Inexperienced males vs females with too much experience

[LTP]

No man has ever asked me, after my teens, how many guys I've slept with. And even back when they did, they only asked if I was a virgin or not (because we were young enough for it to be something you ask). That said, I'd never not tell someone something as big as that because if a guy was a virgin and didn't tell me that, I'd be really upset. JMO: that's something you share.

 

No one is obligated to tell you how many people they've slept with in their past including whether or not they are a virgin. The past is the past as long as they are STD free.

[ScreamingTrees]

Eh, I sincerely don't want to have sex with females that I don't really know just to do it, and I'd probably be nervous. I guess it's meant to be? 12 years from now, and I'll still be a 30 year old virgin. I wish I could see things differently, but I just don't want to do it like that. Whatever.

[Emilia]

I think ultimately you can't explain to people what life experience is and those that are inexperienced can't comprehend what they are missing out on and why that makes them incompatible with experienced ones.

[silvermercy]

What you are describing is either codependence or some silly verse printed on a unicorn and stars tapestry, definitely not "love."

lol

So sue me for getting the first quote off Google. LOL One line... pff... lol Feel free to google more quotes if you want. lol

[silvermercy]

@kaylan

 

I was about to write a long response, I won't though because I woke up to about a hundred responses in a thread I made last night in another large community (um... from established non-virgins of both genders before you ask). I posted them a link to this thread and your posts. I was really curious if all men thought like you. I am now perfectly satisfied with all of their HONEST diverse responses and I feel sooo much better. Maybe I should post the link with the myriad of hundreds of adjectives you and a couple of posters are described as, but then I don't think it's a good idea... And maybe it's against the rules.

 

Won't add much else but maybe what I forgot to mention: I did have 2 relationships and a third boyfriend which didn't last. (I just didn't sleep with them - wisely it seems in retrospect). I do have a couple of dates again lined up next week though from eharmony (as I ALWAYS do, what can I say, I'm in demand, I do look like a combo of 20-year old Audrey Tautou & Natalie Portman - or Lara Croft. The latter I'm told all the time) so who knows, if I like them maybe I won't be a virgin in a couple of months.

 

I have one last question though before I disappear into the virtual sunset, maybe forever: What exactly is the "freak" in bed you and your friends are going about all the time? And those "buttons" of course? It's ok, my virgin eyes can handle it. Maybe I will practice it with one of my dates soon. My gut says after a few initial warm-up sessions I can be even "freakier"...

Edited December 28, 2011 by silvermercy

[kaylan]

Not caring.

 

 

Confirmation bias at its best. You dont like what you hear here, so you run to a forum your more established in (?) to get an answer you like. You can do that with any topic on the internet really. The best thing to do is gather info from many different sources online, but real life should be the only thing that reigns supreme.

 

Look, tbh its not like internet can accurately judge how the masses will react to certain things anyways.

 

You already know from real life experience how people feel about this whole topic. Responses on the internet doesnt change that. And you chimed in here, and created your other thread hoping that things were different from what the real world has already shown you. The world isnt what we all want it to be, it just is what it is.

 

Deal. And good luck.

 

Have fun getting those life experiences in.

 

Good luck.

 

EDIT: And to answer your last question. A "freak" in bed is a man or woman who is without sexual hangups. They tend to be very open to trying new things, and dont just stick to vanilla sex. They are pretty kinky.

 

Freak can also mean someone who just likes a lot of sex.

 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=freak

Edited December 28, 2011 by kaylan

[silvermercy]

Right...

So you're not gonna answer me what "freak" in bed for you means then?

[kaylan]

See my edit.

 

I think people just use the term "freak" when they are with someone who they really click with sexually.

 

Since everyone likes something different, I dont think the term freak has strict standards on what practices are done behind close doors.

 

Like for me, if a girl was down to have some sort of sex every time I saw her, enjoyed oral as much I do, liked the rough stuff I enjoy(see my other thread lol), and didnt mind getting locked in a dressing room or lost on a beach naked somewhere, then Id call her a freak since thatd def work for me.

Edited December 28, 2011 by kaylan

[silvermercy]

See my edit.

 

I think people just use the term "freak" when they are with someone who they really click with sexually.

 

Since everyone likes something different, I dont think the term freak has strict standards on what practices are done behind close doors.

 

Like for me, if a girl was down to have some sort of sex every time I saw her, enjoyed oral as much I do, liked the rough stuff I enjoy(see my other thread lol), and didnt mind getting locked in a dressing room or lost on a beach naked somewhere, then Id call her a freak since thatd def work for me.

EDIT: Oh!!! I wouldn't want vanilla sex either. I'm about to do so much kinky stuff the man will be either be scared of me or worship me in the end.

 

Examples: Kama sutra, public sex, bondage, roleplay, handcuffs, leather, whips, oral (as long as it's equally reciprocated) even anal at some point and lots of other stuff which well... I'm not going to mention in a forum like this. Also... well.. not sure if the man would like gay porn but I would watch lesbian porn with him if he gave it a chance. hehe! Or we could make our own videos... Not sure about the frequency though: sure I could do it every time I saw him but then I'd think what if he mostly wants me for sex and that's it? What if we lived together? I don't want a sex addict. I mean I don't mind the frequency, it's just I may have start having doubts about his true feelings.

 

 

Why people think virgins or at least celibate people in between relationships are prudes by default I will never know.

But anyway, thanks for the definition.

[zengirl]

Well I suppose it's a case of different opinions. To you, it's gross; to me, it's not a big deal.

 

Well, of course to the person seeking power and feeling insecure, seeking power is not a big deal. Just like lots of things. To the person doing something gross, I assume it's usually not a big deal. Otherwise. . . why would they do it?

 

But, I'd imagine the scenario of a 30 year old dating a 22 year old because she was less experienced and/or more accepting of his inexperience would be no different than that same 30 year old inexperienced guy dating a single mother for the same reason (i.e. she's "desperate" and will date anyone, etc.).

 

Well, desperation is pretty gross. All that fear is pretty gross. Most guys who date single mothers do it because they like the woman, not because they thought single mothers were easy pickings (an idea that reminds me of a movie where Hugh Grant is playing a gross guy who does that--About a Boy). That's. . . also gross. Again, nothing wrong with dating someone you genuinely like, but dating only a particular age range because it makes you feel empowered and you get your power from others in that way is the weird thing.

 

I'd also imagine that were I to be 30 years old and in the same position that I am in now I can't honestly say that the prospect of taking some "power" for myself wouldn't be a tempting proposition (and I'd wager to say that for most people this is the case). You might think it's "gross" but walk a mile in my shoes and see where it takes you.

 

Adversity is no reason for one's behavior to change for the worse, which is the message I'm getting her. But, really, it's just a destructive mindset on your part. The idea that adversity controls your behavior is what's constantly creating failure. It's sad.

 

Absolutely. But, the problem with "me" is that I simply lack that manipulative, lying, deceitful/mysterious side that makes women swoon. You know that whole "he could sleep with me and never call back" thing. I don't have that. I'm too upfront with my good nature that's the problem.

 

No, that's not the problem. There are many good, lovely men who get women. It's a myth that only jerks get women (though some jerks do).

 

And I highly doubt you've seen "many people" see dating success after experiencing nothing but failure through their early 20s. There just aren't that many people who struggle with dating for you to have met "many" of them. But, then again, the world is a smaller and smaller place, so maybe you have...

 

Oh, yes. I said I've seen many people change their lives --- it's not always the same kind of adversity. Sometimes it's something much worse than your situation. But the formula I gave is both straight-forward and universal.

 

I agree with everything you said, except the part of guys not having a concept of a virgin being less skilled at sex. Men do talk, and do like a girl with skill, and many like a girl who is a "freak". But you are right, it all depends on the fella.

 

I'm not saying men cannot differentiate between girls with different moves and inclinations (though amount of sex does not always determine that; not that many virgins know their "sex personality" yet, but after a moderate amount of sex, most people figure it out; it doesn't take oodles); I'm saying if they really like the girl, most guys are just happy to have sex with her. Skill isn't really a great 'concern' for men the way it is for women; men are considered the ones (I think erroneously in some cases) who make sex good or bad moreso than women.

 

No one is obligated to tell you how many people they've slept with in their past including whether or not they are a virgin. The past is the past as long as they are STD free.

 

Personally, I would feel lied to if someone let me take their virginity without informing me. I would never have done that to someone. It's a big responsibility, on both sides, is all.

[LTP]

Oops...with the way silvermercy took over the thread, I thought she was the OP lol.

 

And ok, you can dismiss my chess analogy if you want, but my relationship analogy still stands and is quite valid. Experience > Inexperience, in most, if not all, things.

 

"I could say the same thing about relationships. Just like [silvermercy] did. Why would I date someone whos never had a relationship. It would say a lot about their ability to have them."

 

You can't simplify all of that into an analogy. It's these analogies and generalizations that lead people to make incorrect judgments.

[kaylan]

EDIT: Oh!!! I wouldn't want vanilla sex either. I'm about to do so much kinky stuff the man will be either be scared of me or worship me in the end.

 

Examples: Kama sutra, public sex, bondage, roleplay, handcuffs, leather, whips, oral (as long as it's equally reciprocated) even anal at some point and lots of other stuff which well... I'm not going to mention in a forum like this. Also... well.. not sure if the man would like gay porn but I would watch lesbian porn with him if he gave it a chance. hehe! Or we could make our own videos... Not sure about the frequency though: sure I could do it every time I saw him but then I'd think what if he mostly wants me for sex and that's it? What if we lived together? I don't want a sex addict. I mean I don't mind the frequency, it's just I may have start having doubts about his true feelings.

Well hopefully your not bluffing about all this =p

 

And I dont see why having a lot of sex would mean the guys true feelings would be in question. Some people have high sex drives and some people are like me and express their love through sex.

 

The best feeling in the world is making love to someone you care about, so why not do it a lot.

 

Why people think virgins or at least celibate people in between relationships are prudes by default I will never know.

But anyway, thanks for the definition.

Because many people speak from experience with virgins.

 

 

You can't simplify all of that into an analogy. It's these analogies and generalizations that lead people to make incorrect judgments.

Yes you can.

 

Dont just disagree without a proper retort. Give me some examples where experience is not better than inexperience. Actually, I would say that if people followed this generalization more often, that more things in life would go smoothly.

[LTP]

EDIT: Oh!!! I wouldn't want vanilla sex either. I'm about to do so much kinky stuff the man will be either be scared of me or worship me in the end.

 

Examples: Kama sutra, public sex, bondage, roleplay, handcuffs, leather, whips, oral (as long as it's equally reciprocated) even anal at some point and lots of other stuff which well... I'm not going to mention in a forum like this. Also... well.. not sure if the man would like gay porn but I would watch lesbian porn with him if he gave it a chance. hehe! Or we could make our own videos... Not sure about the frequency though: sure I could do it every time I saw him but then I'd think what if he mostly wants me for sex and that's it? What if we lived together? I don't want a sex addict. I mean I don't mind the frequency, it's just I may have start having doubts about his true feelings.

 

 

Why people think virgins or at least celibate people in between relationships are prudes by default I will never know.

But anyway, thanks for the definition.

 

It is a lie perpetuated all over the place that inexperinecd people don't have much of a sex drive and will be boring sexual partners. Sure there might be a learning curve at the beginning, but so what? People in love will have lots of time to practice and will do it thousands of times over the years often doing a wide variety of things.

[silvermercy]

Well hopefully your not bluffing about all this =p

And I dont see why having a lot of sex would mean the guys true feelings would be in question. Some people have high sex drives and some people are like me and express their love through sex.

The best feeling in the world is making love to someone you care about, so why not do it a lot.

Nope! I'm not bluffing. lol As zengirl correctly said, that should be MY "sex personality" after a get the initial "baptism". But many people would not give me the chance to prove it...

 

Oh, sure, I get it, but what if I get sick or have an accident or whatever else, like a genuine headache? Is he gonna dump me or grow distant because I don't "love" him enough through sex? What if I just want to cuddle?

 

Because many people speak from experience with virgins.

Well, I suppose I'm an anomaly in the sky... lol

[LTP]

Personally, I would feel lied to if someone let me take their virginity without informing me. I would never have done that to someone. It's a big responsibility, on both sides, is all.

 

Why do they have to inform you of this? With all the negativity about older virgins, what do you expect? Some virgins get thrown out time after time just for being a virgin. A 25 year old virgin doesn't want to end up a 30 or 35 year old virgin. If you assure someone that you won't judge them for being a virgin and mean it, I'd say they would be quite likely to tell. There is way too much judgment about this.

[zengirl]

Originally Posted by silvermercy

 

Why people think virgins or at least celibate people in between relationships are prudes by default I will never know.

But anyway, thanks for the definition.

 

I think there's a very big difference between being an older (mid20s or older) virgin and being celibate between relationships. I don't necessarily think people who keep their virginity a long time are "prudes" at all, but there are only a handful of reasons someone would be a virgin that long: (1) religious conviction, (2) hasn't been able to have a meaningful relationship with anyone because (a) cannot attract anyone they like, (b) too picky and doesn't like anyone, © outside circumstances (such as living in a completely unpopulated area or having had a terrible disease that kept you incapacitated since you were young), or (3) sexual anxiety, which only grows the longer you wait since it becomes a bigger and bigger deal.

 

#2 is a bit of a big one, and there are many individual reasons; some might be perfectly good, even. But the perfectly accepted by everyone answers there are super individualized and not something we can generalize about---and rare. And many of the reasons in #2 don't speak of one's ability to engage in a relationship, sexually or otherwise, unless, of course, the person has undergone some changes in their life.

 

#1 is what it is. Some people will admire it, and others will find it not their cuppa. I don't understand sex-shaming religions, personally.

 

#3 is probably where the "prude" myth comes from. The fact is, as sex remains a relative mystery to a person, and everyone else in their age range starts having it, that person is bound to experience some dissonance. I don't know that it becomes prudishness at all, but it certainly could, at least for a time. Anxiety, in general, is unattractive.

 

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.

 

I know MANY people who don't have sex between relationships. Some have had some in between when younger, but I would say a lot of people really do only have sex in relationships. Very different from being a virgin though and much easier to "explain" (in terms of it almost always has the same explanation: that one has a monogamous nature where sex is considered reasonably meaningful or, alternatively, that one has trouble finding sex outside of a relationship---generally only applicable to males).

[fortyninethousand322]

Well, desperation is pretty gross. All that fear is pretty gross. Most guys who date single mothers do it because they like the woman, not because they thought single mothers were easy pickings (an idea that reminds me of a movie where Hugh Grant is playing a gross guy who does that--About a Boy). That's. . . also gross. Again, nothing wrong with dating someone you genuinely like, but dating only a particular age range because it makes you feel empowered and you get your power from others in that way is the weird thing.

 

It's more about trying to avoid people who are judgmental than seeking "power" (which is why I put it in quotes the first time). I personally would date any person who would have me (older or younger, single parent or not) but let's say I was 30 and women my own age expected me to have some kind of dating/relationship/sexual experience and I did not. Why then would I bother trying to date those women? They've already crossed me off the eligibility list, unless I lied (which you frown upon) or just enjoy being rejected it really makes no sense.

 

 

Adversity is no reason for one's behavior to change for the worse, which is the message I'm getting her. But, really, it's just a destructive mindset on your part. The idea that adversity controls your behavior is what's constantly creating failure. It's sad.

 

Like I said above it's not necessarily changing behavior for "the worst". And what is creating failure is something I can't figure out, but I don't think it's because I feel adversity controls me.

 

No, that's not the problem. There are many good, lovely men who get women. It's a myth that only jerks get women (though some jerks do).

 

It's not about being "lovely" or not lovely. I know that jerks aren't the only ones who get women, I have plenty of friends with girlfriends and most of these guys are fairly pleasant people. What I'm talking about is the mysterious side of it. The idea that someone could be a jerk if they wanted but is choosing to be good.

 

Oh, yes. I said I've seen many people change their lives --- it's not always the same kind of adversity. Sometimes it's something much worse than your situation. But the formula I gave is both straight-forward and universal.

 

I don't think that my kind of adversity is the "worst" or anything like that. Certainly having no limbs or being blind or deaf would be much more difficult to deal with. But, I do believe that of the fixable kinds of adversity mine is probably one of the more difficult to fix. I can't make anyone be interested in me, I can't make women suddenly think I'm a great guy and a wonderful catch. I can improve myself in certain ways, but I'll always be at the mercy of the whims of women.

[LTP]

Dont just disagree without a proper retort. Give me some examples where experience is not better than inexperience. Actually, I would say that if people followed this generalization more often, that more things in life would go smoothly.

 

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.

[zengirl]

Why do they have to inform you of this? With all the negativity about older virgins, what do you expect? Some virgins get thrown out time after time just for being a virgin. A 25 year old virgin doesn't want to end up a 30 or 35 year old virgin. If you assure someone that you won't judge them for being a virgin and mean it, I'd say they would be quite likely to tell. There is way too much judgment about this.

 

True, I might've judged if it'd ever come up, and others might as well. But I think it's vital information. I don't see the need for a number (because after 1, it doesn't really matter), but if you've NEVER done this before, that's a HUGE thing. I think when you're going to be intimate with someone, you need to be honest with them. What you're describing is trying to trick someone because you have your own desires. . . and that's always wrong to do with sex. I don't believe any trickery is acceptable, but particularly with sex.

 

I mean, many people wouldn't sleep with someone who is married, so does that make it okay for married people to lie about it to get people to sleep with them?

[zengirl]

It's not about being "lovely" or not lovely. I know that jerks aren't the only ones who get women, I have plenty of friends with girlfriends and most of these guys are fairly pleasant people. What I'm talking about is the mysterious side of it. The idea that someone could be a jerk if they wanted but is choosing to be good.

 

I think you're way overthinking it, but I now understand what you mean. I suppose what is attractive are people who: do what they want, and want to do good things. It's not, "Well, I could be a jerk, but I'll be nice to you," so much as it's, "I'm my own person, and no one's doormat, but that doesn't mean I'm not kind, generous, and loving." It's not about being a jerk at all. It's about being a whole person who chooses their life.

 

But, I do believe that of the fixable kinds of adversity mine is probably one of the more difficult to fix. I can't make anyone be interested in me, I can't make women suddenly think I'm a great guy and a wonderful catch. I can improve myself in certain ways, but I'll always be at the mercy of the whims of women.

 

I was speaking only of psychological adversity -- not limblessness or blindness or deafness -- that is able to be overcome, FTR. And I do not think any particular kind is any more difficult than any other, though some cases may be harder than others because the people in them BELIEVE them to be more difficult.

 

As long as you think your problem is desperately hard to fix, it will be.

[fortyninethousand322]

True, I might've judged if it'd ever come up, and others might as well. But I think it's vital information. I don't see the need for a number (because after 1, it doesn't really matter), but if you've NEVER done this before, that's a HUGE thing. I think when you're going to be intimate with someone, you need to be honest with them. What you're describing is trying to trick someone because you have your own desires. . . and that's always wrong to do with sex. I don't believe any trickery is acceptable, but particularly with sex.

 

I mean, many people wouldn't sleep with someone who is married, so does that make it okay for married people to lie about it to get people to sleep with them?

 

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?

[LTP]

True, I might've judged if it'd ever come up, and others might as well. But I think it's vital information. I don't see the need for a number (because after 1, it doesn't really matter), but if you've NEVER done this before, that's a HUGE thing. I think when you're going to be intimate with someone, you need to be honest with them. What you're describing is trying to trick someone because you have your own desires. . . and that's always wrong to do with sex. I don't believe any trickery is acceptable, but particularly with sex.

 

I mean, many people wouldn't sleep with someone who is married, so does that make it okay for married people to lie about it to get people to sleep with them?

 

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.

[Afishwithabike]

I promised myself I'd not come back to this thread but curiosity won over.

I'm curious as I don't think I have this answer properly yet: What is the definition of TRUE love and how come an act like sex, while necessary, wins over everything else so as not to date someone who is not experienced?

 

Let's see some definition of True Love:

 

"Love is not wanting to go anywhere without her. Love is not caring what other people think about the two of you. Love is when you feel depressed and sickly when you're not with her. You feel like your life has no meaning or purpose without her. And that if she wasn't holding your hand you would float away to heaven from where she came. Love is caring for her physically and emotionally. It's telling her everyday, anytime, anywhere, anyhow, for no just reason that you love her. Love is telling her u want to spend the rest of your life with her. Love is wanting to marry her even tho ya'll haven't been dating that long. That you would do anything and everything for her. It's the feeling that you would give up everything just to see her smile or look into her beautiful eyes or hear her soft, soothing voice. Love is pure happiness. Love is the feeling you get when all you have to do is think of her and it brings a smile to your face and a yourning to your heart. Love is not being able to think about nothing but her. Love is having the sweetest dreams about her and waking up with a smile on r face. Love is an overwhelming feeling of pure bliss when the 2 of u kiss. Love is wanting to hold her in ur arms till the end of time. Love is wishing ur time with her never ends, that your lips would be locked together forever, that she'd be in ur arms till the end of time, that u could cuddle with her for all of eternity. Love is being hel..."

 

 

Thanks LTP!!! I wish there were people like you in my area!

 

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.

[LTP]

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?

 

What would she do if she found out? Would she end everyone after they were together for months? That would be some bitter breakup.

[silvermercy]

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.

I already said earlier it's the very first quote I got from google.

What you can't deny is everyone's definition for love: it's different every single time and nobody is more right or more wrong than the other.