Judged due to minimum dating history.

[Red Arremer]

I'd love to date more than I do now. But where in the world do I actually find dates?

This is kind of the problem I have too. I'm doing pretty well getting first dates (well by my standards at least, which means I get about 1 a month) but then my lack of confidence and experience shows through and I very, very rarely get second dates, let alone anything resembling relationship potential. Which isn't really helping me, because when girls ask about your experience they're not asking how many first dates you get, they're asking you about your relationships/sexual experience.

 

I'm 29 and have never been in a relationship. When I get asked about my relationship experience I pretty much have to lie, I don't really see any other way to handle that question.

[irc333]

I would think saying you've had a "dry spell" would be more realstic than saying you have a lack of relationship experience.

 

I guess you just lie about your relationship experience, in hopes you can get experience with said woman of your interest , and at least you get to experience sex.

 

Of course, you lied in order to get there, so I guess it isn't such a big deal.

[iris219]

For me it wouldn’t be about dating experience, but relationship experience. (I don’t have a lot of dating experience, but I have relationship experience.) I would be suspicious of someone who dates a lot but never has relationships.

 

My fear with someone my age (32) who has little relationship experience wouldn’t have to do with thinking they need “training,” but that they’re “un-trainable,” for lack of a better term, when it comes to relationships. I wouldn’t discount them entirely, but I’d be apprehensive.

 

There are people (not saying you OP) who have been unable to create or maintain meaningful long-term relationships because they suck at them, they don’t have the qualities/abilities necessary to connect with another person emotionally, and no amount of experience will change this. In these cases, a person who’s had failed relationship is better than someone who is unable to create them.

[zengirl]

While the sentiment behind it is real, the word "training" was a bit tongue-in-cheek. My point is that rarely does someone know how to be a good partner in their first relationship, and I've had several very serious relationships (lived together with one, talked about potential marriage with a few others, was engaged to my HS sweetheart) so I'm not interested in that disparity. There are things you just "learn" by having serious relationships and that I find lacking in those who've never had them. They don't get it, and I don't want to be the one who explains it at this stage in the game.

 

Chances are, you would not be relationship material.

 

It saddens me to hear a woman say, "I'm not into training someone"

 

That means, they're selfish, and don't put work into relationships anyhow.

 

I put work into relationships, but I wouldn't buy a fixer-upper car either. I'd rather have it in working order when I buy it. This is just a metaphor; I don't think people are cars, obviously. I've never met a guy who magically just HAD great relationship skills. They're learned, through having relationships. At 26, my dating range is about 24-33.

 

And the truth is. . . Any guy in that range who's never had a serious relationship hasn't had one because he was deficient in that area, for the most part. Either he's chosen to play around (unattractive) or he's had trouble relating to women and attracting them (unattractive) or he's had trouble establishing a long-lasting connection (unattractive) or he didn't value relationships enough to make time for them in his life (unattractive). I'm sure there is a weird exception out there (like someone who was in a coma for 6 years or something) but I don't cater to exceptions when forming general value judgments.

 

I don't think people who know me would call me selfish. I'm very willing to help people, be kind, and I've always been told I'm a good partner. I've never had complaints on that level, and I've had mostly healthy, mature relationships. I'm certainly not perfect, but I don't think it's "selfish" to express that you want someone with relationship skills. And people who haven't had relationships don't have relationship skills.

 

I've never been told (in life) I wasn't relationship material. In fact, I tend to be the girl who guys who've played around for ages somehow develop a crush on and want to settle down with. I won't date those guys. They've demonstrated their dating priorities by playing around; I'm not interested in being the game-changer. I've also, obviously, been in relationships with men who found me to be "relationship material" (and even some who saw me as marriage material). But, obviously, that doesn't mean I'd be right for everyone or even most people --- nobody is.

 

Wow, I guess I only have 3 more years until I get into "undateable" territory. You're welcome to your own preferences, but I do hope you realize how crushing that kind of statement is to guys like me (the inexperienced ones). When I read a statement like that I only come to two conclusions: 1) if you reach that age and you're inexperienced you should give up or 2) you need to lie (or engage in historical revisionism as I'd like to call it).

 

It's not your job to uphold my self esteem but this is how a lot of the more inexperienced guys will see it.

 

Hm. . . Perhaps the more inexperienced guys --- if they're sincere --- should date women who've also struggled with dating. Or they'll find more experienced gals who don't have the same views I have. Mine are formed mostly by being put on a pedestal by supposedly former Players or guys who put off romance (for medical school, etc) who are in my social circle. Those are the worst kind of "Never had a relationship" though, no, I could not see myself attracted to someone who'd had so much social trouble they'd never had a lasting romantic relationship and were already in their mid-20s or older. I don't think that person and I would be socially compatible.

[fortyninethousand322]

And the truth is. . . Any guy in that range who's never had a serious relationship hasn't had one because he was deficient in that area, for the most part. Either he's chosen to play around (unattractive) or he's had trouble relating to women and attracting them (unattractive) or he's had trouble establishing a long-lasting connection (unattractive) or he didn't value relationships enough to make time for them in his life (unattractive). I'm sure there is a weird exception out there (like someone who was in a coma for 6 years or something) but I don't cater to exceptions when forming general value judgments.

 

Hm. . . Perhaps the more inexperienced guys --- if they're sincere --- should date women who've also struggled with dating. Or they'll find more experienced gals who don't have the same views I have. Mine are formed mostly by being put on a pedestal by supposedly former Players or guys who put off romance (for medical school, etc) who are in my social circle. Those are the worst kind of "Never had a relationship" though, no, I could not see myself attracted to someone who'd had so much social trouble they'd never had a lasting romantic relationship and were already in their mid-20s or older. I don't think that person and I would be socially compatible.

 

I think by and large your view is actually in the mainstream. Women generally don't want to deal with a guy who's never seriously dated before. I can't blame them, if the shoe were on the other foot I'd be the exact same way.

 

Most of the women who are open to dating inexperienced guys are also the stereotypical good church girls who want to wait until marriage to have sex, and want to get married fairly soon. That's just not for me, I think I'm fairly well adjusted and can handle a relationship, even with someone who is experienced, and I don't think I should date someone who's not compatible with me just because they're the only ones who would have me. So in lieu of actual experience I will lie about it, and maybe tell them years down the line.

 

Sometimes I wish there was a pill I could take that would make me no longer be attracted to women because at this point I feel like I've reached the point of no return. It's just completely hopeless.

[chuckles11]

I think by and large your view is actually in the mainstream. Women generally don't want to deal with a guy who's never seriously dated before. I can't blame them, if the shoe were on the other foot I'd be the exact same way.

 

Most of the women who are open to dating inexperienced guys are also the stereotypical good church girls who want to wait until marriage to have sex, and want to get married fairly soon. That's just not for me, I think I'm fairly well adjusted and can handle a relationship, even with someone who is experienced, and I don't think I should date someone who's not compatible with me just because they're the only ones who would have me. So in lieu of actual experience I will lie about it, and maybe tell them years down the line.

 

Sometimes I wish there was a pill I could take that would make me no longer be attracted to women because at this point I feel like I've reached the point of no return. It's just completely hopeless.

 

 

I looked at your posting history and saw that you wrote that you don't go to bars, either. You've severely restricted your dating potential if you aren't interested in dating religious people, but also aren't interested in going places where people in their early 20s go to meet people of the opposite sex(bars and clubs). Obviously you shouldn't do anything you aren't comfortable with, but just be aware that you are making things more difficult for yourself.

[mr.dream merchant]

The amount of experience had holds little to no influence on how good of a partner one could be and definitely shouldn't be a make it or break it deal. If you find yourself to be so fickle over trivial things of the sort, maybe it's time you take a look in the mirror. One could easily look at you and ask "Why has she had so many failed relationships?" It's always easier to pass judgment on others. :/

 

Might I add that a bar or club isn't the most ideal place to meet a LTR partner.

[Red Arremer]

I looked at your posting history and saw that you wrote that you don't go to bars, either. You've severely restricted your dating potential if you aren't interested in dating religious people, but also aren't interested in going places where people in their early 20s go to meet people of the opposite sex(bars and clubs). Obviously you shouldn't do anything you aren't comfortable with, but just be aware that you are making things more difficult for yourself.

I'm in the same boat, although for me it's not so much a lack of interest in meeting people at bars and clubs than it is just absolutely not having the skill set necessary to find dates in an environment like that and having no way to pick that skill set up at this point. I don't like those places either, but if I was any good at meeting people in an environment like that at all I would at least be able to force myself to go every now and then. The few times I've gone before I feel like I've stepped on to an NBA court for the first time after spending a few weeks playing horse in my driveway.

[fortyninethousand322]

I looked at your posting history and saw that you wrote that you don't go to bars, either. You've severely restricted your dating potential if you aren't interested in dating religious people, but also aren't interested in going places where people in their early 20s go to meet people of the opposite sex(bars and clubs). Obviously you shouldn't do anything you aren't comfortable with, but just be aware that you are making things more difficult for yourself.

 

Hmm...well I'm not opposed to going to bars, but in general the people in my social circle do not generally go to them, most of my friends rarely (and in some cases never) drink. I think I've been to a bar three times in my life.

 

So, how does one start going to bars without going with friends and without drinking (I don't drink)? If you genuinely think this is a good place to go to meet people I'm completely open to it.

[chuckles11]

The amount of experience had holds little to no influence on how good of a partner one could be and definitely shouldn't be a make it or break it deal. If you find yourself to be so fickle over trivial things of the sort, maybe it's time you take a look in the mirror. One could easily look at you and ask "Why has she had so many failed relationships?" It's always easier to pass judgment on others. :/

 

Might I add that a bar or club isn't the most ideal place to meet a LTR partner.

 

 

I think Zengirl hit the nail on the head. Fact is, you do learn things about yourself and what you want in a partner by being in relationships. Every relationship isn't going to end in marriage.

 

Also, believe it or not, not everyone who is hanging out in bars and clubs is a heathen without morals. The guy I was responding to was 23 years old. Most people his age go to bars and clubs, including students and young professionals. Your issues with these places are your own.

[irc333]

Well, in my situation, I suppose I'm maybe shy when making a flirtaceous move with a woman, though, I'm just an average looking guy. Most women don't have an interst in me, or I get blown off.

 

But ONCE in a blue I nail the jackpot and can at least land ONE date with a woman. So they must've been attracted to me initially.

 

Maybe because I don't beleive in chemistry or something, and like to build a relationship from a friendship? I"m not sure.

 

I think it might be

 

I mean, I don't fart, burp, or creat arguements (like I hear a lot of guys have and wind up sabatoging relationships) I'm kind, casual, and easy going.

 

I mean, I'm doing good, by attracting some women initially.

 

I have to say I DO recall this ONE woman I REALLY connected with...in fact, I think I knew what people were meaning about chemistry.

 

We connectd from online, over the phone, and in person...everything RAMPED up.

 

AND I actually could genuinely see MULTIPLE dates with this woman, our sense of humor was uncanny actually, we bounced jokes off each other, flirted, it all flowed so easily it was like "BAM" like that woman said in taht Eharmony commercial

 

Even when I got home she called me to see if I made it home okay, I NEVER had a woman do that.

 

THEN all of a sudden, I called to ask her out on a 2nd date, and she was "too busy" or 'had to hang out with a female friend that was in need"...she was totally cold, like ice...I wonder where the magic went.

 

No joke, that was the first experience where I REALLY think I had something there.

 

Since THAT one date....when I go out, I don't know what to think, because I thought, "Hey, this must be the IT girl!" or "IT FACTOR", because I never felt this way in other dates as with that one.

 

Then she fell off the face of the planet, I thought I had a basis of comparison, but then she flaked, so there went THAT comparison.

 

I can't say I can completely blame myself, but some women tend to have some kind of issues I don't know about that probably causes them to not make up their own minds either.

 

I think the remaining single people in this world don't even match up anymore.

 

For me it wouldn’t be about dating experience, but relationship experience. (I don’t have a lot of dating experience, but I have relationship experience.) I would be suspicious of someone who dates a lot but never has relationships.

 

My fear with someone my age (32) who has little relationship experience wouldn’t have to do with thinking they need “training,” but that they’re “un-trainable,” for lack of a better term, when it comes to relationships. I wouldn’t discount them entirely, but I’d be apprehensive.

 

There are people (not saying you OP) who have been unable to create or maintain meaningful long-term relationships because they suck at them, they don’t have the qualities/abilities necessary to connect with another person emotionally, and no amount of experience will change this. In these cases, a person who’s had failed relationship is better than someone who is unable to create them.

[irc333]

men: sage advice if I ever saw any.DO NOT REVEAL YOUR PAST RELATIONSHIP HISTORY. EVADE AND IF SHE BADGERS MAKE UP WHAT SHE WANTS TO HEAR.

 

 

Hm, dooley noted. I think I'll use my ex- "Cuddle Buddy" as an example of a past relationship. lol

[mr.dream merchant]

I think Zengirl hit the nail on the head. Fact is, you do learn things about yourself and what you want in a partner by being in relationships. Every relationship isn't going to end in marriage.

 

Also, believe it or not, not everyone who is hanging out in bars and clubs is a heathen without morals. The guy I was responding to was 23 years old. Most people his age go to bars and clubs, including students and young professionals. Your issues with these places are your own.

 

Understood but the answer to dating success isn't picking up women in an environment where everyone is inebriated or a drink away from it. And to suggest that he does what everyone else is doing is...eh. :/ You can easily find and meet decent women without the help of intoxication or being a follower. Simply be yourself, believe in yourself. That's all it takes.

 

As far as what zengirl said, there's definitely some credibility there but it's not the defining statement. As mentioned before, a guy could easily use her tactics for finding the right partner, and ask why she's been in so many failed relationships.

 

Food for thought for those who aren't so open minded.

[Star Gazer]

I judge guys by the relationships they've been in, but not how often they get dates. Someone who dates around 2-3 times a week would not be attractive to me, but then neither would someone who hadn't had a couple significant relationships and already knew how to be a good boyfriend (something you only learn in relationships) already. At 26, I'm not into training someone.

 

Seconded. At 32, I'm not interested in training/teaching someone how to be a good relationship partner. He's got to be an equal going in.

[chuckles11]

Hmm...well I'm not opposed to going to bars, but in general the people in my social circle do not generally go to them, most of my friends rarely (and in some cases never) drink. I think I've been to a bar three times in my life.

 

So, how does one start going to bars without going with friends and without drinking (I don't drink)? If you genuinely think this is a good place to go to meet people I'm completely open to it.

 

In that case, you may just have to expand your social circle. For example, you may want to consider joining some sort of club, social group, etc. where you will be able to make more friends(including male friends). It just depends on what you're interests are. The drinking thing isn't a huge deal. Heck, most people would love to have a friend around who doesn't drink(if you don't mind being the designated driver).

[Star Gazer]

While the sentiment behind it is real, the word "training" was a bit tongue-in-cheek. My point is that rarely does someone know how to be a good partner in their first relationship, and I've had several very serious relationships (lived together with one, talked about potential marriage with a few others, was engaged to my HS sweetheart) so I'm not interested in that disparity. There are things you just "learn" by having serious relationships and that I find lacking in those who've never had them. They don't get it, and I don't want to be the one who explains it at this stage in the game.

 

 

 

I put work into relationships, but I wouldn't buy a fixer-upper car either. I'd rather have it in working order when I buy it. This is just a metaphor; I don't think people are cars, obviously. I've never met a guy who magically just HAD great relationship skills. They're learned, through having relationships. At 26, my dating range is about 24-33.

 

And the truth is. . . Any guy in that range who's never had a serious relationship hasn't had one because he was deficient in that area, for the most part. Either he's chosen to play around (unattractive) or he's had trouble relating to women and attracting them (unattractive) or he's had trouble establishing a long-lasting connection (unattractive) or he didn't value relationships enough to make time for them in his life (unattractive). I'm sure there is a weird exception out there (like someone who was in a coma for 6 years or something) but I don't cater to exceptions when forming general value judgments.

 

I don't think people who know me would call me selfish. I'm very willing to help people, be kind, and I've always been told I'm a good partner. I've never had complaints on that level, and I've had mostly healthy, mature relationships. I'm certainly not perfect, but I don't think it's "selfish" to express that you want someone with relationship skills. And people who haven't had relationships don't have relationship skills.

 

I've never been told (in life) I wasn't relationship material. In fact, I tend to be the girl who guys who've played around for ages somehow develop a crush on and want to settle down with. I won't date those guys. They've demonstrated their dating priorities by playing around; I'm not interested in being the game-changer. I've also, obviously, been in relationships with men who found me to be "relationship material" (and even some who saw me as marriage material). But, obviously, that doesn't mean I'd be right for everyone or even most people --- nobody is.

 

 

 

Hm. . . Perhaps the more inexperienced guys --- if they're sincere --- should date women who've also struggled with dating. Or they'll find more experienced gals who don't have the same views I have. Mine are formed mostly by being put on a pedestal by supposedly former Players or guys who put off romance (for medical school, etc) who are in my social circle. Those are the worst kind of "Never had a relationship" though, no, I could not see myself attracted to someone who'd had so much social trouble they'd never had a lasting romantic relationship and were already in their mid-20s or older. I don't think that person and I would be socially compatible.

 

Seconded again...

[mr.dream merchant]

It's pretty interesting that the same women who detest men judging a woman on the number of people she's slept with....are denying men based on the number or lack thereof, of serious relationships in his past.

[irc333]

Right, for someone who thinks negatively of someone who hasn't been in many relationships can also counter with why someone has been in so many failed relationships.

 

You know I hear the stories of women who have been in abusive, black-eyed causing, drug using boyfriends on a constant basis.

 

They get knocked up, probably wind up in an abusive marriage they've could've avoided long before getting married, because they had no sense in getting out of something that was obviously bad for them.

 

With me, I am wise enough to avoid these kinds of people and detecting these people as being toxic.

 

Maybe that's why I'm still single? Because I know a bad person when I see one, when obviously people who have been through a string of bad relationships don't have the foresight to see the obvious, because they're blinded by love or scared of being alone.

 

 

 

Understood but the answer to dating success isn't picking up women in an environment where everyone is inebriated or a drink away from it. And to suggest that he does what everyone else is doing is...eh. :/ You can easily find and meet decent women without the help of intoxication or being a follower. Simply be yourself, believe in yourself. That's all it takes.

 

As far as what zengirl said, there's definitely some credibility there but it's not the defining statement. As mentioned before, a guy could easily use her tactics for finding the right partner, and ask why she's been in so many failed relationships.

 

Food for thought for those who aren't so open minded.

[Professor X]

No offense, but this was probably the most absurd post made in a while.

 

Sorry, but I don't agree with this.

 

So if someone never/barely dated by the time he's 40, he will all of a sudden change, get the courage and go out on a multiple dates?

Nah, the older you get, the harder it is for you to change.

Also, the older you get the less you want to play around. The more you know who you are and as so, most women that age will look for a partner to grow old with.

And as we know actions speak louder than words, and your actions (or lack thereof) will lead to 1 conclusion. And it doesn't matter what you want deep down when you don't chase it.

 

But by all means. Prove me wrong.

[fortyninethousand322]

Seconded. At 32, I'm not interested in training/teaching someone how to be a good relationship partner. He's got to be an equal going in.

 

I hope you realize this means all inexperienced men will lie like there's no tomorrow about their history. Just the way it is.

 

The thing I don't understand is, if I'm not going to hold someone's past against them, why would they hold my lack of one against me? This is where I get puzzled about how complicated we've made things like romantic relationships. Look, if you like someone you like them, if you don't you don't. This should be regardless of their history.

[irc333]

That's because they are jealous or envious of those who know to avoid a bad relationship and when to bail when they see someone that's toxic.

 

Some people like myself, no better to avoid a bad prospect when I see it. Some prefer to get burned in order to learn their lesson.

 

I've explained this in a previous post, I think it might've gotten overlooked or ignored.

 

I don't have to grab a hot oven heating element to know that it's going to burn my hand, but some like to place their hand right into the heating element and go "OOOOOW, I burned myself!!!!"

 

 

And learn their lesson that way.

 

 

 

 

It's pretty interesting that the same women who detest men judging a woman on the number of people she's slept with....are denying men based on the number or lack thereof, of serious relationships in his past.

[irc333]

Yeah, I really wouldn't not not date someone who has had a sexual and/or relationship history more so than me. Because I know there's a lot of decent people out there that have hopefully learned their lesson by now,

 

Esp, by a certain age.

 

But, gosh forbid if the person is more than likely disease free and there's probably less drama to deal with the inexperienced.

 

You know why the inexperienced have it better?

 

No worry of STD's

No worry of a pregnant woman looming around them.

No drama

 

I hope you realize this means all inexperienced men will lie like there's no tomorrow about their history. Just the way it is.

 

The thing I don't understand is, if I'm not going to hold someone's past against them, why would they hold my lack of one against me? This is where I get puzzled about how complicated we've made things like romantic relationships. Look, if you like someone you like them, if you don't you don't. This should be regardless of their history.

[Tayla]

You don't have an expiration date per say, but it will become harder and harder to get out of this cycle the more you wait.

Already now you doubt yourself. Imagine you are 40yo, then what? Think it'll be easier?

By then it means that chances are you'll never find someone.

 

So my suggestion to you is to date a lot more than you do now, blurr reality a bit when they ask you about RS, tell them you were busy with studies, job, family, etc..

 

Ohh how I used to be of that belief, over the hill, washed up never gonna find or meet a partner to share life in. THank you for letting me know that myth is still out there and I will still need to contend with the ignorance portrayed.

I posted on LS my desire to date after age 40, and I am glad for the supportive words there. I personally dont feel the desire to interrogate someone on the first date, its hard enough relaxing and being oneself during the initial getting to know phase.

To the OP- I would suggest politely changing the subject in a gentile way when personal questions of your dating habits are mentioned. Then be gracious and keep things in the "NOW" theory. Current topics are fair game, its the past that can bite some folks.

You are at free will to maintain your privacy in certain matters.

On another matter- I do get the one statement of "not wanting to train someone" to be a fair accessment on so many levels. THerefore I accept folks as they are in that moment. If they are willing to share or train me on auto repair or how to fix a roof is far different then training them on proper regard or bedroom habits. THere is a difference in what is being trained. SO I get in part what the fellow poster was trying to get at.

[zengirl]

I don't think going to bars and clubs significantly helps with dating experience. I mean, not drinking at all is going to lead to a totally different social scene. (I actually don't think I could date a guy who abstained from alcohol entirely, because I like doing things at local pubs, like trivia and such, and I'd feel self-conscious if I could never share a bottle of wine with a partner or something; wouldn't say never, but it'd feel odd.) However, clubs in particular are horrible places to meet people; I rarely go to clubs. I go to bars and pubs, but I've not met most of my BFs there.

 

The amount of experience had holds little to no influence on how good of a partner one could be and definitely shouldn't be a make it or break it deal.

 

Have you ever been in love and had a real, mature, loving relationship with someone? If you haven't, I can see how you wouldn't view it as a transformational and important experience. I have, so I do.

 

I think Zengirl hit the nail on the head. Fact is, you do learn things about yourself and what you want in a partner by being in relationships. Every relationship isn't going to end in marriage.

 

Yes, I forgot to add that relationships teach you about yourself. In fact, I kind of see that as their primary goal -- at least early relationships. Some people luck into a great one early on (I actually did; however, unluckily, he passed away in an accident when we were quite young) and that's awesome, but for most people, those relationships are essentially teaching them how to be good partners and teaching them how to be, just in general, and about themselves. When you're young, there's no great disparity (everyone lacks experience) AND no pressure to find a serious or significant relationship. That changes as you get older---and that's just a fact.

 

It's pretty interesting that the same women who detest men judging a woman on the number of people she's slept with....are denying men based on the number or lack thereof, of serious relationships in his past.

 

Well, I don't judge them by the NUMBER unless it's 0. One significant, serious, long-term relationship is fine. (Unless they've been screwing around a lot since then. I don't date anyone who has ever been a player.) I do judge people by patterns in dating and relationships, and have no issues with people doing this, as they show a great deal. I also don't take issue necessarily with judging a woman or man by whether or not she or he sleeps around (I do that, too, with partners). . . I only have a problem when it's someone being hypocritical, who themselves sleeps around. If I had no relationship experience, I'd totally be a hypocrite and jerk for expecting a guy to have it.

Edited April 25, 2011 by zengirl

[fortyninethousand322]

So essentially what I get from the gist of this thread is that you better start dating by the time you're done with college or you're screwed. And, if you don't drink, you should because otherwise you're a buzz kill.

 

Jeez, and I was feeling so great about myself when the day began...