Dating a woman who has slept around....

[Rejected Rosebud]

What would posses you to think I would willingly agree to pay for crimes I didn't commit?

 

 

Me thinks most 30 something sane men are going to pursue a younger / hotter 25 year old who still appreciates it when you take out for a nice steak dinner and has a lot fewer "miles" on them.

Ok, how would you be "paying for a crime" and why is having sex if you feel like having sex a crime anyway?? :confused:

 

If guys mainly want a "younger hotter" blablabla then that is def what they should have, if they can get one that is!! Guys I know IRL are not into negatively judging women for having a lively sex life.

Edited August 29, 2015 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Leigh 87]

Me thinks most 30 something sane men are going to pursue a younger / hotter 25 year old who still appreciates it when you take out for a nice steak dinner and has a lot fewer "miles" on them. Ok, how would you be "paying for a crime" and why is having sex if you feel like having sex a crime anyway?? :confused:

 

If guys mainly want a "younger hotter" blablabla then that is def what they should have, if they can get one that is!! Guys I know IRL and some on this thread as well though are not into negatively judging women for having a lively sex life. Carry on though!

 

I wonder if he can get younger hotter women.

 

Would be really interesting to see if he's the type of guy who gets all these gorgeous younger women he so wants.

[johndoe2]

So long as the woman is not sleeping around while you're dating her (seriously) this matter seems moot.

 

Now, I wouldn't be surprised if you could find a study saying that women who are more promiscuous are less faithful in relationships than ones who are not. And they may be a valid association. I also happen to know for a fact that IQ correlates positively with height, and I'm really short, but that doesn't mean I'm going to accept that I must be an idiot.

 

I'm not sure one can put emphasis on sexual purity of one's prospective partner in a way that doesn't still end up sounding like a rationalization for what isn't really a rationally-based predisposition. I just don't see what the argument is. She's had a lot of lovers. If she doesn't have any STDs or out-of-wedlock children, seems like a moot point.

[Two Pump Chump]

A 30 year old would be happy with a 28 year old woman like me. I have the body of a 20 year old and look young for my age due to good genes. What 30 year old wouldn't be happy with that?

 

1. Those grow on trees.

 

2. Looks fade.

 

3. If looks was the only thing that mattered and my highest priority why wouldn't I just date a 23 year old instead of a 28 year old with good genes?

 

I happen to meet many late 20 s and early 30s men who think I am gorgeous and are very happy to date me over a younger hotter girl.

 

I was being speaking in generalizations and asked you a few simple questions which you still haven't answered by the way.

 

I am not going to bother typing out every single exception to "the rule" and use extremes / worst case scenarios with every example I post. If my generalizations does line up with your own life experiences, please ignore me.

 

And what makes you think that all 30 year old men want a super young looking super model look alike? What planet are you living on

 

I wasn't confused but I am now. Why say this?

 

I have the body of a 20 year old and look young for my age due to good genes. What 30 year old wouldn't be happy with that? Plenty of 30 year olds would be thrilled with me.

 

Normal sane 30 year olds I know look for women they are attracted to.

 

On one hand you all you look young and hot. On the other stating women younger than you can't be attractive and all men prefer 28 over 23 year olds.

 

Which is it?

 

They don't assign an age preference and they don't need them to be models.

 

Can you please post where I ever said older men only date younger women? And only younger women who are models? You can't because I never said that.

 

As far as younger goes, it's ANOTHER generalization which applies to both women or men in reference to the younger you are the likelihood is you will have fewer "miles" compared to someone who is older. Is it 100% accurate and true and did I state that ALL women and men think that way or it's a fact? NO! If can't deduce that on your own, that is not my problem.

 

And you do realize plenty if women who are over 25 do meet ample guys who think they are gorgeous?

 

Please point out where I said older women / all older women are unattractive and ugly? Again, you can't because I never said that either.

 

Anyways. You probably won't fathom that men can be hugely attracted to women who aren't model look alikes.

 

And you probably won't fathom that there are a lot men who prefer / will not date women who have slept with a lot of guys.

 

Just like there are a lot of women who will not date guys who slept with hookers. For many, there isn't a difference between having sex with a hooker or "bar fly" you just met.The only difference is a hooker is less expensive whom you pay in cash compared to a few drinks for the "bar fly".

 

What do u think us formerly promiscuous women like?

 

I refer you to my earlier post where I describe the two very distinct types of promiscuous women / men and what the differences are.

 

And I haven't wasted my time sleeping with " bad boys ". Nor do I carry any signs or indications that I slept around in the past.

 

Strange considering you said it caused you psychological problems. Were you lying or was I suppose to overlook that statement?

 

Relationships are hard enough as it is. I really don't care how they got them, I am not going to date someone who has psychological problems. They should take a time out from dating and focus their priorities on go getting "healthy".

 

I went through a promiscuous phase and they didn't.

 

Wonderful. If they are happy and you are happy, who cares what I or anyone else thinks.

 

I actually act the same as my friends who have never slept around. I hold the same values as them. You couldn't tell the difference.

 

You are right. All men are brainless knuckle draggers. We are oblivious to the fact that 90% of your posts in this thread are about looks and other superficial crap. Men including me, would never think for a second that you have major insecurities and think your value is based on what men think about your looks or your posts a few back about "tight vagina".

 

Had it not been for you telling us about all the certified studs that you slept with... There is not one guy on this forum who would have believed for a second that "Bad Boys" and PUA had a field day with you.

[SmartDude]

To me it matters not how many men a woman has had sex with.

it could be one or a thousand men.

What matters is the reason for all that sex, and how did she treat the men she was with. How does she veiw men in general?

 

There are men and women who use sex like a drug.

They often take some damage but they become very skilled at sex.

These people also come to an understanding that others do not have.

Yet they must hide in the shadows for fear of being condemned.

 

I am VERY attracted to women who have slept with lots of men because they wanted to explore human sexuality. That to me is just hot like fire. There are very few who are like this. They treat sex as an art to be practiced...all they need is a willing participant who understands sex on this level. And its not just the physical sensations.

 

It is about getting to know someone on a different level.

Monogamy or a deep pre-existing relationship not required!

[Maleficent]

I believe the mods deleted some. (see notations after above post by mods)

 

Those are just the first two posts of his I looked up. Not going through all of them.

 

OP called me a disguting whore that was no good for marriage. But the moderators deleted it (thankfully)

[Maleficent]

My response was to this:

 

"One big difference is that this is a thread that started with a man insulting women"

 

The thread 'started' with a man insulting women?

 

Please, quote that information!

 

I really want to be clear on this moving forward, so there's no ambiguity. If I'm missing something, point it out, so I can be more sensitive to women's perceptions moving forward.

 

We can't. A lot of them were deleted because they were going against the forum's guidelines

[SawtoothMars]

If guys mainly want a "younger hotter" blablabla then that is def what they should have, if they can get one that is!! Guys I know IRL and some on this thread as well though are not into negatively judging women for having a lively sex life. Carry on though!

 

The guys you "know" are not going to be honest with you about their feelings. They know just as much as anybody that you are likely to get all pissy and judgmental if they admit how they feel.

 

That fact alone makes this entire statement worthless.

 

Also, you completely misunderstood what he meant by "crimes I didn't commit". Go back and reread that.

Edited August 29, 2015 by SawtoothMars

[SawtoothMars]

And what makes you think I don't appreciate a man taking me out? What do u think us formerly promiscuous women like? That we don't enjoy the same simple things as women who were never promiscuous? How ludicrous. And I haven't wasted my time sleeping with " bad boys ". Nor do I carry any signs or indications that I slept around in the past. I dress the same, talk the same and hold the same values about sex and love as my mates who never slept around. The ONLY difference between me and my mates who didn't sleep around, is that I went through a promiscuous phase and they didn't.

I actually act the same as my friends who have never slept around. I hold the same values as them. You couldn't tell the difference.

 

I guarantee that you don't. You just don't realize it. I've dated long enough that after getting to know a woman you can easily know whether their number is generally high or not.

 

For example, I dated this very religious woman who at first appearance came across as a very inexperienced woman. She barely even dated. However, once I got to know her better, it didn't take long to realize she had some issues. Her father was rarely around and her mother was a serial cheat. She responded by being pretty wild in her teens and early twenties.

 

Fact is that virtually all women who have a promiscuous phase also have emotional issues.

 

I wonder if he can get younger hotter women.

Would be really interesting to see if he's the type of guy who gets all these gorgeous younger women he so wants.

 

Of course he can. It's just a numbers game.

 

My wife is about 7 years younger. That is very close to the largest age gap I've ever had in dating. Feels like we are the same age though.

[Rejected Rosebud]

The guys you "know" are not going to be honest with you about their feelings. They know just as much as anybody that you are likely to get all pissy and judgmental if they admit how they feel.

 

That fact alone makes this entire statement worthless.

 

:confused: What on EARTH are you going on about?? What "fact"? You have no idea about the men I have in my life and what they care about, obviuosly! I'm not going to bother to explain it to you since I know it will be a waste of my fingers!! Suffice it to say though that just because you are evidently a male person, you are obviously not evolved to the point where my personal friends and family members are! You could not hang that is for sure!

 

Also, "pissy and judgmental"?? WTH? :eek:

 

Also, you completely misunderstood what he meant by "crimes I didn't commit". Go back and reread that.

 

Listen little fellow I can read quite well but thanks! Since you doubt my abilities in that department though why don't you explain to me exactly what he did mean, in your opinion, and also how I "completely misunderstood it"??? Please??? :bunny: Cause I don't get it at all!

[Rejected Rosebud]

We can't. A lot of them were deleted because they were going against the forum's guidelines

So I guess that means it didn't really happen and we didn't actually read them right? This thread continues to be full of ugly insults towards women in general and to some of us who are posting here. I was just called "pissy and judgmental" and accused of poor reading comprehension! :) Those were not on the list of disallowed types of slurs though so I'm good with it!!

[johndoe2]

Fact is that virtually all women who have a promiscuous phase also have emotional issues.

Hmm. So, there is a small kernel of truth in this statement which is, nonetheless, an exaggeration of reality.

 

It has been found that women who are promiscuous are disproportionately likely to have had an 'unusual' childhood. The most poignant factor, though, is that women raised in single mother households are more likely to be promiscuous. At risk of delving too much into evolutionary biology, this pattern may be for the same reason why males without fathers are disproportionately likely to be aggressive. Absent a father, both males and females go through puberty faster, perhaps as a way to compensate for the lack the protective figure of a father; male overcompensated by becoming more aggressive to better protect self and family, female overcompensated by developing sexually earlier to find mate(s) sooner to replace absent father. Highly speculative evolutionary explanation, but there it is.

 

But I'm not sure what the point of that is anyway. They used to say serial killers disproportionately tended to wet the bed as children (or at an older age than usual); but that doesn't mean wetting the bed is necessarily an indicator of being a serial killer. Everything about a person, including sexual behavior, is influenced by one's childhood. Not sure where you're going with this particular matter though.

 

I guarantee that you don't. You just don't realize it. I've dated long enough that after getting to know a woman you can easily know whether their number is generally high or not.

How would you know whether you're guess is right or not? Even if you ask all your dates what their 'number is', you'd have to assume they are all equally honest about their 'numbers' for your assessment to be accurate. And I assure you they are not all equally honest about it. Consider this possibility: you believe a factor is correlated with number of men slept with; but what if that subcategory of women are simply more honest about the number of men they've slept with, and therefore they don't underestimate it as much?

 

Behavioralism is kinda discredited; people don't tell you as much about themselves by their behavior as movies would like us to believe. I know plenty of people who think they can 'read people', including things like sexual habits. By and large, in my experience, they prove to be about as accurate as palm reading.

 

We can't. A lot of them were deleted because they were going against the forum's guidelines

Perhaps they shouldn't delete them. Deleting comments only seems to cause confusion. I prefer forums that don't do that, unless someone's posting people's addresses or something. I'm not sure what is gained by deleting things. We don't have to see, I guess, some insults, or a flame war here and there, which doesn't seem all that necessary anyway. I don't know, I guess I'm a bit of an anarchist when it comes to the internet.

[Vercetti]

Seems some people need to Google dunning kruger effect for a start. Yet even that might not be enough to clue them in.

[UntitledNotepad]

If a man meets a woman and feels true chemistry and finds her drop dead gorgeous and adores her personality, she isn't going to become unattractive simply because of her last...if they had something real go begin with, he will still fall for who she is, and one element about her and her life won't stop true love from blossoming.

 

Wrong. If I found out she had a past of sexual addiction and revealed to me she had 200 partners, she would, in my mind, immediately become significantly less attractive.

 

Are you a man or women? Probably a woman because no man would say that.

[Imported]

If a man meets a woman and feels true chemistry and finds her drop dead gorgeous and adores her personality, she isn't going to become unattractive simply because of her last...if they had something real go begin with, he will still fall for who she is, and one element about her and her life won't stop true love from blossoming.

 

 

Maybe it's not "true love" then or maybe I just don't suddenly feel that because some girl is "drop dead gorgeous". Totally replaceable.

 

 

I am concerned. I'd be welcoming her into my family. My family is not just me.

[jay1983]

The kinda girl you take home to mom.

[WonderKid]

I've had over 40 partners it's something only my sister knows about and I don't think a woman in my town would be intrigued by it. I just keep it to myself. If she had 100 guys it really doesn't make a difference. If you can't handle past partners it is best you date a virgin or a woman who can count on her hands how many she slept with.

[Leigh 87]

I guarantee that you don't. You just don't realize it. I've dated long enough that after getting to know a woman you can easily know whether their number is generally high or not.

 

For example, I dated this very religious woman who at first appearance came across as a very inexperienced woman. She barely even dated. However, once I got to know her better, it didn't take long to realize she had some issues. Her father was rarely around and her mother was a serial cheat. She responded by being pretty wild in her teens and early twenties.

 

Fact is that virtually all women who have a promiscuous phase also have emotional issues.

 

 

 

Of course he can. It's just a numbers game.

 

My wife is about 7 years younger. That is very close to the largest age gap I've ever had in dating. Feels like we are the same age though.

 

 

I actually do act the same as my friends who never had a promiscuous phase.

 

I went four years, from age 20 to 24, without having sex or hooking up. I was waiting for the right man.

 

I then gave up and decided to see what all the fuss was about.... Had a few casual encounters ( not more than 10 in a four year span from age 24 to 28) and have now deduced that casual aint for me.

 

I don't regard sex or conduct myself any differently to my mates who never had a promiscuous phase. I go out on weekends, I don't kiss any of the men who are after me, I NEVER go out and hook up. I ignore the advances of men and make the night about my friends..........

 

How is that acting promiscuous? I am totally abstinent as it stands, waiting for the right man. I have not been intimate with the man I am dating currently. And won't until exclusivity has been discussed and even then sex won't happen until a relationship is imminent.

 

I don't believe the way I go about my daily life and dating, is any different to a sexually conservative girl who has never had a promiscuous phase.

 

And yes women like me who were briefly promiscuous do have issues but I know this and I am combating my issues with a professional. She even agrees that I am not awfully damaged from it anymore and I have full capacity to love and be loved as it stands. She says it is just time and regular therapy that will heal old wounds.

[Leigh 87]

I was formerly promiscuous.

 

I have also :

 

- gone years at a time without sex as an adult while I was waiting to find the right man. Without feeling sexually frustrated.

 

- I have NEVER gone out every weekend and been that girl to hook up every time she goes out, I wasn't even like that at my most promiscuous. I wasn't screwwing a different dude every week or every month. Promiscuity isn't as vile as you presume. Some of us werent total ferals about it.

 

- I have never cheated

 

- I go out to have drinks with friends and listen to live music at my local most weeks - NEVER do I hook up. Not once.

 

- I am currently happily abstinent until the right man comes along that I feel could be the One.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So yeah. Some formerly promiscuous gal's like me assign very important values tied to sex. We don't treat sex more flippantly than girls who were never promiscuous....... We regret our promiscuity of the past and are changed people in terms of our sexual habits.

 

I am not a ho now just because I kind of was during a low point in my life.

 

I am no more likely to cheat or house an STI ( I've been tested recently)

 

There really isn't ANY sign to new men I meet that I was once promiscuous.

[Leigh 87]

Maybe it's not "true love" then or maybe I just don't suddenly feel that because some girl is "drop dead gorgeous". Totally replaceable.

 

 

I am concerned. I'd be welcoming her into my family. My family is not just me.

 

How on earth would my promiscuous last affect the way I interacted with your family!?

 

Do you actually think my promiscuous past means I dress differently, talk differently and actually differently to girls who didn't have w promiscuous past????

 

I don't have a neon sign.......

 

I am not promiscuous anymore...I dress well and don't show my boobs, I wear long sorts covering my knees even in summer, and I am well spoken and down sound like trailer trash.

 

Please tell me why you feel your family would have any inkling as to my past????? There are NO visible outward " sighs " that I was ever promiscuous. Because I am not w promiscuous woman in this present moment and never will be again in all likelihood ( especially since I know that I don't enjoy being promiscuous and I know when I did it, it came from a place of depression and despair that I just won't allow myself to sink down to again)

[SmartDude]

 

I then gave up and decided to see what all the fuss was about.... Had a few casual encounters ( not more than 10 in a four year span from age 24 to 28) and have now deduced that casual aint for me.

 

 

Not even close to being considered promiscuous!

You got some work to do girl:p

 

Call me when you have had sex with a different guy every day of the week for at least one week and then we shall bestow you the badge of "promiscuous woman".

[Pull n Pray]

...and they believe they were totally entitled to them too, but they still deserve their "angel", of course they do.

 

She, unsullied and chaste - that is, until she realises she completely missed out in her life, and dumps them forthwith to pursue greener grass.

 

I'm sure that's happened before, but it is the exception to the rule. Generally speaking, the fewer premarital partners that people have had, the more likely they are to be satisfied with their spouses, the less likely they are to have an affair, and the less likely they are to divorce.

 

Evolutionary psychology predicts that women should be more discriminating than men in choosing sex partners. Males have the biological potential to father hundreds of children per year, while females can only mother one child per year. So it makes sense that men and women would evolve different mating strategies. For males, reproductive success depends on quantity of sexual partners. For females, reproductive success depends on quality of sex partners. A female who has sex indiscriminately actually reduces her chances of passing on her genes. If she is impregnated by a male with poor genes, she can’t become pregnant by a man with superior genes. Also, the more sex partners she has, the less likely any one of them is to invest in her potential offspring due to paternal uncertainty. For this reason, it is only evolutionary advantageous for a female to have casual sex if it is with a male who has particularly fit genes (studs). Still, she is engaging in a sub-optimal mating strategy. Ideally, she would form an emotional bond with the stud. But since he is in such high demand, that it not always possible. For males, it is almost always advantageous to have sex… even with females with low quality genes. But while men have an almost limitless supply of sperm, they do have a limited supply of time and resources. For this reason, it is advantageous for a man to only provide food, protection, and care to his female partners with the fittest genes and whose offspring he is confident belong to him.

 

While culture clearly plays a role in determining the sexual behavior of men and women in modern times, genetic predispositions also still play a large role. As predicted by evolutionary psychology, men have a much greater appetite than women for no-strings sex. Men routinely pay women for sex, while the reverse is extremely rare. Additionally, studies have shown that women have higher standards of physical attractiveness for casual sex partners. For example, a woman might be willing to date a guy who is a “6” but would only have a one night stand with a guy who was an “8”. With men, it’s the opposite.

 

Because of males' greater appetite for NSA sex, a man who has sex with a different partner every week, whose physical attractiveness is equal to his own, will always be looked at differently than a female who does the same thing. He is doing something that most other men would like to do, but can't, while she is doing something that most other women could do, but don't want to. Consequently, he is looked up to and called a stud, while she is looked down upon. The double standard is not caused by sexism, but by market dynamics. He's having lots of sex because he is in high demand. She's having lots of sex because she is in high supply.

Edited August 30, 2015 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
Language

[BlackOpsZombieGirl]

Every time a guy brings up the "biological" excuse and double standard of why it's acceptable for men to [language redacted] be enjoying and having a lot of sex with different members of the opposite gender but - because of their "biological explanation" - it's NOT acceptable for women to enjoy having sex with different members of the opposite gender because it's "just not biologically plausible or necessary"....I actually have to laugh.

 

Sorry guys...we're no longer living in the Paleolithic Era. So, regardless of how many times you bring up the "biological explanation" of why this ridiculous double standard exists and why most men are still using this excuse today to justify them being "studs" while calling women "whores" for enjoying the exact same thing that THEY'RE doing, it just doesn't hold water. Seriously.

 

We NO LONGER need men to "provide food, shelter and protection" for us (I know that really bothers a LOT of you, but, oh well). Heck, we no longer even need to have intercourse with any man to become pregnant to have our own babies, thanks to sperm banks, in vitro fertilization, surrogates, ETI (embryo transfer implantation) and individual sperm donors. We have our own careers, make our own money and we provide OUR OWN food, shelter and protection (weapons, self-defense, etc.). So, we basically do NOT need or want men for anything other than..........wait for it...........sexual pleasure and/or companionship.

 

If men want to still adhere their attitudes and modern way of life to ye ole double standards and ridiculous "biological" excuses that they can [be promiscuous] but women are (*gasp!*) NOT allowed to, because it is such a "turn off" for them and because they can't possibly 'respect' such kinds of women ...then, let them have at it. Mens' archaic attitudes are NOT going to change what we women choose to do with OUR bodies, OUR minds and OUR lives.

 

 

 

.

Edited August 30, 2015 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
Redact full quote of immediately preceding post and redact language

[William]

Since language is apparently a hot topic in this thread, rather than sharing personal experiences regarding the topic, I'll bump this prior directive from moderation up as a bookmark outlining what we've cleaned up so far. We find the topic to be valid as it discusses interpersonal relationships and will leave it open for members who chose to respond in a topical and respectful way and we thank them for their participation.

Link to prior directive

Bumping this up once again to save members the indignity of being moderated for language. We'll just keep bumping these up and moderating people until the message gets across. We'll get there eventually.

[johndoe2]

Every time a guy brings up the "biological" excuse and double standard of why it's acceptable for men to act like whores by enjoying and having a lot of sex with different members of the opposite gender but - because of their "biological explanation" - it's NOT acceptable for women to enjoy having sex with different members of the opposite gender because it's "just not biologically plausible or necessary"....I actually have to laugh.

...

Well, I've never known a woman who seriously believes a woman (or a man) forcing a man to have sex is as heinous a crime as a man forcing a woman to have sex. Then there's also the 'virgin' double standard when it comes to men.

 

Wouldn't really make sense to apply a double standard in choosing your double standards.