Inexperienced males vs females with too much experience

[silvermercy]

Why do you assume he will be lucky? You have no experience of male sexuality, he could turn out to be into very different things than you are but you will be putting all your eggs in one basket and you will be crushed when you find out.

 

How will you know what YOU are into, what makes YOU happy when you meet the man who you think is the man of your dreams? How will you express your desire to him? By 'letting him' have sex with you?

 

People are complex. They behave differently with you than they behave with your friend. The guy that dumped your friend maybe wouldn't have dumped you because the two of you would have been compatible. You cannot possibly judge an individual in isolation and you never ever understand what goes on between two people. Sexual relationships, boundaries and love produce shades of grey that you cannot understand until you experience it.

How will I know? By getting to know him first for 3-4 months (for STD reasons, too). If he doesn't leave me by then, then I'll know he's probably serious about me. Actually, I had it happen to me when I didn't "put out" within the first 1-2 weeks and the men left me. Well, at least they were honest I suppose...

[kaylan]

You see, I just don't believe it when I hear about casual sex & kickass BF. This combo does not exist in my kickass-BF book. What they were doing as single guys gives me an indication of if he's gonna be a lasting BF or not. How can that person even exist!? Maybe that's why we have so many breakups and divorces today. You cannot be a kickass BF by the way by judging inexperienced women as non-dating material. (It's you who first mentioned it and making assumptions, too). I simply wish you won't accidentally fall madly in love with a nice girl one day but she doesn't return the feelings because of these ideas and assumptions against non-experienced females.

 

Lol, trust me silver....like I said, if you knew me in real life youd think I was a swell fella lol. And I pretty much know the buttons to push (non sexual) with girls such as yourself. Though Im not sure youd know how to push mine. So Im sure youd have no complaints with me as your boyfriend =P. I dont need you to believe me though. Im very confident in my ability to be a good boyfriend. Plus I have a great way with words when it comes to a girl whos got my heart.

 

What I do as a single guy doesnt have any bearing on who I am when I am dating someone. Is a single guy with a sex drive supposed to be celibate? I am single because I havent met the right girl to date yet. And I dont date just anybody. I date women I can give me complete self too...someone Im super sure of. So I dont rush it.

 

Theres so many breakups and divorces because people rush these things and jump from relationship to relationship. I know what I want in a woman and Im picky. Ill wait....and while I wait I wont keep myself from enjoying women because the wait could be a while.

 

And yup, I can be an awesome boyfriend and judge. You are judging me and guys with flings in the same way. So it swings both ways miss. I basically gave my preference for a woman of my experience level since wed click more. Nothing wrong with that. I gave my opinion, so it is what it is...plus I doubt a virgin girl could be able to handle me or my past without being insecure or judging me. If she could...great...but I doubt it. Again, my single life has no bearing on how I treat my girlfriends, especially considering Ive always been honest with girls.

 

Trust me, if I fall in love...that woman will share my opinions regarding this. I seek someone I share things in common with. When I think about it, any girl ive been with in the past wouldnt care about this opinion. Theyed probably share my opinion with regards to older virgin men.

[Emilia]

How will I know? By getting to know him first for 3-4 months (for STD reasons, too). If he doesn't leave me by then, then I'll know he's probably serious about me. Actually, I had it happen to me when I didn't "put out" within the first 1-2 weeks and the men left me. Well, at least they were honest I suppose...

 

He can still leave you after a few months, he might be sleeping with someone else until he beds you, if he is that type (in my experience those guys are rare but they exist) he will dump you no matter what.

 

There is no correlation between how soon you have sex with someone and how long you will last in a relationship. One of my greatest loves started off as a two-night fling. When a man is into you he will want to know everything about you and see how you fit into his world. Whether he is waiting around for months indicates nothing.

 

I wouldn't wait beyond a couple of weeks either. To me sex is part of the person, before I commit to him I need to know whether we mesh in bed. A lot of relationships end after the 6 months honeymoon period is over.

 

A guy I'm talking to at the moment online told me how his previous partner one day told him she wanted another sexual partner parallel with him because she had this fantasy about two guys being loyal to her. There is no way of avoiding dealing with things like that, it's experience that gets you through it.

[silvermercy]

Lol, trust me silver....like I said, if you knew me in real life youd think I was a swell fella lol. And I pretty much know the buttons to push (non sexual) with girls such as yourself. Though Im not sure youd know how to push mine. So Im sure youd have no complaints with me as your boyfriend =P. I dont need you to believe me though. Im very confident in my ability to be a good boyfriend. Plus I have a great way with words when it comes to a girl whos got my heart.

 

What I do as a single guy doesnt have any bearing on who I am when I am dating someone. Is a single guy with a sex drive supposed to be celibate? I am single because I havent met the right girl to date yet. And I dont date just anybody. I date women I can give me complete self too...someone Im super sure of. So I dont rush it.

 

Theres so many breakups and divorces because people rush these things and jump from relationship to relationship. I know what I want in a woman and Im picky. Ill wait....and while I wait I wont keep myself from enjoying women because the wait could be a while.

 

And yup, I can be an awesome boyfriend and judge. You are judging me and guys with flings in the same way. So it swings both ways miss. I basically gave my preference for a woman of my experience level since wed click more. Nothing wrong with that. I gave my opinion, so it is what it is...plus I doubt a virgin girl could be able to handle me or my past without being insecure or judging me. If she could...great...but I doubt it. Again, my single life has no bearing on how I treat my girlfriends, especially considering Ive always been honest with girls.

 

Trust me, if I fall in love...that woman will share my opinions regarding this. I seek someone I share things in common with. When I think about it, any girl ive been with in the past wouldnt care about this opinion. Theyed probably share my opinion with regards to older virgin men.

I WISH... SOOOO wish to believe you, but blimey I just can't bring myself to do it.

[silvermercy]

He can still leave you after a few months, he might be sleeping with someone else until he beds you, if he is that type (in my experience those guys are rare but they exist) he will dump you no matter what.

 

There is no correlation between how soon you have sex with someone and how long you will last in a relationship. One of my greatest loves started off as a two-night fling. When a man is into you he will want to know everything about you and see how you fit into his world. Whether he is waiting around for months indicates nothing.

 

I wouldn't wait beyond a couple of weeks either. To me sex is part of the person, before I commit to him I need to know whether we mesh in bed. A lot of relationships end after the 6 months honeymoon period is over.

 

A guy I'm talking to at the moment online told me how his previous partner one day told him she wanted another sexual partner parallel with him because she had this fantasy about two guys being loyal to her. There is no way of avoiding dealing with things like that, it's experience that gets you through it.

Oh I know that's true unfortunately. I'd just rather take as many precautions I can rather than none. Sexual compatibility is not THAT important to me obviously. I count on personality mostly. Because when you're old and gray and don't/can't have sex, what's left?

 

God this thread is making me depressed. I'd better stand back for a while.

[Untouchable_Fire]

It actually depends on personality. I've dated a sexually inexperienced man recently and it was terrible, he was so nervous and clueless (and I'm not talking about acrobatics) it was a real passion killer. The worst sex I've ever had was with inexperienced guys who were also two pump chumps.

The person I went out with before my last fling was also not the most experienced guy - he was only 21 - but he was much more clued up about how to build rapport and intimacy and we had a great time.

I also dated men who had way too much baggage and a serious number of sexual partners but somehow still became bitter and unhappy.

So I'd say experience counts for little, it's personality and character that you should be after.

 

Look, nobody hops on a pair of ski's and just gets down the mountain perfect first time. Especially when they have to learn to navigate your personal preferences... ect.

 

I think you can have morals too if your number is low but you don't believe in waiting till marriage (and never did) but are into ''waiting for the right moment'' in the relationship.

I don't see any point in a serious relationship heading towards marriage eventually but without intmacy. IMO there has to be everything involved. Why would I need a legalized paper to have sex?

Besides I think there are more important things than ''waiting till marriage'' and that is having integrity. No point in dating if you're being dishonest with him/her.

 

Forgive me, but I read your 'almost' cheating threads. I don't think you can even say the word moral with any authority. You are to the word moral as a virgin is to the word sex.

 

I am the same, I dated someone recently who was sexually inexperienced - though not a virgin - and I had no desire to teach him what he should have learnt in his late teens, early 20s. He was 27 and in my opinion he should have known by that age how to build rapport and intimacy with a woman. The fact that he was a virgin until a late age (mid 20s) has put him in a disadvantageous position with women. Though for him it was cultural, not due to lack of social skills as it is usually the case.

I'm pretty sure the men you talk to know or suspect that you are virgins. Sexually experienced women are comfortable with their sexuality and they know how to attract men that way. I date a lot of younger men (I'm 39) because they are drawn to experience and to a woman who knows what she wants and who is assertive. The conversations I have with them are very different from the conversation they would have with you.

 

Sexual experience translates into something different for each woman. Some just learn to lay there like a corpse... some like my friends GF learn to try and shove her finger up his butt... ect.

 

I would say that for what I've seen of women that are sexually experienced it makes sex less important to them. They seem to care much, much more about clothes and cars and money. Just my opinion though.

[LTP]

Shouldn't the past remain the past? From what I see here you can't win by talking about past relationships or sexual partners. A lot of judgement is going around. What about how well you and your current date mesh with each other? Shouldn't that be the deciding factor?

[samsungxoxo]

Forgive me, but I read your 'almost' cheating threads. I don't think you can even say the word moral with any authority. You are to the word moral as a virgin is to the word sex.

It wasn't really much of a relationship and I didn't cheated (you can say almost but it's not an affirmation) so it doesn't count.

[Emilia]

 

Sexual experience translates into something different for each woman. Some just learn to lay there like a corpse... some like my friends GF learn to try and shove her finger up his butt... ect.

 

I would say that for what I've seen of women that are sexually experienced it makes sex less important to them. They seem to care much, much more about clothes and cars and money. Just my opinion though.

 

Ain't that the truth. One of my exes told me about a previous girlfriend he described as wild in bed while really what she tried to do was shoving her finger up his bum (which he hated and I never ever tried that with him for that reason).

 

Experience doesn't replace finesse I agree.

 

I love sex and I am sexually experienced. I am financially independent and buy my own clothes or car when I wish One more data point as carhill would say.

[LTP]

Oh I know that's true unfortunately. I'd just rather take as many precautions I can rather than none. Sexual compatibility is not THAT important to me obviously. I count on personality mostly. Because when you're old and gray and don't/can't have sex, what's left?

 

God this thread is making me depressed. I'd better stand back for a while.

 

I agree with virtually everything you have posted in this thread. I'm surprised that so few others do.

[Emilia]

Shouldn't the past remain the past? From what I see here you can't win by talking about past relationships or sexual partners. A lot of judgement is going around. What about how well you and your current date mesh with each other? Shouldn't that be the deciding factor?

 

Of course. That's why I mentioned my 21 year-old ex in my first post. He wasn't particularly experienced but we hit it off in bed and had unbelievable chemistry. Nothing that we did required body contortionist techniques.

[LTP]

What exactly is the difference between ''high'' and ''low'' morals?

 

I think it's either you have morals or you don't. I never heard of a high or low moral. That's the same of comparing someone who robbed a bank vs someone who steals papers.... and then saying the one who stole papers is a better robber when in reality both are burglar. None is better than the other.

 

How can you divide people into just two groups? Most people would agree that Mother Teresa had morals and Adolf Hitler did not. Where would someone be who lived an impeccable life, except for stealing some candy from a store one time? Where would your average American be? Who gets into the morals group and who doesn't get in? Is it half the population?

Edited December 27, 2011 by LTP

[silvermercy]

I agree with virtually everything you have posted in this thread. I'm surprised that so few others do.

I wish I could give you a virtual hug!! Thanks! That made me feel soo much better. (Inexperienced people or virgins get so much stick and have sooo many untrue assumptions and generalizations against them, it's sad and crazy.)

[dasein]

Relationship addicts often use "experience" as code for "fellow relationship addict." There is NO relationship skill other than sex (which some learn quickly and others never regardless of amount) that can't be learned just as well in other areas of life. I'd much prefer a relationship with someone who had excellent family and friend relationships, serious exposure to members of other generations than their own, significant charitable experience, and 0 relationship experience to someone who has been serially monogamous their entire lives, and sacrifices those other very important things to "shack up" with the new codependent at the first chance. I find an alarming number of women today are relationship addicts, and it's no wonder those types get the willies when faced with a non codependent prospect.

[lululucy]

Replace the word morals with standards then. Same thing. What is wrong with that?

...

Do these nice girls really know what you're writing here on these boards? I bet they'd think differently if they knew. Also, you're making assumptions about ALL less experienced girls not being exciting. Maybe for you. But I think the correct world would be simply "non-compatible".

 

If you'd taken some time to follow kaylan's posts, you'd know that he's actually a really nice, genuine guy.

 

On a different note, the high morals-low morals crap is overwhelmingly patronising. Replacing morals with standards does not make a difference. You essentially state that I have low morals because I choose to sleep with whomever I want to (and not sleep with whomever as well) -- why is my sexual experience the basis of my scale of morality? If someone chose to only sleep with married men and then extort them for money, that's immoral (or low moral as you incorrectly stated). Changing it to standards implies that I sleep with losers or unattractive people. I'm fairly shallow and picky about who I sleep with but because I'm not stuck up or think too highly of myself, I have never had a shortage of available, attractive, nice guys to pick (or not pick) from.

 

 

As I would be totally turned off by these "normal" men. Simples.

 

I'm being defensive because virgins (i.e. more than 21) and inexperienced people are being insulted right, left, centre, above and below in this society: having people talking about a "red flags" etc is not only insulting, it's very demoralizing, and also appears to make a lot of untrue assumptions (uptight, reserved etc).

 

Perhaps it's the way you are responding to this thread that makes you seem uptight. I only know four female virgins my age (23) and the reasons they are virgins are different. Two are very religious so I won't comment on that. One is unfortunate looking and she has spent a lot of time trying to find men and cannot so she's given up. The last had her last boyfriend (who she didn't sleep with and was together with for over a year) attempt to sexually assault her and she has never been able to recover. I can't fault her for that but it isn't exactly a relationship "green flag".

 

 

He can still leave you after a few months, he might be sleeping with someone else until he beds you, if he is that type (in my experience those guys are rare but they exist) he will dump you no matter what.

 

There is no correlation between how soon you have sex with someone and how long you will last in a relationship. One of my greatest loves started off as a two-night fling. When a man is into you he will want to know everything about you and see how you fit into his world. Whether he is waiting around for months indicates nothing.

 

I wouldn't wait beyond a couple of weeks either. To me sex is part of the person, before I commit to him I need to know whether we mesh in bed. A lot of relationships end after the 6 months honeymoon period is over.

 

Aaaaamen. My current boyfriend and I had sex maybe a hour and a half after we met (which is probably the fastest ever, but he is gorgeous and I thought it was a one night stand) and there isn't a day we haven't talked since then (July) and neither of us have seen anyone else during that time. Some of the guys I waited to sleep with turned out to be the bigger d-bags and I would have been better off sleeping with them faster so I saw their true colours, rather than waiting until I was emotionally invested.

[Emilia]

Oh I know that's true unfortunately. I'd just rather take as many precautions I can rather than none. Sexual compatibility is not THAT important to me obviously. I count on personality mostly. Because when you're old and gray and don't/can't have sex, what's left?

 

God this thread is making me depressed. I'd better stand back for a while.

 

How do you know?

 

Sex builds intimacy. It's a way to express love when you are having sex with someone you have feelings for. There is nothing like giving pleasure to a man you care about. I have a weakness for guys with big brown eyes because those eyes shine when you are doing their favourite thing and they are trying very hard to hold back and not climax. That's my favourite part. You are missing out. Love is what makes the world go around.

 

Sexuality is part of someone's personality. I'm much better at telling nowdays who is likely to be good in bed because of similar personality traits.

[Emilia]

(Inexperienced people or virgins get so much stick and have sooo many untrue assumptions and generalizations against them, it's sad and crazy.)

 

I think you have made just as many crazy assumptions about the rest of us especially with the 'low and high morals' or 'standards' comments. We obviously represent opposite spectrums in society so it's hardly surprising.

[LTP]

I wish I could give you a virtual hug!! Thanks! That made me feel soo much better. (Inexperienced people or virgins get so much stick and have sooo many untrue assumptions and generalizations against them, it's sad and crazy.)

 

Here's a virtual hug for you. I don't get why people make so many generalizations. Take 100 inexperienced people and all of them will be different. Take 100 experienced people and all of them will be different. Everyone is unique.

[silvermercy]

How do you know?

 

Sex builds intimacy. It's a way to express love when you are having sex with someone you have feelings for. There is nothing like giving pleasure to a man you care about. I have a weakness for guys with big brown eyes because those eyes shine when you are doing their favourite thing and they are trying very hard to hold back and not climax. That's my favourite part. You are missing out. Love is what makes the world go around.

 

Sexuality is part of someone's personality. I'm much better at telling nowdays who is likely to be good in bed because of similar personality traits.

I'm not talking about love but pure sex.

Sex can also be a double-edged sword. It can also destroy intimacy as it can build it. As I said, I didn't say I wouldn't have sex with them, just not as early as he would possibly like (so he pass my the first test if you like). Intimacy can by built in other ways other than sex. Maybe much more slowly but definitely more steadily. And I don't think I'm much of a less person because I'm not so experienced. In fact, historically, some of the people who would be considered whole individuals by experts and average people alike are those who remained celibate for long periods of time. Also, extreme example: a monk or a nun is not an non-whole person just because they are celibate. In fact I think they are more fulfilled in life because they have no such vacancy to fill in the first place.

[silvermercy]

I think you have made just as many crazy assumptions about the rest of us especially with the 'low and high morals' or 'standards' comments. We obviously represent opposite spectrums in society so it's hardly surprising.

I really don't think I made as many assumptions as the ones aimed towards virgins or inexperienced people.

So a promiscuous person with lots of partners has high morals or standards?

Ok...

[Emilia]

I'm not talking about love but pure sex.

Sex can also be a double-edged sword. It can also destroy intimacy as it can build it. As I said, I didn't say I wouldn't have sex with them, just not as early as he would possibly like (so he pass my the first test if you like). Intimacy can by built in other ways other than sex. Maybe much more slowly but definitely more steadily. And I don't think I'm much of a less person because I'm not so experienced. In fact, historically, some of the people who would be considered whole individuals by experts and average people alike are those who remained celibate for long periods of time. Also, extreme example: a monk or a nun is not an non-whole person just because they are celibate. In fact I think they are more fulfilled in life because they have no such vacancy to fill in the first place.

 

I think it's quite well known that a few monks and nuns had homosexual experiences while locked up in those godforsaken places. Their cruelty to children they taught in religious schools is also well recorded so I wouldn't base my life around their value system just yet. Again you are discussing something you have no experience of.

 

My point is that you make a lot of comments about sex that show ignorance. It's like listening to a teetotal who never had alcohol discussing what it's like to be drunk. Sex does not destroy intimacy for starters and it is NOT possible to build the same kind of closeness with someone. It just isn't. Your body doesn't release the same chemicals and same hormones so it's not possible even physically let alone mentally.

[Emilia]

I really don't think I made as many assumptions as the ones aimed towards virgins or inexperienced people.

So a promiscuous person with lots of partners has high morals or standards?

Ok...

 

You are assuming that sexual experience and promiscuity are the same thing. They are not.

[Emilia]

Also, extreme example: a monk or a nun is not an non-whole person just because they are celibate. In fact I think they are more fulfilled in life because they have no such vacancy to fill in the first place.

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2011/1221/1224309339588.html

 

Incidentally you stumbled on one of my favourite topics as a Catholic. Ireland being one of the still deeply Catholic countries has suffered some of the worst abuse.

[silvermercy]

If you'd taken some time to follow kaylan's posts, you'd know that he's actually a really nice, genuine guy.

I can only go with what I'm reading in THIS thread, and it was enough for me to form a picture.

 

On a different note, the high morals-low morals crap is overwhelmingly patronising.

Not as much as calling virgins or inexperienced people as having "red flags".

 

Replacing morals with standards does not make a difference. You essentially state that I have low morals because I choose to sleep with whomever I want to (and not sleep with whomever as well) -- why is my sexual experience the basis of my scale of morality?

Oh not your morality in general but it definitely puts a question mark over your ability to form stable and long-term relationships (i.e. 5-10 years). I'm just stating a general universal truth. Nothing else.

 

If someone chose to only sleep with married men and then extort them for money, that's immoral (or low moral as you incorrectly stated). Changing it to standards implies that I sleep with losers or unattractive people. I'm fairly shallow and picky about who I sleep with but because I'm not stuck up or think too highly of myself, I have never had a shortage of available, attractive, nice guys to pick (or not pick) from.

But men in general don't need much to sleep with a female as a one-night stand. So females can be as picky as they want. Even the ugly ones.

 

Perhaps it's the way you are responding to this thread that makes you seem uptight. I only know four female virgins my age (23) and the reasons they are virgins are different. Two are very religious so I won't comment on that. One is unfortunate looking and she has spent a lot of time trying to find men and cannot so she's given up. The last had her last boyfriend (who she didn't sleep with and was together with for over a year) attempt to sexually assault her and she has never been able to recover. I can't fault her for that but it isn't exactly a relationship "green flag".

The reason I am inexperienced is I am too picky with whom I sleep with in terms of both physical appearance AND personality. And I don't want to be anyone's sex object. If I only wanted a casual relationship, I wouldn't bother about personality, why would I?

 

Aaaaamen. My current boyfriend and I had sex maybe a hour and a half after we met (which is probably the fastest ever, but he is gorgeous and I thought it was a one night stand) and there isn't a day we haven't talked since then (July) and neither of us have seen anyone else during that time. Some of the guys I waited to sleep with turned out to be the bigger d-bags and I would have been better off sleeping with them faster so I saw their true colours, rather than waiting until I was emotionally invested.

If I fall off a tall bridge and survive doesn't mean I will survive if I do it again, even if I jump from shorter bridges. Also, that's the difference right there. Even some of my friends who ARE experienced women, will never do a one-night stand. Their reasons are different.

[ThaWholigan]

There are no winners in this one OP.

 

Emilia's posts on inexperience are interesting though. I agree that dating was something I "should" have done in my teens, otherwise I wouldn't be having these problems now. I cannot use autism as an excuse as I didn't even know I had it then . Tis not good, but luckily I am optimistic....