Sex, marriage, conflict - Everything you want in a usenet post
Richard E. Lynch
In article <346daf26...@news.geo.net>, ddu...@pobox.com
(Daniel DuBois) says:
>
>Sex before marriage.
>
>Basically, I'm for it.
[overly long text deleted. In short, he want to have sex and his
girlfriend wants to wait until marriage. He's certain he's right
and she's wrong.]
You sound very immature and manipulative to me. You should
respect your girlfriend's decisions. I think it would be best if
you just forgot about it and moved on so that both of you could
find someone more compatible. It really would be best for her to
have you out of her life completely.
-- Rich
Daniel DuBois
Sex before marriage.
Basically, I'm for it.
The women I've been dating for approximately two months, on the other hand,
is saying she's not. She was wishy washy before, but she told me recently
that she has a renewed sense of conviction that she wants to be a virgin
until she gets married. Background: she's 23, a good Christian girl, a
little bit more of a goody-two-shoes than I'm used to, but I feel strongly
for her. I like sweet, intelligent girls, and she's cuter than your
average button.
So I'm perplexed how to proceed. I've made it clear from the beginning
that I think sex is an important part of a relationship and that I'm not
going to wait until marriage. I've dated virgins before, and almost
universally, once they've reached a point where they feel real intimacy
with me, they let go of the no-sex-until-marriage ideal. I don't have a
good feel if this relationship is heading in the same direction. We've
been physical to quite an extent, and she seems to be a very passionate
person, so I was comfortable in the beginning that eventually she'd 'come
around to my way of thinking', but her recent statements concern me.
It's my position, and I've said this to her, that after some amount of
time, maybe 2-6 months, you have a strong feeling about the quality and
future of a relationship. If a woman still doesn't want the physical
intimacy of sex with me at that point, it indicates something is probably
wrong with the relationship, IMO. I've also 'admitted' to having a fair
amount of casual sex in my past, and explained that I don't view sex as
this hugely magical thing.
She's worried this sex thing could be come a real problem in our
relationship, i.e., I'll leave her at some point in the future over it. I
can't honestly allay her fears and say that that won't be the case. I'm no
sleezeball, quite the contrary, I'm a moral person, but I really like sex
and am not willing to give it up. Marriage is something you enter when
you've reached a point of such extreme intimacy that you're confident
you'll never love anyone else, nor feel the need to be with anyone else. I
don't put sex anywhere near that pedestal. As far as I'm concerned, sex is
just a grand way of displaying affection: no morally different from kissing
or holding hands, although admittedly, it is much more emotionally charged.
Anyway, that's how I feel. I don't know whether I'm seeking advice, or
whether I'm seeking justification for my beliefs. I think by being honest
with her, I'm OK to feel whatever I want and behave accordingly, even if it
puts some people off that I would place sex so highly, and not be willing
to wait until marriage.
This is going to sound pretty crude, but I think she'd be better off for
having sex. I just think it's something adults should experience and
enjoy. IMHO, it's a maturing process, and she should get it out of the
way. In fact, I wish she had gotten over this hump in her life before I
met her; it's something I'm not exactly thrilled to be going through at
this point in my life (I'm 25). I think of these as issues people in high
school and college work through, not someone like myself with alot of
sexual experience, a career, an 'adult lifestyle', etc... It doesn't help
the situation, at least not from my point of view, that most of the members
of her group, a tight-knit bunch of girls that've been together all through
and after college, are virgins as well. Personally, I don't feel they have
a proper frame of reference to be giving the best advice. The two friends
or so in her tight-knit group that aren't virgins give her advice something
to likes of: "Well, if you've held out this long, might as well stick with
it." They're her freinds, and I'm sure they mean well, but I'm rather
shocked at their advice. Sex is one of the greatest pleasures in life, I
would never recommend to someone I like that they shouldn't experience it.
Anyway, the last time I went through a 'virgin ordeal' (at which point I
should mention I swore off virgins because they were too much trouble ;) -
Oh well, I was wrong) the situation had the benefit of her friends being
more of the idea: "Will you just do it already! I'm sick of hearing about
your virgin crap." (Heh. They were good friends don't get them wrong -
they were beign semi-humourous in that quote.) That's not the case here.
Without the 'helpful' peer pressure, she could conceivably never 'come
around to my way of thinking'.
Anyway, to bring this huge post to an end.... I suspect most people here
share my belief system: i.e., that sex is not something you have to wait
until marriage for. How would you react to in a situation like this? How
long would you 'hold out'? What would you say? Should I be trying to
'convince' her to have sex? If it is ok for me, as someone who is clearly
not an independent observer, to be trying to sway her, then how should I
convince her, other than doing what I've been doing - striving for
emotional intimacy and a good relationship?
I'm sure that as strongly she may feel about being a virgin upon marriage,
I feel more strongly about being happily sexual well before marriage. Is
this a conflict that can be resolved? If it can't how and when do I come
to the decision that it can't?
Daniel DuBois
>In article <346daf26...@news.geo.net>, ddu...@pobox.com
>(Daniel DuBois) says:
>>Sex before marriage.
>>Basically, I'm for it.
>
>[overly long text deleted. In short, he want to have sex and his
> girlfriend wants to wait until marriage. He's certain he's right
> and she's wrong.]
I'm positive that nowhere in my post did I make any claim that anyone is
right or wrong. The issues involved don't even have the capacity to be
right or wrong. There's nothing to be true or false, just things I want
and things she wants. People are never completely on the same page with
their wants, at some point they reach a consensus -- they negotiate until
they're both happy.
Or - I suppose - they split when they realize that there are irreconcilable
differences.
>You sound very immature and manipulative to me.
You sound like an asshole to me. I don't know where you're coming from,
but you've contributed nothing useful to the discussion. If you don't
agree with my philosophies, just say so. If I was immature I wouldn't be
as honest with her as I am, I wouldn't be making the effort to pursue
serious committed relationships with quality people like herself, and I'd
be off getting sex from far easier sources.
>You should respect your girlfriend's decisions.
Who said I don't. Respecting her decisions, and liking them/being content
with them are not the same thing. I even expressed a small amount of guilt
about trying to convince her, but in reality, I shouldn't feel guilty. She
understands I'm not a neutral observer, and there's no reason for me to
feel guilty about expressing my feelings.
Really, what the hell does 'respecting someone's decision' exactly mean?
Should she 'respect my decision' that we have sex? No one's preposterous
enough to claim that - it sounds silly just saying it. Why would you imply
that me having wishes different from hers is somehow disrespectful?
If a woman came to you and said "My boyfriend wants sex, I don't, give me
advice" would you tell her she should leave him, she's immature and
manipulative, and that it'd be best for him to have her out of his life?
What the hell kind of advice is that?
>I think it would be best if
>you just forgot about it and moved on so that both of you could
>find someone more compatible.
This is the only thing remotely resembling a useful comment in your entire
post, but given your attitude and the context, I'm going to choose to
dismiss it as the ramblings of a small-brained man with mis-placed urges of
protective chilvary.
>It really would be best for her to
>have you out of her life completely.
We're both certain you're wrong. We're both intelligent, attractive,
caring, generous people, who like each other, and want to spend time
together. We have a few issues to work through, including this doozy or a
conflict that I've posted about, but I want to make as much of an effort as
possible to work through them because I feel strongly for her and for the
potential of something long term between us.
What pisses me off the most is that fact that even though you are so
off-base, the end result may turn out to be as you say. Hopefully that
won't be the case.
-----
Daniel DuBois ClickOver, Inc.
Senior Software Engineer (650) 322-8336
turtoni
Hi Dan,
Just like to say it's a pleasure to read you shooting down in flames some
badly thought out advice.
This is obviously a difficult situation which I hope has a happy ending.
Good luck...
Ian
Daniel DuBois wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 1997 19:09:34 EST, Richard E. Lynch
> <ric...@NOSPAM.wvnvm.wvnet.edu> wrote:
>
> >In article <346daf26...@news.geo.net>, ddu...@pobox.com
> >(Daniel DuBois) says:
> >>Sex before marriage.
> >>Basically, I'm for it.
> >
> off-base, the end result may turn out to be as you say. Hopefully that
> won't be the case.
>
Tracey3007
>From: "Kukulcan" <quetza...@nospam.com>
>Date: Wed, Nov 12, 1997 21:48 EST
>Message-id: <64dpqo$cjg$2...@gte2.gte.net>
>
>She would be better off having sex, but not with you.
>
>FWIW
>Andy
>
>
>
>
Who's having sex? With who? What is FWIW?
:)
Tracey
"Attitude is the mind's paintbrush. I use it to color every situation"
Daniel DuBois
On Thu, 13 Nov 1997 16:40:56 GMT, ba...@spamdragon.com (Bards) wrote:
>Dangerous, your first post was a load of pseudo-intellectual,
>self-seeking, immature trash, the second more of the same (with a few
>offensive comments at Rich thrown in).
Oh woe is me; I'm a horible person. Someone insulted me, and I insulted
them back. How can I live with my shame.
>I see no 'discussion'...
I guess I don't either. I was hoping one would occur however, but that
seems impossible at this point. I kind of suspected I'd make some people
uncomfortable by admitting I wanted to have sex with someone who didn't
currently want the same, but I had no idea....
>>If I was immature I wouldn't be as honest with her as I am,
>
>So she doesn't read talk.origins, I take it.
No, she doesn't. Your point?
>It might be more "mature" and "honest" to go back there and re-post
>your original request, explaining
>(a) exactly WHOM you were trying to enlighten by "proving the
>existence of evolution to someone who currently believes in
>creationism";
Yes, this is the same person. So what? She knows how I feel about
Evolution, and she knows how I feel about Creationism. I've even done a
little (very little) evangelizing about it to her. (I gave her the Moral
Animal to read, which AFAIK she hasn't cracked, but oh well.) In fact, I
even told her I posted to the newsgroups asking about evolution materials
to convince her.
BTW, am I supposed to be impressed that you know how to use dejanews? Big
deal. I'm not ashamed of anything I've ever said. You want to throw my
words back at me? Here, go to:
http://www2.inow.com/~ddubois/posts/maillist.html
That's every thing I've said in newsgroups from March 95 to March 97 (I've
been lazy and haven't updated it in a long time). I'm not afraid. Have a
fucking blast.
>(b) exactly WHY you wanted to enlighten her in such a way, i.e.
>deconvert her from her beliefs so that you can bury your pork sword.
Bury my pork sword. Haven't heard that one before. That's pretty funny.
>"If I'm about one thing it's bold-faced truth. My momma raised me to
>be honest to a fault." (Quote from Dangerous DeBore, in ba.personals,
>09/09/97)
>You're a nasty little piece of work, aren't you, Dangerous?
The kids in grade school came up with better varaints of my name to use for
insults. Maybe you could try harder. How about "DooBra"?
What is nasty little piece of work supposed to mean anyway? What *exactly*
is my crime? What is the huge deal? Every guy on this planet wants to
have sex with the person they're seeing: I'm just the only one 1) bold
enough to admit it, and 2) willing to spend a couple of hours analyzing
what it all means with a bunch of strangers on usenet.
And I'm not saying I'm not willing to wait until she's ready, or that I'm
going to coerce her, or that she is wrong to not be in favor of casual sex:
All I said was I wasn't willing to wait until marriage. Ceratianly someone
has been in my position before. I wanted to know how it's been handled in
the past. Do people just wait it out, and hope for the best? Do they just
eventually get frustrated and leave the relationship?
>You'd probably get called an asshole by raving fundamental atheists
>and cult survivors, never mind those with religious sensibilities.
>[...]
>Your best chance of an honest, committed relationship is frenzied
>masturbation in front of a mirror, preferably as far away from this
>newsgroup as possible.
>And if your poor girlfriend ever does deconvert from her religion, I
>hope she goes straight over to Satanism, and has you sacrificed.
I don't want her to convert (You don't have to beleive in Creationism to be
Christian), but anyways...
This is pretty interesting. In all my years of usenet, I don't think I've
ever been attacked so viciously. (You want me sacrificed? Wow, that's
pretty harsh.) I'm failing to comprehend why.
If I'm coming off as pseudo-intellectual, it's subconsciously intentional.
I spent alot of time on my original post developing a tone of voice that
wouldn't be seen as crass; trying to qualify everything I said with "in my
opinion", "I think", "I feel" so it would be less confrontational. I
wanted to make it very clear I wasn't 'interested in only one thing', i.e.,
'burying my pork sword'. Basically, I didn't want to be judged/attacked
for wanting sex. I guess my best efforts failed, because that's exactly
what happened.
Thanks for nothing soc.singles.
Kenn Barry
In article <346daf26...@news.geo.net>,
Daniel DuBois <ddu...@pobox.com> wrote:
>[she's saving it for marriage, he's a modern man]
>Anyway, to bring this huge post to an end.... I suspect most people here
>share my belief system: i.e., that sex is not something you have to wait
>until marriage for. How would you react to in a situation like this? How
>long would you 'hold out'?
I can tell you how you can put the ball back in her
court: tell her that, as long as you two aren't having sex,
you feel free to date other women. There's no reason to
consider breaking up with her, just because she won't have
sex. But it would seem unfair to me if she demands you two
be an item, an exclusive relationship, when there's no sex.
It's not a radical notion. Used to be parents preferred
their kids to date around, it's quite traditional. The theory
was that "going steady" meant some hanky-panky was going on,
while dating around meant things weren't going that far. The
implicit borderline is sex: once that starts you forsake all
others, but until then you're free to see others.
Obviously it's a dangerous maneuver and a potential
crisis; do as you think best. But it does put things back,
as it were, in her lap. She'll be the one who has to break
it off, should it come to that.
>Should I be trying to
>'convince' her to have sex? If it is ok for me, as someone who is clearly
>not an independent observer, to be trying to sway her, then how should I
>convince her, other than doing what I've been doing - striving for
>emotional intimacy and a good relationship?
A bit of gentle persuasion isn't unreasonable. But
you've probably already done some of that, and without
success. Continual escalation could be dangerous. It'll
reach the point eventually that, even if she gives in,
she'll be grudging and resentful, and that could be outright
fatal to your relationship. So don't push too hard.
I'm rather surprised at how much flack you got for
your post. I hope you're still reading the responses.
- From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELECTRIC AVENUE: ba...@netcom.com
Bards
Daniel - I was indeed out of order there. I had no right whatsoever to
judge your intentions. You did not deserve an attack like the one I
made.
Please accept my unconditional apology for spewing vicious drivel at
you.
Apologies also to the ng as a whole for having to receive it.
Bards
Bards
Bards
-- remove the 'sp' in 'spamdragon' to reply --
turtoni
Bards just saw your apology to Dan for some reason I'm not getting some of
the posting in soc.singles
a few days later and some times not at all !
Ian
Bards
On Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:11:08 +0100, turtoni <i...@wm.estec.esa.nl>
wrote:
>Bards just saw your apology to Dan for some reason I'm not getting some of
>the posting in soc.singles
>a few days later and some times not at all !
That may be more my squirly laptop system clock. I think my ISP trusts
it rather than its own global clock. My first post of the apology
appeared date-stamped the day before the stuff it referred to.
these machines have *minds*, I am sure.
Bards :*)
walter mracsna
Kenn Barry schrieb:
> In article <346daf26...@news.geo.net>,
> Daniel DuBois <ddu...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >[she's saving it for marriage, he's a modern man]
> >Anyway, to bring this huge post to an end.... I suspect most people
> here
> >share my belief system: i.e., that sex is not something you have to
> wait
> >until marriage for. How would you react to in a situation like
> this? How
> >long would you 'hold out'?
>
> I can tell you how you can put the ball back in her
> court: tell her that, as long as you two aren't having sex,
> you feel free to date other women. There's no reason to
> consider breaking up with her, just because she won't have
> sex. But it would seem unfair to me if she demands you two
> be an item, an exclusive relationship, when there's no sex.
>
> It's not a radical notion. Used to be parents preferred
> their kids to date around, it's quite traditional. The theory
> was that "going steady" meant some hanky-panky was going on,
> while dating around meant things weren't going that far. The
> implicit borderline is sex: once that starts you forsake all
> others, but until then you're free to see others.
>
> Obviously it's a dangerous maneuver and a potential
> crisis; do as you think best. But it does put things back,
> as it were, in her lap. She'll be the one who has to break
> it off, should it come to that.
>
> >Should I be trying to
> >'convince' her to have sex? If it is ok for me, as someone who is
> clearly
> >not an independent observer, to be trying to sway her, then how
> should I
> >convince her, other than doing what I've been doing - striving for
> >emotional intimacy and a good relationship?
>
> A bit of gentle persuasion isn't unreasonable. But
> you've probably already done some of that, and without
> success. Continual escalation could be dangerous. It'll
> reach the point eventually that, even if she gives in,
> she'll be grudging and resentful, and that could be outright
> fatal to your relationship. So don't push too hard.
>
> I'm rather surprised at how much flack you got for
> your post. I hope you're still reading the responses.
>
> - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ELECTRIC AVENUE: ba...@netcom.com
hi everybody out there
I like to mail with a 35 year old nice woman
mra...@netway.at
Sunshine
<snip>
>>You should respect your girlfriend's decisions.
>
>Who said I don't. Respecting her decisions, and liking them/being content
>with them are not the same thing. I even expressed a small amount of guilt
>about trying to convince her, but in reality, I shouldn't feel guilty. She
>understands I'm not a neutral observer, and there's no reason for me to
>feel guilty about expressing my feelings.
<snip>
>If a woman came to you and said "My boyfriend wants sex, I don't, give me
>advice" would you tell her she should leave him, she's immature and
>manipulative, and that it'd be best for him to have her out of his life?
>What the hell kind of advice is that?
<snip>
Funnily enough, I am exactly in that situation and I would advise her to
think extremely carefully before giving up on what are obviously
important values to her. There is no reason for you to feel guilty
about expressing your feelings, you're right. But, tread lightly ...
I have a couple of female friends in similar situations -- they're
christians. One of them 'gave in' to the pressure out of fear she'd
lose her boyfriend. Now, she feels nothing but guilt and contempt for
him for (as she now feels) coercing her into doing something that went
against her moral fibre. It ended up destroying their relationship and
the sex was a disastour anyway. Now she has no boyfriend *and* an
enormous sense of loss and guilt. It wasn't worth it.
The second friend still hasn't agreed to have sex with her boyfriend
and, in spite of the fact that I don't share her values, I have related
to her what I've just written above. I hope she won't sleep with him.
I think it'll end in tears. As her friend I'm becoming increasingly
angry with what looks like insensitivity on her boyfriend's part.
I do think it's a no win situation. My advice to *you* would be that
you should carefully assess what this woman means to you in the long
term. If she is the woman of your dreams, wait until you're married.
Negotiate limits which you'll need to resolve to respect and experiment
with 'foreplay'. If she is the woman of your dreams you have a hell of a
lot to lose by 'convincing' her she's wrong. If she isn't, move on to
someone you're more compatible with because it's unfair to push
something you are uncertain will work out.
It's *not* a question of compromise. She won't be *compromising* when
she has sex with you and meeting you half-way, she'll be *totally*
giving in. You either have sex, or you don't. She has a life after you.
If you do love her, remember that.
I haven't got the original posting so hope I've fully understood what
seems to be happening. Good luck.
Sunshine
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"By the time he focused she'd be gone; and in trying to preserve it, he would
miss the moment of her going"
--- from David Harsent's 'From an Inland Sea'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
~bean~
Aw hey, dont go away mad, just...No, I'm kidding. Hey, I particularly
enjoyed your post. It's unusual that someone actually makes sense
here. Typically it's a bunch of juvenile bullshit. IT's common on
the net for some reason. I suppose "we" are able to attack people here
somewhat anonymously, with little or no recourse available to those
that we attack save an equally as harsh response, the way we WISH we
could in real life, but can't for a myriad of reasons relative to
social conventions, etc.
ddu...@pobox.com (Daniel DuBois) wrote:
>Thanks for nothing soc.singles.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
PEAS! NO SPAM!
~bean~
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Charlotte L. Blackmer
In article <34744675....@news.geo.net>,
Daniel DuBois <ddu...@pobox.com> wrote:
[*SNIP*]
>Thanks for nothing soc.singles.
You're very welcome. Of course, if you don't like what was posted here,
you're entitled to a triple refund of what you paid us individually for
it.
ObClue: That's the *really easy* row of the multiplication tables.
ObSheeshDaNoive: Sheesh, da noive.
C"Congrats! You've stepped on your crank in front of a world-wide
audience! What's next, going to Disneyland?"LB
------------------------------------------------------
Charlotte L. Blackmer http://www.rahul.net/clb
Berkeley Farm and Pleasure Palace (under construction)
Junk (esp. commercial) email review rates: $250 US ea
Steve Chaney
In article <64gjc0$5...@camel19.mindspring.com>, ~bean~ <bearx.fuc...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Aw hey, dont go away mad, just...No, I'm kidding. Hey, I particularly
>enjoyed your post. It's unusual that someone actually makes sense
>here. Typically it's a bunch of juvenile bullshit.
Bean, the irony of what you just said, is as subtle as Krakatoa's 1883
hiccup.
-- Steve
Sherry Bailey
Break up now.
You and this woman are a classic mismatch.
My ex and I were similar -- I was a virgin until we got together, he thought
like you do, I believe in monogamy, he does not. He convinced me to "give in"
believing as you do that "I would be better off" (which I find an OUTRAGEOUSLY
presumptuous thing for anybody to decide for anybody else!) We lived together
six years, got married, were together another five, got separated and then
divorced -- because his basic belief structure about sex and it's importance
finally meant he couldn't keep his pants zipped and at home.
If you continue with this woman, I would bet almost anything you will end up
getting bored with her and dumping her within three to five years, max, and
that is even if you decide to get married, which I doubt you will. Respect her
values and her RIGHT to those values enough to leave her alone. Don't try to
argue her into your way of thinking -- that is merely trying to dominate
her. You don't sound like the kind of man who values love and sex as an
important integral unit, and she does. Let her find someone like herself (rare
though they may be.) You should date women who already agree with you withOUT
argument. (And, if my understanding of your values is correct, you shouldn't
marry anybody -- some men aren't suited to commitment.)
(Obviously this is based on what you said -- the more you differ from the
picture you paint of yourself, the less valid is this advice. But before you
get defensive, think about it seriously. None of this is so much judgemental
as it is introspective. Better to go with your real personality and needs
than to destroy lives pretending to be something you aren't or trying to force
someone to be what THEY aren't.)
Sherry
Daniel DuBois
On 18 Nov 1997 23:45:16 GMT, slba...@bu.edu (Sherry Bailey) wrote:
>six years, got married, were together another five, got separated and then
>divorced -- because his basic belief structure about sex and it's importance
>finally meant he couldn't keep his pants zipped and at home.
I'm sorry you had a bad experience like that. Unfortunately, it seems that
kind of thing is all too common in today's society.
>If you continue with this woman, I would bet almost anything you will end up
>getting bored with her and dumping her within three to five years, max, and
>that is even if you decide to get married, which I doubt you will. Respect her
>[...]
>argument. (And, if my understanding of your values is correct, you shouldn't
>marry anybody -- some men aren't suited to commitment.)
Wow. You are so completely and thoroughly wrong. You would be better
served not to make such huge inferences to come to conclusions about people
like that. Not everyone who doesn't thinks sex can occur without love has
tendencies towards infidelity. You clearly do *not* have an understanding
of my values.
I'm not your ex-husband.
Sherry Bailey
Daniel DuBois (ddu...@pobox.com) wrote:
: On 18 Nov 1997 23:45:16 GMT, slba...@bu.edu (Sherry Bailey) wrote:
: >If you continue with this woman, I would bet almost anything
you will end up
: >getting bored with her and dumping her within three to five years, max, and
: >that is even if you decide to get married, which I
doubt you will. Respect her
: >[...]
: >argument. (And, if my understanding of your values is correct, you shouldn't
: >marry anybody -- some men aren't suited to commitment.)
: Wow. You are so completely and thoroughly wrong. You would be better
: served not to make such huge inferences to come to conclusions about people
: like that. Not everyone who doesn't thinks sex can occur without love has
: tendencies towards infidelity. You clearly do *not* have an understanding
: of my values.
: I'm not your ex-husband.
Nope. But you SOUND exactly like him, justify yourself TO yourself exactly
like him, and ride roughshod over other people's needs and desires to you own
advantage exactly like him.
Your girlfriend has told you her values and beliefs. If she is a virgin, she
is probably NOT using birth control, so sex threatens her with pregnancy
(which is a life-threatening and permanently life-changing event) not to
mention STDs and a simple but possibly devastating loss of self. YOU want to
control her sex life, you think you are right about it and she is wrong. It's
not yours to control. Even if you ARE right.
Answer this, I dare you. So, you talk her into giving up her virginity even
though she has her own reasons not to. She is reluctant, you are jubilant
(after all, you WON.) You have sex. It's terrible. She is upset, she dosen't
really WANT this, it's upsetting. There is no wild abandon. There is no
passion. It's boring. Perfunctory. Not fun. Then what? You going to stick by
this woman and build a life with her? I DOUBT it. You want free samples at her
expense -- and if you don't like the outcome, you will wander off, possibly
with some guilt, and that will be that. Meanwhile SHE has given up a chunk of
herself to please you, something important to her is gone. Irretrievably. You
expect things to go the way you fantasize, but what if they don't?
If you didn't get the slightest twinge of "geez, what if it DID go bad" then I
take it all back -- maybe you aren't like my ex. But I'd lay money on the line
that if you are honest, you are more interested in SEX than you are in HER
(specifically) and if the sex is not what you hope for, you will want to go
where you can get the kind you want to have. (Maybe you figure the odds are
50/50 -- you can have the wonderful woman AND have great sex or you
won't... but that "or you won't" part has many possibilities, and consists of
much more than 50%... )
The thing is, eventually with ANY partner, unless both of you make the
concentrated effort to work at it, it gets boring and stops being what you
would like it to be. If you don't have kids to "keep you together" and you
don't care enough about the PERSON to make the effort to spice up your sex
life (like my ex, apparantly) then you will want to try new more exciting
partners...
If you have strong feelings apart from lust for this woman, let her decide
when SHE wants to have sex.
(But back to my "misperceptions" -- I only know about you what you say and how
you say it...)
Sherry
Daniel DuBois
On 19 Nov 1997 23:51:10 GMT, slba...@bu.edu (Sherry Bailey) wrote:
>Nope. But you SOUND exactly like him, justify yourself TO yourself exactly
Hmm... justifying myself. I'm not exactly sure when explaining one's
thoughts to other's becomes 'justifying oneself to oneself'. I don't think
I need any justification; I'm perfectly content with my moral system.
>like him, and ride roughshod over other people's needs and desires to you own
>advantage exactly like him.
Ride roughshod over? This isn't a hostile takeover, it's dating.
>Your girlfriend has told you her values and beliefs. If she is a virgin, she
>is probably NOT using birth control
Well, duh. I certainly would hope not.
>mention STDs and a simple but possibly devastating loss of self. YOU want to
>control her sex life
How so? I don't want to control her sex life: I'm not even sure what that
means. Is that sex on demand? Or the bisexual twin S&M love slave
waiting-on-hand-n-foot action you refer to your ex obstinately wanting in
another post?
Key: I want her to *want* to have sex with me: more than I want her sex,
really.
>you think you are right about it and she is wrong. It's
>not yours to control. Even if you ARE right.
I've already given the right vs. wrong speech in a prior post.
>Answer this, I dare you. So, you talk her into giving up her virginity even
>though she has her own reasons not to. She is reluctant, you are jubilant
>(after all, you WON.) You have sex. It's terrible. She is upset, she dosen't
>really WANT this, it's upsetting. There is no wild abandon. There is no
>passion. It's boring. Perfunctory. Not fun. Then what? You going to stick by
It's not going to be 'perfect' the first time of course. It takes time to
get know each other - that goes for the physical as well as the mental.
I'm not telling you anything you don't know I'm sure.
>this woman and build a life with her?
It's too early to talk about building a life with her. We've only known
each other a couple of months.
Will I continue to date her if the sex is bad? Yes. Will it always be
bad? I can almost guarantee it won't. I digress, but I can already tell
she's passionate by the way she moves and acts in our 'make out sessions'.
It's interesting to me, but she's not shy about her body: she doesn't
'carry herself' like a virgin. I think it portents a good sex life, and
yes, I'm pretty happy about that.
>I DOUBT it. You want free samples at her
>expense -- and if you don't like the outcome, you will wander off, possibly
Presumptuous and insulting. Thanks. ("Free samples?")
>with some guilt, and that will be that. Meanwhile SHE has given up a chunk of
>herself to please you, something important to her is gone. Irretrievably. You
I would hope she would take some pleasure out of it as well. And I would
hope if things didn't work out in the long run that she would have fond
memories of the time we were together.
>If you didn't get the slightest twinge of "geez, what if it DID go bad" then I
>take it all back -- maybe you aren't like my ex. But I'd lay money on the line
>that if you are honest, you are more interested in SEX than you are in HER
>(specifically) and if the sex is not what you hope for, you will want to go
>where you can get the kind you want to have. (Maybe you figure the odds are
>50/50 -- you can have the wonderful woman AND have great sex or you
>won't... but that "or you won't" part has many possibilities, and consists of
>much more than 50%... )
I'm not following this paragraph. Am I supposed to be twinging or not
twinging?
In any case, the worst-case-scenario you describe sucks. Yes, it's
conceivable she could be hurt. But that could happen sans sex as well.
That could happen tommorrow if I took the advice of people in this
newsgroup and told her we should break up now because we're fundamentally
incompatible. In fact, at some time in the future, I could be hurt, and
that would suck to. It's happened in the past; and it's fairly
unavoidable. People get hurt - over and over - yet they continue to try to
find happiness in the compansionship of MOTOS. If there was some way to
ensure both my - and her - eternal happiness I'd sign up for the program.
People are assuming I'm more interested in SEX than in HER, possibly
because my original post focused on the topic of SEX. I didn't focus on
the topic of HER, because there's no problem with the HER part. I'm quite
happy with the HER part, and didn't feel the need to have a discussion
about HER. All I wanted to talk about was people's experiences of dealing
with virginity.
And yes, I do want a wonderful woman and great sex.
>The thing is, eventually with ANY partner, unless both of you make the
>concentrated effort to work at it, it gets boring and stops being what you
>would like it to be. If you don't have kids to "keep you together" and you
>don't care enough about the PERSON to make the effort to spice up your sex
>life (like my ex, apparantly) then you will want to try new more exciting
>partners...
One of the strongest tenets of my moral system is the permanence of
marriage, followed closely by the fidelity therein. In my mind, I could
never wander off from a marriage to try to find new exciting partners, so
this whole sub-thread of discussion is moot and uninteresting to me.
People need to work at their relaitonships: Point made.
>If you have strong feelings apart from lust for this woman, let her decide
>when SHE wants to have sex.
Oh, she's going to be doing the deciding alright. I'm not going to be
putting your under hypnosis or giving her chemicals to take her powers of
reason away from her. *But*, that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to attempt
to influence the decision process.
-----
Daniel DuBois
Sunshine
[snip]
>Key: I want her to *want* to have sex with me: more than I want her sex,
>really.
>
But she doesn't want to ... maybe you need to accept that.
[snip]
>It's too early to talk about building a life with her. We've only known
>each other a couple of months.
I really don't think you should even attempt to 'influence' her decision
on the basis of a mere couple of months. You're going to end up hurting
her very badly.
Sherry is right, what will be a disappointment tinged with guilt for
you, will be a calamity for her. She'll end up hating and despising
you. And quite honestly, I don't think I'd blame her.
>Will I continue to date her if the sex is bad? Yes. Will it always be
>bad? I can almost guarantee it won't. I digress, but I can already tell
>she's passionate by the way she moves and acts in our 'make out sessions'.
>It's interesting to me, but she's not shy about her body: she doesn't
>'carry herself' like a virgin. I think it portents a good sex life, and
>yes, I'm pretty happy about that.
That's a very problematic paragraph. You seem to be labouring under the
misconception that virgin's are frigid. Well, they aren't.
The decision often isn't about passion or whether someone likes the idea
of sex or not, it's about her values. Try and respect that and back off
until she comes to you, or move on.
>
>>I DOUBT it. You want free samples at her
>>expense -- and if you don't like the outcome, you will wander off, possibly
>
>Presumptuous and insulting. Thanks. ("Free samples?")
It may be presumptious and insulting but I know what Sherry means. If
she said that with respect to a woman who ordinarily has an active sex
life I'd think she was out of line. But she didn't, this is a unique
situation.
Perhaps you need to see it as unique, and respond accordingly
(respectfully) and stop thinking of her as being like the girls you've
dated before.
>I would hope she would take some pleasure out of it as well. And I would
>hope if things didn't work out in the long run that she would have fond
>memories of the time we were together.
She's unlikely to if it fails and she's given up a very important
valuable part of herself. That's a reality greater than your hope. Are
you willing to risk that -- at her expense? Women have loathed men for
far less -- and this is a biggie.
>In any case, the worst-case-scenario you describe sucks. Yes, it's
>conceivable she could be hurt. But that could happen sans sex as well.
It's not the same, and I bet you know it. Stop being deliberately
blind. Face it, she doesn't want to.
>People are assuming I'm more interested in SEX than in HER, possibly
>because my original post focused on the topic of SEX. I didn't focus on
>the topic of HER, because there's no problem with the HER part.
There *is* a problem with the HER part -- that's the part you are trying
to influence and change irrespective of the future consequences, and on
the basis of a mere two months.
>And yes, I do want a wonderful woman and great sex.
There are loads of women out there who can offer that. At the moment
your girlfriend is only willing to offer half. That's who she is. You
know that. Figure it out.
>People need to work at their relaitonships: Point made.
>
>>If you have strong feelings apart from lust for this woman, let her decide
>>when SHE wants to have sex.
>
>Oh, she's going to be doing the deciding alright. I'm not going to be
>putting your under hypnosis or giving her chemicals to take her powers of
>reason away from her. *But*, that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to attempt
>to influence the decision process.
Influencing the decision process is hardly allowing her to make the
decision on her own.