DISCOVER HOW SMART, STRONG & SUCCESSFUL WOMEN (THAT'S YOU!) CAN FINALLY Find Your Man
Take this short quiz
to discover what you need to do now.
A year ago he started living with me, kind of. He keeps all of his clothes at my house sleeps there every night and spends his down time there even when I am not home. I recently said I want him to fully move in because I think it would be financially better. He still keeps his apartment with his things in it. He calls it his “studio” (he is an artist) and he, after a huge disagreement, finally agreed it was the right thing to do.
Well, the day before the big move he backed out. He said he wasn’t ready and that he didn’t want to promise me anything in the future for fear of hurting me. He wants to keep it the way it is. I am so confused. We are really happy as long as we don’t talk about this kind of commitment. I believe he is in love with me but what do I do? Wait? I am confused what is going to change in his mind. He keeps saying he will lose himself and everything he loves to do if he moves in and gets married. He just sounds like a child to me. I appreciate your advice. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Cahnie
This is going to be really hard for you to accept, Cahnie, but there’s no other way to say it:
Your boyfriend doesn’t want to marry you.
He’s never going to want to marry you.
If he actually DID marry you, it would be largely against his will and he’d end up resenting you for it.
And if you twisted his arm to get married and he resented you for it, it would probably not be a very happy marriage.
If he actually DID marry you, it would be largely against his will and he’d end up resenting you for it.
I know you just wrote me a three-paragraph email and I’m telling you to completely erase the past seven years, but, well, what were you expecting?
In fact, I’m going to guess that what I’ve just written only goes to confirm what you already know deep in your heart.
“I have wanted to move in and get married since year two.”
“He always says he isn’t ready.”
“The day before the big move, he backed out.”
“He didn’t want to promise me anything in the future for fear of hurting me.”
“He keeps saying he will lose himself and everything he loves to do if he moves in and gets married.”
Honestly, sweetheart, the writing is on the wall in ten-foot fluorescent orange letters. GET OUT!
The fact is that he doesn’t want to move in with you or marry you — if he did, he’d have done it years ago. He has a relationship completely on his terms, and you didn’t have the guts to walk away in Year 3.
Now’s your chance.
Honestly, sweetheart, the writing is on the wall in ten-foot fluorescent orange letters. GET OUT!
Unless you want to write me this same exact email in one year, which is exactly what I predict if you don’t break up with him NOW.
P.S. If you NEVER want to get married and are content with this arrangement, you can keep seeing him, but you know what? He’s STILL going to break up with you eventually, so you might as well begin the healing process now.
Evan is right. I wish I had found this blog years ago. Would have personally saved me a lot of grief. Move on. He’s a stringer.
Thanks, Taylor, I am in the same situation. My boyfriend of 7 years refuses to talk about living together or get married!! Today is a day I said no more bulshit!!
Are you still with your boyfriend?
TAylor…completely agree!!!! Evan is dead on!
Evan, I agree with everything except the “he’s STILL going to break up with you eventually”. If the OP wants a relationship the way she described, this is not the man for that. He clearly likes his space and independence. You have called him a child in this letter… Do you even LIKE the guy, or do you just feel like you’ve invested these 7 years hoping he will become a guy you do like?
There are a few things that aren’t mentioned here… OP, did you ever offer to find a place together where he can have a separate room/space where he can do his art? Or do you just want him to move in with you? You haven’t mentioned how he feels about your kids. Maybe he loves you, but the idea of being a full-time stepdad isn’t appealing to him. 10 is still really young. Also, your claims of “financially better” are beating around the bush. If there isn’t an actual issue of finances (meaning you both live just fine and neither is unable to pay the rent/mortgage), this is a moot point. It sounds like neither of you are being honest with eachother, and maybe you are playing it superficially b/c, as Evan said, you don’t want to see the writing on the wall.
There is an interesting Freakonomics podcast about Time as an investment, and the longer people spend on something, the less they want to walk away even if it’s not what they want. Evan is right. You can either get real, and choose to accept your guy and the relationship for what it is or you can walk away and start over. I don’t think it’s true that he won’t change. People mature at different rates, but the truth is that some people would’ve given this up at 25 and some people won’t give it up until 45. And when he does mature, who knows what he will want? You both are at completely different maturity levels.
@ Angie, I don’t think it’s about them being at different levels of maturity. He doesn’t want to move in and marry her, plain and simple. And he has never wanted to. He seems to have been consistent in this, at least. 5 years is a long time for her not to face it…
Sticking your head in the sand is not a demonstration of maturity. We’ve all been guilty of this at one point or another in our love lives. I didn’t walk away from a disastrous marriage early enough, didn’t have the guts or maturity to see the writing was on the wall for me. I did eventually but it took me a while.
At the end of the day, they want fundamentally different things, eg she wants marriage and he doesn’t, it’s not going to work. No matter which way you spin it. Most likely, they’ll break up and he’ll fall in love and marry the next woman he meets. She’s better off getting out, spending some time healing and looking for a man who CAN offer those things.
When a man decides that a woman is wife material, he’ll ask her to marry him. I’ve seen plenty of my male friends go from hardened bachelors to family men as soon as they met the right woman.
The OP’s story seems very one-sided…she is driving all these conversations and he is refusing…all on his terms.
You never know, if she does leave him, he might change his mind (on his own accord). Regardless, I know these things are easier said than done and I wish her well…
Very smart reply. I agree with Luisa. I had seen the same kind of men live with someone because it is convenient and as soon as they break up, find someone else whose self-esteem is higher and who demand proper safety measures right away and they marry them. Cahnie’s boyfriend senses Cahnie’s insecurity and knows that she wants his support and she definitely wants his financial support. Many women realize how being single mothers carries an invisible social stigma. Cahnie had benefits for being in this relationship as well. She had a sex partner. There is no way in a million years that he will marry her. Cahnie, unfortunately, is going to join the ranks of single women in mid age and find out that men in that age group are not too eager to accept much of any financial responsibility. Cahnie will have to organize her family and cut out some Cahnie time. I actually reccomend Cahnie to stop all the things she is doing for him and terminate sex immediately. She should focus on her physical health, on getting enough sleep, proper nutrition… She should join Tinder, e-Harmony and Bumble and start spending 15-30 minutes per day chatting with other guys. In two weeks she can have a talk with her smart boy about removing his stuff from her home respectfully. Give him a specific deadline and be prepared to pack his stuff for it to be ready in case he drags. Cahnie should therapy date for friendship reason and for learning. She should join a hobby meetup and practice being sexy in public away from her kids. Cahnie definitely has some negative patterns accumulated. First of all she probably had them to begin with since she accepted crumbs of a lifestyle for at least 6 of those 7 years. It would not be so bad to work on those negative patterns with a therapist. It will not be easy for Cahnie, but she has no other options that make sense. After he moves out, she must terminate all contact with him for at least 21 days. She must let her body withdraw from her addiction to him. She must not hear his voice or have any reminders of him. She needs to inform him that she is taking a break to think about her life and not to bother her. Cahnie needs to focus on her family and her financial stability on her own. She must figure out a modestly comfortable way to live that makes her feel ok. This might require creative ways of earning more money or changing jobs. Cahnie needs to realize that just because the society assigns to her a lower value on the market since she has three children to support, her value as a person is even higher for the same reason. She should ignor the social messages and focus on her personal power. She can plan her days in writing or start a home improvement project. She must associate with men who she can easily converse with, but who also have their life together: own a home, drive a decent car and dissaccosiate with anyone who shows signs of risk: poor living conditions, really old car, job instability. She must make sure that the appearance and the communication goes along with decent stable lifestyle. Cahnie cannot be needy and get involved with another needy person. Cahnie can use some support herself!
Yep…
I wonder if the OP is a regular reader? I’m betting she knew the answer she was going to get. I am not without compassion for her; but this will not be an easy exit. She’s poured 7 years of her heart and life into this. But the only way to deal with a guy who wants his freedom is to walk away from him. This one reason my personal policy is no to cohabitate.
I was in an 8 yr relationship and I ended it. We never lived together. I was ok with not living together the first 3-4 yrs, but around the 5th year, it started to really bother me that we were basically still “dating”. I was married for 10 years before, so I tend to feel that until you actually live together, and share daily life together, you are just dating. One day I brought up the subject again of moving in together; and this time, he brutally honestly said, “no, it’s never going to happen”. He felt we were too old to start over with that kind of commitment; we had both been married before. I was very hurt. It was like cold water thrown in my face. I went home, and after a few days of thinking of his words over and over in my head, “it’s never gonna happen”….I made up my mind that night to end it. I didn’t want to be in a relationship with him anymore if he felt like that! He called me up a few days later, and I told him that I think we should take a break to think about things. He agreed, and time went by……an entire year. He called me about a yr after, and I was polite with him, I was no longer hurt or angry, so he tells me, “I’d really love to take you out to lunch sometime”. I thought, “HUH? after all this time; after 8 years of trying to have a relationship with him, he thinks I’m going to start dating me again! lol. Not this time buddy. I never saw him again. I started dating a new guy about a yr after my breakup, and we’ve been together for 2 years now, we are very close. We got close fast, and we are already talking/planning on moving in together – in fact my new boyfriend brought it up first, and he hasn’t stopped talking about it. I’m not pushing him at all. It was so nice to hear a man mention it first that he’d like us to live together. We both own homes, so we need to rent/sell a house or both, but at least we talk a lot about it; almost every time we get together, so I feel it will happen in the near future. BUT, if it doesn’t, and we aren’t living together within the next couple of years, this time I will feel that it isn’t likely to happen. I think if you’ve been dating 4-5 years you’ve kind of missed that open window of wanting to share a life together because a lot of guys get comfortable with the status quo, and us gals start to get disheartened and lose interest waiting. I do anyway, and then things just go down hill fast after that. I have learned one thing over the years about men, if a guy tells you he NEVER wants to live with you, or he never wants to get married, he means it and you aren’t going to change his mind. Guys say what they mean esp if the answer is “NO”. Don’t hang on to a relationship that is keeping you unfullfilled and unhappy. It’s not fair to either of you. There’s no point in being in a relationship if you aren’t happy in it. Breaking up with my last boyfriend was the best thing I did for myself that year because I was unhappy and sad alot of the time, I felt very lonely. So consequently, I didn’t miss him. I was happy again even before I met my new boyfriend. I was hopeful about life again, and I was looking forward to finding a happier relationship, and so far I have.
you really dont think he will change if she leaves?
I don’t think he will change. I was in the same situation and boyfriend said he wanted to move forward. Then changed his mind because he lives with daddy at 51 years old and gets treated like a kid…no responsibility what so ever. So I think maturity does have something to do with it.
I was in a relationship for 5 years with a man who lived with his father as well. One of the last conversations we had, he called HIMSELF a “boomeranger” which is a child of a person from the post WWII “baby boom”, who returns home to life off of parents. He knows he is comfortable, he admits he lacks motivation and faith in himself to create his own life. And when I left, I wasn’t angry, I just felt sorry for him and the life we could have had if he was able to get past his shortcomings. What that really adds up to is that I was more in love with what I hoped he could never be, than the person he was today. The day I left was the day I recommitted to loving him enough to let him be the person he is today without expecting him to be someone else. Best decision I ever made.
Evan is 100% right–the LW should have bailed in Year 3. The fact that she didn’t is essentially tacit approval that she’s OK with not being married to him.
@ starthrower68 #5: Yup. If he wants his freedom, she should give it to him! 😀
I’ve been there more than once (younger days). It’s hard to see the writing on the wall sometimes when you have feelings for the person and have invested so much time into the relationship. But as hard as it is Cahnie, don’t waste any more of your precious time on this man. You are in the prime of your life and given the ages of your children, they need and deserve a whole mom and healthy role model. Dump this guy ASAP! The more time you waste on him, the less time you take away from meeting the right guy. New beginnings Sista 🙂
Based on the limited knowledge gleaned from the letter, I would say that this is a classic “string along” situation BUT, she’s stringing herself along, hoping he’ll magically change. There is no indication in her letter (unless I missed it) that he has ever even thrown a crumb of hope her way. No “I would like to get married, but first I have to accomplish X, Y and Z” or “I think I’d like to get married but I have reservations about A, B & C”
If she’s a regular reader of this blog, then she KNEW what EMK would say, and he certainly delivered. She needs to VAMOOSE ! I’m not saying it will be easy (if it was, she wouldn’t have stuck it out for 7 years) but EMK is right, this guy has consistently showed her “the negatives”. She just didn’t believe or act on them.
I’m not a mind reader, but I wonder if part of the issue is that she does have 3 minor children. Being a single mom of three is a TOUGH obstacle to negotiate in the dating jungle. I wonder if she’s settling for this road to nowhere (or at least this road to something other than her desired destination) because she feels as a single mom to 3 children, that she should be grateful to have ANY relationship ?
Bingo!
The writing is on the wall. You said in your letter you had a huge disagreement before he agreed to move in as it would be financially better for both of you. What does that tell you? He isn’t one of your kids, he’s an adult and can make up his own mind and has done by saying he can’t go through with it. He’s been telling you for a long time that the relationship isn’t going anywhere, you either aren’t listening or think you know better.
Either way, it’s time for you to move on. There is another guy out there who will love you and your kids and want to commit to a life together without you having to argue them into it.
If he broke up he’d be doing you a kindness. Sadly, that’s probably something you’ll have to do youself given his lack of oomph.
How did they manage not to figure out over the course of seven years that they want completely different things out of a relationship?
Then again, I shouldn’t be talking, as my relationship of two years just ended for that exact same reason (I wanted to ultimately live together, he didn’t, both of us were oblivious to the fact that the other person wanted something completely different). For a number of reasons related to my and his children, and to his career, neither of us would’ve been able to move for another few years. So I just assumed that we both saw living separately as a temporary arrangement, and that, once we got the kid/career problems out of the way, we’d live happily ever after. Lesson learned. Never assume. Sit your two butts down and have a talk about how you see your future as a couple. You might be surprised.
In Cahnie’s situation, okay I agree with the other commenters that the man shouldn’t have kept telling her that he’s “not ready” to move in, when he knew damn well he wouldn’t ever be ready. But right now, it sounds like he’s finally clearly expressing what he wants. He does not sound like a child to me. He sounds to me like a man who knows what he wants out of a relationship, and is able to articulate it. He has every right to want that kind of arrangement. There is nothing wrong with that kind of arrangement. It just happens to be the opposite of what Cahnie wants. So, yeah. It is not going to work, there is no earthly way to make this work, you two have a very serious disagreement on your hands about something fundamental, and you won’t be able to find a middle ground on it, because there is no middle ground – either you live together or you don’t. Time to move on.
I understand with kids involved and he has no kids he would not feel comfortable moving in with you. I am a single woman whose dated single dads with kids who work alot and I felt like the bottom of his list of things to do and esp. if he has daughters! So from that point I told myself the next man I meet with be single and available, no ex and no kids, same as me. I was singlefor 5 whole years thats the time I needed to find myself or so I thought. So I met this guy in my complex and we have been seeing each other 2 years I am 2 years older than him. He had a tendancy to push me away, turn cold, take me back he did this like over 20 times to me. I am not from this city so I dont have much social networks. Hes also a golfer and plays in tournaments. He always told me if he met someone he likes more he will tell me and wed break up, same for me. He also waited for sex 5 months so I had alot of respect for him as I believe in that too. Lately his health is not the best. He lost his job 8 months back this was a hige dent in our relationship before this he paid all the time, hes the old fashion type so am I. If I have money I spoil him but Im not working now either. He hangs with golfers with money and they go to eat and drink, karoke bars etc. He always said he loves a woman his age or older.Hes told me he loves me and considers me his wife, but he said he wont marry me or live with me. Hes talked about adopting and foster care or if I can have kids but its normally when hes drinking. I went there before he went on a golf trip for 4 days and he had said hes leave me his key so I could watch movies as I do not have tv at home. Just before ( we spent 4 hrs helping him prepare!) he said hes not leaving me his key! This is 2 years of being together and hes no kid he is 51, if he was 21 I could understand as hes just new in dating etc. Hes been a bachelor for decades. So he went and played bad. We met again, he wrote me a love note of promises that he will be honest and good to me and make me happy, then 15 mins later ( he was drinking), he said no forget that and burned the note. He started throwing things around he was very angry ( cause he loss his golf major) and his rich brother came first! to put more salt in his wound. Then he freaked that I left earrings there, 2 sets and he got very angry and said why do you do this,I said for no reason I just forget, he said im not cheating if thats why your leaving them behind. I found out 3 wks ago he hangs with a 21 yr old bartender with his gold buddies and Im mad and uoset about this and Ive told him and he said its no big deal, so I said Im going to find a 24 yr old hunk and get him to be my body guard and take me to bars to protect me ( cause he said they need to protect her as shes a babe!). Hes lucky i never hit him for that comment. So I had to leave as glass was flying all over almost hit me, came home and he calls and tells me sorry to come back, I said this is bs, I will leave here and you wont hear from me again, and he said no dont I want you in my life. Since then we went out one to a concert and critizued that I yawn too much ( well thats because Im tired on antitiobics its not from him), and I pee too much! (what can I do about that nothing!). My health is so much better than his he has arthritis and takes injections for 12 yrs I have nothing wrong and Im 53! Hes done a few other things to me and he does not bring them up he flirted with a lade at a bar last month and left me standing alone and still denies he was flirting why would a guy go talk to a girl alone at the bar for what other damn reason what a liar!! And he did other things that night I was so shocked he was trying to get me to take my clothes off for his friend who we visited and neither of us budged! So disrespectful wow he was nothing like this for 2 yrs now hes turning like this! Some men have hobbies and good friends and like that life and only want a woman when they want to see them if I want to see him too bad! He says 2 times a week like thats no relationship! We are not 20 we are 50!!
I don’t know you Janice, but I think you should get out of that relationship. It sounds abusive, or at the very least unhealthy and disrespectful towards you. You deserve so much better.
Sorry Janice, but he is with you for convenience and you are scared to be alone. All valid. This is not healthy for your self-esteem. I agree with the comment above. The man has a lot going on and he is involving you into his drama. 53 is not elderly just yet. Get another poor old man who is a bit less messed up.
I don’t understand your PS, Evan. What if he decided a long time ago he doesn’t want to get married and what if she is OK with the current arrangement? Why are you so sure that relationship would end any sooner than any non-marriage LTR. True, some people will flee something that might be worked out when they hit a hard point if they are married, but after 7 years, no doubt they have seen a few of those already.
If marriage is what she wants (and it is clear to me that she does) she should leave, but in the speculative world of your PS, why is this LTR any more doomed than another based on what you know from the OPs letter?
What Mr. Katz said. Leave. Now. I’m your boyfriend in reverse. I have dated men type A, type B and everything in between with the same end results when the pressure is on to “commit.” I can’t commit. I use words i.e., I am not ready, I don’t know what I want, Let’s be happy about today, I am on major therapy 🙂 The last one asked how long should he wait. I was forthcoming and said I do not know. If all else fails, I cut them loose. Not string men along.
Wow, I’m impressed, no one has tried to call this guy a cad (which he isn’t) b/c it’s the letter writer who thought if she waited him out, a guy who didn’t want to marry her ever would marry her.
If your goals for a relationship aren’t aligned, don’t turn it into a stand-off.
No one can blame the BF for not wanting to get married. He may love her and want to be with her, but 3 kids (none of his own) is a huge commitment. Being responsible for them as a physically, emotionally and financially is a tough pill to swallow.
But if she is looking for a marriage then she is out of luck, he isn’t going to marry her. But does marriage have to be the end goal? She has been married already and has children. Finding another man willing to marry her with these circumstances is not going to happen easily either. If the BF cares for her and treats her well why not just stay with it?
So the guy becomes her 4th child and sits around a house she pays for to explore his creative talents as an artist. I don’t think so. I always say if you aren’t a part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. He is doing her no favors. After the kids move away, he’s not likely to suddenly change his PERSONALITY and commit to a mutually satisfying life together.
I agree. She is asking a lot from him to take on all this kind of responsibility. Relationships shouldn’t require moving in and getting married. If two people enjoy each other’s company why not continue to do so. Most issues begin when couples have to share space anyways.
AllenB- I think it’s doomed because her boyfriend keeps saying ‘not ready’ when what he means is ‘not ever’. The OP clearly should’ve left long ago but I also get the impression that there is something about this relationship that isn’t quite right for the boyfriend, not what he wants long-term and when he admits that ( or finds what he wants) he’ll probably leave.
@J-17
This relationship is doomed because she does want to get married, he doesn’t and they aren’t even fully communicating. It has gotten to the point that she is starting to denigrate him, calling him a child in her mind. They are toast.
Evan proposed an alternate history where she doesn’t want to get married either and he still says he will break up with her eventually, so she might as well start moving on now. If she didn’t want to get married, I want to know what fatal flaw Evan still sees.
EMK – P.S. If you NEVER want to get married and are content with this arrangement, you can keep seeing him, but you know what? He’s STILL going to break up with you eventually, so you might as well begin the healing process now.
Some have questioned this P.S. This is my theory. Most people want to marry & have kids eventually. Perhaps the sense is that this guy doesn’t want to marry HER, but some day, the tug of fatherhood will tug at him, and he will look for someone unencumbered, (or less encumbered, perhaps with just one child), so he can start his own family “from scratch”. How often have you seen, experienced, or heard of someone who finally breaks up an LTR, because the other “wasn’t ready” “wasn’t sure” “couldn’t predict where this relationship would go”, etc. only to have the non-committing partner marry the NEXT person they got involved with. The orig LW didn’t say weather or not she wanted any more children, but with one almost grown, and having already 3 children, it wouldn’t surprise me if she was done with motherhood. Perhaps this guy wants to be a father someday, but doesn’t want to tell her that. She could be a stop-gap girlfriend, until he meets his future wife. This is just my speculative, unscientific, theory, your opinion may differ 🙂
Right up front, let me say that I’m not an advocate of marriage as a goal in and of itself. Marriage doesn’t guarantee happiness, especially if you go into it expecting that your now-spouse will change for the better. There’s a lot about this relationship we don’t know. Yes, he may be a guy who can’t/won’t commit & who hangs in there by sheer momentum and because it’s easier than going out and finding a better relationship. But it’s also possible he’s been a loyal, supportive boyfriend for her these past 7 years, is bonded with her kids, adds a lot to her life, but simply doesn’t want to marry her or live with her and her 3 kids. So, I would encourage her to ask herself why it’s so important that they live together or marry. Is it a power play on her part, or does she believe marriage or cohabitation will quell her insecurities by “locking him in?” The truth is, it’s hard to find a good relationship, and even harder if you’re raising 3 kids. I’m NOT saying she should settle, because if she’s convinced she won’t be happy without further commitment, she won’t. But I am suggesting she look at her reasons for leaving a good relationship (if it is good) based solely on the fact that she sees marriage as a must.
I agree. I think he does love her because he is only 36 and been in the relationship for 7 years. He is an artist , independent and most likely needs his own space and peace of mind. I am sure that he would commit down the road but 3 kids take a lot of time and energy. Not to mention paying child support if a living arrangement didn’t work out. If she is happy being in love with a guy that ticks all of her boxes as a woman, keep it as is. If she is looking for a daddy and to share half the financial and parental responsibilities then she should look elsewhere- this man is not interested in a kid- living arrangement at this time and why should he be ? I do not believe he should “have” to live with her but, if it is what she wants then time to move on. He probably loves her but does not want the parenting responsibility.
If a man and woman cannot live together married or not they are not in real life. It seems men want the perfect life their independence and a woman when he is free. He wants to be single when hes not with her and in a relationship when hes with her, you cannot have your cake and eat it too! Also drop your single friends and bars and that whose scene the guy I am with still goes to bars with male golf buddies most are married mind you and I do not feel that is fair as I am his girlfriend. I am not 20 I am 50!! Hes had 30 years do go hang at bars ffs…he can use the my parents almosit killed each other drank every day excuse all he wants he should be well over that now. I had rotten men abusive men 3 times in my life I only met one good man my whole life that iswhy I am not married and do not have kids! I thought this guy was the one, he even tells me he thinks Im the one too lately but Im about to give up on him he is all over the map!! Another huge issue is I have NOT MET HIS FAMILY IN 2 YEARS!!
I 100% agree with your invitation to OP to exam all of the above. I have been in a 3+ year relationship with my boyfriend who has been with me and my 5 year old daughter since she was 2. We are both attractive, Successful, educated. I’m 37. He’s 43. My daughter is well mannered, sweet and beautiful. We all have a very loving, honest and respectful relationship. I can honestly say he is committed to me and my child. He will and has dropped everything for us if I needed him to. But The talks about moving in together caused tension in our relationship. I know we would never get married, and I’m okay with that although I think it’s a novel idea. And at some point, I realized that if he wanted to, if he was ready, whatever the case, he knows my desires. And I feel I stayed without moving in together, there’s no one to blame but myself. But our relationship is amazing. So I just shut up. But deep down, I want a family. I want someone who will commit 100% to me and my daughter. To be home for meals, to have bedtime stories nightly, to host family and friends at our home. It’s important to me. I’m sick of packing mine and my daughters things to slumber at his condo… it makes me sad to leave my love. But the other day, he was telling me how much I needed to to put down for s downpayment on a house for “x” amount of dollars. No mention of how much WE needed to put down for a house. I hear what he’s saying. And I’m not gonna shame him for where he is. And I completely disagree with Evan that HE will eventually leave me why would he? If we kept this arrangement, he’s got the best of all worlds that he is most comfortable with
We had a miscarriage in January. He said if he ever wanted children or get married or live with someone, it would be with me. But he has so much trauma from growing up watching parents bicker and stay miserable, he’s got a lot of baggage. I believe in time he may get over it. There is so much value in the commitment and love we share. And moving in together isn’t a guarantee for longevity or success. But I aspire for more and I don’t see moving in together in our near future. I will have to leave to find what I want. And if it doesn’t work out for me, I know I’ll always have a loyal and loving friend who would accept me with open arms again as long as on his terms/timeline. I beleive we can all have everything we want in life…
This guy isn’t getting married because he doesn’t have to. He has most of the benefits of marriage without having to make a real commitment. It’s an wasy arrangement or him that’s gone on for 7 years. I’m curious, when he says, “he will lose himself and everything he loves to do if he moves in and gets married”, exactly what does that mean? Does it mean that he’ll lose the freedom to come and go as he pleases? To keep his art studio as his private space? Or does it mean that he doesn’t want to lose the option of meeting other women?
I cant even leave my cat there at his place for over 3 hrs and gets anal on her shes just a cat, imagine a baby!! Then he tells me he wants 5 kids!
I am thinking, would it be easy, if you are 40 and have three kids, to find a new man who would be willing to marry you? Not impossible, but very difficult. Most men would shy away from giving full committment to a mother +3.
Otherwise, I do understand the desirability to be married: it tells the world that he did finally choose you, above all other women. Unfortunately, in real life, that would be a rarity, given the circumstances.
I have a friend, who is a divorced mother of two, and she has a boyfriend who almost lives with them – very similar situation, except he is an accountant and not an artist. She does not necessarily desire to marry him (as she already has children) but she gets pissed at his unwillingness to introduce her to his family and friends. He keeps the fact that they are together away from public attention; at one point he even told her that his parents would be upset that he is dating an older divocee with kids instead of someone younger and single. At the same time, he seems to be ok as a subsitute father to her kids – gets on really well with them, helps with chores, takes them from school, etc., and, even thought the situation is not ideal, when she weighs the pros and cons, she still chooses to be with him.
He needs to be a man and introduce her to his family and friends. He either loves her for what she comes with or not. It sounds like he is into it but fears judgement. Time to stand up for the woman he loves.
@Andy 16. Interesting comment: thanks. I noticed that you thought the fellow in question was expected to shoulder the financial (as well as emotional & physical) burden of co-raising the OP’s children. I can understand the emotional and physical demands: anyone who spends time around children is somewhat responsible for ensuring they don’t drown in the pool or get bullied in plain sight (for example). I’ve just been surprised by how many men assume that if they get involved with a single mother, that paying for the child is part of the package. I don’t think that the OP mentioned anything to this effect in her post.
If this has been your experience, I certainly don’t want to dismiss it. I’m not a mother so your answer certainly won’t offend me. But, I’d like to hear from all men on this blog; when you meet a woman with children/ a child, do you assume that she’ll want you to shoulder financial responsibility? Have single moms actually let you know that this is what they expect or is this merely a nebulous fear/ an assumption on your part? I ask because about 30% of my friends who are actively dating have children and none of them would expect a new partner to pay anything for her offspring… ever. But, maybe they’re unusual. Should every single mom who is dating online include something in her profile specifying that she does not want someone to financially support her kids?
He keeps all of his clothes at my house sleeps there every night and spends his down time there even when I am not home.
Sounds like living together to me.
I recently said I want him to fully move in because I think it would be financially better.
Financially better how? Is he not contributing to the household expenses? Do you want more of a contribution? Believe you would have more spending money if he gave up his studio?
We are really happy aslong as we don’t talk about this kind of commitment.
If you are really happy, then why is such a commitment so important? Why do you keep bringing it up? How would him giving up his studio/marrying you affect your day to day happiness?
.
He said he wasn’t ready and that he didn’t want to promise me anything in the future for fear of hurting me. He wants to keep it the way it is. He keeps saying he will lose himself and everything he loves to do if he moves in and gets married.
He’s not thinking like a child, this is the way he really feels about making the kind of commitment you are asking for.
Yes, he could leave you at some point down the road. He could STILL leave you at some point down the road even if he gave up his studio. Even if he married you. There are no guarantees against that happening.
If you really aren’t happy with the relationship as it is, then yes you should move on. But if you aren’t unhappy in the relationship, you may want to evaluate whether the things you say you want are truly that important to you after 7 years together.
Whether one believes in marriage or not, I think it’s important to remember what it means when someone decides to get married. They are saying to that person that I want to spend the rest of my life with you and doing everything that I can to make you happy and forsaking all others because you are the only one for me! They are so sure of this partnership that they are willing to share everything in the eyes of the law, their family and friends and/or their religion. I agree with Zann that marriage certainly does not guarantee happiness but when a man wants to marry a women (for reasons of love) it is the ultimate expression of love and you have to admit that it carries way more weight than a man saying I’m happy as things are ie. living together but with no desire to get married, “we’ve a good thing going, why change”. As Evan has said many times when a man wants a women he will do everything in his power to keep her and make sure no other man gets a look in! I think most people aspires to this sort of security with their partner in life and Cahnie is one of them. Cahnie says they are really happy but… one of her core desires is not being met therefore it is not a good relationship. People can argue that marriage is not important if the relationship is good and he’s committed but at the end of the day it does matter to Cahnie and that’s all that really matters.
Hope everything works out for you Cahnie
I hate to say it, but…
…he’s just not into you. Move onto someone else.
OP
Despite my earlier comment, you have one chance I think to get a proposal that may or may not work.
For six months, do not bring up marriage, or living together, or the benefits thereof. No hints, Don’t mention there is a six month deadline. Try not to even think about it. After the six months, re-evaluate.
This worked for three of my friends. one who had been with her boyfriend for over three years, one for five years, and one for seven years.
The small chance this has will only be realised if he is able to come to the decision himself and not because you are trying to convince (nag) him.
All will become clear if you finish his sentence for him.
Instead of: “I’m not ready to get married.”
What he’s really saying is: “I’m not ready to get married… to you.”
I bailed out on a 7-year, go-nowhere relationship to a guy I was “certain” loved me (even though he cheated on me, kept breaking up with me, let me keep breaking up with him, etc.) Boy, am I glad I did. I never would’ve met the sweet, loving man who I’ve now been married to for almost eight years.
Cut this fishie loose. He’s had his chance. He’s not interested, and it’s next!
A word to the women out there: if you still nurture the hope of being married by a very eligible bachelor, please do not become a single mom. While it is true that some men don’t mind dating single moms, most of us single guys will not marry them. It is just biology. Men generally do not have the motivation to jeopardize their lives and limbs for other men’s kids while those fathers sit on their butts doing little to nothing to provide for their offspring.
A colleague of mine, a 32-year-old attractive professional woman, recently told me she wanted to become a single mother, because her “eggs are rotting away”. All I could do was to encourage her not to lose heart in searching for the right man, but at the same time realize that by becoming a single mother, she has automatically ruled out many of her colleagues as potential husbands.
to #28:
“…kept breaking up with me, let me keep breaking up with him, etc.) Boy, am I glad I did. I never would’ve met the sweet, loving man who I’ve now been married to for almost eight years.
What exactly did you expect this guy to do when you decided to break up with him? Adults take responsibility for their actions. When you broke up with him, he did not let you; you took that decision. Try to take responsibility.
“…. He’s not interested, and it’s next!
This was the message that this man has ben trying to send to the OP for the last 7 years. So far, she has refused to get it.
Guess what? Some moms become single because the husband LEAVES THEM!! Do you think they willingly become single moms unless the situation is unbearable? You act like a single woman with kids should not expect serious commitment from a guy.
Now where I live 3 black women all single mothers and no husbands around and they are from africa not canada!
I think that its interesting that this conversations has turned into a conversation about the merits of marriage, not shocking though. The OP WANTS to get married her boyfriend of 7 years won’t even move in with her, she would be crazy to continue this relationship. For whatever reason her boyfriend can’t commit to her in the way she needs so she needs to give him up and find someone who will. Not try to change who she is or what she needs in a very fundamental way.
TheThinker,
While I agree that people, both men and women, should avoid having children out of wedlock, single parenthood is unavoidable when one gets married, has children then gets divorced. This isn’t a choice for divorced people. People who have children are no less deserving of marriage and committed relationships. Granted they need to be in a relationship with someone who truly accepts them and their children as a package deal and doesn’t see it as “baggage.”
So-called eligible bachelors think it can never happen to them–that they aren’t faced with the possibility of marriage, children, then divorce and single-parenthood. People who are divorced, like the woman who sent her question to Evan get married with the best intentions for their families and unfortunately marriages end and there are children involved. Divorcees didn’t plan or choose single parenthood.
If you don’t want to date women with children that is your choice and you shouldn’t, but don’t assume that all men think like you. I’ve known many men to date and marry women with children. And men need to get rid of this idea that it’s ok for them to be single parents but it’s not ok for women.
As a single parent for the past 10 years, I can tell you that I won’t let just any one into their lives let alone live with a boyfriend. I forged a tight bond with my children and the times I have dated someone I have been the one to compartmentalize.
I agree with Evan and previous commenters: if her long-term goal is marriage, she must end this relationship now. She should indeed have ended the relationship five years ago, and the extra years are now just sunk costs.
But she is obviously conflicted since her relationship is otherwise happy and she is probably well aware that going back on the dating market as a 40 year old mother of three is not going to be a walk in the park. It’s easier to wait and hope for the best. What is your priority, Letter Writer? Immediate gratification of a loving companion who will not marry you, or keeping yourself available for meeting your future husband with little chance that it will happen before your kids are all grown?
This being said, I find this post a good reminder that it’s up to the partner who want more to make sure they’re not over-investing themselves on a dead-end situation. Sure, it’s best if the guy who only wants casual sex clearly states his intention and does not lead his date on, and it’s best if the man who does not want marriage stop wasting the time of his girlfriend when he realizes that she wants more than he does. However it’s natural to look for one’s own benefit, and stall/stop progressing as soon as the sweet spot is reached.
So much emphasis is put on “securing the boyfriend” that it makes women fall into autopilot mode as soon as they become a girlfriend. Ladies, if you want “more”, you have to be diligent and look at signs of progress within the relationship. As Karl R said one time, a relationship must show signs of progress every three to six months. In the dating phase there is a time frame when exclusivity is agreed upon if it has to happen at all, and similarly there is also a time frame to enter marriage when it’s what both partners desire. Do not let love make you over-invest your time or energy.
It’s hard to end a happy relationship where there is no apparent conflict. But having vastly different relationship goals (or other serious incompatibilities) makes the relationship pointless for the long-term. The sooner you find out about these incompatibilities, the easier it is to do a graceful exit before having wasted years of precious energy and time. Love is simply not enough for a successful relationship.
If I read the OP correctly, not only has this man been her life for 7 YEARS, he’s also been in her children’s lives since the youngest was 3, the oldest 10. I’m guessing he figured out quite some time ago what dating a single mom was all about. Especially since he does live with that family despite retaining a separate residence. This doesn’t sound to me like a man who is “stringing her along” until he finds someone without “baggage”. He’s had 7 years to do that, yet Cahnie believes he’s in love with her. Says they are happy until this issue comes up.
It’s possible Cahnie could find another man who wanted to marry her. But I’m not so sure why one would want to trade a happy life with someone who loved her and her children for a possibility. That’s what I think she should be weighing.
Offtopic – it is my pet peeve when people read something extra into what a man (somehow I’ve never seen it done to a woman) is saying. There’s one example in this thread, but I’ve seen it many times on this forum, when the man says “I’m not ready to get married” and people immediately inform this man’s SO that it really means “I’m not ready to get married to you.”. You know what? it may mean that, it may mean a million other things, but can we just give the man a benefit of the doubt and assume that he is an adult in sound mind, and means what he says? Do we need to finish his sentence for him? Haven’t we all been in a state where we’re not ready for a relationship? I know when I tell a man I’m not ready for a relationship, it doesn’t mean “… with you”, it means I am NOT ready for a relationship, be it with him, George Clooney, Pope Francis, or a male clone of my own self — I’m not ready for a relationship with anyone. If I don’t want to date this particular man, I come right out and say so. Don’t most people? Men especially, in my experience, don’t like head games. They say what they mean to say. In this case, the two of them are “really happy” outside of this disagreement and the LW believes he loves her, so where did this “with you” come from? I just don’t think this trend of putting words in men’s mouth is fair to them.
#29, 31 – I agree with Ren. Yes there are men who wouldn’t even consider a woman that has someone else’s kids. Well these men are probably not a good match for this woman, because of where their priorities lie; and, for each of these men, there is a hundred others who do not mind blended families at all. So I wouldn’t go around spreading this idea that single mothers (not single fathers, eh?) are damaged goods.
@ Selena #24, you do have a point! Living separately did not work for me at all, but you’re right, these two are not even living separately per se. And as an artist, even if they do move in together, he still will need a studio where the kids, pets etc cannot come in and disrupt, or accidentally damage, his work. So maybe let him keep it?
I’m so tired of single parents assuming their boyfriends or girlfriends should move in because it would make more financial sense. Who would benefit from this arrangement. He wouldn’t … He’s not an extra bank account, maid or someone to drive your kids around. Of course he doesn’t want to marry you! Move on find someone who wants to be with you and your kids or don’t date till your kids have left the house. Stop being self fish
@Zara, where did the OP say she wanted to live with her boyfriend because it made financial sense and she wanted help with her kids? She said she wanted to live with him because she wanted commitment.
Why is there this assumption that single parents are always after someone’s money?
Why you are saying has nothing to do with the question and it sounds to me like you think single parents should be left out to pasture and are unworthy of relationships. That’s unfortunate that you are so narrow-minded. I hope you never end up a single parent.
Ren#37, the LW DID say that it would make more financial sense if he gave up his place and lived with her. Apparently she thinks he doesn’t know it would be cheaper for him in terms of money. But I think that she thinks this arrangement would morph into a marriage, and it hasn’t. And after 7 years it probably won’t. If after 7 years a guy is still telling the women he doesn’t want a committed relationship, he is never going to give her that kind of relationship.
Zara, it would make financial sense for both of them if he moved in, not because she wants to mooch off him, but because it is cheaper for both of them to have one residence than two. Less rent, less mortgage, less to pay for utility bills… for both of them. Of course this is all assuming they have their finances together and run their household together, since they’ve been together for seven years. Maybe your assumption is that, he only pays for his own studio, comes over every day, crashes at her house, eats her food, uses her electricity and water and pays for none of it? in that case yeah, you are absolutely right, he would not benefit from moving in together, but something tells me that is not the case.
Yes, he is an extra bank account, because he lives with them and is for all intents and purposes a part of their family. If he is not an extra bank account, that would mean the OP supports him financially? why would she do that?
@Ren 37: The OP wrote, “I recently said I want him to fully move in because I think it would be financially better” so, yeah, there was talk about living with her boyfriend bc it made financial sense. However, like you, I didn’t see any mention of her wanting help with the kids.
Writers words are I want him to move in because it would be financially better.
Im not saying single parents can not date or have relationships but they have to understand if they have younger children some people will not move in or commit.
divorce rate for second marriages is high! Why because of ex’s, children and financial obligations!
@Ren @37:
The LW wrote: I recently said I want him to fully move in because I think it would be financially better.
Presumably because she would benefit from him not paying a mortgage, etc. elsewhere?
I didn’t see the part where she said it would be financially better. But even still, before and after that she said:
“A year ago he started living with me, kind of. He keeps all of his clothes at my house sleeps there every night and spends his down time there even when I am not home.
He still keeps his apartment with his things in it. He calls it his “studio” (he is an artist) and he, after a huge disagreement, finally agreed it was the right thing to do.”
Where did she say it would be better for her financially for her and her kids? It sounds to me like she’s saying it would be financially better for him since he practically moved into her place and keeps all his stuff there. If she said that and she didn’t have kids would it be seen is so bad? She’s looking out for him more than herself or her kids.
People are busy attacking the fact that she’s a single parent and therefore unworthy of a man instead of the issue at hand, which is that he doesn’t want to commit to her. Is it because she has kids that he doesn’t want to commit? Only he knows that. He knew she had three kids going in and stuck around for seven years.
Bottom line is she needs to get rid of him if he doesn’t want what she wants. Her being a single mom has nothing to do with it.
Single moms out there…
A good man who lives with you is not going to go out and grab a bite to eat and not pay for the kids too.
If they go shopping together, food, clothing, school stuff, he’s not going to not chip in.
So while there is no overt mention of “men supporting the kids”, of course a man will. Probably not in terms of providing for their college tuitions and such, but lending money for gas or other incidentals like that? You know it’s going to happen.
If he keeps his own studio and never officially moves in, he contributes when he feels like it, but it won’t feel like an obligation, because he can always flee to his studio when doesn’t feel like it.
If OP wants to marry and he doesn’t then she needs to decide if that is a deal breaker and break the deal they have or accept it. Another OP who wants to somehow change her man. Doesn’t work.
Wow Zara, all I can say is it sounds like you are projecting a whole lot. Have you been burned by a single parent?
#35:
“…for each of these men [who do not date single mothers], there is a hundred others who do not mind blended families at all. So I wouldn’t go around spreading this idea that single mothers
Apparently, the OP wanted a single, eligible bachelor with no kids, though she came into the relationship with 3 kids of her own. The fact is, men in that demographic will not readily marry a single mom with 3 kids, as the OP has sadly learned. The men who don’t mind blended families are generally divorced dads with kids.
Also, there is a world of difference between a widow, a divorced woman with kids, and a never married woman with kids. Thus, in men’s thinking, not all single moms are created equal. Strictly speaking, only a never married woman with kids is a single mom.
Here’s a little advice to single moms and dating. Speaking from years of experience (I was a single mom for many years), and now 51 years old. A decent man who has character will not just “date” a single mother. He will consider the situation. A guy who is self-absorbed and out for his own gratification will. Of course only time will tell. I always felt that being a single mom was a feather in my cap as far as weeding out the players and the keepers.
I am going to disagree. If a woman has been married before the chances of getting divorce has greatly increased. About half of marriages end up divorce. Having 3 children is certainly a plateful. I remember my father who was a single dad having to provide 2 kids and when my father remarried and had another additional one it was very difficult.
Depending how much this guy makes it can be a huge risk for him. Child support for 3 children and lose everything he owns. Why should he take a risk in that situation. Also men are typically treated poorly. If I was him I wouldn’t see her. I would never date a single mother because of what she can do. If you listen to Tom Leykis there were plenty of men that didn’t follow the advice of Tom and they thought they knew better. Some of these men ended up dating or marrying single moms and pay a dear price for it. All of them said they thought this woman was different.
For those of you debating whether he doesn’t want to get married ever or just doesn’t want to marry the OP, that can be really difficult to know. Sometimes the guy himself isn’t too clear on this until he meets the girl that he eventually does marry. My fiancé was with an ex for 9 years, then another ex for 3 years. He told the first he never wanted to get married and dodged the second because she wanted kids. His parents have a bad marriage. It wasn’t until he met me that he seriously started to think about what marriage meant and whether he really wanted to write the institution off. He actually thought about whether he could one day marry me on our second date because he knew that what I was looking for in general was a relationship leading to marriage and if he couldn’t give me that one day he had best get out of the way. Knowing his history I made very sure to clarify with him 1)did he ever want to get married and 2) if he ever saw himself getting married to me (this came 6 months later). If you are of a certain age and want kids or marriage/re-marriage, don’t make assumptions. These things need to be clear. Helpful also is if you had an internal timeline and don’t wait 7 years to find this out.
@ TheThinker #45, “Apparently, the OP wanted a single, eligible bachelor with no kids”… We don’t have the information about what the OP wanted. We just know who she ended up with. Maybe they just liked each other, or (gasp) he liked her and pursued her until she said yes? Is eligible bachelor even still a thing these days? Even if it is, an artist would hardly qualify as one. Personally, I probably wouldn’t want to get involved with a man who in all seriousness thinks of himself as an “eligible bachelor”. So, if he doesn’t want me either, great, our feelings are mutual.
TheThinker,
The problem with comments from people like Ren is that they wear rose-coloured glasses when it come to relationships, believing that “love” will conquer all, and that if a man or woman truly loves someone, he or she will be with that person no matter what.
The harsh truth is that people approach relationships as a cost-benefit excercise – men readily accept and acknowledge this. Many women are in total denial, even though their behaviour and attitude to relationships indicate ottherwise.
Sure, many men would go for single mothers – because they cannot get anyone better – these men may be quite physically unattractive and/or may not have great career prospects. They may be very happy to “take on” another man’s children if they get to have regular sex with a single mom who is still quite young and very beautiful.
Men who are in great demand by women – tall, attractive, successful, intelligent, sociable and wonderful husband/dad material can get any woman they want – and they generally do not want single moms unless she is truly truly exceptional – much more so than him.
@ Androgynous, I agree that people approach relationships as a cost-benefit exercise, but I believe it’s not in the way you imply they do. The reason why people end up choosing partners who have children from previous marriages, is that they live in a real world. After a certain age, if a man wants someone that’s not young enough to be his daughter, and if he insists that he has to have a woman who’s never had children, he will, one, be looking for a long time, and two, because his pool will be so limited, he’ll have to compromise on her other qualities if her not having children is so incredibly important to him. Of course if he wants a trophy wife, then you’re right, he’ll be more selective on things like children and could also choose a much younger woman. But if he’s looking for a partner to share his life with, then his definition of both cost and benefits is not as straightforward as real material cost and benefits.
OP,
I was once in a similar situation as you. Fortunately, I had only been dating the guy for 14 months. He acted like he saw a future with me in the beginning, but after a year, he said that he wasn’t sure and started giving mixed signals (he hadn’t met anyone else yet, and did not want to give up the sexual benefits) I really cared for him and was confused by his behavior. Thank goodness I found Evan’s blog, learned that this gentleman was wasting my time, and ran–not walked–away from that relationship. Six months after I broke up with him, he met and married a woman 14 years his junior, after dating her for only ten months.
When I look back, I realize that he never really saw a future with me. He told me afterwards, that he said things he did not mean because he was speaking only in that moment. This guy that you have been in a relationship for the past seven years has made it clear that he does not want to marry you. The longer you continue to stay, the deeper the pain will be once he decides to move on–especially so if he decides to marry someone else shortly afterwards.
I agree with poster above that said she OP, has already been there, done that (wedding and kids) and a live in boyfriend is a reasonably good deal (for her age/situation/marriage market value). The boyfriend sounds reasonably happy and content, (is it real feelings, love, comfort, inertia, laziness? don’t many men stay married for these reasons) it’s already been seven years, we don’t know if he’s got one foot in and one out. He might very well stay forever.
@Goldie
I think Androgynous was spot on, actually. It’s still pretty easy to date childless women well into your thirties. There are many options out there. As a man gets older, the women’s children are are close to being, if not already, out of the house. So, it’s easy for a guy to avoid the grifters.
[email protected]
Yes, you’re right in saying that men past a certain age do date and marry women with children. The crucial difference here is that these older men do not have any step-parenting responsibilities whatsoever since the children of his partner would almost always be adult children. So in effect, he is dating a “single” woman in all but name because she does not need to devote as much time or energy to her adult children.
The problem arises when children are still young and need a lot of parenting. Most men are not up for that unless they really have no other options for relationships.
Whoever said we are projecting words into the boyfriend’s mouth when he said he’s not ready to be married and we think he means not ready to be married to her… well, people are saying this because the relationship is 7 years. You should know after being with someone for 7 years that you want marriage, unless you are one of those people who says they don’t believe in marriage but people say that all the time and when they meet the right person, they change. Move on in the relationship. My last relationship was on/off again but it wasn’t progressing on his part. Yes I was the one being on/off but my feelings were deepening but I chose to get out because I saw the signs that he wasn’t serious for a relationship and I wanted one. He was a divorced dad with 1 son who was 10 so that was partly why it was on/off and he looked older then his age.
i cant believe how this has turned into a discussion on dating women with children and all of the negative opinions about that. It makes us single moms feel like there is no hope…..
@ Androgynous: “The problem arises when children are still young and need a lot of parenting. Most men are not up for that unless they really have no other options for relationships.”
Cannot argue with that! To be honest, I’m not up for that myself. I did bail on a single dad once (two special needs kids and one young child) because the potential responsibility was just too much for me to handle. So yes, I agree on that count.
So now single women with kids are “grifters”? The OP got together with her boyfriend when the kids were 10, 8, and 3. He knew was getting involved with a women with young children. After 7 years, I’m guessing he has a relationship with them as well as with the mother, especially if he practically lives in their house, keeps his stuff there, has keys, and comes and goes as he pleases. And the OP has been supporting herself for all this time (plus whatever financial support she gets from the children’s father, if she gets any). I’m guessing that the “artist” is not a wealthy man.
Why is SHE the one labeled a “grifter”?
I also date man with two small kids. First of couples of months were great but I realized I didn’t want to be a step mom. I also felt my needs were not being met. it was not his fault he just didnt have enough time. I understood that … And moved on. Now I have a partner who doesn’t have children and I feel alot happier.
When single dads have asked me out I poliety declined them. small children do not fit my lifestyle. I might be called selfish … But Im happy.
jlhsr- I wouldn’t feel that way if I were you. It may be better to set your sights on another single Dad, but even if you’d prefer a childless guy I would not say there is no hope, just potential issues to be aware of.
jlhsr
I know a mother with three children who met her current partner nearly ten years ago while her kids were still at home. My ex boss, a senior partner in a law firm with a girl in every port finally married … a single mother in her forties. He adopted her daughter. They went on to have two children together. A friend of mine with three daughters living at home met someone in her forties and married him in her fifties. They are still married over ten years later.
Certain people have very strong beliefs on what they feel is acceptable and unaccpetable and when they say “men this” or “women that”, they’re really saying “me” not fathoming that others have different experiences. Every example contradicting them is an exception and they are the absolute norm. Well, there are enough exceptions that you don’t have to give up hope. Sure, the carefree bachelor around town may not be your best match, but women younger and more beautiful than any of us have been disappointed by those men too.
As for finances, I bought my own flat. I earn a good salary but should I end up with someone yes, I will be happy to be splitting the bills and not having to pay single room supplements to go on holiday. That doesn’t make me a scrounger. It’s called sharing.
Marymary in #61 says it best
Simple don’t date men who are aren’t able to accept you come as a package and a family if you already have children.
Only date men who pursue you and prove with their actions that they want the whole package.
Don’t pursue men, let them pursue you and prove themselves worthy of being in yours and your childrens lives.
And any man who calls women names like grifters or any other degrogatory names, is not worth a moment of your time. Men like that are worthless to you and best completely avoided.
I think Selena has a point in #34. If marriage is Cahnie’s goal, then this is the wrong guy for her. However, why should marriage necessarily be the endgame? The guy has stuck around for 7 years, has moved in (despite retaining a refuge for his work), and is apparently well-integrated into her “family”. Are a piece of paper and a piece of metal going to somehow make that permanent?
FTR, some people want to be able to work at home, some people don’t. I refer you to The Oatmeal: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/working_home. Maybe the guy needs a place to work without kid-ly distractions.
@ Goldie #35: I sincerely doubt that for every man who isn’t interested in dating a single mom that there are a hundred others who are. I’d be surprised if the ratio was even 1:1.
@ Joe, my bad, I was thinking about my age group (40s). A man who would want to date a woman in her 40s with no kids, and would not compromise on that, might as well say he wants to date a unicorn and won’t compromise. He’ll be waiting a long long time. Besides, most men that are dating in their 40s and 50s, already have kids of their own, so it doesn’t come as a shock of their lifetime to them that other people may have children too. I have already agreed that the situation is different for the younger crowd, but I can honestly say I have never met a man in my age group (or older) that said he was holding out for a woman with no kids. And I have plenty of single male friends who sometimes talk to me about these things. No one is that idealistic. For someone in their 20s, I agree, it wouldn’t even be 1:1. And, I might add, pretty much every guy (and woman) I’ve talked to draws the line at very young children. So I’d say it says a lot in Cahnie’s man’s favor that he got together with her when the kids were 10, 7, and 3 (and he himself was 29 at the time), stuck around for seven years, and apparently conducted himself in this relationship in a way that makes both Cahnie and her kids happy (otherwise she’d be referring to him as her ex by now). You and Selena are right. He just might be a keeper.
@Joe – you sound like my fiancé when he was trying to dodge getting married to his ex girlfriends. ” I’m not anymore committed if I had a piece of paper” etc, why must marriage be the end game etc. Well I’m not exactly sure what internal process he went through when he met me but all of a sudden he felt like marriage is a higher level of commitment, that it does signify something special and all the sappy cultural norms are true. It beats me how men go from being skeptical about marriage to being its cheerleader but I’m glad in my case the process existed. He can’t exactly even articulate himself but it just happened and its just how he feels.
@Goldie – my gut reaction to the original post was much like Evan’s PS. I think there is something off in this relationship and parties sense that in some way. She does not seem secure in the level of emotional safety as represented by the next level of commitment he is providing and wants an extra level of commitment. I think the financial part is just an excuse to have him closer. And he does not feel comfortable being closer. He is already practically living there but balks from any official recognition or finalization of that. If its a matter of workspace he can keep a studio apartment and still get married. But he does not want to blend their identities together permanently in any way. Do you think it’s good to be with someone who is rejecting you and your family on such a fundamental level?
The significance of that little piece of paper is enormous indeed. A man and woman can practically be living as man and wife, but that piece of paper legally binds them to each other – so if one decided to break it off to pursue someone else, there are legal and financial ramifications for that.
I think Cahnie senses her boyfriend has one foot out the door, or at least wants to keep his options open. He is 36 without children and if I were him, would be wanting to keep my options open too – since I may want to have kids one day and Cahnie, at 40 with three children (one under 12) is not likely to provide me with the children that I may want some day.
I think he is battling a battle between wanting to be with Cahnie and sensing that there is no long term future with her. I really think he should be honest and not say things that are not the real cause of his lack of committment – ie losing his identity blah blah.
Well I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks a 29 yr. old man who gets involved with a woman with 3 young kids, sticks around for 7 YEARS (longer than many marriages last) helping her raise her kids…just might not be a total douchebag. Especially when SHE says he loves her and she is happy.
Having read this blog almost from it’s inception, I know the commentary is predominately from women who wish to be married, or re-married. I knew what the typical response would be to this letter and almost didn’t comment – why bother? Minds are going to be made up: guy’s a jerk for not marrying her after 7 years. Never mind that he’s BEEN THERE for 7 years while her children were growing up and emotionally supporting their mother. That doesn’t count. That’s not as important as a certificate put away in a drawer.
I wrote because it can be hard enough in this life to find someone you genuinely connect with. Hard enough to find someone who WILL stand by you. Love you. Someone you can love in return. The letter writer appears to have that. SHE doesn’t mention dumping him, she is confused why he feels the way he does about marriage. Thinks it’s childish. I am merely pointing out she might have good thing here – why throw it away? She might regret it if she did.
@Marie #67:
But he does not want to blend their identities together permanently in any way. Do you think it’s good to be with someone who is rejecting you and your family on such a fundamental level?
What a load of…hyberole.
There is so much projection going on in this thread it would be amusing – if it weren’t so sad.
Choose happiness folks when you find it. And when you find it, realize how fortunate you are.
Selena #69, the issue isn’t whether he’s a douchebag. It’s whether he is likely to give her the commitment SHE wants. Something prompted Cahnnie to write in the first place: she felt she was not getting what she needed from her boyfriend. He might be a nice guy, but I think it’s unlikely at this point that he is going to change his mind and be in an official committed relationship with her.
@Selena
Choose happiness folks when you find it. And when you find it, realize how fortunate you are.
Except the OP wouldn’t have wrote to Evan if she was happy.You seem to set aside her right to happiness. She is unhappy in the situation, its highly unlikely to change, she should leave and pursue happiness.
Selena- I don’t disagree with your overall sentiment but the OP does not seem happy. Whether she should or not, she’s been wanting to marry him since Year 2. She’s upset that he planned to move in and pulled out at the last minute. She’s losing respect for him ( calling him childish). This sounds to me like a woman who has been trying to wait out her boyfriend’s not ready-ness, not someone who has been pretty blissful and content for 7 years. Being happy as long as you don’t talk about one subject, when that one subject is a big one and something you’ve wanted since the second year, doesnt sound that great to me.
From the letter paragraph 3:
We are really happy as long as we don’t talk about this kind of commitment.
I form an opinion based on the words the person wrote.
I’m weird like that.
@Selena – while I agree with a lot of your past comments I have a hard time figuring out where you’re coming from here. I haven’t read all of the comments but the majority of them here aren’t calling the guy a douchebag at all but rather say he is justified in his desires. In fact most people have been exceedingly nice to the OPs boyfriend. I certainly have never criticized him or his character and his choice isn’t wrong. and I’m not saying that marriage should be for everyone. But the fact of the matter is marriage and/or cohabitation is important to the OP and there lies the fundamental difference. They have divergent visions of their ideal future life together, and different hopes and dreams for that. To me, if the OP allows herself to continue to stay in this relationship despite her unhappiness at the elephant in the room, she would be settling and not in a good way. As Julia says, she deserves a chance at finding happiness the way she has defined it for herself. Now if she makes the calculation like you suggest and decides to continue and accept the relationship on his terms that to me is a cost benefit analysis. She has a right to decide that but what do you make of Evans comment that he will leave eventually anyways? You haven’t addressed. If they are so bloody happy together why would he leave?
@ Goldie# 50: There actually are women over 40 that never had kids for various reasons. We are a minority, but we are out there.
@Ruby
I can see how you interpreted my comment the way you did. I do not think that all single women w/kids are grifters, and I definitely wasn’t accusing the OP of that. I was specifically responding to another poster’s comment that I believed to be inaccurate.
My point was that many guys (that have options) will simply avoid them altogether because of the possibility of being expected to financially support and/or help raise the kids down the road.
Chance how does a woman who already has children expecting a man to help or finacially support/provide for her and their family if and when they decide to take the plunge and co create a shared life together make her a grifter? As if he wants to and is willing to take that on they now become part of his familiy. As he already knows she has children how on earth can she be classed as a grifter? As grifter means to cheat or swindle.
What exactly do you think is that woman cheating or swindling out of him in your eyes?
Any woman with childen can hardly hide the fact that she has them and if she is dating, most women are dating in the hope of finding someone to share and co create a loving relationship and life with. So where exactly is the deceit swindling and cheating?
I’m not so sure this guy isn’t into her – I don’t think he would have stayed with her 7 years if he wasn’t. Also, she feels as if he loves her, she hasn’t complained about that.
I get the feeling this guy might just be an uncommittable type, a commitment phobic, or maybe a bit emotionally unavailable. These guys are not bad guys, but they do like to keep the relationship on their terms and they do like to maintain a bit of distance. Bottom line, he is not in the relationship with both feet and Evan’s advice is absolutely spot on correct.
@Selena
I form an opinion based on the words the person wrote.
I’m weird like that.
I look at actions. Happy people don’t write dating coaches about their situation. People can lie with words all the time, actions rarely lie.
@Marie #73
…but what do you make of Evans comment that he will leave eventually anyways? You haven’t addressed.
I did address that in comment #24. Second paragraph from the bottom.
If they are so bloody happy together why would he leave?
Indeed, why would he?
Marie, unlike many of the commenters, I am not convinced that this woman has been desperately unhappy for years because her lover doesn’t want to marry. SHE has been married. SHE knows marriage does not guarantee permanency. Neither does dumping someone you love in hopes of finding someone else. I’m merely suggesting to the LW (and anyone in a similar situation) to examine what they really have. Maybe, just maybe, it really is a good thing – as is.
@Julia #78
Her actions have been to stay with this man for 7 years. Why would she do that if she were so unhappy? While also claiming they ARE happy until they talk about this issue. Her words and actions do seem to match up.
Not all men who refuse to marry their girlfriends of 7, 10 or more years are commitmentphobes. In many cases (by no means all), the real reason is that those women have not made it beneficial for the men to take the next step.
Men will naturally evaluate every transaction they find themselves in (including romantic endeavors) using cost-benefit analysis.
When a man gets involved with a woman, he will instinctively place her into a category (just friends, friends with benefits, girlfriend potential, or wife material). Sometimes, a girlfriend has some deficiencies which the man has complained about, and is hoping that the woman will address. As long as she does not address those deficiencies, she will never be promoted to the next stage, no matter how long the relationship lasts. As long as she has enough qualities to qualify her as a girlfriend, she will continue to be that, but no more. This sometimes explains why men seem to be comfy with a prolonged relationship with the same woman without marrying her.
Unfortunately for the woman, she thinks that her refusal to address the man’s concerns as a girlfriend is an expression of her “independence”, and the man’s acquiescence is an acceptance of her status. Alas, she does not know that that is exactly why the man refuses to “promote” her to the position of a wife, though she is a “good” girlfriend. The fact is, a marrying man will marry a woman in no time, if he finds her a marriageable woman.
The situation above might be somewhat different. Chances are, the man has evaluated this woman over the years, and he had concluded that all she will ever be is a girlfriend. The woman, by omission or commission, had unwittingly accepted that arrangement. However, she is now trying to renegotiate the relationship, and the man is not interested in changing the terms.
So, there are four possible outcomes:
1. The woman gets out of the relationship. Will be painful for all concerned, including the kids. Not a likely scenario.
2. The man concedes and marries her. The marriage will inevitably break down soon afterwards, because the push is one-sided. Again, not a likely scenario.
3. The man moves on to another relationship. Possible, but not the most likely scenario.
4. The status quo is maintained; the woman accepts that she is unlikely to get married to this man. Most likely scenario
@Julia #78:
I look at actions. Happy people don’t write dating coaches about their situation.
Actually, they do. This woman needed advice. We all need advice all the time, and that is no proof of our unhappiness.
People can lie with words all the time, actions rarely lie.
The OP had no reason to lie to the person giving her advice. She is an adult, and intelligent enough to know that when you mislead your advisor, you will get a wrong advice. Let’s give adult women credit for being adult enough to say what they mean and mean what they say.
@ Aisling #74: I do know that you guys, er girls, are out there 🙂 I just pointed out that making “no kids” a deal-breaker, if the man is looking at the 40 and over crowd, would limit his options by a large margin. (Just like the examples, often discussed on this forum, of women holding out for a man who’s over 6 ft tall, has never been married, and makes over 100K. They do exist, there’s just not enough of them to go around.) So for that reason, to the men that I know personally, it is not a deal-breaker.
As for why Cahnie wrote the letter – I honestly think that, all these years, she’d had that mental picture of the future in her head, that involved moving in together and getting married, and now she’s realizing that the future, with this man, may not happen exactly the way she envisioned it. So she’s trying to figure out what takes priority, her future plans or her bf. Like I said before, I just recently found myself in a similar situation, and my bf chose to end it – but we didn’t just want slightly different things, like it seems to be the case here – the arrangements that he and I wanted were, long-term, pretty incompatible with one another. Whereas Cahnie’s bf seems to want basically the same thing she wants, except for minor details like keeping his studio and not getting a marriage license. (I have to admit that getting or not getting married *is* a minor detail to me personally, so I am biased here.)
As to why Evan said “he will leave you eventually anyway”, I honestly do not know. I’m kind of wondering myself. I don’t get this vibe from the letter. Keep in mind he is an artist. Yes, “he will lose himself and everything he loves to do if he moves in and gets married” would be strong words coming from a CPA, but an artist’s mindset is different.
Goldie … There is a big different with dating someone with small children and someone who has adult children. Alot people are open to the idea of dating someone with grown children but dating someone with 3 small children can be a huge stresser on the relationship.
He doesn’t need to marry her, he is already getting the benifits of her behaving like a wife without her being a wife Along with coming and going when he pleases so he gets to have his cake and eat it, he is hardly going to give up that.
Lesson don’t treat him like a husband with all the benifis that come with that if he isn’t committing to you and asking you to be his wife. If a wife or life partner is what you want to be.
Of course he will stay and get his feet under the table without making a committiment if there is a woman out there who is willing to offer and be available for that. I’m sure he is as happy as Larry with that arrangement.
Company when he wants it, meals cooked when he wants, laundry done, someone willing to share their bed and body. All this and without having to commit and to be able to come and go as he pleases.
Cut him loose, learn from it and be open to finding someone who values what you have to offer and realises how lucky he is and wants to commit, share and co create a life with you.
He could have watched male friends and family go through divorces they didn’t want. Seen the devastation that they go through, so he is terrified of getting to that level of legal commitment also. We men normally loose large portions of our assets and access to our children. Many men have observed the forced change in adult relationships and are reacting to that as best we can. It isn’t commitment phobic, it defensive relationship skills. It seems like their is no loyalty, love, respect long term.
@Rose # 85: Well put. There are also women, especially those over 40, who do not want to live with someone or get married. Some actually like the arrangement the OP describes. Companionship with plenty of personal space. If one wants marriage, it makes sense to cut your losses and believe that there is someone out there who wants the same. This scenario is one of several reasons I do not believe in cohabitation before marriage. I’ve always felt that it is a bad deal for women who truly desire the status of wife. Of course, if both parties have the same relationship goals, it is a different story.
Okay, Rose, in all fairness. This guy’s second residence also happens to be his place of work. Do all of us, who to to work at an office every day, also “come and go as we please” so we can get our cake and eat it too?
True Josh he may have and that maybe the case and if it is then any man in entitled to live his life however he chooses and choose to stay single.
And if a woman wants to be married and have a family, then she is entitled to whatever she wants to and the two would not be a compatible match, so are wasting each others time.
Men don’t lose their assets when they get divorced. They were shared assests so they get shared and split dependant on the individual circumstances and legnth of the marraige, children etc.
If a man doesn’t want a family and to take that risk then stay single. Can’t have your cake and eat it though unless you find a women who is ok with that.
And if as woman you want a family and to be married then don’t let a man get all the benefits of having a wife until you are one. Stop agreeing to being an indefinate for now girlfriend or semi live in lover. Take control of your own life.
Most women don’t want to keep being a for now girlfriend or to have endless flings, they want to get married and share a life and family with a man who they love and loves them. Relationships move foreward, stay stuck or fade to nothing. And after seven years it is stuck and not going in the direction of happy ever after.
Lol Goldie do men really get away with I’m sleeping at the office tonight darling?
Get an office then and get real. What a load of BS
@Rose #90
From the letter paragraph 2:
He keeps all of his clothes at my house sleeps there every night and spends his down time there even when I am not home.
He’s not sleeping at his studio, he’s sleeping with her every night.
Just a tip: I find it helpful sometimes to actually read the letter before writing a comment.
I’m with Selena on this one. In # 79 she wrote:
“SHE has been married. SHE knows marriage does not guarantee permanency. Neither does dumping someone you love in hopes of finding someone else. I’m merely suggesting to the LW (and anyone in a similar situation) to examine what they really have. Maybe, just maybe, it really is a good thing — as is.”
If LW wants to get married because she thinks that it is the ultimate expression of love and devotion, she is not living in the reality of today. Yes, for the never-been-married, I do think it is the ultimate expression of love. But for those of us who have already been married…and now divorced…we should know better. Marriage is not the ultimate expression of love, DEVOTION is. And DEVOTION does not need a piece of paper. It’s either there or it’s not.
For the OP if she doesn’t feel that her man is devoted to her, some piece of paper won’t magically make him so.
So, like Selena, I think OP needs to ask herself WHY it is so important that she be married. And once she can articulate that reason (or those reasons), discuss those reasons calmly and rationally with her man.
If she TRULY believes that it’s ONLY a financial benefit, she needs to present the reasons to him that way. “Baby, I’ve done the math. If we combine incomes and expenses, we’re going to have an additonal $500 per month between us to spend. That’s $6,000 more than we have right now. And if we marry, we can claim the tax credits for couples, and that’s another $1000. Plus you can go on my health insurance.”
I know, doesn’t sound romantic, but if it’s the truth, he can’t argue it. And if he says no, then it’s not finances, that’s stopping him from marrying her but something else.
If she wants to marry because she wants to “take his name” — She can just ask him how he feels about her changing her last name officially (you can do this without marrying, you know) — without getting married. If he’s incredulous, she should find out why. If he says, “go for it.” Then she can go for it.
Once she can articulate the REAL reasons for her “needing” to marry him to be happy, she’ll have a better chance of changing his mind with sound reasoning than her nebulous “I’m not happy unless I’m married” message.
“Happiness is a choice.” Sometimes to be happy, all you need to change is your mindset or your expectations. Not always easy to do, but it’s free, and it works.
Why are we focusing on the value of marriage again? This woman cannot even get the guy to move in, with or without marriage.
Yes you are right Selena realised that after I had already pressed send and re read it
Excuse is still bullshit though re work. just buy or rent some office space.
Bottom line is he likes it just as it is. And she doesn’t. So after 7 years they are not on the same page so not compatible.
Karmic #92
Love it! Great advice.
@ #94:
Sounds like you still haven’t quite read the whole letter. He already rents an office space. It’s called his apartment.
Marie,
Remember the old saying, “Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?” — That was the question our mothers asked us to try to convince us to to not have sex before marriage. Worked really well, right? lol
Although not expressly written this way, some articles/blogs I’ve read have deemed “living together” the 21st century cow. Why would a man marry a woman if he’s already living with her and getting the wifely benefits without the responsibility that goes with marriage, as Rose has alluded to?
Those same blogs/articles have posited that if a woman truly has marriage as her goal, then she SHOULD NOT – AT ALL – EVER move in with the guy before she has a ring on her finger and a date set. If I wanted marriage, that’s the way I’d go.
So, if the OP really wants to get married, she should actually ask the guy to move out. The fact that he’s not really moved in and not really living apart actually is a worse no man’s land than if he were to just live apart from her, because she really doesn’t have “her own space”. Maybe his “moving in” fully was her way to resolve that no-man’s land feeling.
Which actually reminds me — when things don’t work out and the man has moved in to the woman’s house, and she wants him out…the law doesn’t help a woman in this case. At the end of my 6yr relationship, I wanted my guy to move out. He wouldn’t. I went to the police and asked about my options. It was MY house, I paid the full mortgage without his help. I thought I had the right to ask the police to MAKE him move. Nope. I would have had to LEGALLY GET HIM EVICTED. I was NOT happy about having to go through that.
So if OP owns the house, and he fully moves in and things don’t work out, it could be a nightmare for her. That should be a consideration for her…and all women here who want to have their bf’s move in with them. Think about whether you’re comfortable being in the 21st century cow situation and be aware of the legal ramifications should he move in with you and doesn’t feel like moving out when things are over.
@KE
Although not expressly written this way, some articles/blogs I’ve read have deemed “living together” the 21st century cow. Why would a man marry a woman if he’s already living with her and getting the wifely benefits without the responsibility that goes with marriage, as Rose has alluded to?
I think you have a good point. I’ve never been a fan of moving in together before engagement. One man asked me to live with him and I turned him down, it was the right choice because he wasn’t a good boyfriend. I think its fine once there is a promise to get married to move in together in preparation. I don’t own a home and will likely never own a home on my own so I don’t need to worry about the legality of having a partner reside with me but I think your point was a good one and something more people should know.
Finding #7. Those who live together before marriage have higher separation and divorce rates.
Cohabitors who do marry experience a 50% higher divorce rate (Horn 1998).
Cohabiting couples have an 80%+ chance that their relationship will end: 40% breakup before they marry; the other 40% divorce within 10 years of marrying. Those who live together before marriage are the least likely to marry each other. A more comprehensive National Survey of Families and Households, based on interviews with 13,000 people, concluded, “About 40% of cohabiting unions in the U.S. break up without the couple getting married.” One of the reasons may be that those who cohabit drift from one partner to another in search of the ‘right’ person. The average cohabitant has several partners in a lifetime.
The risk of divorce after living together is 40 to 85% higher than the risk of divorce after not living together. In other words, those who live together before marriage are almost twice as likely to divorce than those who did not live together (Bumpass & Sweet 1995; Hall & Zhao 1995; Bracher, Santow, Morgan & Russell 1993; DeMaris & Rao 1992 and Glen 1990).
Psychology Today reported the findings of Yale University sociologist Neil Bennett that cohabiting women were 80% more likely to separate or divorce than were women who had not lived with their spouses before marriage. The National Survey of Families and Households indicates that “unions begun by cohabitation are almost twice as likely to dissolve within 10 years compared to all first marriages: 57% to 30%.” Another 5-year study by William Axinn of the University of Chicago of 800 couples reported in the Journal of Demography that those who cohabit are the most accepting of divorce. In a Canadian study at the Univ of West. Ontario, sociologists found a direct relationship between cohabitation and divorce when investigating over 8,000 ever-married men and women (Hall and Zhoa 1995:421-427). It was determined that living in a non-marital union “has a direct negative impact on subsequent marital stability,” perhaps because living in such a union “undermines the legitimacy of formal marriage” and so “reduces commitment of marriage.”
A 1992 random-sample survey of 993 Christianity Today subscribers found that 78 percent of those who have been divorced engaged in sexual intercourse prior to marriage. The study also found that those who had engaged in sex before marriage were more likely to commit adultery than those who had no premarital sexual experience. (CT Inc. Research Department, “Christianity Today Marriage and divorce Survey Report,” July, 1992.)
@Karmic & Julia
What wifely benefits are you referring to? Pretty much all women I know think that traditional housewife duties should be shared 50/50 with the husband/BF. Refusing to marry is simply for asset protection.
When will women on here view things equally between a man and a woman?? I find it hysterical how so many have said that it is the man’s benefit to live with a woman. Last I checked most people move in together as a financial benefit- a situation that benefits a woman just as much as a man. Enough with this nonsense about the poor woman….. Apparently, I view things more equally than most women on here ever will.
@Chance
I was quoting KE, I don’t utter phrases like “wifely duties” I was referring to a personal choice, of my own, which you must admit I have the right to make, to not move in with a man until he asks me to marry him. One man asked me and I turned him down, it ended up being a good thing because he was a bad partner.
Julia, you copied/pasted KE’s comment that noted how a man who lives with a women, without being married, is getting the “wifely benefits” without the responsibility or marriage….. and you said that she had a good point.
Did you write this by mistake? I’ll admit that I was a little confused by your comment because, after reading a number of your posts on here, I’m pretty confident that you don’t believe that a wife should adhere to any gender roles (no disagreement there).
However, that means your comment doesn’t really make sense. Were you implying that these men are avoiding the responsibilities of a husband even though you don’t believe that they should receive wifely benefits?
Oops, that would be *with a woman* and *responsibility of marriage*
I think the confusion lies with the fact that you chose to switch the word benefits with the word duties. The two mean very different things, duties implies a strict adherence to gender norms whereas the benefits implies that a man (or woman) get the benefits of a live in partner, similar to a spouse, without the legal commitment. I do actually agree with KE and her entire post but it would be silly to copy and paste the whole thing. I really don’t want to put myself in that situation unless there has been a clear promise of commitment from a man. I definitely think it makes sense financially to share expenses but I don’t need a partner to pay for half my housing, I want a husband to share my life with.
My mother always recommended that I live with somebody for at least a couple of years before marrying them because you never really know somebody until you have to share a space for some time. I think it’s sound advice.
Benefits of having a wife. Someone who lives with you 24/7 loves and is in love with you. is loyal, comitted and bonded and wants to only be with you forsaking all others is this life, committed to raising future children together and supporting each other in learning and growing together.
Why should a woman live with a man and give him all that without a committiment of marraige and the man saying to her and the world I want to make that comittiment to you and are future children or the children you already have?
If he is only offering to be a for now boyfriend, then you give back equally, he doesn’t get yoo all to himself and you keep yourself open to dating others for dinner coffee getting to know each other in incase you do meet someone who wants what you want which is to create a future family life together in a lovng loyal committed relationship.
If you are already loyal and have closed your options down and he has still got one foot in and one out after seven years he really is not that bothered about you and doesn’t want to claim you all to himself, so if he hasn’t claimed you and offered to take you of the market then don’t behave like you are his and off the market to others. He is just taking what he can and what you are making yourself available for. When there are other men out there who would want to be part of a family commit and claim you and be a family unit. Seven years is taking the pissssss and you tolerated it . How is that for a woman and children that after 7 years nobody even knows if he actually wants to stick around for the long hall.
Don’t waste another minute on him. He doesn’t value you or your family enough. Why are you and have you given him your exclusivity and committiment and let him mailnly live in your house before he has offered or given you his? His got one foot in the door and one out. Until someone wants to put two feet well and truly next to yours and say ” let’s do this together” only give them the same back. He doesn’t want to be a team and be there for you and your family and be a family.
He wants all the benefits without the committiment. So learn and next time don’t give and offer all the benefits to you get all the committiment that you want. He leads you follow. At the moment you are way leading this and he is not wanting to follow. He is saying he doesn’t want to.
@Julia
I believe that the duties (or better put: responsibilities) of the wife is implied because the comment refers to the man avoiding the responsibilities of marriage. I interpreted that to mean that a husband has specific responsibilities/duties that come with being married. I could be wrong in that interpretation… please feel free to point out what I’m missing.
At any rate, I was originally going somewhere that tied back to the OP’s dilemma, but I see that we’re veering further off-topic with each additional post. So, I’m going to assume that you’re a fair-minded person, and that you certainly didn’t mean that you thought that husbands have specific responsibilities in a marriage and that wives do not.
I don’t want to judge anyone who has moved in or wants to move in first before marriage/engagement. I do think that for certain personalities it does work better to be engaged first before officially moving in, so in that sense I agree with Karmic and Julia. For example, my fiance and I are both Builders (referencing Alison Armstrong) so we like the idea of making the decision of level of commitment before moving in and having the engagement as a “cornerstone” from which to build a strong and permanent foundation for our relationship. We wanted to make the conscious decision first of where our relationship was going to go instead of sliding into a multi-year cohabitation without a specific goal in sight. We did not want our decision to be clouded by convenience or too much proximity and we had spent enough time together staying over to be comfortable with each other’s habits.
Until he met me, my fiance had never really thought about it this way. His past gfs made it easy on him by just moving in without any demands so he was never forced to consider where the relationship was heading. He just fell into it, and then fell out of it. Sometimes he spend years co-habitating without any end goal and was always somewhat surprised when the woman suddenly brought up marriage or kids (when he had expressed at the beginning he wasn’t ready for that). Nothing was ever discussed upfront and no expectations were set. But with me, he knew my expectations and had to go through a period of soul-searching. Once he had decided and surprised me with the engagement (I had gone through the soul-searching too and decided I would say yes if he ever asked), he felt from then on, every action we took was deliberate and we were building something together that was going to be permanent. Was going to be for our future and that of our potential family. For example, we do things like invest and save together, and we even adopted two little kittens from a shelter, something he had always wanted to do but never did with his past relationships because at the back of his mind he never felt a sense of permanence. There was always an easy escape hatch and one foot out the door.
I do think even if you don’t get fully engaged, that these types of expectations should be addressed before moving in so that you are not just floating around out there and then one person expects something and gets crushed. If you are going to have a trial period of 1 year to live together then stick to that, for example.
In the OP situation, I don’t know if she tried to have such a conversation or not. I agree with Karmic that she probably should not have been “giving away the milk for free” but I am not sure what she could do about it at this late date. Would doing a 180 at this point be helpful and what does that mean to stop giving the milk? Stop letting him stay over? Stop sex? I think he might just decide at this point, screw it, I’m just going to get another cow!
@ Josh #99
“Cohabitors who do marry experience a 50% higher divorce rate (Horn 1998).”
Could it be because the people who believe that living together before marriage is a sin and therefore unacceptable to them, also believe the same about divorce? Not because living together is evil and must be avoided.
@ Karmic — The legal ramifications are a good point. I’ve never thought of it that way. Then again, after six years of living together, the whole thing probably felt more like a painful divorce than like an amicable separation anyway.
The whole cow/milk thing strikes me as something from the 19th century, when a woman could give up her virginity but once, and after that, she was damaged goods and not marriageable material. She was also the property of her husband, if memory serves me. Just like a cow is the property of a farmer. Well I do believe that we live in different times, when it is possible to have an equal partnership, if both sides so desire.
@Chance 108
If you keep looking at relationships through the ROI lens, you’re always going to find women who care more about money than you. “What the mind focuses on, it will lead you towards.” Like if a woman thinks all men are players, unfortunately, she’ll actually meet more than her fair share of players. Because the mind doesn’t judge what you think about as good or bad, it just knows you think about it and it leads you towards what you think. Probably too zen for most folks.
So, I’ve been on both sides of that household responsibilities. When I was married, my ex hubby did most of the house cleaning and the laundry; when I was in the 6 yr relationship, I did most of it. Those aren’t the benefits/responsibilities we’re talking about.
What makes a home a home isn’t who cleans this or that, it’s a feeling. It isn’t the actual act of who drops off or who picks up the dry cleaning, but the caring and thoughtfulness that goes into, “Hey, I’m dropping off my dry cleaning today you have some stuff to go too?”
In this way, I’m like men in that I struggle with the articulating those feelings, (so women, please help me out here) — Those feelings that sharing a home with a woman, in addition to her warm body whenever you want it, are the benefits I’m talking about. The reminders to go to the doctor, the nurturing when you have a cold, that sense of someone close by and caring about you. You really can’t get that living apart, even if you spend a majority of the time at each other’s place.
Those are the wifely benefits I’m talking about. You won’t understand until you’ve actually lived with someone you love for a while.
The reality is that most women puts herself into the position of “auditioning” to be a man’s wife when she’s living with him. The man is not auditioning to be her husband. She’s already chosen by the time they move in together. Unless he shows some real dealbreakers (or sometimes even when he does) she’s not going to dump him. And most men know this. So, yes, men may decide to marry for financial reasons, but once he’s moved in, he knows he’s in the drivers seat, and that “passive aggressive” thing that all you men hate about women, you end up exhibiting when it comes to getting married when you’re in a cozy live-in relationship.
Goldie @110
“Could it be because the people who believe that living together before marriage is a sin and therefore unacceptable to them, also believe the same about divorce? Not because living together is evil and must be avoided.”
lol You may want to reread your post. Your comments seem to contradict each other.
Josh, I don’t see how they contradict each other. Maybe I should elaborate?
“Cohabitors who do marry experience a 50% higher divorce rate”, compared, I assume, to couples that don’t live together before marriage. I think it may very well be because those couples that refuse to live together before marriage, do so on principle, because they think living together before marriage is immoral or whatever. These same people also tend to not believe in divorce. This is why they have a lower divorce rate than the rest of the population. Not because their marriages are more awesome, and especially not because their marriages were somehow made more awesome by the fact that they did not live together before getting married.
To the rest of us, there’s nothing wrong with living together before marriage, or with divorcing if things don’t work out. Which leads to the statistics shown above. On the surface, the higher numbers seem to mean that people who live together somehow fail at marriage, when in fact they just don’t want to stick it out at all costs.
Hope this helped.
It’s not a sin, it’s not in a womans best and highest interest if she wants to have a secure family unit. And wants a Husband and Father who will commit to looking after them and raising a family together in a secure enviroment. A legally binding cotract shown those intentions with action. Words are meaningless without actions that match. Just hot air.
My mother always recommended that I live with somebody for at least a couple of years before marrying them because you never really know somebody until you have to share a space for some time. I think it’s sound advice.
No, it’s not a sound advice. Our grandparents had much better marriages without living together with their potential spouses. Look at it this way: what if you discover, after living with a man for several years, that he is not good enough for you, or you good enough for him? What then? You or he will move out, and you will repeat the same cycle. And, how do you present that scenario to a potential husband, after 3 or more of such cycles? I think it’ll become challenging, because, frankly, your desirability to a man as a future wife and mother reduces somewhat with each cycle of living with another man. Why would a man choose you when there re countless women without such histories?
Or, flip it this way: would you choose a man who has lived with several women without marrying them when there are men without such history pursuing you? I think it is unlikely.
I am not being sexist here: I have seen it again and again in business and in life that women generally are poor negotiators. They give up what they have in hopes that the other party would be “nice”, and give them what they need. Well, it doesn’t happen that way.
In the olden days, a woman would not act as a wife, and fulfill her wifely duties (yes, there are such things as wifely duties), unless the man officially recognizes her as a wife, and fulfills his husband duties.
That is, until feminism came, and destroyed the age old dance of male-female interactions. Feminism told women that what they had was not valuable, that they must be like men and act like men to be respected. Thus women threw away their valuable leverage in marital negotiations, and sold themselves for cheap on a regular basis.
I think the modern woman should ask herself this question: why in heaven’s name should a man marry, when he can get all the benefits of marriage without the commitment? Would anyone here go to work everyday, particularly in the dead cold of winter, if they had enough money to last them a lifetime? I don’t think so. I for one would need another motivation to get me out of bed.
So, I think living together before marriage is counterproductive in most cases.
You had me up until:
“That is, until feminism came, and destroyed the age old dance of male-female interactions. Feminism told women that what they had was not valuable, that they must be like men and act like men to be respected. Thus women threw away their valuable leverage in marital negotiations, and sold themselves for cheap on a regular basis.”
Yeah, nope! Feminism didn’t tell women that what they had wasn’t valuable. Being a homemaker (as most women were back in those “good old days”) is and was a thankless job – you work well past the regular 9-5 day that a man works (especially when there are babies and small children involved) and you get no appreciation, respect, or pay for it. You get room and board (if that!) and the privilege of cooking your spouse’s meals, cleaning up after him, enduring the physical pains of bearing his children, raising them (with minimal help from him). Basically working like a dog and no respect or rights as a member of society. No one valued homemakers and women realized they had skills that could be both useful and lucrative outside the home. If being a housewife (house servant) and popping out babies was so idyllic, women would never have ventured outside the home.
It’s really easy to see why modern men long for those “good old days” (that none of them were actually alive to experience, so they have very misguided views on it!). They had all the privilege and power, while women were submissive and helpless. Do you honestly think women were happier back then? My mom was one of those homemaker’s and she made damn sure that all her kids got the right education and had independent careers, so that they wouldn’t be subjected to a thankless, boring, and submissive life like hers. And guess what? Just because the divorce rate was a lot lower back then, doesn’t mean that people were actually happier. People still had affairs and people became “estranged” (moved out) and men became “deadbeats” rather than file for divorce. Even if you look up the Hollywood starlets of the golden era (1920s-40s), many of those stars had multiple divorces and marriages – and this was pre-feminism! Marriage has never been idyllic – please don’t fool yourself about the “good old days” that you never actually lived.
The Thinker ?????
“Feminism told women that what they had was not valuable” What garbage!!!!!
Feminism was about gaining the right to vote , having the opportunity to equal pay and equal opportunity for a job without being discriminated against .
In the” good old days” my mother had 2 options of a job A nurse or a teacher at low pay The rest of the job were advertised as mens jobs only .I remember that clearly My mother stayed with an abusive man because she didn’t have the economic means to raise her kids.
Women in the “good old days” were on massive amounts of valium for depression .
The modern woman might say why the hell should I marry this man when I have my own economic power. If he’s good to her maybe should should But she doesn’t have to now. Many studies site that men are happier and healthier when married. If he wants to keep moving from one short term uncommitted relationship to the next he should knock himself out doing it.
Thinker, you mean the good old days when the husband banged the secretary, and the wife banged the milkman, because both felt that they were trapped in their marriage and the only way out was death? Those old days? You know, these days, divorce rate might be up from a century ago, but cheating is about as socially acceptable as picking one’s nose in public. For that alone, I prefer here and now over the good old times.
@Goldie 116
I’m with TheThinker on this one.
Cheating happens nowadays as often as it did back then. Cheating has not changed.
What has changed is that Equal Opportunity has allowed women to make enough money so that that they’re usually able to extricate themselves out of unhappy marriages. But Sexual Liberation has made it EXTRAORDINARILY difficult for many women to secure marriages, happy or otherwise, in the first place. So most women have “given in” as TheThinker is saying, and “settling” for LTRs when they are in fact looking for marriage (as per OP of this thread).
———————
I believe a huge segment of Evan’s clientele are the never-been-married-never-had-children-can’t-have-NSA-sex women. Feminism hurt those women more than most because
1) it made those women postpone looking for marriage partners until she achieved the business success that feminism taught her to value, at which time it’s usually too late for her to get the “best catch”
2) it freed up the men who normally would have married them to stay single because those men can get sex from all those truly sexually liberated women, which was one of the reasons why men married in the olden days, to get access to regular sex in a socially acceptable way. Sexual liberation made pre-marital sex socially acceptable. Need I say more?
Unless you can have NSA sex, sexual liberation didn’t help you in the least. What good is birth control if when you’re ready to have children, the man you want to have them with is having sex with someone younger than you who CAN have NSA sex, who has more fertile years left than you?
I know how EASILY a woman can get pregnant is not significantly different between her 20’s and 30’s, but the fact remains that if a 40 year old man can marry or be in a relationship with a woman in her 20’s or early 30’s who’s having (NSA or relationship) sex with him, why would he choose to be with a woman in her 40’s demanding monogamy from him before having sex with him?
40+ yo women (maybe even 35+ yo women) who still treat their female body part (after marriage and kids) as if it were a virginal body part that any man would be lucky to get, you’re living in the wrong century. The value of that female body part went down as soon as you lost your virginity, and again when you married, and again when you had kids.
So if it’s not your female body part that you guard so ferociously, what is it that will win you the man you really want? It’s YOUR PERSONALITY. That’s why I keep harping on improving yourself until you are KIND, FUN, CONFIDENT, SECURE, and HAPPY. For most men, those qualities are hard to come by in a woman. Not your no-longer-virginal body part that sexual liberation helped to devalue.
@Karmic Equation
Thanks for answering the question. I may not agree with all of your points, but I appreciate the debate.
“What the mind focuses on, it will lead you towards.” – interesting saying. Is that an eastern thing? I’ll give that some more thought.
Fair enough as it relates the wifely benefits you described, but I remain confused what responsibilities, then, the husband is avoiding by simply avoiding marriage as opposed to a LTR? Wouldn’t the “husbandly” benefits be similar, and couldn’t he provide that when not married?
“but once he’s moved in, he knows he’s in the drivers seat, and that “passive aggressive” thing that all you men hate about women, you end up exhibiting when it comes to getting married when you’re in a cozy live-in relationship.”
Have to disagree there. It never crossed my mind that I was in the driver’s seat when I and my gf started living together, but I could be an exception. Maybe I’m too stupid to realize it lol.
@KE
I think you greatly overestimate how much sex the average man is having. Sure the top 10% might be having tons of NSA sex but that leaves the other 90% who get laid occasionally, after having to go out with quite a few women. I know many single men and they aren’t having near the amount of sex you think they are. I am a woman who can have sex pretty easily, I’ve stopped mostly so I can focus on finding a partner but even when I had casual sex with ease I didn’t have it with everyone who wanted to, I wouldn’t have time to do anything else. So no, I don’t think that women who are single after 26 or doomed to either sleeping with whomever or just being alone.
I am 32, all of a sudden I don’t need to date men in their late 30s because there are a whole crop of men my age who are getting to a point in their education/career where they want a relationship and are looking for women their own age. I know we are a different generation but I don’t think what some people like TheThinker pass off as age-old wisdom really applies to us.
I agree with you – KE and The Thinker have some incredibly archaic opinions that do not really apply to this generation or future generations.
Goldie @ 113
I was referring to calling something that is sin, not evil. Which would be a contradiction.
Something else I remember about that study on the correlation of cohabitation and divorce rates. You are right, the point of view is central to the cohabitation and divorce rate. I never said the ones who stick it out have ‘more awesome’ marriages. But I do see the ones who don’t give up as believing in something better.
The same can be said when a spouse becomes seriously ill. My parents went through that before my Mom died. It lasted for more than a decade. My Dad was there for my Mom through the whole thing. The medical staff told me they hadn’t seen anyone stay married after one spouse became seriously ill for that long. One of my Mom’s nurses said they always saw the healthy spouse divorce and stop caring for they sick spouse. A high view of marriage.
Josh
Friend of mine cared for his wife for fifteen years when she got sick until she died. I suppose that was a bad ROI.
@The Thinker and Karmic,
I agree with you on the loss of importance of sex but I am afraid the wifely benefits are not a huge negotiating tool.
As it is often said here, men like low investment/low return relationships. Women want to get committment, and taking the step to live together with someone certainly signifies much greater level of committment than living apart. So, what you are saying is, to get the level of committment you want, you need to become a very desirable partner, and have him beg you to move in with him, but keep saying no until you have a ring?
Even if you replace “I do not sleep with a man unless he is my boyfriend” with “I don’t live with a man unless he is my fiance”, you are still negotiating to get something you want by pretending you do not want it too much. Same principle, and while it saves you the pain from being taken advantage of, I am not sure it produces the results you desire.
117 Karmic equation, I get what you’re saying but it only seems to be relevant if you assume that the woman wants marriage. You say feminism has hurt women, but the two examples you give are assuming that she wants to get married. Feminism has helped me because I see that I DON’T need to get married. Feminism has helped me get a job and a salary equal to a man doing the same work, to own property, and to get everything I need. The only reason to get married is if I wanted kids and wanted to raise them in the context of a married household, but I don’t want kids (and even if I did want them, I wouldn’t think it was fair to hook a guy just for that reason). Otherwise it’s more fun being alone and seeing others on my own terms.
After all, you’re not married are you? If you prefer to be unmarried, it is probably for the same reasons a lot of us like it that way. It doesn’t mean we can’t get into LTRS. Just that we don’t need to make it legal, and it’s better to leave the government out of it anyway.
I don’t think men do like low investment/low return relationships. I think people who’ve been hurt and are very afraid of being hurt again seek those things. But low investment/low return may sound more manly.
I can’t understand how to be a desirable partner without having sex, without getting emotionally close and without taking any risks. Who is the subset of the population who does that? Am I doing it wrong. While I am abstaining from sex before marriage my boyfriend and I are very very close, it’s kinda scary. Avoiding sex is not going to stop me from getting hurt if this goes south. In fact, I might be mad that we didn’t even get to do it!
When people talk about being taken advantage of, it’s not the sex or the money that’s the real stinker. It’s the time. You can’t get that back and life is so short.
Josh, I am sorry for your loss. My Dad passed away this spring; he and Mom had been married for 49 years, and had a very good marriage till the last day. It is very hard on her now. He got cancer five years ago, and the treatment did not work. So I can very much relate to what you are saying.
With that said. There is no contradiction in my post at all. What is a sin to you, may not be to someone else. So, just because other people believe cohabitation to be evil, does not make it so for everyone. They are free to have whatever beliefs they choose, and live them out as they choose, but those are their personal beliefs that do not, and should not, apply to everyone.
Also, I don’t see people divorcing their sick spouses left and right. Divorce is an expensive and cumbersome process, that people don’t usually jump into because the other spouse got sick. They do however start this process to get out of an abusive marriage, marriage to an addict, marriage that only exists on paper where spouses live as roommates and never talk to each other, etc. And they normally do it after they’ve tried all other options and none of them worked. The end goal of it being, not to dump the other person like a bag of trash on the curb, but to get both people involved to the point in their lives where they can move on and find someone that would really be a good match for them, that they can be happy and grow old with.
@ Julia #119, not your generation, but I agree with what you’re saying here. The 80-20 rule probably applies, i.e. 20% of men get 80% of the action. And most of these 20% aren’t even good partner material. The negative consequences of feminism are greatly overrated. Either way, I wouldn’t want a man to want me, not because he thinks I’m a great person and wants to share his life with me, but because I’m a virgin and he’ll be the first to plant his flag in this uncharted territory. I’m not cool with being objectified. I’m a person, an intelligent individual and a damn good partner, not just a female body part with some other irrelevant body parts attached to it like a package deal.
@Karmic, your #117 would be spot on, if “female body part” was all there was to a woman. Then yea, a 40yo would not stand a chance against a 20yo. However I’m not interested in men who are not interested in a woman outside of her female body part. Is anyone?
Exactly, women are not there sexual organs. That is part of a woman. Any man or woman who views women and objectifies women as their sex organs and does not see them as a whole person is not able capable of having and being in a healthy functional realtionship. They see women as accesories, or belongings like a car or house, favourite pair of shoes.
So it’s about not giving that part of you up until a man has proved consistenly with his actions that he is interested in you as the whole woman you are, rather than just your age and your sexual organs to use as a disposible commodity.So if a 40 yr old man chooses a 20 yr old woman who he is choosing because she is available and willing to have her body used without commmittiment over a 40 yr old who woman who is not avaialable of offering her body without being in a healthy comitted functional relationship, let them do and choose what they want. No healthy woman would want a man who chose that over her and what she was offering, the whole person and package in return for the whole person and package. I say no to dysfunctional dissconnected relationshps with dysfunctional discconected people. Leave them to each other. They are a match.
Mentally healthy women don’t want their bodies objectified and treated as if they are separate from their brains and hearts and to be used as disposible commodities. They want to be in fully connected fuctional loving relationships.
@Chance 118
So it never crossed your mind that your gf would like you to marry her? Who suggested moving in together?
@Julia 119
I actually agree with you, or rather you and Goldie, that it’s probably like 20/80. 20% of men are getting all the action they can handle; and 80% struggle, but probably can get some if they drop their standards, which we know men do. That pesky beer goggle effect.
However, if you read about what women angst about on this board, one of the major sticking points to dating a man (and/or having sex with a man) is that “he can’t be dating someone else” or “he can’t be sleeping with someone else” or “he has to agree to sexclusivity first.”
So, either most women here are dating the 20% and need that sexclusivity promise to “feel safe” (makes sense – but should they be dating that 20% guy who has so many other options than she??) — or are these women dating the 80% guy and asking for sexclusivity from a not guy getting any? She’s asking for something she already has, de facto, so Why ask (for sexclusivity) at all?
I know you and I don’t. But I’m asking the other women who do ask for sexclusivity. Which man are they dating? The 20% guy or the 80% guy? — If she doesn’t know, then maybe she needs to figure that out before having sex with him, regardless of whether he agrees to sexclusivity or not, because as Goldie # 125 states, that 20% usually aren’t relatioship material anyway. In other words, imo, if a woman has to ask for sexclusivity, then she hasn’t properly qualified the man for her relationship needs (because she doesn’t know for sure he’s the 80% guy)–or she thinks she’s dating the 20% guy, who isn’t relationship material in the first place.
@Goldie 125
Of course we are more than our “female body part”, it’s her LOVE and her personhood. But the women here guard themseleves from having sex as if it were the MOST important thing for her to give in a relationship. You read from this board of women who fall in love with their bfs without certain reciprocity. You don’t hear of women lamenting having given their love to the wrong guy, they’re upset they gave their body.
So you tell me, am I, the woman who withholds giving her love until the man is proven worthy, or is it the woman who withholds giving her female body part until the man proves himself kinda/sorta worthy, who is giving higher value to her female body part?
@Karmic Equation
I actually did my own version of Evan’s speech the other night. Not the exclusivity part but explaining why I needed to wait. I was on a very good first date, we talked easily, joked, held hand and made out quite a bit. He was trying to get me to go with him and I said “I am lots and lots of fun, like the best time of your life but I need some emotional build up before I get there.” He put a big smile on his face and said “That’s the most perfect thing you could’ve possibly said.” I didn’t negotiate a commitment, I just let him know I need more to get to that point but I am worth the wait. Let’s see if he asks me out again (fingers crossed really but I have 3-4 men lined up besides him)
@ Karmic 127. Oh, I see what you mean. Agree with what you’re saying. I, too, don’t get what is so terrible about giving your body. You and your body supposedly had a good time, unless the sex was bad. Giving my heart, and my time, is what I would have issues with, just like you. And even then, it can be a learning experience.
Re: 20/80: Sure, the guys with the most stereotypically attractive features + the drive to play the field will get the most actions from all women minus the very least attractive ones that he will not bother settling for even in down times. But it does not mean that the rest does not get any sex at all. Of all those other men, some have plenty attractive features but do not have the drive to maximize their dating, and some less attractive do have some drive and succeed at “game”. Those men will still get sex. How does a woman know whether they are dating multiple women at once or not? And even if she knows, an agreement to start a relationship will still have to be made.
Re: wifely duties: I think it’s an expression that women use to express their frustration at a situation that feels “they are giving it all” while not receiving the marriage proposal they are hoping for. Of course, men fulfill husbandly responsabilities when cohabiting as well, but the expression does not have the same connotation. The problem is that in general, women tend to do high-risk investments in their dating/relationship without even realizing it, whereas men are more pay-as-you go types. Women have sex while hoping for exclusivity, whereas men simply enjoy the sex they have in the moment. Women enter a cohabitation while hoping for marriage, whereas men cohabite to share housing costs, enjoy more companionship, and see where it goes. Basically, on their path to secure long-term love and support, women tend to give more than they are actually comfortable giving, while attaching unspoken/unconscious strings to their actions.
The solution is to become aware of our needs and communicate them adequately before moving to the next stage. It’s also turning the high-risk investment of “hope” into the lower-risk one of “facts”, by discussing what each stage truly means and making sure that both parties are getting their needs met. It’s more safe than giving something by simply hoping to receive compensation later on.
In the past, the turning point was sex. If people wanted sex, they had to get married. Still the case in conservative societies by the way. Nowadays there pretty much is no turning point, which is dangerous for the stability of marriages. But it’s up to people still desiring marriage to make cohabitation as their turning point in the path to a life commitment. But a turning point needs COMMUNICATION.
Karmic interesting post – so you are saying why ask for exclusivity because it’s just female body parts so kind of pointless, focus on winning him over with personality instead? I guess that could work if you can divorce your mind/heart from sex. For me I can’t have sex until I care deeply about a guy and I can’t care deeply about a guy until we have established a safe zone for me to let down my guard. That means our relationship has naturally progressed to bf:gf and exclusivity goes along with that for me. I’m always intrigued by women like you who can have NSA without getting hurt. The world must be very different. I’m happy where I am though. I got my guy the way I felt was most authentic for me – or should I say I let him catch me, haha.
@Julia 128
Well said. I could see myself saying something like that as you’re not asking for anything but time to develop feelings.
@Goldie 129
That is exactly what I mean!!
@Marie 131
“That means our relationship has naturally progressed to bf:gf and exclusivity goes along with that for me.”
Who brought up the bf/gf thing? If he brought it up, that’s what I’m talking about 🙂 Your personality made him want to commit to you, and progression of your relationship was HIS idea. That is the key. If you manage the relationship so that the guy thinks it’s all his idea, you end up with better results. Sounds like that’s what you did. Congrats 🙂
As to the NSA sex without getting hurt, it’s both a blessing and a curse. A blessing because I can. It’s a curse because the reason I can is that I’m non-orgasmic during intercourse, so I don’t get slammed as much by oxytocin as other women. God has a sense of humor 😀
@Marie
A variation in the oxytocin receptor gene is linked to how strongly women bond to a partner through sex. Most women are unable to have NSA sex without getting hurt; it is beyond their control. Some women have the so-called A-allele of the oxytocin receptor gene, which prevents them from getting attached emotionally to men after sex. They are the lucky ones who are able to enjoy NSA sex.
@Fusee
Excellent analysis. I think you hit the nail on the head pretty much from top to bottom.
@Karmic
It did not cross my mind at all. The reason being is that, in any relationship that I’ve been in, I have made it abundantly clear from the start that I do not want to get married at any point in my life. I figure that it’s fair to communicate that very early on. There have been women who have broken up with me on the spot because of it, and that’s fair. There is no sense in wasting each others’ time if we don’t have the same end-goal. I honestly don’t believe hat many men realize that the woman is “auditioning” for marriage when they begin living together. I think men generally start living with women for the reasons that Fusee described so well.
I think one of the worst things a woman can do to both herself and her guy is to hope that one day he will come around and want to get married – when he has shown all the signs that he has no such intentions or even flat-out said that he doesn’t intend to get married. She will end up making herself miserable, obviously, and the man will have no idea why she is so angry and frustrated with him.
marymary @121 “Friend of mine cared for his wife for fifteen years when she got sick until she died. I suppose that was a bad ROI.”
I would say it was a good RoI myself. it’s what being married really means. Each is the one person indispensable and irreplaceable to the other.
KE
I’ve not found sex to be the mythical bonding experience either. However, I’ve had several men describe me as “addictive”, and I’m thinking “huh?”, of what is it you speak?
@Karmic Equation 132,
I am of the opinion that all women can have NSA sex, and this oxitocyn thing is yet another attempt to find a medical reasoning for a pure social construct.
Society has us to believe that women are naturally monogamous while men are not. I think that neigher men nor women are monogamous by nature, and that sticking to one partner requires a conscientious choice and deliberate effort from both men and women.
On not being able to orgasm through intercourse alone: I know women who were exactly like that until they found the man with whom they can. Besides God having a sense of humor, Nature has a way of giving you hints 🙂
@Kiki
I am of the opinion that all women can have NSA sex, and this oxitocyn thing is yet another attempt to find a medical reasoning for a pure social construct.
YES!!!!!!
137 Kiki OMG you are absolutely right. It’s almost like women aren’t allowed to admit that we’re fine with NSA sex, because then we’re seen as being cold or abnormal or something. A lot more of us are fine with it than you would otherwise realize.
I am of the opinion that all women can have NSA sex, and this oxytocin thing is yet another attempt to find a medical reasoning for a pure social construct.
Nice try. But not quite close.
The bonding experiences of romance, sex and breastfeeding are real, as most women would readily confirm. A typical woman can still recall, in vivid detail, the romantic gestures of a long lost boyfriend in high school; she can recall and relive the enjoyments of sexual experiences with ease. And that story about a woman melting when she looks at her adorable (though ugly looking) kid? It’s real too.
Guess which hormone modulates all these behaviors? Yep, it’s the good old oxytocin. his is no social construct. The differences between men and women are more real than air you breathe.
As in all things physiological, the more frequent and varied the bonding, the less the strength of attachment. Meaning, the more romantic partners, or more sexual partners or kids a woman has, the less she will be attached to any of them. Same is true of men, though men are generally less attached to anyone anyways, because their brains are less marinated in this bonding hormone.
Spot on Kiki.
I also don’t think oxytocin or sex, bonds women to men. It’s an excuse after-the-fact; the woman wanted to bond with that man (or any) therefore she convinces herself she has once she’s shared her body.
It’s amazing how quickly a woman can un-bond from a guy when she figures out she doesn’t like him all that much. Despite having had sex with him.
@TheThinker
The only two men I ever loved, I loved before I had sex with. I never felt a surge of love after intercourse. We are much more complex beings than those of you who believe in evolutionary biology can imagine.
@TheThinker.
I think my theory gives a better explanation of the world than yours.
The bonding experiences are real and work pretty much the same way for men as for women, except for breastfeeding obviously. NSA without being hurt is possible if you have no moral objection to it, and the oxytocin has nothing to do with it.
@The Thinker
The more kids a woman has the less she will be attached to any of them??? Give me a break.
140 TheThinker
A typical man can also recall in vivid detail romantic gestures of a long lost girlfriend in high school (betcha you can, if you’re a guy). A man can remember sexual experiences with ease, you should take a look at some of the sites online. Dads go bonkers over their kids too, and sometimes bore others to tears with their sentimental stories of their kids.
Guess what, it turns out both men and women produce oxytocin. Anyway, the ability to produce oxytocin doesn’t mean that either side cannot enjoy NSA sex. We women don’t get attached to everyone. Maybe some people would like to think we do, but we don’t.
Kiki, Julia, Karmic, josavant.
“I am of the opinon that all women can have NSA sex”
I’ve known this to be partly true for many years. My guess is about 20% of women can have NSA sex and move on without any effects at all. I reckon another 20% can have NSA sex without any psychological effects, but don’t do it for practical reasons (health, safety, stigma etc.)
This is actually great news for men though; as it means we can hump and dump to our heart’s content now! Because oxytocin is only a social construct right?
Well not quite; there is still a large amount of women who get upset when men move on after sex, and it’s their angst that we read about in these comments.
@Josavant 123
I’m divorced and have no intention of ever marrying again.
Equal Opportunity helped you get the job, own property. That’s enacted law, and yes Feminists drove that. I take full advantage.
Sexual liberation is a concept, not law. I’ve also taken advantage.
Feminism did help ME and others like me who have embraced BOTH.
But for the women who have embraced the former but struggle with implications of the latter, those women Feminism hurt.
@Chance 134
Fair enough. You didn’t say you told your gf that you didn’t ever plan on getting married. In that case she’s probably fine with LTR that you’ve implied by moving in with her. However, you might want to reiterate your position about not ever wanting to get married, and that moving in is not a step towards that, in case she’s conveniently forgotten you said so when you first met.
@Fusee 130
Awesome post.
@Kiki
I agree with you completely and would actually expound further. I think the oxytocin bonding thing is more than just a social construct, it’s social programming of women to benefit “society” (who typicially runs society? Men do, as in politicians and religions).
The scientific community is comprised of mostly men. Sure there are women in their midsts, but they’re a minority.
So if men discover oxytocin has “attachment” effects, are they going to promote that women attach to the act of sex? No. Because that would not benefit men, because then a woman would feel free to have sex with ANY man to get a hit of that drug. Much better to promote that that oxytocin bonds to THE MAN. Then she feels she needs A SPECIFIC man to get a hit of that drug, not just any man.
Then on top of that, because most women like to think she is more evolved than men, she wouldn’t want to hear that oxytocin bonds her to sex, it’s much more palatable for her to accept that oxytocin attaches her to the MAN. In other words, we’d rather believe that we’ve fallen in love with the man than that we’ve fallen in love with the sex. So we propogate the idea of oxytocin bonding to men to our own detriment and men’s benefit.
Food for thought.
@marmary
I wonder if they’ve done studies if women of Asian descent have that anti-oxytocin allele that Mimi talks about. Interesting, no?
@TheThinker
I’d have to disagree with you on most of your post.
“A typical woman can still recall, in vivid detail, the romantic gestures of a long lost boyfriend in high school; she can recall and relive the enjoyments of sexual experiences with ease.”
I don’t believe the above demonstrates bonding, but rather that women have better memories than men.
“And that story about a woman melting when she looks at her adorable (though ugly looking) kid?”
Well, if after spending 40 hours in pain, I felt the result was not worth it, why would I ever contemplate going through it again? In other words, I think the oxytocin effect is to ensure that women continue to have children in the future, even though she goes through hell each time she has them. It’s God’s way to ensure propagation of the species. Like I said, He has a sense of humor.
“As in all things physiological, the more frequent and varied the bonding, the less the strength of attachment. Meaning, the more romantic partners, or more sexual partners or kids a woman has, the less she will be attached to any of them.”
I can’t speak for other women, but even though I can have NSA sex, I’m not having it willy nilly. 5 partners in the last 8 years is not a lot. I do feel attachment but I don’t give that any importance during the first 5 days after sex, because that’s how long it takes for oxytocin to evaporate in my system. I give credence to the feelings and thoughts I have on Day 6 and onwards.
So you’re saying that if a woman has 5 kids, she might love children 1-4 and dislike #5? I’m pretty sure most mom’s on this board would disagree with you.
“Same is true of men, though men are generally less attached to anyone anyways, because their brains are less marinated in this bonding hormone.”
I agree with this in principle. But, technically, studies have stated that testosterone counteracts oxytocin, rather than that men’s brains are less marinated.
@Tom10
This is actually great news for men though; as it means we can hump and dump to our heart’s content now! Because oxytocin is only a social construct right?
If you believe that the only reason women might not have sex with you is because she is afraid she is going to bond to you, sure. But in my experience, I don’t have sex with 99.99999999999999999999% of men because I don’t want to have sex with them. That statement totally infantilizes women into creatures who can’t use reason, logic, self-control etc.
KE, 147
Between you and me, from one chinese person to another, we’re generally not a very cuddly people are we? Maybe you have a point.
Other cultures have massages and oils and saunas. We got acupuncture.
I’ve had guys bond to me after sex, too. This is one of the reasons why I haven’t had, and don’t have any immediate plans on having, NSA this time around. All of a sudden I’m afraid of hurting the men I might get involved with. But as for me, I have not experienced this automatic bonding right after sex thing. (I am Eastern European, FWIW.) Then again, I love both of my kids the same, so there must be something wrong with me, heh heh.
I actually want to address this. Emphasis mine:
“Meaning, the more romantic partners, or more sexual partners or kids a woman has, the less she will be attached to any of them.”
I guess I am just not that woman. I get attached to a man that I click with on a personal level, that consistently shows me that he cares, and treats me well. No matter whether he’s my first, second, or twenty-fifth. Otherwise, I wouldn’t bother dating and looking for a partner. Why bother, if I’ll be even less attached to him than I am to my ex-husband, who was my first? Luckily, I am a human, not a computer. I get a say in who I get attached to. It’s not all hormones and biology in the driver’s seat, with the rest of me tagging along for the ride.
@ Julia
“I don’t have sex with 99.99999999999999999999% of men because I don’t want to have sex with them”
Yes, but you’re part of the 20% of women who can have sex and not be upset if you never see the guy again.
For the 60%/80% of women (my guess) who can’t do this, one of the reasons they hold back on having sex right after meeting a guy they’re really attracted to is the fear that he will disappear once he gets sex.
I don’t know how many times I’ve met a woman, gone back to her bed and then had to spend the night frustrated and cuddling. They keep saying: “I really want to have sex with you, but I can’t.” I assume what they mean is if they have sex and I don’t call they’d be quite upset. Or maybe it’s because they’re worried I might think they’re a slut? Either way something is preventing them from having NSA sex, even though they’d really like to.
I didn’t mean to infantilize women, rather have a clear conscience: believe it or not, a lot of men try their best not to hurt women by dumping them after sex / leading them on etc.
But if you’re telling me that women attaching due to sex isn’t true, or just a social construct, then we’ve been worrying about nothing really.
For the people who dont understand oxytocin and bonding being hard wired for women…. Read or listen to talks articles or published books by anthropologist Helen Fisher PHD . Women do bond from the effects of oxytocin produced from orgasm with sex Its the same powerful hormone that bonds her to her newborn baby. To say that mechanism is a social construct is an uninformed and uneducated point of view.
Women can have no strings attached sex if they have higher levels of testosterone, or they are able to disassociate . I have a friend who was molested as a child .she can disassociate and have casual sex because shes now wired that way as a result of trauma and self preservation But Helen says , over time a woman will be fighting her own biology. Its neuroscience.
Wendy Walsh PHD talks about women adopting a more male model of sex as they become more avoidant living in a society where people move around a lot and the current sexual economy of todays times
If you look at science and anthropolgy, NSA sex for women is not a natural or fulfilling model of female sexuality.
@Tom10
For the 60%/80% of women (my guess) who can’t do this, one of the reasons they hold back on having sex right after meeting a guy they’re really attracted to is the fear that he will disappear once he gets sex.
But what you are saying here contradicts your previous statement. Its not that they literally could care less about a guy but are terrified if they have sex they will start caring just as he disappears, its that they like the guy BEFORE they have sex with him and want to make sure he is not just using them. I can have sex without bonding, this doesn’t mean I want to be used by a man I am interested in.
@Kathleen
Interesting article that I will preface with this quote:
Let’s take a look at what oxytocin is. Let me preempt what you’re about to read by saying that we not only still know very little about oxytocin, we still know very little about all neurochemicals and how they affect our feelings and actions. If someone says they know something absolute and definitive about oxytocin and what it does in our bodies, that’s a big pseudoscience red flag.
http://io9.com/5606765/myths-about-the-love-hormone-oxytocin-that-could-ruin-your-love-life
#152 wow that’s a lot of assumptions for one post. While there may be some truth to the statement that some women, to some degree, attach to men after sex, it is IMO being blown completely out of proportion these days. Just like romantic love in the 19th century, oxytocin is supposed to sweep us off our feet and render us incapable of making our own decisions.
As an aside, I’m seeing an interesting trend lately, where, now that patriarchal laws no longer apply, people tend to wrap these same patriarchal ideas into articles and scientific publications, and try to push them on us again, this time in the name of science. Anyone that disagrees is by definition anti-science. If the person disagrees with something that’s being stated under the blanket of evo psych or evo biology, there’s an added bonus of calling that person anti-evolution, implying that they’re a closet Creationist. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority
TL;DR: I do not need a PhD that has articles and publications to tell me how I feel.
Also, I cannot believe we are arguing about what is natural and what is not, in people’s sex lives, in the 21st century. Breaking news, if it’s legal and everyone involved gave their consent, it’s natural.
It’s always interesting when scientific findings explain/confirm empirical experiences, but it’s constricting to use those findings as a go-to explanation or to invalidate opposite observations. As a scientist myself, I’m constantly exposed to the fallacies of science: the biais of what the mind believes and wants to prove at any price, the too narrow sample pools, the barely-there statistical significance of data, the elimination of critical contributing factors, etc. I still value science and give more weight to data over random beliefs or opinions, but I do not worship at the science altar any more. I trust empirical experience and intuition as well, especially when it’s about informing personal choices and values.
So when women share that they feel incredibly bonded after climaxing in the arms of a new lover, I believe them. I also believe women who say that for them sex does not do trigger much more emotion than good pleasure in the moment. There will never be one way of experiencing “woman-ness” or “man-ness” because if we certainly are influenced by social constructs, we’re also extremely driven by our personal biochemistry, the way we were raised, and how we choose to live our sexuality.
For me what bonds me to a man are two kinds of energies:
1. Hope. It would happen in my mind very quickly and unconsciously (I now have control over this but it took a while). As soon as mutual feelings of attraction and interest would be shared, my internal hope machine would kick in and make me wish the man to be the one. I suspect it’s true for most relationship-oriented women who long for sharing their life with a loving partner. That’s why women complain about having been led on, strung along, etc. The guy said/did a few things that meant little for him in the moment but that fed the woman’s hope machine before anything has even had the time to truly start.
2. Intimacy. It happens later since it involves sharing more than the attraction and excitement of the first meeting and dates, but for me, it’s not just about sex. For example, what bonds me around sex is less the sex itself than everything else that happens as a result of having sex: spending the night and waking up together, getting out of the shower with wet hair, sharing breakfast, all these little intimate things that trigger the feeling of partnership and relationship. However what truly bonds me to someone is when I trust enough to start opening up to what makes me feel vulnerable and realizing that I am being accepted nevertheless.
That’s why I think the bonding process is different between a woman who will primarily feels more vulnerable through sharing her love and a woman who will feel most vulnerable sharing physical intimacy. It will also be different for men who might have completely different vulnerabilities. Different things make people feel vulnerable. For me it always comes back to the physical as it just so happens that my vulnerabilities and weaknesses are mostly physical (and not just around sex, but physical stamina, and other physical aspect of myself), so I will continue to need a lot of security to open up my physical side to a man irrespective of oxytocin and other chemicals, whereas I have no difficulty giving my love early on. But I can totally see why it would be different for another woman with different vulnerabilities.
Agree with the ladies and especially Selena 141
Fusee
Yes people are different. Evolution works because nature loves variety. Not everyone is the same or one virus, or natural disaster, or even social change would wipe us all out. Some will survive and they’ll start mutating.
There are fish that change sex according to their environment. Maybe we’ll be doing that some day.
I definitely believe that there are women who can have NSA sex. No doubt in my mind, even though I’m not one of them.
However, I also know that there are many, many women who are not sure which camp they fall into. Or, they might be able to have casual sex with two guys and not think a thing about it but with the third, for some reason, they are terribly hurt and sad if it doesn’t lead to more. And I have plenty of male friends who’ll sleep with a woman who’ll assure him that she’s just horny and wants nothing more than a fun sexual release but will then shoot him dirty looks when they see him out on a date with another woman, two weeks later.
My overall point is, it’s idea when men and women need are honest not only with each other but also with themselves.
From a guy’s perspective, I meet so many women that have wasted prime years because they dated the “wrong” type of guy. It is hard to be accepting of these situations, and I find myself increasingly hostile to them.
Consider how your prospective future husbands will feel when they learn about this seven-year live in relationship where some guy refused to marry you and you would not give up on him. Now you are seven years older (yes, it matters even if you pretend it doesn’t) and have been scarred by this man from your past. You gave him full access to you for seven years without marrying him.
Now the next guy will feel like he does not rock your boat quite as much because you are forcing him to marry you after one year or two years.
Mallarde, when I am hit on by a 60 yr-old paunchy dude who was recently left by his supposedly-subservient mail-order bride, I politely reject his advances and move on. When I meet a 42 year-old who spent his 30s bedding all manner of women he didn’t care about, I wish him luck and keep going. We all encounter people who spent time in bad situations. If we feel that they’ve displayed such poor judgement or values so out of line with our own, it’s probably best that we not date them.
Quite frankly, the fact that you are “increasingly hostile” to women who’ve “wasted” time with unsuitable partners is disturbing. Why the animosity? If you think it such a terrible mistake that a woman chose to spend 7 years living with a man who didn’t want to marry her, then don’t date her! It really is that simple. And let’s hope that any perceived flaws you might possess will be met with greater kindness and understanding by the women you wish to date.
@Katleen 152 and others,
“If you look at science and anthropolgy, NSA sex for women is not a natural or fulfilling model of female sexuality”.
This statement is misleading because it equals natural to fulfilling. It is exactly a demonstration of the social construct I am talking about: theories that have you believe that something is natural and hence fulfilling. I argue that this statement is wrong in two ways
1) assuming that biologically women can not have sex for sex only but need a relationship for that
2) assuming causality between a biological predisposition (levels of oxitocyn)and a moral/psychological category (fulfilment).
I have also, like many of you, read several articles on oxytocin, dopamin, endorphines, etc.. Please note that there is a difference between medical theories explaing human behavior, and medical facts.
Women choose not to have NSA sex for various reasons – unwanted pregancy, STDs, personal security. Very importantly, women require more time to become sexually aroused (due to lower testosterone levels and that is a medical fact and not a theory) and require more attentive sex/lovemaking in order to experience orgasm. A short, NSA encounter is thus much more likely to result in no orgasm for the woman than for the man. I think that we women get upset when we add insult to injury – not only he was a lousy lover, but also did no like me enogh to call me again!
I think it is a smart strategy for a woman to be selective with whom she has sex with for various reason, including to have a relationship as a prerequisite to make sure your lover would care enough to do his best to satisfy you. If women were not brainwashed from the day they are born that virginity has a value and that being monogamous increases your value as a woman, they would be able to clearly spell out their sexual needs to the men they date, and they would not have stupic reactions like the one Tom decribed “I really want to have sex with you, but I can’t.”
Kiki 162
Of course women can have random sex for various reasons eg todays sexual economy as I mentioned. But what writers and researchers like Fisher say is that women are hard wired to bond So a women who is having orgasmic sex with a guy over time will likely become attached to him unless she can disassociate .
I’m with henriette 161- Mallarde, if you don’t want to date them, how do their choices effect you?
Dissasociating is only a good thing when someone is in a helpless trauma situation as self protection. Rape/ abuse, car accidents etc where someone can’t escape.
If this is happening at other times it’s not a good thing and therapy will be needed to help overcome this problem. Or if no help has been given for past trauma situations to help when freeze response and disacciation has occured and not been released from the body.
It is not a good thing to be recommending o encouraging women to learn to dissacioate during sex or any other situations. Our bodies will automatically do this for us in the trauma situations I previously noted.
Rose #165
I couldnt agree more
@Fusee #156
“…so I will continue to need a lot of security to open up my physical side to a man irrespective of oxytocin and other chemicals, whereas I have no difficulty giving my love early on. But I can totally see why it would be different for another woman with different vulnerabilities.” [Emphasis mine]
Interesting…I’m not sure I agree that giving of one’s love or giving of one’s body is about sharing our vulnerablities. I believe both are gifts that you bequeath the worthy. But what makes a man worthy to each woman is subjective. And depending on what you seek, you have different criteria for worthiness. For example, while some men might make good boyfriends, they’re fun, spontaneous, carefree, etc; those qualities might not translate to stable, steady, reliable, that we need in a husband. I think that if women are seeking husbands, women need to date husband-material men, which means that they can’t date a bf-type guy and then “hope” that he’ll become the husband-type guy someday. And I will agree that most husband-material guys would be willing to have sex on the woman’s schedule (a la Fusee’s husband) as opposed to player-types, who bail when you don’t have sex on HIS schedule (a la Tom10 ;)). And I only mean this for women in my generation. Women in their 20’s and early 30’s have time to take that gamble. But women of my generation don’t have that time to waste.
@Kathleen 163
So does that mean men are hardwired to play? If that is so, why is it that we women expect men to change their wiring (e.g., give up playing) but we’re not expected to change ours (e.g., have NSA sex)?
I think this goes back to my “Women have the power but prefer to abdicate it” position. It’s so that we women don’t have to do any work on ourselves. Let the men change, not us!
While I agree with Kiki overall, unlike her, I do believe that oxytocin (together with other hormones) DOES have some effect — I’ve felt those effects myself. However, I DON’T believe that we are incapable of fighting off their effects if we actually want to do it. (I’ve actually worked to overcome those effects. NSA without attachment feelings didn’t come naturally to me.) In other words, I believe neither women nor men are slaves to their hormones.
I was lucky in that I had oxytocin bonding feelings for a man with whom I did NOT enjoy the sexual experience. That dissonance made me aware that the bonding feelings that come after sex are going to happen regardless of whether the man is a good man or whether the sex is good sex. For most women, they probably never had that dissonance (e.g., they had good sex with a man they felt was a good man) so it felt “natural” to bond to him. For me, it was a weird feeling to want to bond to a man I didn’t know, with whom I had sex I didn’t really like.
From that I learned then that I’m going to have feelings, but I learned not to BELIEVE IN or SUCCUMB TO those feelings. They’re NOT real. For me that oxytocin high lasts about 4-5 days. After that, the guy is just a guy, not “the most special guy in the world” that he was within those 5 days after sex. But after that 5 days or so, I “miss” the guy…but I realize it’s not really the guy I miss, but the high that came with sex. So I want to “see” the guy, not really for him, but really because I want that oxytocin high again.
I learned the latter when I had NSA sex with a man I deemed not-bf-material. So I knew he was not-bf material when I had sex with him. Felt some bonding during that 5-day period, where I started to question myself, “Well, he really is a nice guy. He’s fun. yada yada”. After 5 days, I go back to “Oh, yeah, he’s totally not bf-material for me.”
Hey ladies, do us a goddamn favor and stop diagnosing us over the internet and drawing parallels with PTSD victims, okay? Thanks XOXO
I actually think Selena’s #141 is spot on. I strongly suspect it is not the oxytocin that causes the majority of the bonding. It’s the faulty line of thinking along the lines of, Now that I’ve had sex with this guy, he’s going to have to make an honest woman out of me and propose. Then she’s shocked to the core of her being when he doesn’t. Well, he had no idea he had to!
Karmic #167
I work in neuroscience and appreciate reading about interesting research by experts in their field. I dont think anyone has made the claim that I know of, that we are powerless over neurotransmitters hormones etc… I think womens sexuaity is complex as others have described
I dont expect men to change how their wired but probably like you, Ive grown to understand them better and know how to use my own power. Lately Ive learnt what an aphrodisiac the word NO is to guys, and Ive learnt that men have to trust you before they love you.
Ive suffered from the “sexover” myself Having a high for a few days and then if the guy disappears, plummeting into a funk which makes me think it wasnt worth it . Thats how heroin works too I guess. Good at the time …
@Karmic Equation #167: “Interesting…I’m not sure I agree that giving of one’s love or giving of one’s body is about sharing our vulnerablities. I believe both are gifts that you bequeath the worthy.”
I’m not saying that giving love and/or sex equates sharing our vulnerabilities, but that the process of becoming willing to share love and/or sex with someone is connected to our vulnerabilities. If nothing could hurt us, if nothing would trigger fear, we would give love and sex to everyone freely. Who we deem “worthy”, when we deem them “worthy”, etc is to my opinion directly connected to our fears, therefore vulnerabilities.
If sharing physical intimacy does not trigger fear, then we share our bodies freely with whoever we feel attracted to. That’s what you do. If giving unconditional positive regard does not trigger fear, then we offer our acceptance to everyone. That’s actually what I do in my volunteer job. We all have fears (sometimes very well disguised : ) and they dictate our choices, even who we are attracted to. I was sharing a bit of mine, which are mostly connected to my physical side for some reasons.
“I think that if women are seeking husbands, women need to date husband-material men, which means that they can’t date a bf-type guy and then “hope” that he’ll become the husband-type guy someday.”
I totally agree with you about the importance to date with your end goal in mind. If you want some fun immediate gratification, you go for boyfriend-material men. If you want to build a future with someone who is actually able to, you date husband-material men. Those men act very differently over the first few weeks/months of dating, especially in communication and conflict resolution. It does not take seven years and a pseudo-cohabitation to find out.
“And I will agree that most husband-material guys would be willing to have sex on the woman’s schedule (a la Fusee’s husband)…”
That’s true, but only if he thinks the lady is wife-material as well, and if he actually sees himself married one day. Some husband-material men do not want to be married : ) Also, most husband-material men will go for flings in the meantime or as a way to start a relationship, not really knowing how to do otherwise. My husband/then-boyfriend had a fling in mind for us as he was living in my area short-term. Would not have occured to him to look for his wife three states away, and he was not yet in that mindset anyway. But I said no to the fling concept by slowing down the physical part among other things, so he quickly realized that he only had two options: going to the next woman or getting to know me to evaluate our potential for a more serious track : )
Quick clarification though, so that the dynamics between me and my husband/then-boyfriend do not appear as they are not: I definitely delayed sharing physical intimacy as much as I could to build up emotional intimacy first and find out whether we had an actual chance for the long-term, but I did go for sex earlier than my “ideal” timeline for the sake of my man, and the logistics of our relationship (and ahem, I was just too horny and getting tired of the vibrator : ). I was not that rigid and he was not going to follow just any timeline ; )
@Fusee 170
I usually follow your train of thought, but this one you lost me.
How can you equate giving “unconditional positive regard” to the homeless to giving love to a man in the romantic sense? They’re different kinds of love. Not even in the same ball park. I think you’re reaching on trying to justify why most women will give away her emotional love freely while withholding her physical love, which sends the wrong message, imo. She values her body more than her love.
I understand that women want to build the connection. But the connection isn’t from woman to man, it’s to try to ensure that the MAN builds a connection to the woman. There’s nothing wrong with that. Just be honest about it. I also have a theory that since most women are attracted more to men of status (rich, powerful) — these men are often, how shall I say, not as physically attractive as others she might date. So it actually takes time for a woman to build up her attraction to this somewhat unattractive guy. So the less good looking the man, the longer it takes for her to build up enough attraction to have sex with him. The way that happens is she finds in him the qualities she needs to fall in love with him, which ends up making him physically attractive to her…but that takes time.
With this theory, it’s quite possible that women who feel played feel that way if she’s having sex with a dude she thinks is below her league, and then he doesn’t call back or otherwise disappears, that’s got to sting (adding insult to injury as Kiki wrote). And if she’s dating out of her league, she needs to be aware of that, because most men when they’re ready for LTRs, particularly marriage, will look to marry someone above their own league, so she’s out, unless she has an amazing personality (or she herself is richer or more powerful than he, a la Teresa Heinz, John Kerry’s wife).
@Karmic Equation #171: Ok, it was not the best comparison indeed! What I tried to express is that for some, it’s easier to open up physically first, and for others, it’s easier to open up emotionally first. And I’m suggesting that this preference is based on what we need to trust, hence on our vulnerabilities.
After that, it’s me who got lost. I get what you are saying, but I do not see how that has anything to do with the topic of trust and being ready to be vulnerable. But myabe there is no correlation, and that’s cool. Also, your theories about status and leagues might be valid to some, but so unapplicable to me that it’s real hard to relate. I’m attracted to people kind of like me, not ridiculously rich or handsome, but not ugly and dumb. Just a nice above-average normal ha ha.
But yeah, if (generic) you are interested in a long-term relationship, this is the emotional connexion that matters. And it’s usually the woman’s job to help men find love while they’re on their quest for sex ; ) And this, folks, is the art of dating.
#170
But I said no to the fling concept by slowing down the physical part among other things, so he quickly realized that he only had two options: going to the next woman or getting to know me to evaluate our potential for a more serious track : )
Bingo! That is an effective way to get a man to become serious with you, and consider you wife material. NSA will push him in opposite direction. I wish more women in this part of the world knew how men think. The degree of “man-ignorance” among western women is astounding. I have dealt with Caribbean, African and even Polish women. They are far more man-savvy than most women I have met in this part of the world
@Karmic – thanks! He blurted out the word girlfriend at date 4 (2 weeks) and was so embarrassed at my somewhat horrified expression (I was just surprised) that I had to address it formally again 2 weeks later. 😀
@ Mimi thanks! Interesting!
@Fusee – as always, I love reading what you write. If it’s not too personal a question… would you mind helping me understand the kind of time-line you’re talking about? When some people say taking it slow, they mean a few weeks instead of a few nights; for others, it can mean more than a year. And you wrote that you moved faster than your ideal timeline – what would that ideal timeline have been?
My questions no doubt sound prurient but you really seem to have your Sh*t together so it’s more that I want to better understand how you navigated these tricky waters. Thx! 🙂
@The Thinker
I am neither western nor single but I find your opinions and attitude insulting. Women here and all around the world have the same amount of confusion about men as men have to women.
Also, NSA sex is not ideal but is totally ok for some women and they are neither sluts nor stupid, they simply really enjoy sex. A woman actually smartens up from having had several flings – and she would normally learn to choose away from the sexists and the hypocrites, as she goes along.
This is the way I see it.
As a woman If what I want is to have sex as part of a loving committed relationship. I value myself enough to only have sex under those terms and circumstances.
If I make myself available for sex without the committiment of being a loving committed relationship. My value is then in my availabilty for sex without love, comittiment or relationship. Plenty of men out there who are going to take me up on that offer which is all fine and dandy if i only want sex without being in a loving comiitted relationship
So it’s up to the individual to decide what they want. And then date people who are on the same page. If casual sex is what you want without relationship or comiitiment date as men and women as you want and have as much casual sex as you both want.
If what you want is to be in a loving monogomous committed relationship where you have sex to show your expression of love for each other, then date as many women or men as you want until a relationship organically develops over time and there is a declaration of love and desire on both sides to only be in a monogomous relationship with each other, then have sex to show your expression of that love for each other. You will have to wait longer for sex this way as relationships and love not lust take time to naturally develop.
Only the individual knows what they want. And what they want to make themselves available for with their actions.
TheThinker, nice try, but no one has NSA with marriage plans in mind. You do know it stands for No Strings Attached, right?
Like I said, I haven’t had NSA this time around, (turned down a few offers from my male buddies) and do not plan to do so anytime soon. But not because it’d make me damaged goods in those men’s eyes, make them not want to marry me (probably a good thing since I don’t plan to remarry), or some other 19 century stuff. Just because the possible ramifications do not justify the benefits, and by ramifications, I don’t mean myself getting attached. I mean the men’s reaction. Even the ones that do not get attached, really dislike being told there’ll be no second time if the sex was meh. It’s humiliating to a man, I imagine. Neither do I feel like bringing people into my house for that. As you notice, these are all very different reasons from “if I have sex with him, I’ll fall in love before I even get out of bed, cuz biology” I am not 16; I don’t “fall” in love. I might come to love a man after some time spent together as a couple. And, if I do, it’ll be a conscious decision on my end.
Oh and, having come here from Eastern Europe at age 29, I am hardly a western woman. (And, correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t KE identify as Asian?) Actually, seeing as I have a lot of guy friends and two grown sons, I don’t consider myself man-unaware either. I just don’t want to get married again and have anymore kids. I want a partner, that I might one day move in with, but that’s it. There are several of us on this thread. Yea if I wanted to marry up and start an upper-middle-class family with a nice WASP boy from an upper-middle-class background, and especially if I knew my time was running out, I’d probably be following your instructions to a T. But this is really the last thing I want.
Kathleen,
what i want to make you see is that not only women are hardwired to bond, human beings are hard wired to bond. Men bond too and get hurt when they are rejected too, to the women they really like. If you believe bonding is an inherently female behavior but not a male one, you will think that a woman who can have nsa sex is abnormal whereas a man who can not is also abnormal.
Both are normal and natural behaviors and depend much more on the personal value system and societal norms than on biology.
Defining women who can have nsa sex as abnormal/unnatural and shaming women for such behaviors are mechanis to hold women in submission and prevent them from feeling equally free to explore their sexuality.
Kiki #179
ah…. I was with my ex husband for 22 years. Why would you assume i dont think men bond?
Ive already mentioned female sexuality is complex Women have sex for all sorts of reasons. Im one of the biggest feminists out there and would never shame women for NSA sex Hell Ive done it myself
However I believe NSA sex, at least for me is actually not that great .I believe its difficult for most women to have NSA over an extended time with a partner, and not get attached. So you risk being hurt by someone that has little invested in you.
I listened to a talk by Wendy Walsh recently She said a guy could sleep with the same woman for six months and not feel any differently about her. She also said its hard wired that men have ,after all this time, a double standard of women. Its not fair,!!!!!! But its exists today for reasons she can explain if you look her up . Thats why I think the THinker # 173 made his comment (Which doesnt insult me). His point is backed by what Walsh says. So if you are really interested in a guy and want something longer term, then take things slower and have the discussions that Evan advises.
Kiki- love everything you have said. Haven’t some male commenters said in Evan’s blog that it’s through sex that men become emotionally close to women? In fact didn’t Evan say that himself? gasp – maybe it means that men bond more from sex than women? We have to at least consider that possibility. Like I said earlier, both men and women produce oxytocin. Women produce it more than men only at certain times- when in labor and delivery and breastfeeding. But we don’t spend most of our time in labor and delivery and breastfeeding, and anyway, that is about bonding to the child and not to the man.
Goldie, I laughed at your comment, good reply. You’re right that women sometimes choose not to have NSA sex for reasons not having to do with that they would bond with the guy, but they don’t want the guy to bond to them. Between your comment and kiki’s comment, you gotta wonder how much of our behavior around sex is about protecting the guy’s ego.
TheThinker, you know, there is more to this world than what men want, and some of us women are not interested in acting in ways that please you. What women want out of life and men matters too. Some women want NSA sex, if this bothers you, you might want to ask yourself why. Those African women who are “man-savvy”- many African women are pretty much entirely repressed by the men in their cultures. To the point that even if they think their men are infected with HIV, they feel like they can’t say no when the man wants to have sex with them. Much good it does them to be “man-savvy” like you describe. You know, women and our health and our preferences do matter too. I guess some men don’t like to acknowledge this.
@Fusee 172
Thanks for the clarification. I understand what you’re trying to say. However, I still don’t agree. But we can agree to disagree. I don’t think you’re wrong or I’m right, but we simply operate with different belief systems. As long as it works and we’re happy, that’s all that matters!
FTR, I don’t believe that women open up (or not open up) phyisically or emotionally first because of vulnerabilities, but rather for filtering purposes. If a man we desire is willing to wait to have sex on our schedule, we know (or we think we know) that we have value to him, so we filter him to the next level.
Like Goldie 178, I believe “falling in love” is a conscious decision. I can recall the exact moment that I chose to fall in love with my exhusband and my ex-6yr LTR. I can also recall the moment(s) when I chose NOT to fall in love with my ex-player-bf when the opportunities arose. I won’t give my “in-love-ness” (that special love we have for a partner, for lack of better word) away to a man simply because I’ve been physical with him. The “standard” love that I have for friends, colleagues, stangers, was freely given by the time we had sex. But my in-love-ness has to be earned and not given until he’s proved himself worthy.
@Kiki 179
“Defining women who can have nsa sex as abnormal/unnatural and shaming women for such behaviors are mechanis to hold women in submission and prevent them from feeling equally free to explore their sexuality.”
YES!
This is what I mean by social programming. Most women have internalized the “women can’t have nsa sex” propaganda (from when religions were born, so this propanda is centuries in the making) — to the point where they don’t want to believe otherwise.
@Goldie 178
Yes, I’m Asian in ethnicity, but culturally western, though, as I grew up in America and my family didn’t adhere to Chinese cultural norms.
#144
The more kids a woman has the less she will be attached to any of them??? Give me a break.
Well, a mother with many kids loves all her kids no doubt, but she is often fond of one particular kid out of the lot. Many times, the favorite one is often the youngest.
It is also a scientific fact that women with multiple lovers tend to lose the ability to bond with any man. As a matter of fact, multiple, short-term, intensely personal dating experiences prepare anyone, men or women, for breakups/divorces later in life, than for learning how to maintain long-standing relationships.
#145
Dads go bonkers over their kids too
What does this prove other than that men have oxytocin too? As earlier stated, men have less need for bonding than women are, either because they have less amounts of the hormone in their system, or they have other hormones (e.g. testosterone) which counteract the effects of the hormone. And that is not merely a social contruct; it’s a fact of biology.
We women don’t get attached to everyone. Maybe some people would like to think we do, but we don’t.
Nobody said women did. The factors which determine bonding go beyond oxytocin intoxication. A woman is unlikely to bond with her rapist after experiencing forcible rape, for instance, because the experience is forever associated with pain and fear.
Kiki 176
@The Thinker
I am neither western nor single but I find your opinions and attitude insulting. Women here and all around the world have the same amount of confusion about men as men have to women.
Well, how you see my responses have little to do with the truth of my statements. I tried to relate my experiences, not someone else’s. I have dated women from different parts of the world, but my experiences with US women generally indicate that most don’ have a clue about how men even think. Also, you don’t generally find any businesses in other parts of the world where grown women have to be coached on how to relate to men, and be in long term relationships with them. Except in America. A fully grown woman who is man-savvy knows how to have a meaningful, long-term, mutually satisfying relationship with a man without the need for any outside coaching, particularly after dating men for decades.
Julia 142
@TheThinker
The only two men I ever loved, I loved before I had sex with. I never felt a surge of love after intercourse. We are much more complex beings than those of you who believe in evolutionary biology can imagine.
Julia, I totally agree with you that we cannot be reduced to mere oxytocin receptors. My piece was primarily to debunk the idea that female bonding after intensely close relationship with another is a mere social construct. It is not. Relationships mean much more to a woman than they mean to a man.
Kiki 143
@TheThinker.
NSA without being hurt is possible if you have no moral objection to it, and the oxytocin has nothing to do with it.
True. However, despite oxytocin, some women abuse and even murder their kids. The hormone explains behavior, but we are not helpless against it. Again, my intention was not to write a thesis on oxytocin, but simply to argue the point that it exists, is real, and is more than a social construct.
Looks like there might be a misunderstanding between TheThinker versus Goldie and Kiki. The Thinker simply said that NSA sex was not a good strategy for marriage, while others with no goals of marriage felt shamed for enjoying casual sex.
To TheThinker: Well, duh! Women who have NSA are usually looking for the very opposite of marriage (read Karmic Equation‘s comments), hence the N in NSA : ) If you are looking for a wife, and prefer women who kept sex within the confine of loving relationships, that’s fine. There is a lid to every pot. To Goldie and Kiki: Good points! At least, in this day and age we have a choice, and I appreciate that freedom. The most important to me is to educate our daughters, sisters, friends on the ramification of each sexual behavior, so that they are fully aware of the pros and cons of their choices. I also agree that the reasons a woman could have for abstaning from casual sex are not necessarily related to bonding. I’d also be concerned about other factors than falling helplessly in love with a man. Like Karmic Equation and Goldie, I do not “fall in love” any more. Love is a choice, and that’s actually what makes true love really solid.
@Henriette #175: I do not believe in arbitrary timelines because the time it’s going to take to get there is going to depend on the man and the relationship. It’s not about control but about being ready. The question I asked myself is “What do I need to feel comfortable to have sex with this man, and keep good chances of remaining happy after the fact?”. For me it’s trust, emotional closeness, feeling appreciated for something else than my body, having a good communication even when things are a bit awkward/difficult, knowing that he is open to the possibility of a serious relationship with me, and having good insights on his values and not having found any obvious deal-breaker. The process involved observing behaviors and listening to my intuition, but it also involved conversations and asking questions. It could take a few weeks or a few months, but I believe that it should not take that long if the dating time is used purposefully. Most men want to have sex asap, so it’s in the best interest of both parties to get what we need sooner rather than later : )
Most people just “have fun” when going on dates, which is obviously essential (it’s not a job interview), but there is data to collect as well, and dating artfully is combining fun, seducation, and data collection. With my husband it took six weeks, 15 dates, around 100 hours of good times, sweet kisses, and deeper conversations. We had an incentive to get to know each other as much as possible because he was going to leave my state six weeks after our first date. Going long-distance was a serious decision to make. We were only going to go for it if we had good chances for the future.
A friend of mine abstained until marriage because she had made religious vows. Her husband who is not religious waited for three years well into his mid-thirties. He wanted her, he knew what it involved, and he decided to be patient. But she also made sure they were perfectly compatible early in the relationship, to make sure it was worth it for the both of them. It’s another extreme, but it’s more frequent than one could imagine.
161, 164, 166, the reason is that after a certain age every woman out there has been sleeping with lots of men who never had any intentions on doing anything other than sleeping with them. If I could date women that were youthful enough not to have slept with all these men, I would.
Perhaps there are 1-percent or so of single women over 30 that were chaste or had just a few genuine boyfriends, but this is not very helpful.
Mallarde.
I have yet to meet a woman who has forced a grown up man to marry her.
How does a woman force a man to marry her? Is she there with a gun against his head or beating her?
In my experience men do what they want, they have free will and choice.
The thinker 183
Thank you for an intelligent post.
I think the reason why we have women looking for dating coaching in America is because of a changed economic dynamic. I am not from America but from one of the first countries in the world to give women the vote. Women in America probably have the highest economic power compared to other countries. The effect of more economic power for women is that sex become freely available. As a result of this men may loose the ability to commit and some of the “good ” guys become players. Women can start adopting a male model of sexuality and in addition try to hold out for the CEO or equal status or higher guy. This creates some challenges but its not because American women are clueless. Ive only been dating in the last 4 years after a long marriage and have been shocked at the dating dynamic now.
I agree with your point that if you are constantly changing sexual partners you reinforce more of the same not the ability to be in a long term relationship. I heard of a study that men with high numbers of sexual partners find a partner unattractive after having intercourse with them the first time.
For the women that are advocates of NSA sex that great. But I would find it hard to be sleeping with a guy and then see him out on a romantic dinner with someone else the next night and not feel bad . Ive also heard from a psychologist that women come to her heartbroken cause they got involved with a guy when they had no intention of being attached but their feelings changed
At 54 Ive learnt finally that for me, to have the best quality and most frequent sex, that a guy needs to show me care and commitment first. I understand now the biology of why hook ups in my early 20s would leave me feeling empty and disappointed.
@Kathleen 180
“I believe its difficult for most women to have NSA over an extended time with a partner, and not get attached.”
Most *people* can’t spend extended time with someone (in-laws excepted ;)) and not get attached. We get attached to our coworkers, our SO’s kids, our friends, etc. Attachment over time isn’t simply from NSA sex. If you don’t want to attach to someone, just don’t spend any time with them. If you’re dating and just talking over an extended period of time, you’re going to get attached, whether or not you have sex. So why even date if you’re afraid you’re going to get attached?
That’s only half the story…the other half is in your following sentence…
“So you risk being hurt by someone that has little invested in you.”
This is the main difference between men and women…women feel they “invest” in a relationship. Men are just either in one or not in one. They don’t consider relationships an investment but rather a state of being.
If you’re trying to get a man to feel more “invested” in you by spending more time with you before sex, you’re doing the right thing for the wrong reason. I forget where I read this, but men bond with activities unrelated to sex. In other words women bond to men during sex, but men bond to women outside of sex. So yes, you should delay sex if you want him to bond to you, but you need to spend time with him doing activities that are bonding for him.
Some men do bond through talking (that’s how most women bond to other women) — but most men bond by DOING. You’re better off going skiing with him or some other non-sex activity that you both enjoy (cooking, golfing, hiking, walking your dogs, going to sporting events, or even just simply watching movies and shows he likes on TV/DVD, etc) — The key is that it has to be an activity HE also enjoys. If you both go to the opera and he hates the opera, that will not be a bonding activity. OTOH if he’s a huge football fan (and you don’t know the first thing about football) but you gamely watch a game with him — that WILL help bond him to you (as long as you don’t keep interrupting the game with questions). In other words, if you can are happy spending time with him doing what HE enjoys, he bonds to you.
Once he does bond to you, THEN he is usually more willing to spend time doing what YOU enjoy…as long as he’s not embarrassed being seen doing it…But if he REALLY loves you, he’ll do it even then 😉
Karmic
“you’re going to get attached whether or not you have sex”
I’m one of the few taking this no nsa sex to it’s extreme and waiting until marriage. We are very bonded without sex. I’ll admit that the kissing and cuddling is bonding and some would advocate not even doing even that.
I’ve also heard a number of men – friends and relatives – say that relationships can still be valuable when they don’t last, and that it’s absolutely fine if they have a sell by date. Logically, I can see it but I think I’m with the majority of women who struggle with “loss of investment” when a relationship ends.
Karmic
#188
Dunno about you Karmic, but having orgasmic sex with a guy over, over and over again has a distinctly different quality vs bonding with my neighbor, buddies or co workers. Thats what I was talking about.
Yes, and if I want to bond with a guy by doing stuff before sex, Ill chose risk taking activities that drive up dopamine.
Bonding like a buddy is not the same as romantic pair bonding.
Romantic love is different to the love we have for our friends and certain family members.
Bonding as buddies gets you a friend/buddy.
Romantic pair bonding gets you something different.
What do you want?
Kathleen- a person having orgasmic sex with someone on a near constant basis is not casual NSA sex in my view. I don’t know people who do f-buddies that way- it’s an occasional thing. Maybe that where some folks are going wrong.
…Haven’t some male commenters said in Evan’s blog that it’s through sex that men become emotionally close to women? In fact didn’t Evan say that himself?…
Actually, men don’t necessarily bond through sex. They need sex to express love and closeness to a woman they already bonded with, and care for. They also often have sex just to relieve a biological urge, even if the woman is not someone they care about. This explains why some men sleep with women that are not even attractive to them, if she is the only one available at the moment. Men are far more able to have sex without bonding, and they have sex with women they never bonded with, or have no intention of bonding with, all the time.
However, not all men are like this. There are male versions of marymary #189 who would wait till marriage to have sex, for religious or other reasons, especially in this day and age where STDs are rampant (at least 110 million people have STDs in the US alone).
TheThinker,
For someone who claims that American women are clueless, you carry way too many unfounded beliefs.
The examples you give re. women loving some of their children more than others (may be vis-a-vis men who love each child equally???) and mothers killing their children inspite of oxytocin (now where the hell did that come from?) are totally irrelevant to the topic of whether women feel bad after NSA sex becasue they are hard-wired to bond through sex, or because they have been shamed for being loose for ages.
You take bits and pieces of random observations about human behavior and your own imagination and come to the following conclusion:
“It is also a scientific fact that women with multiple lovers tend to lose the ability to bond with any man. As a matter of fact, multiple, short-term, intensely personal dating experiences prepare anyone, men or women, for breakups/divorces later in life, than for learning how to maintain long-standing relationships”.
What is this science that measures the ability of a woman to bond to any man depending on the number of lovers she has had? Or for any man for that matter?
Statistical surveys confirm that the major predictor of divorce (as Evan has pointed out several times), is the age of the woman at the time of marriage. People who married before 25 have a 75% divorce rate, compared to 50% for the general population. People marryng later in life are likely to have had more sexual partners, all other things equal. Life shows exactly the opposite of what your theory would predict.
Also, since you are on this blog, you may ask our host, Evan, whether because he himself has been on 300 (if I remember correct) dates before he met his wife, he is more prone to divorce/break up as a consequence of that.
Among educated women my generation (early 40s) the ones who started having relationships with men at an earlier age, and had more intensive dating experiences prior to marriage, have happier and longer marriages. I am not sure whether this is universally true, but seems to be valid in my circle of friends. So, I would say, a woman who is educated (meaning she has good understanding to practice safe sex and thus avoid unwanted pregnancies and STDs), can have a very intensive dating experience, with or without sex, depending on her preference, chooose a husband wisely, and enjoy a a long and happy marriage. Actually, the women in my cirle who are still single, are the ones who were still virgins at age 23, but there are probably more complex reasons for that.
The part from your post which is valid is that prior attraction plays a lesser role for men than for women as a requirement to have sex. But the conclusion is different, not the one you are making. If a woman (who likes a guy) and a guy (who is not particularly attracted to the woman but is horny) have sex, without any further knowledge of bonding you can safely predict that she is likely to continue to be attracted to him just as before, and he will continue to be indifferent. She would then quickly find out that they had unequal attaction to begin with, and that is reason enough for her to be upset. No need to have bonded through sex.
If you, as a man, want to be fair, and do women a favor, you may wish to abstain from misleading women with regards to the level of attraction and your “bonding intentions” prior to sex rather than to preach them to not give it away too easily. How about that?
@Kathleen,
I don’t have sex with my neighbors, but I do bond with them. Sex is sex. Bonding is bonding.
You say you no longer have NSA sex, but you just did. Sure technically you wrested a pseudo, for-the-night, sexclusivity with Mr. Non-committal. But the next morning you nexted him in favor of your NBA coach in the wings.
I can hardly believe your non-committal guy wasn’t showing signs of non-commitalness while you were dating. You ignored that because of your attraction to him. You got him to say something that made you feel like you were a “good girl who doesn’t have NSA sex” (“I’ll take my profile down”) and then went on to have “bonding” sex with him. The next day you unbonded as soon as he didn’t give you the answer you wanted. And I suspect if you were truly honest with yourself, you would have nexted him for some other pretext because the sex wasn’t that good and so you found yourself more interested in Mr NBA. This is ok. You could STILL have nexted him for Mr. NBA, without the pseudo-sexclusivity. That’s what I would have done. But yes, you can can kinda/sorta claim you don’t do NSA sex, but you’re lying to yourself. You can. You did. You just won’t admit it.
You had a one night stand, a form of NSA sex, but on your terms. So you were ok with it.
What I’m getting at is that MOST women are ok with NSA sex as long as it’s on HER terms. What “hurts” her is when she has NSA sex on a MAN’s terms. And that happens when she has sex ahead of her own schedule.
I have NSA sex, but always on MY schedule, and always on MY terms. No man can pressure me into sex before I’m ready. That is where most women who “bond” go wrong. They think sex will magically start or cement an iffy relationship and hence they get hurt when the men don’t follow that plan.
Karmic
J made a good point My idea of NSA sex is not a single event or one night stand or a few events . To me it is an extended sexual relationship.
So my goal now is to avoid an on going sexual relationship with a guy who doesnt care that much about me. Because for me, if Im in a sexual relationship with a guy over time it takes on an addictive quality Helen Fisher PHD researcher and anthropologist ,said romantic love is one of the most addictive things on the earth. (Remember the jilted astronaut who put on diapers to drive across country to go after her ex lover . People can loose their objectivity when in romantic love)
I think I ,like many women, cant be detached in a sexual relationship over time. If you can be detached or it works for you I dont judge you for it. Good for you!
So I learnt that the guy I was dating for 5 weeks wasnt looking for a GF. I didnt articluate clearly that I was looking for sexual exclusivity .My mistake . So once he was clear with me he wasnt looking for that I let him go. Funny thing though. Hes now pursuing me harder saying he does want to be exclusive.
I could care less about appearing a “good girl” My intention is to be with a guy who cares about me and is committed to me , because if Im going to loose my mind in crazy sex, at least Ill be in safe hands LOL
@Kathleen 196
I think people construe NSA sex as whatever sex they don’t do. Those who don’t have ONS, think NSA = ONS; those who can have ONS, like you, think NSA = FWB. And the people who do have NSA sex also doesn’t mean, as Fusee believes, they aren’t open to relationships. Having NSA sex doesn’t preclude you from having a relationship with that guy. When I first had sex with my ex husband, on our 7th date, it was NSA sex. He was not my boyfriend nor had I ever even broached sexclusivity with him.
All NSA sex means is that when you have sex, there are no strings, real or imagined. There was no sexclusivity agreement; he was not your bf. After sex, you are both free to date each other and/or other people. That’s all it means.
But having NSA sex doesn’t mean one doesn’t attach. I still love my ex-player-bf. We’ll continue to have NSA sex every now and then until one of us enters a relationship with someone else. Both of us are dating other people, though we don’t talk about that openly. Do I feel jealous? Sometimes. Does it bother me that he’s not exclusive with me? Sometimes. But the reality is that I’m not exclusive with him either (I know with online dating I’ve met more men than he has women). We get along and as along as we do and continue to behave like adults, this FWB relationship works. It’s an undemanding, easy-going non-relationship.
194 Kiki yup. That’s why you always have to be careful when someone pretends to be authoritative with “Science says this” or “it is a scientific fact that.” For two reasons. The first you nailed it, who is going to do a scientific study on whether women bond differently after having had NSA, and supposing they did, what would that study look like and who would have confidence in the results? Also gimme a break, science is so broad. It’s physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, medicine, yada yada. People who say “Science says this” probably don’t know science themselves, otherwise they could name an exact discipline or study instead of hiding behind a nebulous authority of “Science”.
TheThinker, wanna show us a study that supports what you claim as fact?- “It is also a scientific fact that women with multiple lovers tend to lose the ability to bond with any man.”
@Kathleen 196,
Remember when I asked you, on the other thread whether you have heard back from the non-committal guy after you broke up with him? I expected that he would trace you back and try to reconnect. This is what men do very often when you show some back-bone.
But I suspect you do not want him for reasons more complex that just the misunderstanding about exclusivity and profiles. He was not your good match to begin with, and, with or without having a clarifying discussion before the sex, it would not have worked long term.
How do I know? You keep asking the question when is it a good time to have sex, what did I do wrong to get myself in such a disappointong situation. You are not asking the question “how to get him back” or “how to make him like me”.
I want to tell you, that, being a grown-up woman, who has already been through marriage and all, there are no “deadly mistakes” as dating coaches may say (;-)) when it comes to sex. Honestly, you know more about sex and attachment and how it works for you than anybody else ever will. The choices you make are the result of your up-bringing, your values, your circumstances, your friends, possibly even what you read on this blog (:-)). You decide what to do based on being you, and, as being you, you can not make a TERRIBLE mistake, you can only do thinks that you have the experience and mindset to do, and learning to do new things takes time and several trials.
It seems to me that you overestimate the danger of falling into a protracted NSA relationship, it is all in your hands whether you would have that or nor. A good dating strategy (in my humble opinion) would be not to worry where things will go, see several man, have fun, don’t beat yourself over the ones who are not dying to become your boyfriend. Allow youself to be naughty once in a while, with protection!
At this point, I would like to make a joke; but last time I tried on this blog it did not go down too well (Cheers David T!). So, I am making the disclaimer that the comment that will follow is for entertainment pusposes only and not to be construed as a scientific fact (haha) or advice:
If you are really skillful, you will manage to be dating several men, without anyone of them realizing that he is not the only one. That will greatly increase your chances with thinkers who see sexually active women as emotionally handicapped.
Best of luck!
@Karmic 197.
Loved your comment that NSA sex is what other people do!!!
But I got a bit upset when I read that you still love your former bf and you still have occasional sex with him. The problem I have with NSA is not bonding but the fact that when you are very clear with each other that this is only sex, and you are also (implicitly or overtly) also sleeping with other people, your rob each other of the hope/potential to experience growing love with each other, to enjoy the passion of being fully devoted to each other, and to look forward to sharing a future.
My best wish are for you to meet someone who rocks your world and gets you out of your non-relationships!
And you can have sex with someone who DOES care about you AND is monogamous but is NOT committed. Is that NSA sex?
@marymary
No, its called dating. Most women don’t ask for sexclusvity and they will eventually end up with a man they slept with before there was a stated commitment. Those who can’t deal with that idea should not but I can guarantee you, non-jerks don’t have rules for the women they commit to based on when she sleeps with him, just the MRA types and no one wants to date them.
@Kiki 199
Awww. Thanks. Don’t be upset for me. I’m not upset. I love my ex-bf, but not in the in-love way. I’m the one who folded on the the relationship, because as much as I love him, he’s not a good relationship bet. I’m the sanest woman I know and he could drive ME crazy, in the bad way. lol. I’m more relaxed being his occasional date/booty call than I was being his gf. I get all the good behaviors without having to deal with his bad ones, and he had those to spare.
@marymary 200
LOL. Not sure. Maybe you can tell me if this couple is committed:
Married but keep separate homes, neither one a rental. Both folks sometimes go on separate vacations. Live together more often than not, but the wife sometimes goes off and spends time her own place for days. They’re happy and not resentful.
Are they really married? Committed? Weird, but it works for them.
The husband is a good looking lawyer in his early 40’s, who owns his own firm. Not sure what she does. The husband is a good friend of my best friend (male, also a lawyer). Per my bff, he never thought his friend would marry. They eloped and my friend found out after the fact.
julia,
Very much agree with #210. Curious though what does MRA stand for?
@Julia
Funny, I just wish women didn’t have rules tied to sex. My experience has been that they are the only ones that attach any kind of rules to sex and commitment.
@Chance
There are some men who attach rules to sex, some men will stop dating any woman who doesn’t sleep with him on date #3. Some men don’t want to commit to a woman he thinks of as “loose” I would say this is the minority though, definitely the MRA types which is why I said “non-jerks don’t have rules for the women they commit to based on when she sleeps with him, just the MRA types and no one wants to date them.” but you know, reading comprehension.
jlhsr in post 56 said:
*****i cant believe how this has turned into a discussion on dating women with children and all of the negative opinions about that. It makes us single moms feel like there is no hope…..*****
________________________________
Awwww don’t mind the posters’ projections. Stay focused on your own track.
What others want for themselves is irrelevant to the quality of your own romantic life.
It is what you want, what you don’t tolerate, what you do accept, what you feel grateful for, and how you feel that shapes your romantic life. Focus on that.
Age and the number of children and the number of divorces and her finances do not define a woman’s romantic future. Everything is possible under this sun.
The future is just that: the future. The unknown. Might even not exist. The beauty of it is that I can imagine anything in the unknown. I might as well imagine something for myself that feels good.
Before a dream becomes reality, it’s got to be a dream. 😉
Statistics and generalisations are irrelevant; it takes only one man.The one man right for ME.
The real ME, the ME I focus on, the ME I get to know for real.
When I get in touch with ME, the right man for ME will catch my vibe and won’t want to let go.
xxx
Actually, Julia, I perfectly understood every word you wrote. However, the comment doesn’t make much sense because MRAs are generally not the type of guys that would be in a position to leave a girl that didn’t have sex with him after three dates and simply move on to the next one. They are more likely to be frustrated with, and struggle with, dating in general. As such, they are more likely to happily take whatever they can get, and are more than willing to have sex with a woman on her terms. Same thing things goes for women who’ve had a lot of sexual partners, an MRA probably isn’t going to care. A lot of them are actually weak and needy underneath. It appears that you were really trying to reach for an opportunity to just use that term because I’m sure that you can’t stand them. Funny thing is that they are exactly the same as feminists. The only difference is that they’re men.
As it relates to men who move on from women who won’t have sex with them quickly being “jerks”…… Newsflash: a lot of men want to get laid quickly, and the ones who can 1.) will, or 2.) move on to another woman who will be happy to accommodate. As long as they are honest about what they are doing, and they aren’t intentionally lying or leading a woman on, they certainly aren’t jerks. I think your comment actually – what’s that cooked-up word you use- “infantilizes” women much more than Tom10’s comment did because it implies that women are too helpless to be held responsible for the negative consequences of NSA sex. It implies that if a woman wants to have NSA sex, then it’s no problem, but that we should all be cognizant of the fact women are emotional midgets who can’t handle it when a guy is going to have NSA sex on his terms. Therefore, if he has any rules about moving on after a certain amount of time, he has to be a jerk.
I personally think that women are much smarter and independent than you seem to think they are.
@ Julia
Kiki said “I am of the opinion that all women can have NSA sex” and in #138 you replied “YES!!!!”
And in #153 you said:
“its that they [women] like the guy BEFORE they have sex with him and want to make sure he is not just using them. I can have sex without bonding; this doesn’t mean I want to be used by a man I am interested in.”
Ok I’m confused — my definition of NSA sex means one can have sex without any expectations; therefore one can have sex and move on without any psychological effects — the motives of the other party being totally irrelevant.
I don’t understand how you can say that you can have NSA sex, but also need to ensure that you weren’t used. If there were no strings/expectations how could you feel used? Would you not be using him, as much as he’s using you?
Ensuring that you aren’t being used seems like a condition/string to me thus, as marymary said #200, is it really NSA sex?
I can truly have NSA sex because I don’t care if a woman is simply using me to satisfy her sexual needs, or if she gives me the cold shoulder after sex.
@Chance 204
Re: Rules on sex.
We women try to make sense of the world, and we seek to find ways to minimize pain and disappointment. Hence the rules, some of them valid, some helpful, and some not.
Having NSA sex is reputationally costly for women. At least some women, and the majority of men think that good girls are virtuous (as in not having sex with a man who is not their boyfriend/husband). Whether this is biologically reasoned, fair,is it hypoctritical or not, is a different matter; either way society has a double standard when it comes to sex.
We women struggle to find ways to be desirable, sexual, and still chaste at the same time. We think men have it easier when it comes to sex. To hyperbolize a bit: a desire for sex is considered a sign of good health in a man and a sigh of poor moral in a woman :-).
What are you angry about?
Kiki
Thanks
i dont think I overestimate the down side of getting into an NSA relationship. After my divorce I didnt want to be close to anyone. One guy who I was involved with over time contacted my best friend online. The other one I saw out on a romantic date with someone else after I had just been with him. Those situations dont feel good to me.
The problem with me with NSA sex is that if Im bonking Mr Wrong, in addition to the time in my job, my sport, going to the gym , going out with my female friends … I loose motivation to look for Mr Right. Even though intellectually I say Im still available, I can go out on other dates but always find something wrong with them
So for me it makes sense to keep dating without NSA , so that I have room for a quality whole relationship.
What on earth is MRA?
Chance @ 204
People are allowed to set boundaries with their bodies and lives. Most men obviously have fewer “rules” about sex than women, and I’m sure men would just love to be able to float through life and screw any woman that they see and desire on the spot and she would cheerily comply, no strings attached. But life doesn’t work that way. Just as women (and men) can choose, who they give their money too, who they lend their belongings to and who they allow into their homes (and lives), women get to choose who they will share their bodies with. It really doesn’t matter if their choice is based purely on attraction (she’ll have sex with any man who floats her boat, with no regard to the relationship between the too of them) or if she has other criteria. (has to get to know the man and evaluate the potential for a relationship) A woman (and a man for that matter) can choose to refrain from sex for WHATEVER reason. It’s HER choice. It takes TWO. And they both have a right to consent to or decline sex.
And many men don’t make it that easy. Complain that they can’t get laid by any woman they desire and also complain that women are “sluts”.
@Tom10
Ok I’m confused — my definition of NSA sex means one can have sex without any expectations; therefore one can have sex and move on without any psychological effects — the motives of the other party being totally irrelevant. I don’t understand how you can say that you can have NSA sex, but also need to ensure that you weren’t used. If there were no strings/expectations how could you feel used? Would you not be using him, as much as he’s using you?
Here’s the thing about life, its not black and white like you want to make it out to be. You don’t and can’t approach everyone the same way. If a woman is relationship orientated and desirable she could sleep with several men a week, that doesn’t mean she should. If she likes a man, she would probably want to get to know him before having sex with him. The entire point of NSA sex is there are no strings, if you have feelings those are strings.
But let’s jump into my personal life for an example. I am currently dating. I go on 2-3 dates a week. I am 32 and I want to married and have a child so currently, that’s my goal. NSA interests me less because I view it as a waste of time. I don’t ask for sexclsuvity but I get invited to the apartment after a date a lot, I don’t take them up on the offer (I also never really had sex with someone I first met, I need to feel more comfortable than that.) However, there is a man I dated about 5 years ago. He currently ended an engagement and lives about 2 hours a way. He comes to town about once a month to visit his parents and when he does, we get together, have some drinks then have NSA sex. We always had good sexual chemistry but not much of an emotional chemistry. When the evening is finished we part ways and I don’t really think of it again. Since its only about once a month it doesn’t distract me from my goal. So there it is. I can have both NSA sex and not sleep with every man who wants to sleep with me/I am attracted to.
@Kathleen 210,
yeah, what you described sucks. I have been out of the dating world way too long to remember that such things happen… It’s one thing to give recommendations based on gender-relations theory (that would be me) and pretty harsh to be out in the trenches.
Please keep us posted how it goes!
Julia said: (#205)
“There are some men who attach rules to sex, some men will stop dating any woman who doesn’t sleep with him on date #3.”
Those are typically players. They’re mostly interested in sex, so they’re not wait around in a relationship where they might not get any. They just move on so they can find a like-minded woman.
Why is a man a jerk for seeking a sexual relationship with a woman who wants the same thing he does?
Julia said: (#205)
“Some men don’t want to commit to a woman he thinks of as ‘loose'”
Those are typically the religious/conservative types. In most cases, they hold themselves to a high standard … and they seek a like-minded woman.
Why is a man a jerk for seeking a relationship with a woman who shares his values?
Julia said: (#205)
“I would say this is the minority though, definitely the MRA types”
How is this an MRA-type attitude? Of all the MRA issues I’ve ever heard, this wasn’t one of them.
Chance, (#204)
I think your impression of MRA types is accurate for the majority of them.
Tom10, (#208)
I agree with your definition of NSA sex. In most cases, I assume that the parties involved have implicitly decided to mutually use each other for sex.
Kiki said: (#209)
“At least some women, and the majority of men think that good girls are virtuous (as in not having sex with a man who is not their boyfriend/husband).”
“We women struggle to find ways to be desirable, sexual, and still chaste at the same time.”
It sounds like you’re trying to be all things to all men. I’ve always seen that as a strategy that’s doomed to failure.
Think about what you want in a man (in general terms). That’s probably what you should strive to be. You probably want him to make you feel desirable and sexually attractive. You probably want him to turn you on and satisfy you in bed. And you probably want him to act like a gentleman (instead of a sex-crazed animal) when you introduce him to your parents or your boss.
I’ve repeatedly heard women claim that they have to be two opposite things at the same time. It’s not that complicated. Act appropriately for the situation. As the situation changes, so should your behavior.
Fusee said: (#33)
“As Karl R said one time, a relationship must show signs of progress every three to six months.”
Every three months. It doesn’t have to be much progress, but if you seem to be in the exact same spot that you were three months ago, the relationship has stagnated. It’s time to start a conversation and see if the relationship is going to go anywhere.
(By the way, good memory, Fusee.)
There’s an ebb and flow to relationships, so it’s easy to feel like the relationship is regressing as frequently as it’s progressing if you try to track things on a daily or weekly basis. By looking at the relationship over a three-month span, the ebb and flow averages out, so you can more easily see the progress (or lack of progress).
Cahnie said: (original letter)
“We have been together for 7 years now. I have wanted to move in and get married since year two.”
There have been studies which looked at the length of courtship and compared it to the likelihood of divorce. Average length courtships (28 months) resulted in the lowest divorce rates. Excessively long or short courtships had much higher divorce rates.
From the Article:
“[Dr. Ted] Huston has found that the slowest to marry are often the quickest to divorce.”
http://www.sandiegodivorcecenter.com/marriage-success-related-to-how-long-you-dated
Cahnie,
If you want a long, happy marriage, break up and find someone else.
@Karl R
They are jerks because I say they are jerks. Calling someone a jerk is a matter of opinion, an opinion that I am totally entitled to have. Just like many of the men on here comment on how much they hate the rules that women make for sex, I in turn don’t like men who have rigid rules for sex. As for it being an MRA issue, I’ve sadly spent some time reading MRA forums (mostly when men started negging me and I was totally put off, so I decided to do some research.) Its entirely true that some of the MRA community hold these beliefs, they might not hold both at the same time but they seem to be themes of this community that come up over and over and over. You can choose to believe me or not, you can choose to condescend me (and like every other woman on here) but I have agency over the kind of men I choose to spend time with and the men whom I choose to sleep with. Neither of these group of men will probably spend too much time with or sleep with me.
Karl R,
your response to my comment is factually correct, but it seems that you, just like the other guys here, refuse to see why the dual standard is a problem for women. Why should women strive to project an image whereas guys can just be whatever they are?
Kiki
Thank you !
“Why should women strive to project an image whereas guys can just be whatever they are? ”
The double standard is not fair. Especially in these times. Ive now been convinced it is hardwired in men, and my lifetime experience backs that. Ive heard the funny line “women should have plenty of sex, but not too much”…But this double standard for women is real and I take that into account in dating
I think what Karl and the Thinker # 193 said is the way it is for men and makes sense to me
To be said with a British accent like Carey Elwes in the “Princess Bride,” “NSA sex…I don’t believe it exists.”
In my humble experience and observation — one person is hoping for it to be something more, and the other one is not…regardless of what either of them say to each other or anyone else.
@Kiki
Not angry. I know I can be very blunt, but nothing I say on here is meant to be personal. I enjoy the debate, and when I see comments that I don’t believe make any sense, I like to chime in with a challenge, and see what their response is. Every now and then, I learn something from another person’s perspective, which is a plus.
Regarding the sexual double standard you’ve been discussing: I think perhaps why it may be so hard for some guys to see it is because they probably don’t think that way, and none (or very few) of their friends do as well. That’s the case with me. I don’t care if a woman has never had sex or if she’s had a very lengthy sexual past. That’s not really important for long-term compatibility. I don’t particular remember any of my guy friends expressing concern about it either. Not trying to discount your experience at all…. I don’t doubt that women like you and Kathleen have experienced that in the past. Maybe it’s a generational thing? I don’t know how old you are. I’m only 31, so maybe people from my generation don’t really care that much about that? Also, I don’t know where you live, so it may vary by geography as well.
It’s probably also worth noting how outliers can influence what we think of as the norm. I have heard about this double standard for a long time. I remember a lot of girls complaining about this in college, and perhaps for good reason. However, I remember a few these same girls saying how they were less attracted to a guy who hadn’t ever had sex or had few sexual partners. I found the lack of awareness to be flabbergasting. They were actively participating in the other side of the coin of the double standard that they previously complained about. If a girl who’s had sex with a lot of guys is a slut, and a girl who hasn’t had any/many partners is chaste, and a guy who’s had sex with a lot of women is is a stud, then a guy who hasn’t had a lot of sexual conquests must be chump, right? Doesn’t sound like a fair double standard, either, does it? After hearing just a few girls say that, for some reason it was so easy to think that all girls thought that for a time, but then I realized they were mostly outliers.
Bottom line: why should a guy ever know how many sexual partners you’ve had? It’s nobody’s business. I don’t care how many partners my girlfriend has had in the past, and I’ve never asked. If any guy asks, tell him to get screwed.
@Sparkling Emerald
I don’t disagree with a word you said. However, my comment that you responded to had nothing to do with complaining about women who don’t want to give it up. It was a direct response to a person who was championing NSA sex for women, and basically calling guys jerks for doing the same. Do I wish that women didn’t have rules relating to NSA sex? Yes, but I certainly don’t resent them for it and I respect their decision.
@Julia
“They are jerks because I say they are jerks. Calling someone a jerk is a matter of opinion, an opinion that I am totally entitled to have.”
Intelligent response. You are entitled to your opinion. However, your recent comments on here indicate that you aren’t thinking in terms of what is fair, but rather that you only want is best for you.
Julia said: (#215)
“As for it being an MRA issue, I’ve sadly spent some time reading MRA forums (mostly when men started negging me and I was totally put off, so I decided to do some research.)”
“Negging” is a PUA term/tactic. It has nothing to do with MRA. Perhaps you got your acronyms confused? PUAs are also players, so that part makes more sense too.
Julia said: (#215)
“They are jerks because I say they are jerks. Calling someone a jerk is a matter of opinion, an opinion that I am totally entitled to have.”
You are entitled to have your opinion. But the way you express yourself will change the way others (like the men you’d like to date) perceive you.
If a man claims all his exes are crazy bitches (or a woman claims that all her exes are jackasses), then that man (or woman) is a poor candidate for a relationship … for anyone. If you choose to date that kind of man, he will one day be referring to you as one of the crazy bitches he used to date. (Similarly, the woman’s new boyfriend will end up being referred to as one of the jackasses she used to date.)
Julia said: (#215)
“I have agency over the kind of men I choose to spend time with and the men whom I choose to sleep with. Neither of these group of men will probably spend too much time with or sleep with me.”
That’s a perfectly healthy attitude. It’s also a much better way to phrase your opinion. You can say that without raising red flags.
Calling them jerks just because you disagree with them, that’s red flag territory.
Kiki said: (#216)
“it seems that you, just like the other guys here, refuse to see why the dual standard is a problem for women.”
In this case, I think the dual standard is entirely of your own making. My wife has had sex with men without being in an exclusive relationship. I know this for a fact, because we had sex before we were in an exclusive relationship. Furthermore, she has told me that she had sex with other men without being in an exclusive relationship.
She meets the exact same standard I hold for myself.
Kiki asked: (#216)
“Why should women strive to project an image whereas guys can just be whatever they are?”
You don’t have to strive to project an image. You choose to project an image. I choose not to.
Most women are like you. They choose to project an image. Most men are like me. We choose not to.
Let me give you an example of this difference in outlook. My wife and I had sex during our first week of dating. Several months later, we ended up having this discussion about it:
My wife: “I was mad at myself with having sex with you so soon.”
Me: “Why?”
My wife: “I didn’t want you to think I was that kind of girl.”
Me: “Well, apparently you’re that kind of girl -and- I’m that kind of guy. What’s the big deal?”
So to turn your question around:
Why do you strive to project an image, when many guys prefer that you be just whatever you are?
Kathleen said: (#217)
“Ive heard the funny line ‘women should have plenty of sex, but not too much'”
Here’s an easy solution to apply to dating. Don’t discuss how much sex you’ve had.
https://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/should-i-disclose-the-number-of-sexual-partners-ive-had-in-the-past/
@Chance
It is an intelligent response, I have the right to what I think. I don;t need you or any stranger on the internet to tell me how I should think instead. As far as doing what’s best for me. Why wouldn’t I? Should I do what’s worst for me, or what’s just bad for me? I don’t understand your point at all. I believe Evan teaches us women to pay attention to how a man treats us, if a man treats me as something to use I don’t want to be with him. It has nothing to do with me potentially bonding with someone, it has everything to do with not really wanting to waste my time on anyone who is interested only in sex. Men make their intentions pretty clear, which is why I don’t feel the need to ask for commitment to have sex. I have sex when I want to have sex with a man. That’s what’s best for me, if a man has some rigid view of when he believes he deserves to have sex with me, then he loses the chance to do so. Frankly, I don’t know why you find this so offensive.
And for the record, if a man decides I’m a bitch or a prude because I don’t have sex with him on a first date, he has every right to think that (It’s happened before.) Are we really caring about the names people call us?
The only healthy way to me to have sex is as an expression of wanting to share my love with a person who wants to express and share their love for me in a mutually connected way. So anyone who is coming on to me for sex not in these circumstances is not on the same wavelegnth and they are not a match for me.
Up to others to make their own minds up why they want sex and what circumstances they feel ok with it. And if the person they are choosing to have sex with is on the same wavelegnth and a match.
There are loads of people out there who I find physically attractive and who find me physically attractive, doesn’t mean I want to have sex with them. Sex is more than a physical act to me. So I am not going to be a match with someone who sees sex as just a physical act. That is why NSA sex would not work for me.
Karl R,
I like your comment very much this time! So you know exactly what I am talking about, even your own wife was worried that she had sex with you too soon!!!
The double standars is not my making, or her making, it exists, and it is unfair, and it causes women to engage in all sorts of [irrational] behaviors like trying to create rules when to sleep with a man, whether to diclose/scale down the number of partners she has had, etc.
Sometimes on this blog I feel like I need to expalin obvious things. I know we all have differences in opinion, but it is a fact that women care much more about how their sexual experience is perceived and judged by others, and by others I mean both men and women. Also, I would say, as a generalization, that women care more about how they appear to others than men. There are books and articles on the female “desire to be desired” – you may see for yourself on the web if you are curios.
You are right that we women do not need ALL men to accept us, but just to find a partner to accept us. We would just prefer, if possible, not to be given bad names during the search and exploration process :-).
@Karl R #221
You are entitled to have your opinion. But the way you express yourself will change the way others (like the men you’d like to date) perceive you. If a man claims all his exes are crazy bitches (or a woman claims that all her exes are jackasses), then that man (or woman) is a poor candidate for a relationship … for anyone. If you choose to date that kind of man, he will one day be referring to you as one of the crazy bitches he used to date. (Similarly, the woman’s new boyfriend will end up being referred to as one of the jackasses she used to date.)
I think that’s fine advice and I agree with you. That’s why what I think in my head or express on a blog of a dating coach might be different than what I say on a date. I am also operating under the impression that I am going to meet zero dates from this blog but I digress. When it becomes painfully obvious that a man just wants to bed me (like when he’s asking me to his apartment during drink 2) I politely decline and continue on with the date. I might be thinking “oh this jerk just wants to get laid.” but I still am my best self and take it with grace. There has never been a time when I called a man a jerk on a date. I don’t talk about players or the other men I’ve been out with. This is even after men have said mean things to me for not sleeping with them. So thanks for the advice, I’m sure it might help another woman here but I already follow it.
And for the record, I don’t talk ill about my exes either. I don’t talk about them much at all. Even if I talk about my controlling and emotionally abusive man I simply say “It was a bad relationship, he wasn’t a great guy but I’ve learned a lot from that relationship which is why I only date good men now :)”
@Julia 225
Your comment that you expect to have zero dates from this blog got me laughing hysterically. Yeah, me neither.
The biggest insult the men here can give you is that you are undatable, and that is so funny! That is the “no wonder you are on a dating blog for single women” line.
Are you new around here? I am, kind of, but I learnt pretty fast that there are expectations here for political correctness. When talking to male posters, please bear in mind the following:
1. You may not blame men for making you miserable. It is all your making, until proven the opposite.
2. If a man has made you miserable, and it is clearly his fault, you have exercised poor judgement to ever having let him to approach you. Still you fault.
3. If you think a man should pay for dates/be the bread-earner in the house, you are wrong. This is 21 century, at best we split 50:50, at worst – the woman shall pay more. This is the male vindication for ages of disparity in the other direction.
4. Do not advertise providing blow-jobs on demand before marriage as a viable strategy to attract a mate, unless you seriously intend to continue to do so post marriage. This is really not funny, and triggers people’s traumatic memories that you have no way of knowing about.
I am sure you could come up with more 🙂
I don’t feel comfortable going on a date to a pub for a drink in the getting to know each other stage. Or going back to or inviting them back to each others houses.
Feels better to me if we are both making decisions from a fully conscious aware state, which is not going to happen if alchohol is involved.
And feels safer to me to keep dates to daytime public places until I have seen them over a period of time and gotten to know their character better.
@Kiki #226
The paying on dates thing is a real head scratcher. I’ve literally never paid on a first date, I don’t even have time to do a purse grab, every man snatches the check and puts his card down immediately, maybe I am just lucky? As far as the commenters, I’ve been around for awhile, didn’t comment too much until lately. I notice a ganging up mentality from a couple different groups. I like to think I am pretty level headed and I don’t see things in terms of black and white. I am really not dismayed by the men right now because I don’t want a partner like that, so they are someone else’s problem!
#228 There are different groups of commenters on here? Dammit, once again I am not one of the popular kids. Next I’m going to find out there was a commenters party and I wasn’t invited.
My 2 cents on paying on first dates, dating is a game and this goes double for first dates. I do the reach and he says no way. Both a part of the first-date ritual. I used to set my first dates someplace inexpensive like at coffee shops, so that he can feel manly for buying me food and drink, and not go broke doing so.
I did hear a cautionary tale from a fellow blogger many years ago, way before this site existed. He went on a blind date, and first thing she did was order a $250 bottle of wine. He excused himself to go to the bathroom, left the restaurant through a back door, and drove home. Moral of the story, yes the man pays, but no, he won’t pay $250 for someone he just met.
PS. Ha, I found it. My bad, it was a $225 bottle of wine. Also, apparently there’s more to the story! http://sigcarlfred.blogspot.com/2005/04/saturday-night-date-fiasco.html
@Kiki #226
You’ve made it abundantly clear that 1.) You wish men weren’t allowed to post on here, and 2.) You really don’t like to hear advice that places responsibility back on you. I’m sure there are some other forums out there that accommodate your desires.
As far as your list goes of things to keep in mind when interacting with a male, while you were making an attempt at humor, a good deal of it is actually pretty good advice to bear in mind. We’re all ultimately responsible for our lot in life. When things don’t work out the way I like in my relationships, it would be easy to place blame on women, but really it is my own fault. Therefore, I accept responsibility, and adjust accordingly.
@Goldie
Well, I always let a man choose where we are going, practicing my feminine energy 🙂 My ex said something interesting about paying on the first date. I sort of jokingly that women liked men who pay on the first date, he said “of course they do, that’s like saying men like women with big boobs. But seriously, I assume if a woman offers to pay half she isn’t interested in seeing me again.” So it turns out not everyone is the same! If I follow a man’s lead he chooses where to take me, I assume he can afford it if he’s chosen it and if he grabs a check asap and then puts down his card within 10 seconds, it means he wants to pay. I smile and thank him for his generosity.
Fault and responsibilty are not the same thing.
If a man or woman treats me badly it;s not my fault as until I have been out with him her I don’t know how he is going to treat me. It is not my fault and I am not responsible for how another person choses to treat me and behave. And most people pretend to be something they are not at first.
What I am responsible for is doing my best in minimising the risk of putting myself in situations where I can get harmed or treated badly.
And if I am in a situation where I feel badly treated or abused to take responsibility to do my best to get out of there and away from the person is question. Sometimes this will not be possible.
I am helpless and have no real control over how others choose to treat me or other people or behave, I can only learn from past experiences and control what I do to the best of my ability and situation I am in.
For instance it’s not my fault if I get raped, mugged, beaten up, physically, psychologically or verbally abused etc. And it’s nonsense and victim blaming mentality to say otherwise.
What is my responsibilty as as adult is to do my best to stay in control of my own life and not give my personal power, authority and control over myself to anyone else especially someone who may not have my best interest at heart and not be good for my physical, emotional, spiritial and psychological health and well being.
So I would say to all the women stay in your personal power and you get to choose if what is being offered is what you want and learn to say and stick to NO if you don’t want what is being offered. You can’t say YES to what you don’t want until you can learn to say NO to what you don’t want. And big red flag if you say NO and someone doesn’t accept it, tries to coerce, manipulate, bully, sweet talk etc. RUNNNNN. As they sure as hell have not got your best interest at heart.
Julia, I have always had guys ask where it is convenient for me to meet. (except one guy, who picked a place to meet, a grocery store in a bad neighborhood.) So I let him be a perfect gentleman, and give him a name/address of a place not far from my work/home, so I wouldn’t have to do most of the driving. Of course I don’t look him straight in the eye and say, “Gimme that check, I’m paying half”. That would indeed guarantee that there’ll be no second date. I kinda reach for my purse, smile and ask “do you need help with this?” He usually says no. At that point, I also thank him for his generosity. The gist of what you and I are doing, I think, is the same in both cases, to make him feel manly and generous in every way.
@Chance,
In you previos comment you also suggested that I am old and provincial vis-a-vis you who are 30 and from a large urban area. So you wish to show the old lady the door? It breaks my heart.
Orherwise, I wish that men say useful things and do not insult women, but that would be too much in your case.
Kiki, your power is either in expressing that you find x,y or z insulting and to then disengage. If you don’t engage they are no longer able to connect by using language towards you that you find insulting and will have to find someone else who either doesn’t feel insulted or who is willing to carry on being insulted.
Or in having a pariadgm shift and learning to step outside the box and not to react in the way we have learned we would see the stupidity of the ‘offensive’ remark and then we would no longer be offended and it wouldn’t bother us. If you then really make this shift and are not offended, the people making remarks don’t get fed and have no power over you. As in don’t feel the TROLL! You starve them of their food as it has now become a non issue to you. We can only be insulted or offended by our own consent. They no longer have any emotional power over you.
They can no longer have longer have it over you if you either stop engaging or step outside the box and make that shift.
Well Kiki, I attempted to make a useful comment by acknowledging your feelings and trying to show things from another perspective. Also, I surely didn’t intend to insult you by implying that you were old or from a rural area. I don’t know anything about you. Perhaps you don’t consider anything that doesn’t fit your worldview to be useful?
Kiki, (#226)
Read what Rose (#232) said about fault and responsibility. She’s spot on.
Blaming men (or women) is pointless. It doesn’t get you any closer to your goal. If you’re in a bad relationship (or on a bad date), then I don’t care who is to blame. If you’re unhappy with your current situation, then it’s your responsibility to change your circumstances.
This blog has a lot of outspoken advocates of people taking personal responsibility for their lives (especially their dating lives). We really don’t have much patience for blame-throwing.
Karl R,
I do not disagree with you, so no need to sweat. Also, spare me the so called advocacy and patience – you are just another poster, and I am not even arguing with you.
Chance,
not all advice/opinion are created equal. you fail to present yours in a persuasive or respectful way.
Rose,
thanks. I understand what you say most of the time, but you operate with, like you said, a totally different patadigm, so i dont even know how to relate to you.
kiki, I get what you are saying.
I feel frustrated.hhoseI want to help.
We have no power and no control over how others choose to engage with us.
You have no power or control over how Chance chooses to speak to you.
You feel disrespected, I understand that. Chance doesn’t want to change the way he speaks. He doesn’t care.
You do care how about the way you are spoken to and rightly so. If you carry on engaging with him you are then allowing him to carry on speaking to you in a way that feels bad and disrespectful to you. By doing this you are giving him permission to carry on. This feeds him and gives your power away.
If being spoken to in a way that feels disrepectful makes you feel bad and the person doing this doesn’t want to change what do you think is the best ACTION is to make you feel respected and good?
Do you think carrying on talking to the person will make them stop or get them to speak to you differently and get your respect and power back?
Or do you think dissengaging and choosing to no longer engage with people who speak to you in a way that feels disrespectful and bad will make you feel self respected and good.?
Rose,
thanks again. Either way suits me :-). I get the respect and power I need from other sources, thanks again.
@Tom10 151
So did you stay and cuddle with that woman or take off? Ever see her again? Prurient curiosity.
@marymary 136
That is the most awesome compliment. That is what I mean about a woman becoming the kind that men can’t walk away from. No man walks away from a personality they find addictive (unless that addiction is toxic, which I’m sure you’re not!).
@marymary 189
“Life is a journey, not a destination.”
I believe that of relationships as well, because as you’re developing a relationship, you’re actually IN a relationship to develop that relationship.
Too many women focus so hard on the destination (some form of committed relationship) that they forget to enjoy the journey (have fun with guy while getting to know him, I don’t mean just sexual fun, but just fun-fun). Men don’t forget that. They want to enjoy the journey before they get to the “relationship destination.”
If most women do look at relationships as investments, then that must be extraordinarily stressful, imo. You have to almost constantly worry about what you’re putting into it and if there’s any ROI. This makes sense if you’re a woman with a deadline (having babies) for maximzing the ROI.
But most women here are already financially successful, have been married, and have had children, and have already taken out their relationship-investement ROI (your children).
Now’s the time to just enjoy the journey.
Kathleen,
Don’t let social constructs and social programming tell you what you can or cannot do. As long as what you’re doing isn’t criminal, go ahead and do it. Women have the power. Don’t abdicate it for hypocritical men who believe in the double standard.
BTW, I’ve NEVER met one those. And perhaps if I had, I had the good sense not to want a relationship with him.
If you’re finding that men you’re attracted to have a double standard, then you’re choosing the wrong kind of man to have a relationship with. Choose differently!
Karmic
Thanks
Im not that influenced by social constructs I married a black man when it wasnt so hip as it is now . ( No hardship for me… he was strikingly handsome and charismatic.)
I havent found NSA sex to be worth it for the hurt it eventually causes , and better quality sex is with a guy who is enthralled with me not leaving his options open.
I believe the double standard may be hard wired, not a social construct, so if I really like a guy Im going to avoid sex until we have a friendship and trust is built. ( I believe with great chemistry there are exceptions afterall I had sex with my ex husband within hours of first meeting him LOL)
Ive talked with a few guys about the double standard. With many I think it is unconscious that they may not value or trust a woman when theres no chase. In my area of CA i hear from men that women aggressively pursue men and sleep with them very quickly. Id rather stand out as someone different from the norm.
Kathleen,
Then you weren’t having NSA sex, which is why you were hurt. Sounds like you had sex with the same guy frequently, that truly isn’t how NSA sex works. And if you had expectations, even if you didn’t voice them, then the sex wasn’t NSA.
Women who chase men fall into the slut category in most men’s minds, unfortunately, so don’t chase. Easy solution. Don’t be slutty, be sexy. Tougher to do. That’s the art of being a woman.
Here’s a blog post that touches upon the double standard. Point #2 talks about what men consider slutty attitudes, which is the real turn off.
http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2011/12/what-men-think-about-your-sexual.html
This post is also very interesting as well:
http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2013/02/the-analogy-between-sex-and-commitment.html
P.S. to 243
I didn’t mean to imply you were slutty, or anything like that! I don’t think that at all. Didn’t realize how it sounded until I re-read it again. Sorry!
@Karmic Equation # 241
“So did you stay and cuddle with that woman or take off?”
Well I’ve been in that situation countless times — mainly when I was a bit younger; I would meet a woman, go back to hers and then for one reason or another she didn’t want to go through with sex. I always stayed and cuddled for three reasons: 1) I like cuddling too, 2) it’s probably a bit rude to take off just because she wouldn’t have sex, and 3) there was still a 50% chance she’d change her mind at some point and have sex.
It doesn’t happen as much anymore as at my grand old age women tend to either go back for sex, or else not go back at all.
“Ever see her again?”
I know this is shallow but it would depend on hot she was. If she was very hot I would, if she was ‘meh’ I wouldn’t. Interestingly the decision was made irrespective of whether she had sex or not, so if she went through with or not didn’t even matter.
———————-
Regarding the double standard I’ve discussed this a lot with my friends and the results are mixed. On balance the vast majority of guys I know wouldn’t hold it against a woman if she has sex straightaway, but a few do. I personally think it’s a huge compliment. My mind says something like: “She’s so attracted to me that she just couldn’t hold herself back” ha.
“I believe the double standard may be hard wired, not a social construct,”
I’ve read that too, but from a young age I wanted lots of sex with lots of women so I realized that for women to have sex (with me!) freely they’d have to feel comfortable to do it without any shame or regrets. Therefore I made a conscious decision never to slut-shame and to vociferously support women to express their sexuality as they see fit.
“Women who chase men fall into the slut category in most men’s minds, unfortunately, so don’t chase.”
I don’t think it’s so much we think they’re slutty as beneath our league. I.e. if a woman of such a calibre is chasing me, then surely I could get a higher quality woman if I bothered to do the chasing myself.
Tom10 @ 151 Either way something is preventing them from having NSA sex, even though they’d really like to.
My guess is that they DON’T want NSA sex. They want a relationship. Perhaps their body wants sex, but their heart wants more. It’s called temptation, they come very close, then realize that the sex will give them only a temporary buzz, but going to bed with a man who only wants NSA sex will not help them obtain what they ultimately want.
It’s similar to me deciding to NOT eat a big double fudge brownie, just because it makes my mouth water. I KNOW it will satisfy my immediate hunger or sweet craving & it will be delicious, but it will derail my main goal to maintain a slim & healthy body.
Tom10 -But if you’re telling me that women attaching due to sex isn’t true, or just a social construct, then we’ve been worrying about nothing really.
I suppose my desire to have a nice slim figure is a social construct also, reinforced by fashion magazines, the weight loss industry (and mens general tendency to prefer women who, if not stick figure thin, are at least not very overweight) So really, if my desire for a slim figure is just a social construct, I guess I’m working out and eating healthy for nothing.
KE, Thanks for the links! I liked this post; I think I’ll print it out and post it on my wall at home, when I go back to dating: http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2012/12/fifteen-red-flags-in-dating-world.html
Tom I agree with SE that those women want an emootional heart attachment along with the physical arousal They feel physically aroused. There are a few women who are able to have dissconnected sex and just have sex with a man because they want to have intsant physical gratifaction, NSA sex. And there are women who before having sex although thay feel physically aroused want and need to feel a heart connection aswell be in love with you. Now that’s great if it’s a two way street, welcome to love making. So a woman is happy to have a cuddle and yes feels physically aroused and says yes my body feels like it wants sex. Her heart doesn’t though. And if she gives in and is not able to do NSA and not get hormonally attached it’s a recipe for disaster.
I don’t believe attachment is a social construct. Women produce oxytocin when they orgasm. That’s not love. That’s hormonal bonding and again a recipe for disaster if you bond with someone who isn’t in love with you, just wants you for sex or fwb or is a bad match for you and will not treat you how you want to be treated. Recipe for abusive and dysfucntional relationship or heartbreak ahead.
Love comes from a deep place within and takes time to develop. If you want a loving realtionship and get hormonally bonded the best way to get what you want is don’t have sex until you have spent a lot of time with a person to see if this develops.
If you don’t get hormonally bonded NSA sex will work for you.
I personally would not want to get involved with any man who dissconnected during sex as even if he loved me I would know that he may have NSA sex with another woman even though he was in love or bonded to me. So we wouldn’t be a match. I only want connected love making with someone who cares about me as a person and not just my physical body.And only want to have sex with someone I care and love as a person.
[email protected]Thanks for this post, it’s helpful information, I hope you don’t mind if I go through a couple of points and interrogate you/comment upon your post. 🙂
I would meet a woman, go back to hers and then for one reason or another she didn’t want to go through with sex.
You say “she didn’t want to go through with sex”. Was there an explicit promise of sex, or did you just assume ?
***********************
I like to spend time in each other’s home as part of the exploration process. This is part of my information gathering that happens BEFORE sex, and helps me decide if we have enough compatibility to even consider a relationship, and at any point when I have concluded that there is no relationship potential, then I won’t have sex, and I will no longer see that person.
(KE asked) “Ever see her again?” and you replied . . .
I know this is shallow but it would depend on hot she was. If she was very hot I would, if she was ‘meh’ I wouldn’t. Interestingly the decision was made irrespective of whether she had sex or not, so if she went through with or not didn’t even matter.
I have always suspected something like this in the minds of many men. I am shy about the first time letting someone see me naked. That is a bigger issue than the sex itself. (which is one of the reasons why I keep hitting the gym and eating salads 🙂 ) At least now I know that if I don’t have sex with a guy early on, that’s not likely the reason he’ll stop seeing me. He wouldn’t have seen me again either way. Anyway, I’d rather be dumped because I didn’t hump, then humped & dumped. Also, if the guy really thinks I’m hot, he won’t dump me for not having sex. I assume the same is also true if he sees me as an LTR. (up to a certain point, I realize a guy won’t wait 3 years for sex no matter how hot he thinks I am, or how much GF potential he sees)
I made a conscious decision never to slut-shame and to vociferously support women to express their sexuality as they see fit.
Thank you, Thank you, THANK YOU !!!!! Sometimes I think men are the source of many of their own frustrations. They bitch when they don’t get laid, then when they DO get laid, they thank the girl by dumping her and calling her a slut. (usually not to her face, but to their friends or on an internet blog)
Regarding the double standard I’ve discussed this a lot with my friends and the results are mixed. On balance the vast majority of guys I know wouldn’t hold it against a woman if she has sex straightaway, but a few do. I personally think it’s a huge compliment. My mind says something like: “She’s so attracted to me that she just couldn’t hold herself back” ha.
She could also be hoping for a relationship. Do you tell the women straight up that you aren’t looking for a relationship, and/or that you just want to have sex with as many women as you can ? Or do you not state your intentions at all, and let her guess ?
Final question.
If you were making out with a woman and as your hand was burrowing under her shirt and she moved your hand elsewhere and said “I really like you and want to get to know you better, I’m not ready for this” how would you respond ?
I hope you don’t mind the interrogation, and if you do choose to answer my questions, thanks in advance !
Rose 248
Agreed!!! With my life experience Im in your camp at this point. I also believe in the influence of oxytocin but I work in neuroscience so thats not a far fetch concept for me.
I like SE question of Tom.. was he completely upfront and honest with women he had no interest in a relationship with . This is where the issue is . Its my experience that guys looking for as much sex with anybody dont disclose this and that is what is hurtful to women.
Tom wrote ““Women who chase men fall into the slut category in most men’s minds, unfortunately, so don’t chase.”
I don’t think it’s so much we think they’re slutty as beneath our league. I.e. if a woman of such a calibre is chasing me, then surely I could get a higher quality woman if I bothered to do the chasing myself.”
Tom, why do you think a woman who chases you is beneath your league? When men chase me, that isn’t the reason I think they are below my league. I have been chased by men who I think of high caliber. If a man chases me that I think is below my league, it is usually because of reupulsive behavior, not that he chased me.
Sparkling Emerald @249
I don’t believe that you come from a place of hating men, so I’m going to take off my blunt and confrontational hat and put on my regular hat. I know your questions were directed at Tom10, but I hope you don’t mind if I answer some of them.
“You say “she didn’t want to go through with sex”. Was there an explicit promise of sex, or did you just assume ?”
I my experience, it was neither. I didn’t feel like I was entitled to it, it was more like I was just hoping for it. Us guys are usually just trying to find our way through the dark in this process, and in the dating process in general. We usually fumble through it. We initiate, and hope she is receptive.
“They bitch when they don’t get laid, then when they DO get laid, they thank the girl by dumping her and calling her a slut. (usually not to her face, but to their friends or on an internet blog)”
Guys will probably be frustrated when they don’t get laid until the end of time haha. As for the dumping her and calling her a slut, that sounds like a really awful thing to do. I really hope you’ve never had to experience this. If so, please don’t think everyone is like that Grade “A” jerk
“She could also be hoping for a relationship. Do you tell the women straight up that you aren’t looking for a relationship, and/or that you just want to have sex with as many women as you can ? ”
I’m always honest with what my intent is. However, sometimes we don’t know exactly what it is we’re looking for. It’s like Evan says over and over: “men look for sex and find love”.
“If you were making out with a woman and as your hand was burrowing under her shirt and she moved your hand elsewhere and said “I really like you and want to get to know you better, I’m not ready for this” how would you respond ?”
When this has happened, I didn’t mind and I respected her decision. My girlfriend did this a few times at first, and I’m still with her:). By the way, I think the way you put this: “I really like you and want to get to know you better, I’m not ready for this” – is the perrrrrfect way to put it! It doesn’t put the guy on the defensive, and it also let’s him know that you are still interested in him. If he gets mad after you say that, then he most certainly is a jerk. One time when in my early 20’s, a girl acted really strange after I did that, and I just figured she didn’t like me or I had bad breath or something hehe. She ended up continuing to contact me the following day so I was really confused! I know now that she just wasn’t ready at the time.
@ Rose #248
“I personally would not want to get involved with any man who disconnected during sex as even if he loved me I would know that he may have NSA with another woman even though he was in love or bonded to me.”
Fair enough. Like attracts like I suppose.
@ Sparkling Emerald
Of course I don’t mind — it’s a pleasure to answer such polite and reasonable queries 🙂 Although I pretty much echo what Chance wrote #252
#246
“My guess is that they DON’T want NSA sex. They want a relationship.”
That’s my guess too — which proves some of the commenters here wrong, when they said that all women can have NSA sex.
#249
“Was there an explicit promise of sex, or did you just assume?”
As Chance said it’s more a case of hope than assumption. In fairness to the women they often told me in advance that there would be no sex, but I know from experience that no matter what they say there is always at least a 50% chance of sex. I suppose I wondered why would she bother bringing me back if not for sex – what was the point exactly? Surely she’d have a better night’s sleep on her own than with me beside her.
I didn’t realize she was doing a research mission, scoping me out before sex. Interesting.
“At least now I know that if I don’t have sex with a guy early on, that’s not likely the reason he’ll stop seeing me. He wouldn’t have seen me again either way.”
Right.
“Sometimes I think men are the source of many of their own frustrations”
I do too. I’ve often thought that if there was no such thing as rape, violence or stigma (often perpetrated by men) that women would have a lot more sex with a lot more men, thus benefiting men.
“If you were making out with a woman and as your hand was burrowing under her shirt and she moved your hand elsewhere and said “I really like you and want to get to know you better, I’m not ready for this” how would you respond?”
Ha, all of us pull the same moves do we? “Turning the taps” before “testing the water”. Chuckle.
I always keep the mood as light as possible so I normally try and turn it around into a joke. Kind of like: “don’t worry it’s ok, it’s probably better that you don’t see me as a sexual object anyway, and realize that I’ve got feelings and emotions. It’s better you get to appreciate my personality first“ etc. I might try again later, because again I know that the odds are always at least 50% she’ll change her mind at some point.
“Do you tell the women straight up that you aren’t looking for a relationship, and/or that you just want to have sex with as many women as you can?”
I’ve discussed this at length before so don’t want to repeat myself too much but it’s tricky balance between not hurting someone and not shooting myself in the foot to such an extent that I never get sex. I’ve concluded that the fairest and most practical solution is to tell them upfront if it’s an on-going situation, but not say anything if it’s just an ons.
I would never tell a woman I want to have sex with as many women as I can because 1) it’s not true (anymore) and 2) I can’t imagine any woman would react positively to that. As many as possible is a bit strong. Just lots of sex with lots of women. Surprisingly I’ve turned down lots of opportunities for sex.
Josavant # 251
“Tom, why do you think a woman who chases you is beneath your league?”
Because men will ‘date down’ (for sex / casual) whereas women won’t.
So when a woman asks a guy out she is operating at or above her league. But the guy in the equation might be operating below his league (in his mind of course). If a guy asks a woman out the odds are much higher that he deems her within his league – she would have to be, for it to be worth the effort of overcoming the inertia and possible rejection. When she asks him out she removes the possible rejection and overcomes his inertia, therefore he’s much more likely to take the easy option and ‘date down’ for x amount of time.
Case in point. I was dating two women the summer before last, one a doctor and one a teacher. Both of them were fairly attractive and very much into me, but I was ambivalent about both of them. So in their efforts to ‘woo me’ they would invite me over for dinner and sex — and of course being polite, I availed of their hospitality. It took them two to three months to establish that I was ambivalent. If they had waited for me to ask them out they would have worked it out in a few days. I.e.I would have asked them out pronto if I was actually interested.
[email protected] – Glad you realize that I’m not coming from a place of “hating” men, I don’t. Just haven’t really decided if I’m going back to the dating jungle when my D becomes final (in the next 75-90 days ! )
Thanks for your answers. I enjoy everyone’s feed back.
My “I really like you, etc. speech” seems to be mostly well rec’d. (on this board at least) However, it hasn’t been necessary this time around, maybe because MOST of my dates were from online, and I only would communicate and meet with men who stated they were relationship oriented in their profile. (Yes, I realize men COULD lie, but it’s not really necessary, since they could state that they were only looking for casual, and find plenty of women to take them up on that)
I never had to give the “I really like you” speech to any of my ex hubbies, nor LTR’s for that matter, they all expressed a desire for couple-dom, early on. My second hubby, I can’t remember the precise time line of when he asked for an exclusive relationship specifically in words, and when we first slept together, but I do believe we slept together before the words came, and sometime after he had built me a hope chest, done auto repairs for me (wouldn’t even let me pay him for the parts), introduced me to his mother, taken me to friends wedding as his plus one, planted some plants in my condo front yard, etc. So he may not have expressed in words that we were in a relationship when we first slept together, but his actions gave me so much hope, (and he was so darn cute !!) that I slept with him anyway BEFORE he explicitly stated his intentions. Which he obviously did eventually . . .
My “I really like you speech” never got an on the fencer to commit, or resulted in a relationship, but it did work like truth serum. Once it was out in the open that this was strictly NSA, I could state that we weren’t on the same page, and end it. I had seen so many girlfriends spend YEARS in “string a long” relationships, that technically weren’t string alongs, because he had said UP FRONT, “I don’t want to get serious” or “Let’s not label this” or “Let’s just go with the flow” or my personal favorite “I can’t predict where this is headed”. (to wish I think the right reply inside one’s own mind but not out loud is, “Well no one is asking you to PREDICT anything, it’s in your power to MAKE A DECISION, which requires no psychic powers. Since I like DECISIVE men, good-bye ! ”
If I go back to the dating jungle again, I might handle the “burrowing hand” by moving it, and continuing to make out. Just keep moving it until he either stops, or asks why I keep moving it. Then just tell him “I’m not ready for that, but I’m enjoying this” or whatever. Just drop the “I really like you” jazz, because he should be able to figure that out from the heavy making out going on. If he presses on for an answer, perhaps then tell him “I need more time”. Only say that I really like him, if he says that he really likes me. If he just acts all bitter and frustrated that he’s not getting his way YET, (like he’s ENTITLED to it RIGHT NOW) I won’t need his moment of truth speech, I can figure it out by his reaction. If he volunteers that he really like me, and is willing to to wait until I’m ready, and stops pawing at me, then we can continue on seeing each other.
From your post
(me)“You say “she didn’t want to go through with sex”. Was there an explicit promise of sex, or did you just assume ?”
(you) I my experience, it was neither. I didn’t feel like I was entitled to it, it was more like I was just hoping for it. Us guys are usually just trying to find our way through the dark in this process, and in the dating process in general. We usually fumble through it. We initiate, and hope she is receptive.”
Sounds very similar to many women’s experience. Not feeling “entitled” to a relationship, but just hoping for one. No explicit promise of a relationship, but enough going on with the actions to give hope. Trying to suss out the relationship potential without taking the lead, and staying in our feminine energy is the tough part. It really is just a waiting (and observing) game.
Any way, all of this is WHY there is even a date coaching industry to begin with 🙂
[email protected] 253 Thanks for your response “As Chance said it’s more a case of hope than assumption. In fairness to the women they often told me in advance that there would be no sex, but I know from experience that no matter what they say there is always at least a 50% chance of sex. I suppose I wondered why would she bother bringing me back if not for sex — what was the point exactly? Surely she’d have a better night’s sleep on her own than with me beside her.
I didn’t realize she was doing a research mission, scoping me out before sex. Interesting.”
Tom – Here are MY reason for wanting to go to your place or mine in the getting to know each other phase. (yours and mine in the generic sense, not literally you an me). Yes, I am on a “research mission” regarding the potential for a relationship. If I invite someone in to my home for a snack before we head off to our hike, bike ride, art walk or whatever, it’s NOT for pre date sex. Offering some food and beverage PRIOR to the date, at least shows some hospitality to a guy who’s has presumably paid for a couple of dates. Also, by offering it PRIOR to the date, I (at least hope) that it lessens any perception that he is being invited in for sex. Unless some guy thinks, “How about I make us some chocolate cherry smoothies for energy, before the bike ride” is a sexual come on. This gives him a little bit of a chance to see me in my home environment, I get to find out if he HATES healthy food or not (wouldn’t be a deal breaker, just something to file under, good to know) (My smoothies are extremely healthy, I don’t use refined sugar to sweeten, use raw cacao, and hide some greens in the mix) He can decide if he can live with someone who is fairly neat inside her house, but her yard is a disaster ! Does he like or hate my decor ? If he gets a peek in my fridge or pantry will he think “Crap, are you vegan or something and what the HELL is Quinoa?” or think, “Oh, that’s nice her fridge is stocked with good stuff”. Of course, it gets trickier when the guy invites me to HIS place, because generally, they aren’t trying to just get to know my PRE-SEX (or even to see if a romantic/sexual relationship is possible) They are trying to get me over for SEX, maybe NSA SEX , maybe sex to see if he’d like a relationship etc. But yeah,”how about BBQ some steaks, drink some wine and watch netflix on the couch,” well we ALL know what THAT means. But I do like to hang out at his place as part of the exploratory process of a relationship. I like to see how he lives. Is he sloppy or neat ? (probably cleaned up for company, but I HAVE been to a guys’ house, who place was a DISASTER !!!!) Does he have lots of family pictures out. (Kids, grandkids, old time photos of ancestors, etc) Does he have a frat boy fridge with nothing but beer and catsup (wouldn’t be a deal breaker) I also want to see if I would be comfy hanging out at his place. After all, once a relationship gets started, it will less with the formal dates, and more with the hanging out together. (which I prefer that phase of a relationship anyway). I’d like to know if I can feel comfy at his house. What kind of neighborhood ? How many pets? How are his pets with me ? Etc. Of course, I have navigated a dinner at his place without it becoming sexual (ok just heavy making out which is always fun), and gotten follow up dates. And I’ve also gotten some hostile “So why did you come here then !!!!” responses too. (and that’s the end of that) So if I go over to some guys place to make dinner together, yes, I see a possible relationship, and sex EVENTUALLY, but I want to gauge compatibility and emotional availability FIRST, and that just doesn’t happen for me by date #3 or sooner. And if all he wants is NSA sex with me, then it won’t happen at all.
You indicated that the women invited you for a sleep over. Well, I wouldn’t invite a man over for a pajama party and then just cuddle all night. HOWEVER, if he invited ME for a sleep over and said, “Listen, if you’re not ready, we can just cuddle, I promise”, I MIGHT just take him up on that, because 1.) I LOVE to cuddle, and 2.) He PROMISED !
The first time I spent the night with my first hubby, he had already asked me to “be mine (his)”. He asked me to spend the night and said we could just cuddle. I held him to that; we did “just cuddle” all night. But in the MORNING . . . I put a smile on his face before breakfast. Afterwards, he held me in his arms and said, “I guess this means you’re going to be mine ?” and we spent every day and night together after that, until we married, then divorced a few years later . . .
@Tom10
Thanks answering. Your reply about leagues when women chase makes a lot of sense. Women don’t chase men in their league or below, only those they believe are above them. As well, chasing makes the woman appear desperate or lacking in options. Men probably subconsciously note this.
The once or twice I’ve been tempted to chase (e.g., initiate contact), I had to stop myself short because I wanted to preserve the mystery of whether or not I like him. If he likes me, he’ll contact me and/or continue to contact me after a date. If not, I’ll read it as a lack of interest and move on. If this means I bypass beta men, oh well, they don’t intrigue me as much as the alpha, so I’m fine with that.
@Goldie
You’re welcome. I love that blog. I’ve read every article. The demographic that reads that trend younger than this blog, but I think his posts are applicable to women of all ages who are dating, particularly, this one, which I’ve taken to heart: http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2011/09/wrong-kind-of-attention_11.html
This made me more open to dressing sexy on a more regular basis (or rather makes more more conscious about how I’m dressing).
Good men and bad men are attracted to sexy. One just needs to have a great filter to filter out the bad and the filter in the good when they both come hither.
@Ladies who are able to have NSA sex
This book is a most interesting read: “Sex at Dawn: How We Mate, Why We Stray, and What It Means for Modern Relationships” — I’ve only just learned of it and have read about 17%. But it supports some of the more non-conformist ideas that I’ve espoused about religion, politics, and science trying to control female sexuality. Kathleen, the book specifically counters some of Fisher’s and Walsh’s writings about female sexuality.
Lots of back & forth about weather or not women can have this, that or the other kind of sex, and weather it is because she is biologically hardwired this, that or the other way, or if she has been brainwashed by the jack boot of an oppressive patriarchal society hell bent on controlling female sexuality.
I say who gives a rip ? If an individual woman does not want NSA sex, or she doesn’t want to be married, or a mom, of if she DOES want casual sex, she should just go with what works for HER, without all the mental masturbation and the “why” of it all.
The older (and I mean WWII) generation is dying off and is being replaced by baby boomers (the sexual revolutionaries), and the current hook up culture. A woman could find social validation for just about any sexual life style she chooses, and she could find social ostracization for just about any of her sexual choices. (In fact, no matter WHAT path she chooses, someone, somewhere, will call her a prude, bitch, tease or a slut )
Geez, I speak English, shave my legs, finished high school and don’t wear a bozo nose in public either, due to society. We LIVE in a society, most people DON’T want to be a complete social outcast, most people want to fit in somewhere and have a sense of belonging.
It’s only a social construct that boys don’t wear pink dresses and bows in their hair. Or have names like Suzie. So country song aside, if I had sons, I would not put pink bows in their hair or name them little Suzie Sweet Muffin. So what if that is due to social conditioning??!!! The sons are going to grow up in society. Why purposefully make them outcasts ? Why should a woman worry if her desire for marriage, motherhood, and a heart connection with whom she shares her body with is a “social construct”, if she is content with that choice ? (so long as she isn’t trying to shame women who make other choices)
@Karmic Equation 256,
I loved that blog too. Probably because it confirms a lot of my observations, as we like to see opinions that validate our own :-). The author of the blog wrote that women are ignorant of the male mind and he wants to educate them; however it is very likely that his faithful audience is more likely to be women like you and me and Goldie who already think as he thinks so are not so ignorant :-).
I also think the “dress sexy” thing works wonders. My mother and grandmother never cared about that, and did not educate me how important looks are, so I had to figure it out the hard way. I have a 10 year old daughter, and I intend to install in her early on, that she needs to be healthy, in great shape and pretty, and maximize whatever assets nature gave her, and there is no shame to being able to attract attention.
Kiki @ 258 – I also think the “dress sexy” thing works wonders. My mother and grandmother never cared about that, and did not educate me how important looks are, so I had to figure it out the hard way. I have a 10 year old daughter, and I intend to install in her early on, that she needs to be healthy, in great shape and pretty, and maximize whatever assets nature gave her, and there is no shame to being able to attract attention.
I HATE that aspect of so called feminism (and I realize that “feminism” is hardly monolithic and not all women subscribe to this aspect) but I can’t stand the aspect of feminism that derided feminine dressing and grooming. In fact, I think that the 80’s BS of career women wearing butch pin-striped power suits with shoulder pads, flat shoes, little to no make up and a stern pickle puss was extremely ANTI-WOMAN. Never could understand how styling my hair and wearing lip gloss and heels should make me less effective at my job or why I should be taken less seriously. (unless I’m a firefighter or police officer, the heels would be a problem 🙂 ) The whole notion that women can only be successful in their work as long as they act, think and look like men seems very ANTI-FEMINIST to me. Darn it ! I don’t hold a fancy-schmancy power job, but I AM very good at what I do, I took classes in my field, studied hard, work hard & my co-workers and management comes to me for advice, feed back & problem solving. And I look pretty darn good when I do what I do !
@Sparkling Emerald
That’s 2nd way feminism you are talking about. 3rd wave feminism (I’m 3rd wave btw probably because of my age) believes in the power of femininity in however you define it. Its about respect for all decision. So I can dress super feminine, never leave the house without at least 2 coats of mascara and my best friend can have short hair and wear khakis and it doesn’t matter. We are both human and deserve to be respected for just that reason. So that business woman thing you are talking about, that was out of style before I turned 10 and is long relevant.
About the blog you are all talking about. I think he gives OK advice but he comes off as very immature and advises women to get married and pregnant before they are 30 because once we hit 30 we are all haggered or something. That’s objectively bad advice. I’m sure as he nears 30s and realizes his peers haven’t shrilled up into prunes he will understand how silly his beliefs were before though. But I agree that everyone should show up to a date with their best fave forward and didn’t really need to read his blog to understand that.
@SE,
To be perfectly honest, I am ok with wearing trousers and no make-up. I have the same education, value system, hopes, ambitions, and, by the way, even the same body and face (:-)), whicheverway I am dressed.
But I figured that the world around me (especially men) see me differently depending on the package. I choose not to think whether it is fair or not (my gut feeling is that it is unfair). This is one of the areas where the effort on my part to comply is much less than the effort to change the world :-).
By the way, I do have a fancy-schmancy power job 🙂 For very important meetings actually, I feel safer to dress unsexy… may be I should reconsider further.
@ Julia 260
“I think he gives OK advice but he comes off as very immature and advises women to get married and pregnant before they are 30 because once we hit 30 we are all haggered or something.”
Ha, true, I met my future husband at 20, married at 24, and had both kids before 30… A lot of good it did me. On the bright side, my children and I can now come to each other for dating advice, lol
I agree that some of his advice has to be taken with a grain of salt. “Every woman should wear heels” is downright unhealthy, imo (though he said in the same post that tall women like me can be exempted from wearing heels, so yay!)
Last 5-7 years, I’ve started feeling that I just can’t be bothered to dress up or wear makeup for work. That said, I still feel like wearing something semi-nice that makes me look attractive. But again, I agree with Julia that it should be a matter of personal preference and our assessment of a woman shouldn’t be based on what she’s wearing. Kind of like our assessment of men isn’t based on how they dress for work, unless their clothes smell and have holes in them.
Then again, I have blonde hair. At every new job, I am weighed, measured, and found wanting the minute I walk into the office, no matter what I’m wearing, just based on my hair color. I figure that by age 50-55 I shouldn’t have this problem anymore, though.
@Julia 259
I’ve rescanned The Rules Revisited blog titles. I think there are close to 200 (if not more, I didn’t actually count them) — I even SEARCHED for the word marriage…That didn’t appear in any of the titles and only about 6 posts mentioned marriage at all.
Are you confusing his blog with someone else’s?
I don’t believe he’s at all talking about marriage, but helping women become more datable and understanding the typical male mind. Many women could use that help, especially women who’re just divorced and 40+. The dating world is not the same as the one they left.
@Kiki
“By the way, I do have a fancy-schmancy power job 🙂 For very important meetings actually, I feel safer to dress unsexy… may be I should reconsider further.”
Dress like the women dress in “Suits” and “Fairly Legal” 😉
JK.
I’m not sure it helps or hurts to dress sexy for work, unless you’re in sales, selling to men (e.g., pharmaceutical saleswoman who meet mostly male doctors).
I dress sexier for pool tournaments, hoping to be distracting. It actually worked. lmao
Julie #260- i agree, I find that his blog doesn’t do much for me at all
[email protected] By the way, I do have a fancy-schmancy power job For very important meetings actually, I feel safer to dress unsexy… may be I should reconsider further.
Well, what I meant is that I dress feminine for work. Not low cut, high hemlined, skin tight sexy, but classy feminine,(as opposed to power suited pickle-puss) with the ability to go from classy to sassy if I am going out afterwards. Wearing a softly tailored jacket or sweater over a spagetti-strap top, or wearing an appropriate dress for the office, but adding a sparkly jacket come evening, and of course a tad more make-up, fluff up my hair a bit more and add some bling. Even on casual Friday when I ride my bike to work, I change out of my sneakers into ballet flats, even tho’ sneakers are fine on Cas. Fri.
I have no issue with how other women dress, I respect their choice. However, I did have one close friend, who enjoyed dressing like a girly-girl, but she was a programmer analyst, and felt that she wouldn’t be taken seriously unless she dressed more “business like” and less flowy, flowery & feminine, which was her natural style sense. I thought it was rather sad, she was brilliant in her field, but she had to put on this quasi-masculine act to be taken seriously. So she only wore dark colors (no pastels, no patterns & stiff straight styles) So women who dress in business slacks and tailored jackets because that is their style, I’m fine with, but I think it’s rather ANTI-FEMNIST thinking, to NOT take a smart & talented woman seriously because her skirt is a soft pastel color and flows, instead of being a stiff A-line navy blue skirt. Luckily, that sort of thinking is falling by the wayside. Men don’t have to wear a jacket & a tie, (at least not in my part of the country) to advance, and women can ditch the power suit look if they wish.
I think dress codes and expectations are relaxing for both men and women in the business world, which is a good thing, and everyone gets to dress to their own personal sense of style (within reason).
@J 264
Like I said, you will like the blog if you already think like that, if you do not – it will not change your mind. 🙂 It is just a blog, and this genre is suited best for entertainment, especially if you have a self-depreciating sense of humor.
@Karmic 263
I am in finance/investment. Most of my colleagues are male, over-middle aged and extremely boring. I am weird enough being female, but when I put on my extra with high heels (and I am 5.10 without barefoot:-) they are seriously disturbed. Yes, distraction works :-). I try to use it with moderation.
@SE 265
You sound like you have a great sense of fashion, which I am probably lacking. The women in my family used to dress rather modestly, wore no heels and no make-up and honestly just did not have much style. Up into my late 20s it did not occur to me at all that you might enhance your looks and the impression you make on others with your clothes, accesoried, make up etc. The older I get, the more appreciative I am of the power of presentation.
This is a bit off-topic really but fashionwise, at work, where I’m surrounded by men, I’ve noticed that a skirt to just above the knee and well covered cleavage, soft make-up and cleanliness is far better tolerated IN THE WORK ENVIRONMENT, including by the way, with the women who will visit as well!
After hours, I’ll wear my mini and more pronounced make-up, pretty stockings and maybe do the long glossy hair thing!!! (I wish – I had it cut and really regret that!!!)
@Ren #31
“This…[single parenthood]…isn’t a choice for divorced people.”
Yes, it completely *is* a choice. They *chose* to have children, and they *chose* (in some way) to have a relationship that didn’t last – either by being a poor partner, or not choosing a partner well (yes, and sometimes they’re innocent, but not the majority of the time).
Additionally, the odds are that the single mother (from divorce) *chose* to be divorced (women initiate more than 80% of divorces according ot the CDC). Is it *always* true that the individual in question made these choices? No – but they certainly made some of them, and they hold accountability for their part.
As a man dating women, that 80% stat says that most likely the woman with children initiated the divorce…so yes, she most likely *chose* that route (whatever the history/reasoning is, which is a completely different discussion).
Odds are, the divorce of the single woman with children across the dinner table from me was initiated *by her*. So yes, *she* chose it (regardless of her reasons).
“People who have children are no less deserving of marriage and committed relationships.”
It isn’t a question of what they *deserve*. You only deserve what you *earn*.
“So-called eligible bachelors think it can never happen to them—that they aren’t faced with the possibility of marriage, children, then divorce and single-parenthood.”
So what?
These bachelors are making a decision NOW, not in some hypothetical future. They are under no obligation to treat a woman with children as an equal option as a woman without children…because it *isn’t* equal.
“Divorcees didn’t plan or choose single parenthood.”
Yes, they did. That’s EXACTLY what they chose, over their current marriage. They simply thought being a single parent was a better option than staying married to their current spouse. This may or may not be true, each case is unique. But it is CERTAINLY the *choice* that was made. Don’t paint them as martyrs or victims. Am I empathetic to their situation? Sure. But again, in the case of the 80% stat, most likely the WOMAN chose that path (for whatever reason).
“I’ve known many men to date and marry women with children.” As Evan has always said, your anecdotes do not disprove the general rule. All else being equal most men would chose to marry women *without* children, than with. Why wouldn’t they? Choosing a woman with children is automatically a more difficult and challenging option. There’s the ex to deal with. Visitation. Acceptance by the children. Legal issues. And depending on the state, marrying her may mean accepting financial responsibility for those children, permanently. There’s a lot of risk for a man to marry a woman with children. You act as if this doesn’t exist.
“And men need to get rid of this idea that it’s ok for them to be single parents but it’s not ok for women.”
First, who are *you* to dictate how men “should” feel about something? Second, back up your claim that men in general think that it’s ok for them to be single parents but it’s not ok for women. I think you’ll be hard-pressed to find supporting evidence. At best you’ll find that most men likely think being a single parent of ANY gender is a less-than-ideal arrangement.
In the end, the simple reality is that being a single parent is a negative in the dating world. Most men will consider women with children as a lesser option, all else being equal. My advice to young men is to NEVER date a woman with children. Sounds harsh, I realize, and Evan may take me to task for it (which I accept-he’s trying to help people find good relationships, and my advice reduces their options and unfairly lumps ALL single mothers into the same basket). But from my perspective (in my 40’s), I just don’t see it being worth the risk for young men today to date women with children. There are plenty of available young women for them to chose from.
P.S. Evan – the new site design has some performance issues. I haven’t identified what, but clearly some script is REALLY slowing down page loads in Firefox, to the point where it hangs for several seconds. Also, where did the formatting controls go? i.e. Bold, italics, etc?
.
Most divorced women who are now single parents have chosen to stop being victims of abuse and start to become survivors. They are amazing women.
Most divorced women with kids were victims of abuse? That’s bullshit. Most are spoiled entitled brats that took their husbands for granted and thought they could do better. Many are lying about being abused so they can gain favor with the family courts, that will always believe them.
@ Joe 269
I always wonder about that statistic of women initiating divorce more often . . .
My wasband started a relationship with another women (some people – me included – call this cheating), moved out of the house (in this order), didn’t want to go to counseling, wasn’t being honest, or in any way giving any indication of working things out. I filed for divorce. Statistically – I initiated the divorce. But he was long gone from the marriage. BTW – this is also what he told the kids, I am the one who divorced him.
Which is why I wonder.
@Kristyn @ 272
Thanks for bringing this up. I hate the way this stat is trotted out as if it proves anything meaningful. The person who LEGALLY initiates the divorce is not particularly the person who initiated the breakdown of the marriage. As far as I’m concerned someone who cheats is the one initiating a divorce, but the cheated upon person just might beat them to a lawyers office and start the legal proceedings.
Without knowing the history of the marital breakdown, statistics about who initiates the legal proceedings of a divorce are meaningless.
I’m almost on the same situation as you are..except his never moved in with me or even mentioned it. I’m the one that does an eventually it never ends well. But I’ve stocked around for 7 years..I’m 30 with no kids. reading this is exactly what I needed to know….I’ve got to start the healing process now….