his lack of a past is a bit of a turnoff

[Floridaman]

It came up a month into dating. He asked me about my thoughts on physical intimacy, i said i wait awhile, he said he doesnt mind waiting, i asked him how many girls he's been with and he said 'honestly, i never been with anyone'.

Thanks for the explanation.

My query comes out of the postings I've made (referenced in an earlier post in this thread) to late-bloomin' virgin guys in their late 20s and 30s who are worried sick a woman will laugh at them if she discovers he's a virgin...

 

I keep telling them a woman who really cares and loves him won't ridicule him, just like he wouldn't deliberately say anything to hurt him.

I only asked because I regret not asking a guy once...only after sleeping with him did i find out he's been with many many girls...i just wanted to be mentally prepared thats all and get good protection haha

Am assuming you have limited experience -- or a limited number of partners. You're not a virgin, obv., but am not overly experienced (you don't have sex with every guy you date), would be my guess.

 

Am saying that bec I have also posted to these "inexperienced" guys -- some of whom haven't even held a girl's hand -- they won't likely date and get involved in an LTR with a highly-experienced very sexual woman, as most of us are attracted to people of similar temperment (my wife, for example).

 

Am surprised your BF brought this issue up, as a lot of those virgin guys are insecure.

 

I posted my story either. Wasn't a virgin but only had sex 3X in HS and all of 2X through my 20s.... and didn't do well in relationships until I met my future wife at 30. She only had one partner before me, a prev. fiance years before. Needless to say, we didn't hold back...

 

In fact, it was I who asked about her experience as we were taking off each other's clothes. Like an idiot, I asked if she was a virgin (she was 34, me 30). Don't know why I had to ask that q. at that moment, but she didn't take offense and the rest is history....

 

That was 3 mos. into our relationship.

Like you, I didn't press women for sex and was truly more interested in a relationship (was sex- and relationship-starved at 29-30).

I know getting too sexual too soon can often jeopardize what could be a great relationship.

[Floridaman]

bumped....

[laotzu]

I was a pretty late bloomer as well, and read fairly similar to the OP's significant other: tall, in great shape, good career, well-read, and fairly attractive. I had plenty of opportunities to have sex (though I certainly had my dry spells, as well) but, frankly, didn't want to have sex just for the sake of having sex. I eventually found a girl I was interested in, and I did the only rational thing: I completely lied to her. Why? Because I knew she'd react similarly to the OP if I was honest. (Girls always want an honest guy, except for when they want to be lied to.) Anyway, we were in a pretty long relationship, and I had sex with her hundreds of times. Now I'm single again, and I'm pretty much the same way: girls almost fall all over me. I just made out with a girl for fifteen minutes who I just met a couple of days ago, and I'm pretty sure she would have had sex had I pushed for it. And I might, in a couple of days, but then again: I'm picky. There are attractive girls out there who don't want to sleep with any guy that winks their way, and - I know it shocks girls to believe this - but there are guys out there that don't want to sleep with just any of them.

 

If this guy is as great as you thought, you should have sex with him - and soon. It might be awkward the first time, but guess what? By the tenth time, it won't be awkward - it'll be great. And you'll know he doesn't have an STD and has standards. If you're not careful, eventually he'll realize you don't appreciate him and he'll dump you.

[ChessPieceFace]

Thanks for the responses. I don't want to be an experiment and I don't want him to date me because I'm the first girl to show him any interest either.

 

Did he specifically tell you that you were the first girl to show him any interest? If not, why would you assume that? I am 35 years old, never dated or had sex and I've had a few girls show me interest but I wasn't interested in them. I'm very picky/selective about who I am interested in and that has been a major factor for me. Did that possibility occur to you?

 

Contrary to what you seem to believe, not all men are out to just stick their penis inside anything that moves. If you have that belief, you may in fact be more messed up than he is, in the long term.

 

I don't know, I guess I'm just having trouble getting my mind around a perfectly good catch not being "caught" until now.

 

As opposed to someone who was in one or more relationships that ended. But wait, why did those relationships end? Oh my god, what is wrong with those people that they couldn't stay in the relationship??

 

Let me guess, it's always "the other person" that was the offender in all of the previous relationships. At least that's what 99% of people claim right? You know they must all be right about it too. Makes total sense. More relationships = more experience and therefore a better partner. Same with divorced, I am so excited to get involved with someone that has had like 8 or 9 marriages! What a catch!

[AHardDaysNight]

Good catches, hmmm.

 

With all the bad boys who are being caught, all the drug dealers being caught, all the poor choices being caught...your problem is with this guy not having experience at 25?

 

I'm sorry, but it's girls like you that men like in this situation needs to stay away from. Please give him a break, and break up with him. Let him meet someone who will appreciate him for who he is.

 

If this sounds mean, and cruel...well, you are being mean and cruel by even asking this question. There is nothing wrong with this man, but there is something wrong with you.

[Hot Chick]

At 25 I would be a little wary. I would think he might have social issues that have kept a decent-looking, intelligent guy from dating until this late in life. There might be something lacking in the "go for it" department and he may be a passive type of guy interaction-wise, which would drive a lot of women crazy (not in a good way.) Something internal has kept him from pursuing and successfully achieving a very strong biological urge (to interact and have relations with the opposite sex.)

 

That said, if he's making you happy, maybe he has overcome these issues and is doing great with you. Does he make you happy? Do you feel his interest is genuine? Does he give you what you want in a relationship? If those aren't problems, then I don't see a problem.

 

I knew a 38 year old virgin who had never even kissed a woman. He definitely has social issues which have now evolved to anger and bitterness - it is sad to hang out with him, so I stopped.

[udolipixie]

I was a pretty late bloomer as well, and read fairly similar to the OP's significant other: tall, in great shape, good career, well-read, and fairly attractive. I had plenty of opportunities to have sex (though I certainly had my dry spells, as well) but, frankly, didn't want to have sex just for the sake of having sex. I eventually found a girl I was interested in, and I did the only rational thing: I completely lied to her.

 

That was rational just like it's rational for a wife to cheat on her husband have a child from the affair and lie about the child's paternity.

 

Just like it's rational for a woman with herpes to lie about having the std and sleep with a guy.

 

It's not only rational it's dishonest, deceptive, and omitting/hiding an element that may affect anothers person decision because you want things your way.

 

Your need to get what you wanted overrode her right to have an element included that you knew could affect her decision making.

 

If this guy is as great as you thought, you should have sex with him - and soon. It might be awkward the first time, but guess what? By the tenth time, it won't be awkward - it'll be great. And you'll know he doesn't have an STD and has standards. If you're not careful, eventually he'll realize you don't appreciate him and he'll dump you.

 

Does this argument also work for a girl who has lied about her sexual history and the guy deems her a slut. Hey who cares after the tenth time you won't be thinking about all the other guys inside her.

 

I'm not sure what the uproar is about some women not wanting to date virgins/inexperienced guys after all some guys have their own tastes and prefer not to date experienced or what they deem as sluts.

[udolipixie]

Good catches, hmmm.

 

With all the bad boys who are being caught, all the drug dealers being caught, all the poor choices being caught...your problem is with this guy not having experience at 25?

 

I'm sorry, but it's girls like you that men like in this situation needs to stay away from. Please give him a break, and break up with him. Let him meet someone who will appreciate him for who he is.

 

If this sounds mean, and cruel...well, you are being mean and cruel by even asking this question. There is nothing wrong with this man, but there is something wrong with you.

 

You're the only one being mean by harshly putting down someone behavior to be turned off by something.

 

She wasn't demeaning him or degrading him. She was simply turned off by it.

 

Are guys who are turned off by unattractive women men and cruel. Are guys who are turned off by fat/obese women men and cruel.

 

Seems like you have your own issues with her being turned off by his lack of past but don't project your negativity and overreact on the OP.

[mullberry]

You must be kidding! These guys are rare, providing he loves you he is unlikely to love anyone as much as you ever... Get over it, what difference does it make. No baggage, no hangups, you can grow together. So, he may not have as much experience to draw from when issues crop up so you will have to be a bit more undertanding and communicate alot more but surely he is worth it. Your alternative is to let him go, then he will get the experience from other women and you will lose out... (I was this guy)..

[udolipixie]

About the update where you two had a discussion:

 

1. When discussing his inexperience. Did you ask him why he omitted mentioning it? Seems like from his question of would you have felt any different that like suggested before him waiting 6 months suggests he purposefully hid this. That he waited until after you emotional bonded to him so that your hormones would just brush this deception off.

 

2. Do you know him well enough to get that he was simply a late bloomer and it's not a virgin by circumstance due to low self esteem, confidence issues, and social issues? I'm guessing his inexperience suggesting he has issues/problems is why you were turned off?

 

3. Have you asked him if he went to prostitutes? Some people don't include oral or anal as virginity so he could have visited a prostitute and omitted that info. Apparently with his inexperience omission you can't truly trust him to be honest and straightforward with you.

 

4. Do you have the patience and energy to teach and guide him sexually and about relationships. Is he willing to learn? Do you think you have enough knoweldge on how to have a happy and healthy relationship to instruct?

[ChessPieceFace]

1. When discussing his inexperience. Did you ask him why he omitted mentioning it? Seems like from his question of would you have felt any different that like suggested before him waiting 6 months suggests he purposefully hid this. That he waited until after you emotional bonded to him so that your hormones would just brush this deception off.

 

Projecting. udoli has a negative view of men, OP, and will assume the absolute worst about your guy given the slightest hint of evidence. Take that into consideration.

 

3. Have you asked him if he went to prostitutes? Some people don't include oral or anal as virginity so he could have visited a prostitute and omitted that info. Apparently with his inexperience omission you can't truly trust him to be honest and straightforward with you.

 

KathyM just said a guy doesn't necessarily need to come out and announce his virginity. Yet you are painting this guy as "untrustworthy" by not announcing it. No.

 

Choosing to not stick this fact right in her face is not, by itself, proof or even a strong indication of being untrustworthy. If he openly lied about it, that would be something different. Just because I, personally, would be open about it, doesn't mean he has to.

 

The very fact that this thread exists is proof that the guy may have had good reason to keep it to himself.

[udolipixie]

Projecting. udoli has a negative view of men, OP, and will assume the absolute worst about your guy given the slightest hint of evidence. Take that into consideration.

 

You keep stating I hate men and that I have a negative view of men. Yet you can not provide me with any comments that state, suggest, or imply that when I ask you to.

 

Also my turnarounds on you, Woggle, and Elysian don't count as man hating that's just me poking at the ridiculousness of the women hate/bitterness in the comments by reversing them.

 

While for you:

Babies use porn now??

 

 

But seriously, maybe more and more men are spending their time with video games and porn because they're more interesting, more rewarding and infinitely less demanding than spoiled, "entitled" western women. Women who want us to be a walking contradiction, either chivalrous or 'enlightened' in any given situation (here's a tip on how to tell the situations apart -- anything that gives the woman the best of everything is "correct"), attentive to their needs while letting them walk all over us, and all in the name of twisted, modern feminism.

 

You see, feminized American Women, you have priced yourselves out of the market. Simply put -- you aren't worth it

 

Never met a good woman who was single, who I was interested in and who was also interested in me, nope.

 

 

 

If you indeed have any actual desire to treat a man with any genuine respect or love, other than just faking it to get your "catch" and male body you can exploit, that puts you ahead of most western women. As for that ideal situation being better than video games and porn... I dunno. I really do like my video games, and I have a great imagination. I can "be with" any girl I want. Fantasy may not be real, but reality usually SUCKS.

[udolipixie]

 

 

KathyM just said a guy doesn't necessarily need to come out and announce his virginity. Yet you are painting this guy as "untrustworthy" by not announcing it. No.

 

Yes.

 

So because one person believes he doesn't need to announce it...I can't have my own opinion? He was not straightforward point blank.

 

 

As for painting him...I have my opinion that he is not straightforward yet you clearly missed:

2. Do you know him well enough to get that he was simply a late bloomer and it's not a virgin by circumstance due to low self esteem, confidence issues, and social issues? I'm guessing his inexperience suggesting he has issues/problems is why you were turned off?

 

 

Choosing to not stick this fact right in her face is not, by itself, proof or even a strong indication of being untrustworthy. If he openly lied about it, that would be something different. Just because I, personally, would be open about it, doesn't mean he has to.

So if a girl omitted she was poking holes in your condom to get you to get her pregnant that's not proof or even a strong indication of being untrustworthy?

 

If a girl omitted her extensive sexual history that's not proof or even a strong indication of being untrustworthy?

 

If a girl omitted that she had an STD that's not proof or even a strong indication of being untrustworthy?

 

To me when you omit something and then water later done the line to tell me and ask if it would have changed my opinion it suggests that you already had supsected yes and that's why you chose to omit it.

 

The very fact that this thread exists is proof that the guy may have had good reason to keep it to himself.

As for this thread giving good reason. No it does not. It gives proof that some women are turned off by virginity and inexperience. That's not a good reason to purposefully omit something because you know it may affect her decision about you in a way you do not want.

 

Unless that good reason is getting what you want is more important than not omitting/keeping to yourself something that you know may affect her decision about you.

 

There are threads that exist about husbands negative reactions to finding out the child was not his.

 

Are those threads proof that the wife may have had good reason to keep paternity to herself?

 

 

The very fact that this thread exists is proof that the guy may have had good reason to keep it to himself.

Most of the guys on LS say the same about visiting prostitues and yet you claim that me stating this is painting him untrustworthy...it's painting him not truly trusted to be straightforward....big difference from untrustworthy and not trusted to be straightforward.

3. Have you asked him if he went to prostitutes? Some people don't include oral or anal as virginity so he could have visited a prostitute and omitted that info. Apparently with his inexperience omission you can't truly trust him to be honest and straightforward with you.

[Woggle]

Are people seriously comparing paternity a fraud and a man being a virgin?

[oaks]

Are people seriously comparing paternity a fraud and a man being a virgin?

 

No. I'm not even sure that udolipixie was doing that, but even so that would be one person, not "people". This seems to be the flaw in many of your rants - generalising from a small number of examples to half the population or more.

[udolipixie]

Are people seriously comparing paternity a fraud and a man being a virgin?

 

Seriously how did you get that. If anything you should have gotten that just because telling someone something may cause them to react in a manner you don't want them to doesn't mean it's a good reason to keep that something to yourself.

 

That your need to get what you want doesn't override the other person's right to have an element included that you know may affect their decision making

 

The very fact that this thread exists is proof that the guy may have had good reason to keep it to himself.

As for this thread giving good reason. No it does not. It gives proof that some women are turned off by virginity and inexperience. That's not a good reason to purposefully omit something because you know it may affect her decision about you in a way you do not want.

 

Unless that good reason is getting what you want is more important than not omitting/keeping to yourself something that you know may affect her decision about you.

 

There are threads that exist about husbands negative reactions to finding out the child was not his.

 

Are those threads proof that the wife may have had good reason to keep paternity to herself?

[udolipixie]

No. I'm not even sure that udolipixie was doing that, but even so that would be one person, not "people". This seems to be the flaw in many of your rants - generalising from a small number of examples to half the population or more.

 

Really? I thought I was pretty clear that the whole concept that just because including something may cause a reaction you don't want doesn't mean it's a good reason to omit/keep it to yourself.

 

As for this thread giving good reason. No it does not. It gives proof that some women are turned off by virginity and inexperience. That's not a good reason to purposefully omit something because you know it may affect her decision about you in a way you do not want.

 

Unless that good reason is getting what you want is more important than not omitting/keeping to yourself something that you know may affect her decision about you.

There are threads that exist about husbands negative reactions to finding out the child was not his.

 

Are those threads proof that the wife may have had good reason to keep paternity to herself?

[GoodOnPaper]

4. Do you have the patience and energy to teach and guide him sexually and about relationships. Is he willing to learn? Do you think you have enough knoweldge on how to have a happy and healthy relationship to instruct?

 

So just because he's a virgin, that means he has to do all the adapting to her without any reciprocation? I would think that regardless of experience level, both partners would need to guide each other to some extent. Is there really just one recipe for a happy and healthy relationship . . . and virgin males aren't in on the secret?

[udolipixie]

So just because he's a virgin, that means he has to do all the adapting to her without any reciprocation? I would think that regardless of experience level, both partners would need to guide each other to some extent. Is there really just one recipe for a happy and healthy relationship . . . and virgin males aren't in on the secret?

 

Wow just wow that's some issue there that you just overreached for. Are you a virgin male?

 

When and where did I state that there was one recipe for a happy and healthy relationship?

 

4. Do you have the patience and energy to teach and guide him sexually and about relationships. Is he willing to learn? Do you think you have enough knoweldge on how to have a happy and healthy relationship to instruct?

 

What's happy and healthy differs for most. I questioned this that because of the multiple differences. Ask that question and you'll get an individualized answer not a one recipe answer. You'll get an answer based on the answerer's definition of a happy and healthy relationship.

 

This question was to get whether or not she knows what it takes for her to have a healthy and happy relationship. If she doesn't then she'll be in a bit more trouble since this guy will most likely have some unknowns about relationships and she'll need patience to not get irritated at him for it while working on how to have a happy & healthy one. Having a happy & healthy relationship is it seems difficult for most so it may be even more difficult when he doesn't have much experience with relationships and she doesn't know what a happy & healthy one is.

 

Where did I state he'd do all the adapting to her without any reciprocation?

 

Just because she's instructing or guiding him doesn't mean he's the one doing all the adaptation she will have to adapt as well...most good teachers know to adapt to suit the need of the student and the student's best learning style. Most good teachers also know that they themselves learn from the students as well.

[oaks]

Really? I thought I was pretty clear that the whole concept that just because including something may cause a reaction you don't want doesn't mean it's a good reason to omit/keep it to yourself.

 

Sorry, I guess I'm failing to keep up with this thread.

[udolipixie]

Sorry, I guess I'm failing to keep up with this thread.

 

Okay thanks. I thought I was seriously messing up on my wording to get that kind of reaction.

[ascendotum]

So if a girl omitted she was poking holes

....

big difference from untrustworthy and not trusted to be straightforward.

 

You are going too far in your analogies :

* Staying quite on herpes, the gift that keeps giving for life.

* cheating on your partner and not saying anything about it.

* Getting pregnant to another guy and pretending its your partner's baby.

* Poking holes in your partner's condoms and keeping quite (get real!)

 

These have much greater consequences for other partner than merely having lack of experience, which basically becomes less of an issue as the months go by. A woman having a promiscuous past is probably the closest equivalent.

Its much easier for a woman to knock 10, 20, or whatever off the number of ONS than it would be for the inexperienced guy to fill in the relationship blanks for the past 5, 10 or whatever years, to avoid the loser tag.

[udolipixie]

You are going too far in your analogies :

* Staying quite on herpes, the gift that keeps giving for life.

* cheating on your partner and not saying anything about it.

* Getting pregnant to another guy and pretending its your partner's baby.

* Poking holes in your partner's condoms and keeping quite (get real!)

 

The point with the analogies is that shows how the person is untrustworthy or strongly indicates that in the sense that the person is not looking out for your interests but doing what they want to ensure their needs are met by omission. In all the analogies they have purposefully omitted something because they knew it may affect the other person's decision in a way they did not want.

 

It was just showing that omission can and often does prove or even show a strong indication of being untrustworthy.

Choosing to not stick this fact right in her face is not, by itself, proof or even a strong indication of being untrustworthy.

Also in the case of this piece I had stated that it wasn't the not sticking it in her face it but rather how it was handled:

To me when you omit something and then later done the line to tell me and ask if it would have changed my opinion it suggests that you already had suspected yes and that's why you chose to omit it.

^ edited comment...I deleted water with later and corrected my misspelling of suspected.

 

I thought it would be assumed knowledge most people would want to know about sexual history...the general view being not too many people want extremely experienced partners & most people think they are going to get a non virgin with some experience.

 

Even if it was not assumed knowledge the way he handled it was a bit off to later tell her six months down the line about it. If it of so little importance and okay to omit why let her know. Also him questioning her would it have changed her opinion of getting with him was iffy.

 

These have much greater consequences for other partner than merely having lack of experience, which basically becomes less of an issue as the months go by.

It's this assumption that the consequences of of lesser importance so it's okay to omit something that may affect a person's decision about you. The person purposefully omitting is now not only taking away the others right to not have something omitted that may affect their decision but now that factor is assumed to be of less importance. So not only is something that may affect their decision is omitted but it's assumed to be of little matter ....why not let the other person decide if they consider it of less importance?

 

If these consequences as so less of an issue why the need to purposefully omit or hid it. That's like in my analogy the herpes girl deciding that having herpes isn't that big of a deal so she omitted it because she knew it would affect the decision to sex her and she assumed it was of less importance instead of letting the person decide for themselves.

 

Why did she omit and assume that it was of less importance? Because she didn't want to reveal something that may affect the person's decision in a way she did not want it to go.

 

The reason why this virginity/inexperience omission is minimized because that often times after emotional bonding has occurred later down the line the omission is harder to be upset about.

 

I am NOT comparing or equating the consequences I am stating the behavior is the same except with the virginity omission emotional bonding is usually what the omitter bank on.

 

The behavior is the same because it's omitting something that you know may affect a person's decision on about you. It shows you aren't straightforward and possibly untrustworthy because you are looking out for your interests only by not letting the person know something that may have them act in a way that doesn't suit your interests. That you place getting what you want more important then letting them make a decision that you may not like. So you purposefully omit something because you know it may affect the decision about you in a way you do not want.

 

A woman having a promiscuous past is probably the closest equivalent.

Its much easier for a woman to knock 10, 20, or whatever off the number of ONS than it would be for the inexperienced guy to fill in the relationship blanks for the past 5, 10 or whatever years, to avoid the loser tag.

They're both just numbers it's pretty easy to lie about numbers.

 

Promiscuous women do not have it any easier than virgin/inexperienced men in being judged or lessening/escaping judgment.

Edited September 26, 2011 by udolipixie

[counterman]

I wouldn't rule him off due to his lack of experience. On the plus side, he doesn't have any baggage or any scars.

 

In my one and only relationship, I learnt so much from it and it really opened my eyes to what it really means to be in a relationship. I have been in a relationship since and have been single for over 2 years now. Have I had chances to be in relationships? Of course. But I never wanted to go into a relationship just for the sake of more experience. I wasn't interested going further with any of those girls. Sure, I may be inexperienced but I'm working on other aspects of my life that will set me up for life. I still have a lot of work to do, mind you but I'm getting there. Once I reach that stage of pure independence and having my life together, I'll be that great catch, albeit with relatively little relationships experience. I have been on dates though and many of them ended with the first one.

 

This guy seems to have his life put together and a future. You have been through a few relationships and sort of know the general idea of what it entails. So I think you being his first would be a great thing for the both of you. And when he explores it, he's going to love what's gonna get and you'll enjoy it too.

[GoodOnPaper]

Just because she's instructing or guiding him doesn't mean he's the one doing all the adaptation she will have to adapt as well...most good teachers know to adapt to suit the need of the student and the student's best learning style. Most good teachers also know that they themselves learn from the students as well.

 

The whole student/teacher analogy seems flawed -- and insulting to whomever is deemed the "student". If this issue is such a big deal, I don't understand why the OP just doesn't move on. I understand that guys are supposed to be a little more experienced, and even if you leave out the question of how a guy is supposed to get experienced without having a first one, why would a woman be drawn to a guy who has so much less experience than her, anyway? Is it just an ego trip?