?

        Hardly, and I never suggested that I was only referring to women that I dated. Moreover, since you’ve stated repeatedly in multiple posts that all your relationships have been a disaster, that you generally have no respect for men (which apparently includes your bf), that you’re extremely jealous and insecure and would likely either fly into a rage or have a breakdown if a bf ever spoke to his ex, I’m not sure why you think your opinion would carry very much predictive power.

        You and KK should probably get together and have a coffee sometime. Despite pretenses, the two of you have more in common in certain areas than either of you would probably like to admit. The greatest sex shaming I ever heard came from insecure older or damaged women who couldn’t deal with the fact that the one asset which they felt made them special wasn’t that scarce or special after all.

        1. KK

          Shaukat,

          I agreed with Stacy2’s comment, generally speaking. Not AGAINST you. What she mentioned is in fact a common scenario, and I can see how a man could easily misinterpret what’s really going on.

          But since you’re so adept at insults and temper tantrums, might I suggest the toddler’s sandbox for like-minded playmates. Careful on the insults, though. You might get punished for bullying, ‘Mr. I’m so modern and evolved’. Lol.

        2. Stacy2

          Hardly, and I never suggested that I was only referring to women that I dated.

          Surree, if you say so. However, your defensive tone and your attempts to insult me say otherwise.

          You know what I always find it funny in these discussions – its that  the moment a woman (any woman) expresses any standards at all, a whole bunch of male commenters come out to insult her. It’s a weird defense mechanism i suppose, they recognize that they’re not meeting this standard, immediately feel lesser and their only response to that is to unsult. In the word of Kanye West “they’re exposing themselves, bro” – for the pathetic losers that they are. She won’t put out with a guy who sleeps around? Whaaaat? She must be one of those “insecure older or damaged women “ You couldn’t be more transperent if you tried.

      3. 19.3.3
        Nissa

        This needs a like button.

        That makes sense to me too. On one hand, a person who knows themselves and is very aware of their own boundaries can easily offer whatever they feel is appropriate, without needing any kind of promise. However, in my experience, the vast majority of people routinely lack awareness or appropriate boundaries. That is why having a ‘general rule’ makes sense. It offers a general boundary that works well for most people, especially when they are unable to make or discern those boundaries themselves.

         

      4. 19.3.4
        Shaukat

        I’ll only say that my ‘insult’ was a response to your ad hominem. Read your comment again.

        1. Stacy2

          Rrright, keep telling yourself that. Because your #19 which started this discussion wasn’t seething with contempt towards women with standards, such as i don’t know, suggesting we’re not “confident or emotionally stable” and that we may have “deeper issues” LOL

    4. 19.4
      SS

       

       

      “A woman isn’t ‘giving’ her body to a man during sex; sex isn’t an exchange in which something is handed over or bartered, it’s an act two people engage in for pleasure.”  You seem to understand women a lot.

      “but honestly the most confident and emotionally stable women I’ve met are the ones who don’t require a firm commitment before sex.”

      Har, Har, Ha

      “And that actually intuitively makes sense.”  You seem to understand women well.

      “After all, if the possibility of a man not committing after sleeping with you is so traumatic for some of you ladies that it might cause a complete emotional breakdown”  You mention something about how abject it is for a man to “have to pay” for a woman on dates and get nowhere possibly before this.  How horrible.

      “most of the time women aren’t getting ‘tricked’ when they choose to have sex before a commitment.”  It seems from these comments, they are actually.

      So when Evan found a good woman to marry, it seems as though he also stated that he had to become a man and view that woman’s desires and needs.  Convincing teenagers that NSA is something that they totally deserve and have earned seems like a waste of time, right?

       

  20. 20
    FG

    Hmmm, think we’ll need to mansplain this…

    Sex is shorthand for sexual intercourse AND other forms of sexual stimulation.

    Whereas intercourse, aka coitus, is, well, intercourse. lol  We call that a subdivision 🙂

    Generational thing, where non-trash dating is a form of courtship and usually entertained ONLY with a specific person at any given time. Trash dating, multiple overlapping people scheduling, is not a good idea. So obviously, if I manage dating that way, the extension to sex should be instantly clear.

    As to KK in 18.2.2, for reasons I described earlier in this theme, a pre-sex commitment is not worth much. We could add to my earlier list: gal takes off her bra and might abrade her knees with her mammaries may create a slight reassessment on the man’s part 🙂  Role reversal can also occur: man takes off hsi briefs, and the only nickname she can come up with for his “mine-me” is Tweety Bird. She reconsiders: Japanese miniaturization was once all the rage, but come on… A prospect of years of Tweety makes her sad.
    Or as I like to say, that and a nickel will buy you a bubble gum. May even cost a dime by now.
    Now, if your views of sex are strictly limited to intercourse, which is apparently a very Millennial thing, but you’ve been a steady client at the dry cleaner, you’re already involved in sex.

    1. 20.1
      KK

      “As to KK in 18.2.2, for reasons I described earlier in this theme, a pre-sex commitment is not worth much. We could add to my earlier list: gal takes off her bra and might abrade her knees with her mammaries may create a slight reassessment on the man’s part”.

      You’re in your 50’s right? Maybe you can rub your saggy nut sack against her saggy tits; both being knee level and all. : )

      1. 20.1.1
        Katie

        XD

         

        I love you KK

      2. 20.1.2
        FG

        That would qualify as KINKY sex! ROFL

      3. 20.1.3
        Taylor

        I almost spit out my coffee reading this comment. Hahahaha! Nothing complements the other, like saggy tits and saggy balls. The ultimate symbiosis.

        This is the best thread of comments and it’s refreshing to see women advocating for more commitment before giving sex. Although, it’s not surprising to see why some of the men are so adamantly opposed to this. I mean, what do you think would happen to their precious NSA lifestyle if all women decided to not put out until a relationship or marriage is on the table? It means they would have to put on their big boy briefs and actually work on maintaining loving, lasting relationships with women.

        Commitment before sex just makes sense and it dates back to traditional times. For example, in case of accidental pregnancy, a woman was fairly certain that she would have a man to provide and help take care of the child. Such as now, if a man is more emotionally invested and in a committed relationship or marriage, he’s more likely to support the woman with her pregnancy and the child. It’s no guarantee, but at least it’s more likely.

        Sexclusivity is just, in general, great advice for women. There’s no manipulation there. A woman is simply stating her terms. If you are not ready to meet them and don’t want to wait for sex, that’s fine. Move along and she’ll find the guy that will. No one is forcing or blackmailing you to stay with her. In fact, it frees you up to find women that are more willing to give you easy sex.

        Overall, it doesn’t mean that it’ll always work for the woman, but when you encourage a man to wait to build a stronger connection and invest more of his emotions, especially after all that time spent together, it’s more difficult for him to rationalize that you don’t mean something significant to him. And when you both eventually have sex, the sex is more intimate/passionate and fulfilling because of the emotional bond that you both have already established. Either way, win-win.

  21. 21
    Stacy

    @Sum Guy,

    A woman wanting to wait until she knows the guy better has nothing to do with how high her sex drive is. Personally, I have a ridiculously high sex drive but I am very discriminate on who I have sex with for a variety of reasons. And no one is saying men don’t fall for women they have sex with and can’t end up getting hurt. What I am saying is, on average, a woman tends to have more to EMOTIONALLY lose when having sex too quickly.

    And yes, I CAN paint a broad brush that  men (high value or not – whatever that means to you) tend to be fine with non committal sex in general (and sex does not make them more bonded to a woman) while the AVERAGE woman enjoys sex in the form of commitment . Usually if a woman says otherwise, it is because she has learned to do so for various reasons.  And bonding through sex is not only reserved for a certain kind of people but I digress.  Of course there are women who have and enjoy non committal casual sex on the regular but it is RARE.  And you are right, it does not mean she is low value. I never said this. Again, there are always exceptions to the rule but that is just the way it is. That’s why women buy up all the relationship books about how to make relationships work and how to keep a man and would be seen more often than not on a blog like Evan’s.  Men and women are different and we need to accept that sex tends to be viewed differently as a result.

    1. 21.1
      Sum Guy

      Well I do think speaking in general is a broad brush even if applicable to 80 or 90% of the people out there.  I don’t disagree that the average man is fine with non-committal sex and that the average woman enjoys sex more in the form of a commitment.  Wanting it in the form of a commitment is not the same as bonding, far from it.  I agree strongly that if commitment is something that makes sex meaningful then having sex outside a commitment is an big emotional risk.

      That kind of emotional hurt arises just as easily from a lack of feeling secure, more so, than feeling a bond with the other person.

      I never meant to say people with high sex drives are indiscriminant.  In fact, my experience is the opposite (for myself, the women I have dated, and people I’ve known).  IME in general people with high drives, who are secure in themselves, are very discriminating.

      Clearly bonding is reserved for no one, but I believe some people place a greater value on it, or even know how to attain it, than others.

      I do also focus on what I term high value relationship material, because isn’t that what people want?  In particular, there is plenty of great advice on how to weed out those who are not high value but if taken whole sale ends up throwing the baby out with the bath water.  That is, it can just as well accidentally weed out the good ones as well.

      So what do I mean by high value?  I mean a person is interested in a companion and partner in life, who treats their loved ones with respect, caring and supports them when they are down, a person who is secure and not jealous of their partner having other interests, a person who communicates, and when disagreement inevitably arises fights fair.  Moreover, a person who is emotionally resilient, strong of heart, and who is aware of what they need, what they desire, and knows the difference between the two, and most importantly, knows what achieves these needs and wants for them.  Basically if you are a man everything in the poem IF. 🙂

      You add in the financial resources, looks, and intellect you want.   Those with the above, and looks and smarts and financial resources you want are the high value ones out there.

      Well Evan’s blog is for women after all.  There are blogs dedicated to how men can keep women happy.  Your probably right though that women buy more relationship books, but probably also more self-help, diet, and other books that guide you on how to live.  Not sure if it is sex based or just cultural-gender based, but for all practical purposes the same thing.

       

  22. 22
    John

    Firstly, I am a traditional guy. I like the idea of sexclusivity. I like to get to know a woman first before we have intercourse. I don’t care if others want to have sex on the first date. If a woman offers sex on the first date, I don’t see it as a positive thing. I’ve read the comments here saying the a woman sleeping with a man early on is somehow being “liberated” from the shackles of the 1950s. We are talking about waiting until you are exclusive, not married. I don’t feel like taking the risks of casual sex with a woman I don’t know. Maybe I see it this way because I get a lot of attention from women and I’m not desperate for sex. I think why I’d rather wait is because I want a LTR. There are real social and biological implications of having sex right off the bat. I think this lines up with Evan’s theory of 2-2-2. The idea is to build rapport with a woman. I don’t see sex on the second date as taking time to build trust or rapport. There are things in life that just work better and make sense. Sexclusivity in one of them.

  23. 23
    Esther Isiaka

    I must say I haven’t heard of a more better way to date and be safe in this era of HIT AND RUN. Relationships lately seem to me as cases of hit and run, whereby the one who gives in first stays heart broken.

  24. 24
    Kyra

    I think this practice is wonderful in theory, but in eleven  years single I have never had a man contact me again if I do have sex with them on a first or second date.

    Now, I do have 42EE breasts and a large butt and I realize my body sends communication(s) to men that are opposite of what I am seeking. Men initiate datig me with wrong sexual intention and are hoping to “see and experience the goods.” They don’t have much more on their minds when dating me.

    I’d love to have a boyfriend who loves and cares for me to have wonderful sex with. I just don’t see that happening because… see the first line of this comment.

     

     

     

    1. 24.1
      Kyra

      Correction to above:  I think this practice is wonderful in theory, but in eleven  years single I have never had a man contact me again if I do not have sex with them on a first or second date

    2. 24.2
      D_M

      Kyra,

      Have you actively engaged Evan on what might be going on in your particular case? Based on your assessment, your assets brings all the boys to the yard, so it seems a little odd that they would depart after two dates.

  25. 25
    dandy

    Even if a woman waits until after he’s her boyfriend, she still needs to think about consequences (surprise pregnancy due to failed BC, STD, etc).  If you make him wait 3 months and then end up pregnant, then what?  how well do you really know this guy after a couple of months?  Do you want to be tied down to this guy for 18 years if you keep the baby? Sure there’s always abortion and adoption but those are not easy ways out and have lasting consequences also.  There’s a very small chance the guy is going to stick around in the event of an unplanned pregnancy, regardless of what the woman decides to do.

Leave a Reply to Tron Swanson Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *