Guys, do you respect women who have fbuddy relationships? Is that a "low-grade"chic?

[TheMENemy]

 

 

 

 

 

The number "278" was of no consequence.

 

Is this a difficult concept? Sorry! As far as I can see, you were the only one who found it out of reach.

 

I guess if what you are saying is the information in your posts is not to be taken literally or as meant to be factual, I can accept that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mr. MENemy, perhaps you didn't really read, or comprehend, my initial statement.

 

I did not say that anyone divulged anything to anyone.

 

Oh Ok because your post gave the impression that you actually had a discussion with several of your friends' sons and exchanged information with them about their views on women and relationships. Apparently that never happened. Again I can accept that your posts are not to be taken literally or as meant to be factual, now that you have clarified that. Thank you.

 

 

 

What I said, once again:

 

 

 

 

Because some men, old, young, friends, kids of friends or whatever are not to be found on Internet relationship fora denigrating women in no way implies, infers, presumes, or assumes that these guys have discussed intimate sexual details of their lives with me, or me with them.

 

Since you didn't actually have a discussion with them about their views you don't know what their views actually are, and you certainly don't know whether or not any of them are posting on the internet, nor what they might be saying on the internet. Yes I think I do understand you now.

 

Helllooooooo!

 

Hi.

 

 

Hey!

 

Honestly, no disrespect intended, especially considering that you're brand new here and all, but it's boring and not productive to engage in discussion with a person who either cannot comprehend or willfully misinterprets what another has said.

 

 

OK sorry about that, what you seem to be saying now is that your posts are not meant to be taken as literal fact or as recounting things that have actually occurred, but simply just your style of writing.

 

OK got it. thanks.

[sally4sara]

Maybe you are different than what I thought.

 

I have friends who make money illegally and I am still friends with them because I am loyal to those who look out for me.

 

I get that Woggle, but would you be horrible surprised if one day they illegally made money off of you in a way that had a negative result?

 

Now I don't want you getting confused about what I'm claiming here. I do know cheaters; they are in my social circle and I do not cuss them out whenever I see them in a crowd.

But I don't share my life with them, I don't seek their counsel, and I would not be surprised in the least if they tried to disrespect my own relationship by hitting on me or my husband depending on their sexual orientation.

 

All I'd like to see happen for you is for you to one day, be able to not base all your judgments on the gender of the person you are judging. Because there is no "getting even" ever in life.

Your friend clearly behaves in a manner you find lacking in integrity. But he is your friend and you're not trying to date him so you don't let it bother you. But if he were a woman, you'd go home experiencing difficulty just relaxing and enjoying time with your wife at the end of the day would you not?

What your friend is doing isn't okay just because some women cheated or women he has known cheated. What he is doing - wouldn't that mean he is just like those women we discussed who, in your opinion, have casual sex as an act of revenge? Remember what I said about how those women were doing was is the epitome of letting men control their sexuality?

 

Same thing applies here to your male friend. He is controlled by women and his anger towards them.

[TheMENemy]

All this sentence "proves" is that the author has no facts to pinpoint the "exact time in which the tradition of arranged marriages became a part of any individual culture."

 

Because the author does not have historical data regarding THE EXACT TIME arranged marriage began does not have any bearing upon whether or not the article in its entirety is "fact based."

 

Okay, I have now had enough of trying to help a fellow LS poster with reading comprehension. I think my efforts are not only probably co-dependent, but will be likely to engender some hearty bashing.

 

 

That's fine, you are certainly free to read the article that sally thoughtfully linked in her post.

 

Why don't you do that and excerpt anything you believe is relevant to the discussion?

 

I'll be more than happy to read anything you care to post about the article.

[Anela]

And yet these same men, in many instances, have had FWB/casual sex with multiple partners and expect to have go on to a relationship where they will be expected to be trustworthy and committed.

 

I too am kinda stunned why they think they can flip the switch and live up to honesty and commitment, but a woman cannot. Especially if they also believe men naturally have a stronger sex drive.

 

I really don't understand it - why they don't see (or don't want to see) the hypocrisy in it.

[TheMENemy]

Actually, I know of a woman whose ex-husband had less sexual experience than she did, when they married. She let him know what she liked, he improved, became one of her best lovers, and what did he do? He cheated on her.

 

She should have chosen more wisely.

[TheMENemy]

I should have said attempted shaming. Aren't you guys essentially shaming women who have slept around a bit, by deciding that they're unworthy of your love and commitment?

 

 

All a woman needs to be concerned with is the opinion and attitude of her relationship partner, not third parties. If a woman feels her relationship partner is being disrespectful to her because of her past sexual history, she should terminate that relationship.

[TheMENemy]

I really don't understand it - why they don't see (or don't want to see) the hypocrisy in it.

 

OK Angela, let's assume men with this attitude are being hypocritical.

 

What is the problem? Don't be in a relationship with someone who you feel to be both promiscuous and hypocritical.

 

Pick someone else with values you agree with.

 

Look, be honest--admit that what's really eating at you is that these "hypocritical" guys seem to be able to get girls anyway.

 

K9 said it best: Women will let these guys' past history "pass" in order to be in a relationship with them.

 

Why is that the fault of the men involved and not the women?

 

Just food for thought.

[Mme. Chaucer]

I guess if what you are saying is the information in your posts is not to be taken literally or as meant to be factual, I can accept that.

 

Actually, I posted exactly what I meant to say in precise and clear language. Only you have expressed difficulty with comprehension. I've tried to make things clear enough for you but to no avail, evidently.

 

I have seen this same tendency in 7 or 8 other previous contributors to this thread, who mysteriously disappeared forever after a brief visit here with us.

 

Maybe there is a message in that ... perhaps people who really have problems understanding the written word and communicating well in this medium are better off finding community and discussion in a different style of venue.

[TheMENemy]

Actually, I posted exactly what I meant to say in precise and clear language. Only you have expressed difficulty with comprehension. I've tried to make things clear enough for you but to no avail, evidently.

 

Yes, I agree that what you posted originally was both precise and clear, but the problem wasn't a lack of clarity or precision on your part. The problem was, as you later admitted, the clear and precise things you posted simply weren't true.

 

If I say "A close friend told me that it doesn't bother him at all if his partner had 278 prior lovers" that is a very clear and precise statement. However, if the statement turns out to be a total fabrication, then the problem is not a lack of clarity or precision; it is that the clear and precise information that was provided, is inaccurate.

 

Similarly, if I state that several of my friends supposedly have attitudes and positions on relationships which I state clearly and precisely, but then it later turns out I really don't know what their attitudes are since I never actually talked to them about it, then again, the problem isn't a lack of clarity or precision; the problem is a lack of accuracy of the information that I provided.

 

 

I have seen this same tendency in 7 or 8 other previous contributors to this thread, who mysteriously disappeared forever after a brief visit here with us.

 

If you are repeatedly having this problem them perhaps you need to work a little harder on being more accurate with what you post the first time you post about it, then you won't have to continually revisit it three or four times to keep correcting the inaccuracies.

 

 

Maybe there is a message in that ... perhaps people who really have problems understanding the written word and communicating well in this medium are better off finding community and discussion in a different style of venue.

 

Perhaps people shouldn't make up fictional information and present it as factual.

[on a learning curve]

I've maintained the argument that promiscuous sex of any kind outside a committed monogamous relationship, regardless of the men vs women issue, is damaging. Maybe it is more damaging to women (not blaming women for this) but either way it is bad for all involved. This thread provides a clear indication of that.

 

In what ways do you feel these relationships are "damaging?" Curious, because that's a strong word there.

[Woggle]

I get that Woggle, but would you be horrible surprised if one day they illegally made money off of you in a way that had a negative result?

 

Now I don't want you getting confused about what I'm claiming here. I do know cheaters; they are in my social circle and I do not cuss them out whenever I see them in a crowd.

But I don't share my life with them, I don't seek their counsel, and I would not be surprised in the least if they tried to disrespect my own relationship by hitting on me or my husband depending on their sexual orientation.

 

All I'd like to see happen for you is for you to one day, be able to not base all your judgments on the gender of the person you are judging. Because there is no "getting even" ever in life.

Your friend clearly behaves in a manner you find lacking in integrity. But he is your friend and you're not trying to date him so you don't let it bother you. But if he were a woman, you'd go home experiencing difficulty just relaxing and enjoying time with your wife at the end of the day would you not?

What your friend is doing isn't okay just because some women cheated or women he has known cheated. What he is doing - wouldn't that mean he is just like those women we discussed who, in your opinion, have casual sex as an act of revenge? Remember what I said about how those women were doing was is the epitome of letting men control their sexuality?

 

Same thing applies here to your male friend. He is controlled by women and his anger towards them.

 

My friends who make money illegally do it with willing customers so that is their business.

 

My friend actually does not cheat on anybody but he treats women like toys and laughs at their voicemail messages. I don't condone it but the women who treated him like garbage in my view share at least some of the blame for making him what is today.

[flying]

What I like about the above spammer is that these post titles are tailored to our threads. More of a personal touch than the usual spammers. Well played.

[TheMENemy]

What I like about the above spammer is that these post titles are tailored to our threads. More of a personal touch than the usual spammers. Well played.

 

 

Also that post actually makes sense so a lot of posters could learn a thing or two from it.

[sanskrit]

Life must be pretty bleak for some folks.

 

Personally I think life must be pretty bleak for those who tattle-train legitimate posters on an internet dating forum merely because they don't agree with their ideas. No idea whether you are one of them, but that's why legitimate male posters have to resort to new IDs here.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Personally I think life must be pretty bleak for those who tattle-train legitimate posters on an internet dating forum merely because they don't agree with their ideas. No idea whether you are one of them, but that's why legitimate male posters have to resort to new IDs here.

 

What does "tattle-train" mean?

 

Any poster who reappears with a new ID daily (and sometimes more than one time per day) has had their privileges to post here revoked for valid reasons. They don't have to "resort" to the incessant reincarnations ... they could simply leave permanently, since they flagrantly disregard the rules here. Or, choose to abide by the rules.

 

Why do you think this only pertains to male posters?

[Star Gazer]

I haven't read this thread, but I just realized something.

 

When I was in a place where I was okay being in a FWB relationship, I was not mentally, emotionally, or spiritually ready/available to be in a real, meaningful relationship with anyone. I think my head was pretty effed up to be able to handle that "relationship" at the time. I wasn't datable, and I don't blame any guy for thinking I wasn't at the time either.

 

*shrug*

[Anela]

Personally I think life must be pretty bleak for those who tattle-train legitimate posters on an internet dating forum merely because they don't agree with their ideas. No idea whether you are one of them, but that's why legitimate male posters have to resort to new IDs here.

 

How do you tattle-train someone?

 

Meerkat was one of two men to tell me that I was shaming male posters that I didn't agree with, so I thought theMENenemy was his reincarnation here (if he'd ever left in the first place).

[Anela]

I haven't read this thread, but I just realized something.

 

When I was in a place where I was okay being in a FWB relationship, I was not mentally, emotionally, or spiritually ready/available to be in a real, meaningful relationship with anyone. I think my head was pretty effed up to be able to handle that "relationship" at the time. I wasn't datable, and I don't blame any guy for thinking I wasn't at the time either.

 

*shrug*

 

Would you reject a man for a serious relationship, if he'd had one FwB relationship in his past? And now felt ready for a serious relationship?

[Woggle]

I haven't read this thread, but I just realized something.

 

When I was in a place where I was okay being in a FWB relationship, I was not mentally, emotionally, or spiritually ready/available to be in a real, meaningful relationship with anyone. I think my head was pretty effed up to be able to handle that "relationship" at the time. I wasn't datable, and I don't blame any guy for thinking I wasn't at the time either.

 

*shrug*

 

Finally a woman who can be fair and see things from our point of view.

[donnamaybe]

Where ever underage, under developed girls hang out.

LMAO!!!!! Oh, s4s, I can ALWAYS count on you!!! :lmao:

[donnamaybe]

I haven't read this thread, but I just realized something.

 

When I was in a place where I was okay being in a FWB relationship, I was not mentally, emotionally, or spiritually ready/available to be in a real, meaningful relationship with anyone. I think my head was pretty effed up to be able to handle that "relationship" at the time. I wasn't datable, and I don't blame any guy for thinking I wasn't at the time either.

 

*shrug*

Of course you weren't, and neither was I when I was in an FWB situation. In THIS thread, however, there are a few who have made it clear that you, in their opinion, are now "damaged goods" forevermore.

 

Guys can run about screwing everything they can run faster than, and it's okay. Women make a conscious choice to have an FWB with ONE person (thus negating having sex with random people), and they have emotional problems.

[TheMENemy]

Of course you weren't, and neither was I when I was in an FWB situation.

 

This information supports those who disapprove of those kinds of relationships.

 

 

In THIS thread, however, there are a few who have made it clear that you, in their opinion, are now "damaged goods" forevermore.

 

Actually no one has said that, except you, just now. You see, donna? This is precisely what I meant by suggesting that it is other women, not men, who are primarily responsible for "setting the tone."

 

 

 

Guys can run about screwing everything they can run faster than, and it's okay.

 

Presumably by "everything" you mean competent, adult females who consent to it. If that's what you meant--well then of course "it's okay."

 

 

 

Women make a conscious choice to have an FWB with ONE person (thus negating having sex with random people), and they have emotional problems.

 

Donna, you are the one who just stated that for you, being in a fwb was not good for you. So, there's no need to use the "roll eyes/sarcastic" icon--is there?