Friends with benefits -- opinions?
William Friedman
benefits" situation, and "friends with benefits" in general. (BTW,
I'm 17/m, going to be 18 in November.)
There is a 28-year-old woman at my temple with whom I (and my entire
family) are good friends, and have been for about one and a half to
two years. Another family friend told me, point-blank, that this
woman was interested in having sex with me. The night before I left
for a month-long trip to Israel (June 28) I spent some alone with her,
and, sure enough, we ended up having oral sex, with the promise of
more when I got back. Well, now I'm back. There really isn't any
problem, I had fun and so did she, but I'm wondering just where my
obligations begin and end. In the fall I'm going away to college, and
I don't intend to stop searching for a real relationship, at which
point the benefits with this woman would end (due to age and goal
differences, a relationship between us would not work out). However,
until that point, I'm a little uncertain how to act around her (I
haven't seen her since I've gotten back) -- for example, should I hold
her hand when walking down the street (not around people we know,
obviously), or is that too "relationshippy"?
Just fishing for opinions and $.02s,
Will
Katie
It seems as if all your instrincts are telling you that casual sex
with this older woman is not really your style. Your reluctance to
hold hands with a woman with whom you've been so intimate might be a
signal that you aren't comfortable with this set up at all. The
desire you expressed to have a more appropriate and meaningful
relationship is also pretty telling.
You probably felt that, on a lot of different levels, this woman was
taking advantage of you. She's an adult. You are poised to be one.
Even an ancient 37 year old like me knows that 17 year old young men
are sexually active. I know my son was when he was your age.
However, it might be a better experience for you if you limited your
attentions to someone in your own age (and experience) group.
You asked for $0.02. Do I get change?
Filip M. Gieszczykiewicz
>Well, she certainly is a very giving family friend!
>It seems as if all your instrincts are telling you that casual sex
>with this older woman is not really your style. Your reluctance to
>hold hands with a woman with whom you've been so intimate might be a
>signal that you aren't comfortable with this set up at all. The
>desire you expressed to have a more appropriate and meaningful
>relationship is also pretty telling.
>You probably felt that, on a lot of different levels, this woman was
>taking advantage of you. She's an adult. You are poised to be one.
>Even an ancient 37 year old like me knows that 17 year old young men
>are sexually active. I know my son was when he was your age.
>However, it might be a better experience for you if you limited your
>attentions to someone in your own age (and experience) group.
She is attempting to use him. If he's up for it - her equal - that is
to use her in return to get their rocks off it's one thing. It's quite
another when he's not receptive and she pushes...
--
Filip "I'll buy a vowel" Gieszczykiewicz | http://www.repairfaq.org/~filipg/
Always and everything for the better!
Now exploring whatever, life, and the meaning of it all... and 'not' :-)
Katie
Gieszczykiewicz) wrote:
>She is attempting to use him. If he's up for it - her equal - that is
>to use her in return to get their rocks off it's one thing. It's quite
>another when he's not receptive and she pushes...
>
>--
>Filip "I'll buy a vowel" Gieszczykiewicz | http://www.repairfaq.org/~filipg/
>
> Always and everything for the better!
> Now exploring whatever, life, and the meaning of it all... and 'not' :-)
Do you think it's possible for a 17 year old boy to even come close to
being the equal of a 28 year old woman? Let alone be emotionally
equipped to fully separate sex from intimacy? Maybe if the genders
were reversed, they could be on slightly more equal footing, since
females tend to mature a faster than males. No offense intended,
Filip--just a little fact proven by countless clinical studies.
Look, I don't have any moral issues with sex for sport, but I think it
needs to be between two consenting adults. In my opinion, this young
woman comes perilously close to being a pedophile. This kid was
legally still a child at that time.
Maybe I'm a little sensitive about this since I have a son around this
boy's age, but I'd like to know that my kid was engaging in more
healthy sexual pursuits (or better yet, abstaining until he's in his
60's--kidding).
Katie "I'll sell you a vowel, you need one and I've got six" Goodman
Filip M. Gieszczykiewicz
>On 30 Jul 1998 07:43:04 GMT, fmg...@pitt.edu (Filip M.
>Gieszczykiewicz) wrote:
>>She is attempting to use him. If he's up for it - her equal - that is
>>to use her in return to get their rocks off it's one thing. It's quite
>>another when he's not receptive and she pushes...
>
>being the equal of a 28 year old woman? Let alone be emotionally
>equipped to fully separate sex from intimacy? Maybe if the genders
>were reversed, they could be on slightly more equal footing, since
>females tend to mature a faster than males. No offense intended,
>Filip--just a little fact proven by countless clinical studies.
>Look, I don't have any moral issues with sex for sport, but I think it
>needs to be between two consenting adults. In my opinion, this young
>woman comes perilously close to being a pedophile. This kid was
>legally still a child at that time.
>Maybe I'm a little sensitive about this since I have a son around this
>boy's age, but I'd like to know that my kid was engaging in more
>healthy sexual pursuits (or better yet, abstaining until he's in his
>60's--kidding).
Uhm... I think you misunderstand me... I'm saying that IFF he is
her equal then I don't see a problem (give guys a little credit,
_some_ 17 yolds are quite mature... not MANY but SOME. IF he's
NOT her equal then she is using him.
William Friedman
Gieszczykiewicz) wrote:
>In Article <35bfff00...@news.mindspring.com>, through puissant locution, ch1go...@mindspring.com soliloquized:
My newsreader failed to get ch1goodman's original message, so I'll
reply through Filip's reply, then reply to Filip on the bottom. Hope
it's not too confusing :-)
>>Well, she certainly is a very giving family friend!
Sarcastic? Nahhhhh . . .
>>It seems as if all your instrincts are telling you that casual sex
>>with this older woman is not really your style. Your reluctance to
>>hold hands with a woman with whom you've been so intimate might be a
>>signal that you aren't comfortable with this set up at all. The
>>desire you expressed to have a more appropriate and meaningful
>>relationship is also pretty telling.
Actually, that's not really the problem at all. The problem (or,
rather, question) I have is how far does FwB go? Is it limited to the
sex, does it get a little more intimate (hand-holding), or what? And,
despite the attempt to turn this thread into a "she's USING him" (a
point I'll address below), I have this question about FwB in general.
For example, one of my good friends (my age) is in a very close
relationship with a female (also our age) and they started out as FwB.
Not that my situation could develop into something that serious, but
the point is that FwB sometimes becomes a relationship, sometimes not.
What I want opinions on is how intimate it can/should get outside of a
real relationship.
>>You probably felt that, on a lot of different levels, this woman was
>>taking advantage of you.
Absolutely, 100% not. But thanks for playing :-)
>>She's an adult. You are poised to be one.
>>Even an ancient 37 year old like me knows that 17 year old young men
>>are sexually active. I know my son was when he was your age.
>>However, it might be a better experience for you if you limited your
>>attentions to someone in your own age (and experience) group.
Actually, I've often been accused of being precocious -- when I was a
baby, I had conversations with all the mothers in the park instead of
playing with the other toddlers (according to my mother, my memory
isn't _that_ good!). In fact, I often feel more comfortable
conversing with more mature people, so it really felt natural that my
first real sexual experience would be with an older woman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>She is attempting to use him. If he's up for it - her equal - that is
>to use her in return to get their rocks off it's one thing. It's quite
>another when he's not receptive and she pushes...
Where the heck does this conclusion come from -- certainly not from
the situation I posted in the beginning. No where did I even imply
that she pushed -- if anything, I was the initiator, and when _she_
felt uncomfortable due to the age difference, _I_ told her not to
worry about it (in any case, I'm 100% legal; in NYC, the age of
consent is 17). And while I've always been a big proponent of casual
sex, the tawdry and cheap tone you use to describe it really goes way
too far. Casual sex may be casual, but it does not have to be as
disgusting and meaningless as your choice of words makes it out to be.
William Friedman
William Friedman
wrote:
>Do you think it's possible for a 17 year old boy to even come close to
>being the equal of a 28 year old woman? Let alone be emotionally
>equipped to fully separate sex from intimacy? Maybe if the genders
>were reversed, they could be on slightly more equal footing, since
>females tend to mature a faster than males. No offense intended,
>Filip--just a little fact proven by countless clinical studies.
I won't take offense at the latter statement either. In my case,
anyway, it's really not a matter of _emotionally_ separating the two
-- it's a matter of being able to logically separate the two. What no
one has answered for me yet is where the intimatcy ends in a pure FwB
relationship -- with the sex, or more?
>Look, I don't have any moral issues with sex for sport, but I think it
>needs to be between two consenting adults. In my opinion, this young
>woman comes perilously close to being a pedophile. This kid was
>legally still a child at that time.
Your second statement is false; as I've stated earlier, the age of
consent in NYC is 17. And an accusation of pedophilia is truly, truly
beyond the scope of my original question, and I think shows just how
oversensitive we are in American society; sometimes casual sex between
two differently-aged persons is just that, casual, CONSENTUAL sex.
>Maybe I'm a little sensitive about this since I have a son around this
>boy's age, but I'd like to know that my kid was engaging in more
>healthy sexual pursuits (or better yet, abstaining until he's in his
>60's--kidding).
I don't see where it's unhealthy for two consenting PEOPLE (regardless
of their ages) who find each other mutually pleasant and attractive to
have casual sex.
William Friedman
Filip M. Gieszczykiewicz
>Filip wrote:
>>She is attempting to use him. If he's up for it - her equal - that is
>>to use her in return to get their rocks off it's one thing. It's quite
>>another when he's not receptive and she pushes...
>
>Where the heck does this conclusion come from -- certainly not from
>the situation I posted in the beginning. No where did I even imply
>that she pushed -- if anything, I was the initiator, and when _she_
In what way are YOU the initiator? Maybe you forgot what you wrote:
-----------------chop-with-axe----------------chop-with-axe---------------------
[zap]
There is a 28-year-old woman at my temple with whom I (and my entire
family) are good friends, and have been for about one and a half to
two years. Another family friend told me, point-blank, that this
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
woman was interested in having sex with me. The night before I left
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
for a month-long trip to Israel (June 28) I spent some alone with her,
and, sure enough, we ended up having oral sex, with the promise of
more when I got back. Well, now I'm back. There really isn't any
[zap]
-----------------chop-with-axe----------------chop-with-axe---------------------
SHE initiated... you realized your "opportunity" (which would not have
occured if she had NOT initiated) and took advantage of it.. ie. you
consented... you did NOT initiate. This, BTW, is still suspect of her...
>felt uncomfortable due to the age difference, _I_ told her not to
>worry about it (in any case, I'm 100% legal; in NYC, the age of
>consent is 17). And while I've always been a big proponent of casual
>sex, the tawdry and cheap tone you use to describe it really goes way
>too far. Casual sex may be casual, but it does not have to be as
>disgusting and meaningless as your choice of words makes it out to be.
Oh, ok.. I see... "I spent some [time] alone with her, and, sure enough,
we ended up having oral sex"... really "deep" :-)
I smell a troll here... "I'm legal"... Are you USDA certified too?
William Friedman
Gieszczykiewicz) wrote:
>In Article <35c20f08...@news.i-2000.com>, through puissant locution, pzu...@nospam.leia.factory.com (William Friedman) soliloquized:
>>Filip wrote:
>SHE initiated... you realized your "opportunity" (which would not have
>occured if she had NOT initiated) and took advantage of it.. ie. you
>consented... you did NOT initiate. This, BTW, is still suspect of her...
In what way?
>>felt uncomfortable due to the age difference, _I_ told her not to
>>worry about it (in any case, I'm 100% legal; in NYC, the age of
>>consent is 17). And while I've always been a big proponent of casual
>>sex, the tawdry and cheap tone you use to describe it really goes way
>>too far. Casual sex may be casual, but it does not have to be as
>>disgusting and meaningless as your choice of words makes it out to be.
>
>Oh, ok.. I see... "I spent some [time] alone with her, and, sure enough,
>we ended up having oral sex"... really "deep" :-)
I'd actually call my wording frank -- not poetic, but not coarse.
>I smell a troll here... "I'm legal"... Are you USDA certified too?
<sigh> Would a troll actually respond? And, BTW, yes, Grade A beef
baby -- it's what's for dinner.
Will
Katie
(William Friedman) wrote:
>On 31 Jul 1998 02:26:10 GMT, fmg...@pitt.edu (Filip M.
>Gieszczykiewicz) wrote:
>
>>In Article <35c20f08...@news.i-2000.com>, through puissant locution, pzu...@nospam.leia.factory.com (William Friedman) soliloquized:
>>>Filip wrote:
>
>>SHE initiated... you realized your "opportunity" (which would not have
>>occured if she had NOT initiated) and took advantage of it.. ie. you
>>consented... you did NOT initiate. This, BTW, is still suspect of her...
>
>In what way?
>
>>>felt uncomfortable due to the age difference, _I_ told her not to
>>>worry about it (in any case, I'm 100% legal; in NYC, the age of
>>>consent is 17). And while I've always been a big proponent of casual
>>>sex, the tawdry and cheap tone you use to describe it really goes way
>>>too far. Casual sex may be casual, but it does not have to be as
>>>disgusting and meaningless as your choice of words makes it out to be.
>>
Man, do I feel played. That initial innocence. The teenaged angst.
That tentative plea for advice. Pure Jekyll. Hello Hyde.
>>Oh, ok.. I see... "I spent some [time] alone with her, and, sure enough,
>>we ended up having oral sex"... really "deep" :-)
>
>I'd actually call my wording frank -- not poetic, but not coarse.
>
>>I smell a troll here... "I'm legal"... Are you USDA certified too?
>
><sigh> Would a troll actually respond? And, BTW, yes, Grade A beef
>baby -- it's what's for dinner.
>
You're not certified, you're certifiable. And if it's what for
dinner, I'm not only going on a diet I'm becoming a vegetarian.
>Will
>
S.Pickrell
> Friedman wrote:
> ><sigh> Would a troll actually respond? And, BTW, yes, Grade A beef
> >baby -- it's what's for dinner.
> You're not certified, you're certifiable. And if it's what for
> dinner, I'm not only going on a diet I'm becoming a vegetarian.
Oh come on Katie, I thought it was a nice reply. Funny, even.
But then again, who am I to judge? :-)
Shawn Pickrell (Day -1)
http://members.tripod.com/~sirshawn
Kill Switch
> being the equal of a 28 year old woman?
Yes, in terms of the sex at least. They are more or less at the age of sexual
peak for men and women, respectively.
William Friedman
wrote:
>Katie wrote:
>
>> Friedman wrote:
>
>> ><sigh> Would a troll actually respond? And, BTW, yes, Grade A beef
>> >baby -- it's what's for dinner.
>
>> You're not certified, you're certifiable. And if it's what for
>> dinner, I'm not only going on a diet I'm becoming a vegetarian.
>
>Oh come on Katie, I thought it was a nice reply. Funny, even.
Thank you.
>
>But then again, who am I to judge? :-)
Probably as good as anybody else on this crazy forum! :-)
Will
William Friedman
wrote:
>On Fri, 31 Jul 1998 02:48:44 GMT, pzu...@nospam.leia.factory.com
>(William Friedman) wrote:
>
>>On 31 Jul 1998 02:26:10 GMT, fmg...@pitt.edu (Filip M.
>>Gieszczykiewicz) wrote:
>>
>>>In Article <35c20f08...@news.i-2000.com>, through puissant locution, pzu...@nospam.leia.factory.com (William Friedman) soliloquized:
>>>>Filip wrote:
>>
>>>SHE initiated... you realized your "opportunity" (which would not have
>>>occured if she had NOT initiated) and took advantage of it.. ie. you
>>>consented... you did NOT initiate. This, BTW, is still suspect of her...
>>
>>In what way?
BTW, no one has yet answered my question.
>>
>>>>felt uncomfortable due to the age difference, _I_ told her not to
>>>>worry about it (in any case, I'm 100% legal; in NYC, the age of
>>>>consent is 17). And while I've always been a big proponent of casual
>>>>sex, the tawdry and cheap tone you use to describe it really goes way
>>>>too far. Casual sex may be casual, but it does not have to be as
>>>>disgusting and meaningless as your choice of words makes it out to be.
>>>
>Man, do I feel played. That initial innocence. The teenaged angst.
>That tentative plea for advice. Pure Jekyll. Hello Hyde.
I wouldn't have called it tentative or a plea. It was a
straightforward request, and instead of taking what I wrote at face
value, you and Filip extrapolated all sorts of extraneous (and
erroneous) data. I appreciated your original response, however --
it's all the crap about being used that came after that has no
meaning.
>><sigh> Would a troll actually respond? And, BTW, yes, Grade A beef
>>baby -- it's what's for dinner.
>>
>You're not certified, you're certifiable. And if it's what for
>dinner, I'm not only going on a diet I'm becoming a vegetarian.
<sigh, again> So much for (what I thought) was a clever response to a
somewhat-insulting question. Just never mind. Unless you (or,
preferably, someone else) has some real advice they can give me (other
than "talk to her" -- well, yeah, sure, but maybe someone has been in
a similar situation and can tell me how things worked out) consider
this thread dead and buried. Thank you.
Will
vic...@my-dejanews.com
Comming from a man that has not yet taken the plunge, i can totally respect
MEN that refuse SEX at the peek age of 17-23. That is a very diffucult choose
that many don't seem to take.
Vic
--
--
I am the lord of the Dance
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum