Inexperienced males vs females with too much experience

[kaylan]

You base everything on a very small number of bad experiences and you are quick to blame her for those bad experiences. Maybe it was you just as much if not more than her. If people followed your generalization more often there would be even more virgins who are perfectly capable of good sex, but would not get any opportunity.

Who says I am blaming her?

 

I mean at the end of the day, all it comes down to is a person deciding to date someone similar to them...which is what I seek. People do this all the time. If I found a girl who fit all the things I seek in a woman, but was a virgin, Id give it a try as long as she didnt put me on some long wait for sex.

 

Because Id like to know we were compatible before investing in a long relationship. However, I have yet to meet an inexperienced gal who fits me well enough to date. However I still much prefer someone whos dated around and experienced life the way I have already.

 

And my analogy before was a logical argument that applies to most things, if not all things in life. I just want you to answer my question. Why is it bad for someone with experience to prefer someone who is equally experienced? For this person wouldnt experience be better than inexperience in a given situation? You should be able to answer this easily.

[LTP]

That's not to say there's anything "wrong" with being a virgin. But there is something deviant to the norm about it, after a certain age, so it's going to be wondered about. Really, I think it's better to stay a virgin than sleep with someone you wouldn't want to sleep with, and I've never personally had sex outside of a relationship -- thus I AM someone who stays celibate between relationships -- but would I question why someone hasn't had a relationship when they've had a decade to date is all. That's because of my experiences and the normative experiences most people have. Doesn't mean anything outside the norm is "wrong," but it is questionable.

 

There's nothing wrong with being a virgin, yet it's deviant to the norm and you would judge someone for being a virgin. How is that consistent? Help me understand. I personally believe sex should be within relationships.

[carhill]

IME, compatible 'love styles' are elemental to the synergy necessary to sustain a LTR/M. Such styles do appear to be unique to the individual and not always immediately in evidence. Regardless of relative 'experience', it is possible to have compatible styles of love. If nothing else, one partner has just had more 'practice' with their style. Feeling a style without substantial practice and practicing a style repetitively do not have to be mutually exclusive, but certainly can be.

[LTP]

Who says I am blaming her?

 

I mean at the end of the day, all it comes down to is a person deciding to date someone similar to them...which is what I seek. People do this all the time. If I found a girl who fit all the things I seek in a woman, but was a virgin, Id give it a try as long as she didnt put me on some long wait for sex.

 

Because Id like to know we were compatible before investing in a long relationship. However, I have yet to meet an inexperienced gal who fits me well enough to date. However I still much prefer someone whos dated around and experienced life the way I have already.

 

And my analogy before was a logical argument that applies to most things, if not all things in life. I just want you to answer my question. Why is it bad for someone with experience to prefer someone who is equally experienced? For this person wouldnt experience be better than inexperience in a given situation? You should be able to answer this easily.

 

That's the way it comes off. It's bad when the past takes priority away fromm you two have. If two people are truly in love and one has less experience in something, the other would enjoy teaching them. No two people are identical, so one will always learn from the other in some areas. Compatibility is important, but people put way too much empasis on previous sexual partners. The amount of people who would flatly turn down virgins and even people with too little experience is astounding.

[zengirl]

That's a way off base comparison. Someone cheating on their spouse with another person is doing something almost anyone would consider morally suspect. Who exactly is a virgin cheating on if he or she lies about being a virgin?

 

But I wasn't speaking of morality, really. There are greater reasons, than just the moral reasons, not to sleep with someone who's married. There are also practical reasons, personal reasons, and so forth. There's nothing immoral whatsoever in being a virgin, in my worldview (though morality is such a random concept, as it varies in various societies and views) but it's a large piece of information that it is immoral to withhold. Just like if you started dating someone but you had a non-curable disease (not an STD, but just your personal health); at a certain point, that'd be important to disclose for the sake of honesty.

 

If you're holding something back intentionally because someone else might "judge" you, you're lying.

 

If people weren't so judgmental, they will be more honest with each other. The overly judgmental people are the problem, not the virgins. You don't judge someone who's had sex with 1 or 100 partners, but if it's his first time, you do judge him. Trickery would be someone lying about an STD test. Trickery would be using you just for sex. Not divuging someone's past is not trickey. How can you compare a virgin to an adulterer? That doesn't even deserve a response. What your post says is that a virgin would be better off seeing an escort first and then he wouldn't have to divulge anything. Too much judgment.

 

I would say if you've had sex with escorts, that's something else you should divulge, especially if it's the only sex you've ever had. Clearly, my version of honesty is quite wide-ranging, and I only really associate with people who are honest enough---meaning I don't have to pry information out of them, but they willingly share things. For instance, my SO has lupus, an incurable disease, and he shared that with me before we became serious, even though I may certainly have "judged" him for it, because it was the right thing to do. If you're going to be truly intimate with someone, that's just about sharing.

 

As to virginity and sex: Sex is a big thing to me, not a casual thing, so if someone were to withhold that kind of information, I'd feel tricked. Luckily, I'll never be in that situation, as I'm taken and never dealt with that previously.

 

As to judgement --- I don't see anything wrong with judgement. Everyone has different judgments and thoughts on things, but we all use judgment every single time we make any kind of decision.

 

There's nothing wrong with being a virgin, yet it's deviant to the norm and you would judge someone for being a virgin. How is that consistent? Help me understand. I personally believe sex should be within relationships.

 

I would judge someone for. . . anything. Judgment may be favorable, negative, or neutral, but I'm always employing it as I look at data, emotionally or logically, in various ways.

 

I personally only have had sex within relationships. I have no beliefs for what other people should do, so long as they're totally honest with everyone else and don't hurt anyone else. I personally have no issues with virgins --- I'm just saying there is a REASON someone holds onto it so long, and many of those reasons would make them incompatible with someone who didn't, thus putting them in different dating pools. There's nothing "wrong" with that, but I think everyone should own their personal style, accept it, and work with their own styles.

 

For instance, someone who has had relationships before, sex before, and experienced all of that might not be on the same page as someone who's neither had a relationship, nor sex. And they frequently are NOT on the same page for the reasons I list. If it is true to yourself to be a virgin at 29, then I have no issues whatsoever with someone doing that, but that wouldn't have been someone whose style was compatible with mine, and I think that's true of many people who had relationships in their teens and twenties. As I said, it's more about relationships than sex really.

 

IME, compatible 'love styles' are elemental to the synergy necessary to sustain a LTR/M. Such styles do appear to be unique to the individual and not always immediately in evidence. Regardless of relative 'experience', it is possible to have compatible styles of love. If nothing else, one partner has just had more 'practice' with their style. Feeling a style without substantial practice and practicing a style repetitively do not have to be mutually exclusive, but certainly can be.

 

Certainly true.

[fortyninethousand322]

But I wasn't speaking of morality, really. There are greater reasons, than just the moral reasons, not to sleep with someone who's married. There are also practical reasons, personal reasons, and so forth. There's nothing immoral whatsoever in being a virgin, in my worldview (though morality is such a random concept, as it varies in various societies and views) but it's a large piece of information that it is immoral to withhold. Just like if you started dating someone but you had a non-curable disease (not an STD, but just your personal health); at a certain point, that'd be important to disclose for the sake of honesty.

 

If you're holding something back intentionally because someone else might "judge" you, you're lying.

 

 

Well, I won't go into the other aspects of full disclosure, but on the inexperience issue in particular at some point it becomes a vicious cycle, like trying to get a job when you've never had one. It's fairly easy for you to expect full disclosure when a) you have a healthy amount of relationship experience and b) you only date men who do as well.

 

Look, everyone has their own standards but I don't think society is well served by saying that it's a good thing to be skeptical about dating inexperienced men.

[LTP]

Well, I won't go into the other aspects of full disclosure, but on the inexperience issue in particular at some point it becomes a vicious cycle, like trying to get a job when you've never had one. It's fairly easy for you to expect full disclosure when a) you have a healthy amount of relationship experience and b) you only date men who do as well.

 

Look, everyone has their own standards but I don't think society is well served by saying that it's a good thing to be skeptical about dating inexperienced men.

 

The inexperienced men are often put into an impossible position and are looked down upon by so many.

[lululucy]

I'm curious as to where you got that definition of "true love". Given the style in which it's written, I would venture to guess it came from someone fairly young. That definition of 'true love' sounds like something I would have written when I was a teenager. It's one of those over the top, unattainable versions of love one has when one is still immature.

 

I love my husband. I've been married for over ten years. I know he loves me. However, neither one of us is in love with each other by the definition given in the post above.

 

True love requires two emotionally healthy individuals who are looking to share their lives and aren't looking for anyone else to complete them. The description above is, as a previous poster pointed out, a version of co-dependency, not love.

 

All I could think when I read that quote was that it reminded me very strongly of Twilight. I find it really scary that people truly believe love is like that -- that is co-dependent at best, stalking and bordering on abusive at worst.

 

 

As to virginity and sex: Sex is a big thing to me, not a casual thing, so if someone were to withhold that kind of information, I'd feel tricked. Luckily, I'll never be in that situation, as I'm taken and never dealt with that previously.

 

I would definitely feel tricked if the person I was seeing didn't tell me they were a virgin until after the act. As Emilia (I believe) was saying earlier in this thread, that would be unlikely to happen because there are many signs that someone is an older virgin or at the very least inexperienced in relationships, and those kind of character traits are a big turn off for me.

 

As to judgement --- I don't see anything wrong with judgement. Everyone has different judgments and thoughts on things, but we all use judgment every single time we make any kind of decision.

 

I would judge someone for. . . anything. Judgment may be favorable, negative, or neutral, but I'm always employing it as I look at data, emotionally or logically, in various ways.

 

Exactly.

[silvermercy]

Why is everyone keep commenting on the love definition I gave? I already explained that. Maybe you want one more? Here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OxitocinaCPK3D.png

[Ross MwcFan]

Sex is not chess. Chess is a game people play for fun. Sex has a very deep meaning between two people and it is far more than just the physical aspect.

 

Many people have sex just for fun.

 

Personally the idea of '****ing' sounds a lot better than 'making love'.

[LTP]

Why is everyone keep commenting on the love definition I gave? I already explained that. Maybe you want one more? Here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OxitocinaCPK3D.png

 

I don't get why they make those comments either. That picture is cool!

[lululucy]

Why is everyone keep commenting on the love definition I gave? I already explained that. Maybe you want one more? Here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OxitocinaCPK3D.png

 

I don't get why they make those comments either. That picture is cool!

 

It's because I think it's really telling that someone without serious relationship experience could google love and pick that quote as something they feel appropriately describes the feelings. It just goes to the exact reason why I am not comfortable dating someone without experience: they have unreasonable expectations as to what being in love and in a healthy relationship entails.

[silvermercy]

I don't get why they make those comments either. That picture is cool!

hehe... It is, isn't it? because it's so full of love... aaww...

 

 

Oh, it's OK Lucy, I decided to go with ultra-concentrated oxytocin shots this time.

[zengirl]

Well, I won't go into the other aspects of full disclosure, but on the inexperience issue in particular at some point it becomes a vicious cycle, like trying to get a job when you've never had one. It's fairly easy for you to expect full disclosure when a) you have a healthy amount of relationship experience and b) you only date men who do as well.

 

Look, everyone has their own standards but I don't think society is well served by saying that it's a good thing to be skeptical about dating inexperienced men.

 

I don't think it's right to lie to get a job either, so that's an apt analogy. And there's always ways around that.

[dasein]

It just goes to the exact reason why I am not comfortable dating someone without experience: they have unreasonable expectations as to what being in love and in a healthy relationship entails.

 

Do you date women? Because I find that these types of butterfly moonbeam codependent definitions of what love is to be nearly exclusively female in origin. No adult men I know or have known, regardless of age (>18) or experience, harbor such definitions.

[aj22one]

The attitudes displayed in this thread by some of the women has got to be some of the most laughable, foolish, and unrealistic you will ever see. It's fine to look at inexperience as a negative, but to look at it as an automatic disqualifier will result in you missing out on some great people. People disqualified Drew Brees, Ray Rice, and Tom Brady based on superficial qualities (height, Brady's thin body frame, etc.) and look where those guys are now. You think the teams that passed on them would like to take that decision back and do it over again?

 

There are so many things to worry about: is this person a serial killer, a member of organized crime, an drug or alcohol addict, is this person mean spirited and self-centered, do they have the same life values as me (money, family, etc.)? All of those questions and more should be of way more concern than whether or not someone has a relationship before or sex before or not.

 

Y'all remind me of Buddy Ryan complaining about Cris Carter before cutting him from the team: "all he does is catch touchdowns". Y'all's version: "all he does is treat me right and he's a nice person, but he has no experience".

 

Get real people, start seeing the forest for the trees.

[Oxy Moronovich]

The attitudes displayed in this thread by some of the women has got to be some of the most laughable, foolish, and unrealistic you will ever see.

Dude, you won't just find unrealistic and laughable behavior by women in this thread or even this forum alone. You'll find it in real life too.

[aj22one]

Dude, you won't just find unrealistic and laughable behavior by women in this thread or even this forum alone. You'll find it in real life too.

 

Ain't that the truth.

[silvermercy]

Ain't that the truth.

Yes, with the exception of one male, the majority were women. (I'm female, btw).

[Ross MwcFan]

All I could think when I read that quote was that it reminded me very strongly of Twilight. I find it really scary that people truly believe love is like that -- that is co-dependent at best, stalking and bordering on abusive at worst.

 

 

 

 

I would definitely feel tricked if the person I was seeing didn't tell me they were a virgin until after the act. As Emilia (I believe) was saying earlier in this thread, that would be unlikely to happen because there are many signs that someone is an older virgin or at the very least inexperienced in relationships, and those kind of character traits are a big turn off for me.

 

 

 

Exactly.

 

What are the signs?

[Emilia]

What are the signs?

 

Socially awkward and inept, passive when assertiveness is needed, too shy, probably not a great kisser, doesn't know how to build the mood and progression to sex.

[ThaWholigan]

What are the signs?

 

I'd imagine they are anxiety, nervousness, indecisiveness, emotional immaturity, lack of confidence, lack of self-esteem etc. These will manifest somehow....

[fortyninethousand322]

Socially awkward and inept, passive when assertiveness is needed, too shy, probably not a great kisser, doesn't know how to build the mood and progression to sex.

 

You know I wonder how much of that is the result of all that sexual harassment/sex ed garbage they taught us in school. All that be courteous and don't pressure her into sex nonsense. I mean yeah in theory it's a great idea not to pressure someone into sex, but the guys who are sexually aggressive (not assertive but aggressive in a negative way) weren't dissuaded by that stuff, and the already passive guys/borderline passive guys were just made even more passive by it. So it just ensured that the bad guys were even more emboldened by getting rid of some of their competition and the passive dudes never really figured out what they needed to.

[silvermercy]

Well, I have none of the mentioned signs and symptoms in this diagnosis (even the mood to sex). But maybe I am an atypical and asymptomatic disease carrier.

[ThaWholigan]

Socially awkward and inept, passive when assertiveness is needed, too shy, probably not a great kisser, doesn't know how to build the mood and progression to sex.

 

Pretty much added onto what I said. I do personally think that there is a distinct lack of empathy for men of any age in this position, and I think this lack adds to the difficulty to even be able to muster up the confidence to overcome all these things. I wouldn't say that they should be "given a chance", but I would say that there needs to be avenues in place where they can actively seek help in becoming more social that are seen as acceptable. The word "creep" and "weirdo" gets thrown around too easily, and one who is already self-deprecating will find it extremely hard to overturn that. I am lucky I am able to not allow these things to deter me. It worries me that so many other men are. I can see why PUA is so popular.

 

You know I wonder how much of that is the result of all that sexual harassment/sex ed garbage they taught us in school. All that be courteous and don't pressure her into sex nonsense. I mean yeah in theory it's a great idea not to pressure someone into sex, but the guys who are sexually aggressive (not assertive but aggressive in a negative way) weren't dissuaded by that stuff, and the already passive guys/borderline passive guys were just made even more passive by it. So it just ensured that the bad guys were even more emboldened by getting rid of some of their competition and the passive dudes never really figured out what they needed to.

 

This is true. We're not taught how to be attractive to women when young. If you are naturally able to do this, more power to you. If not, you're screwed. My mother (bless her) isn't one of those women who always told me to "be nice to women" all the time, she always taught me to have boundaries and to be confident, even though I found it hard. She tried.

 

My father is helping more though, probably because he, like my younger brothers, was/is successful with women. I think you need to find a mentor, or someone to learn from. Each one teach one.