The idea of having sex within 2 or 3 date is simply stupid when you are....

[BraddH]

Its funny how guys expect girls to sleep with them on first dates when you both hardly know each other....

Whenever im on dates with guys and they pressure me into sleeping with them on the first few dates, i instantly NEXT them. A decent girl with values and morals wont just open her legs for you on the first date regardless of how charming you are! Even so the ones that do are either wh0res or low self esteem girls..

Another thing to consider is, theres no blacklash on guys sleeping around, with women its different we have our reputations to consider, alot of them wont make it easy for you and that doesnt mean were "playing games" or there is someone else, but if your really that crazy about getting with her you'll wait and be rewarded.

Also some of the guys on here saying how girls are only useful for sex and nothing else is truly degrading to females

Yes. As a human being you cannot think of making another human being a "slave" or a useful thing. That is inhuman. I understand you completely. A decent girl will have morales then how about a girl with full morale and royal? That kind of girl must e quality girl.

The guys here seems to be just the other opposite of the nice guy - jerks. They have utterly failed to become so-called alphas. Alpha is someone who knows balance.

Now the men here says never listen to a woman's advice. But that is also a woman's advice. They always seem to say: don't listen to me, I know not, as a man you must know! And the men here utterly fails.. Women have so much rich advices that you cannot get anywhere else than from them. And I tell you something, the guys who says that what women speak is bull**** are bull**** themselves.

 

[zinc4]

Yes. As a human being you cannot think of making another human being a "slave" or a useful thing. That is inhuman. I understand you completely. A decent girl will have morales then how about a girl with full morale and royal? That kind of girl must e quality girl.

The guys here seems to be just the other opposite of the nice guy - jerks. They have utterly failed to become so-called alphas. Alpha is someone who knows balance.

Now the men here says never listen to a woman's advice. But that is also a woman's advice. They always seem to say: don't listen to me, I know not, as a man you must know! And the men here utterly fails.. Women have so much rich advices that you cannot get anywhere else than from them. And I tell you something, the guys who says that what women speak is bull**** are bull**** themselves.

You sound like a woman to me.

 

[Syrio]

BraddH and djgirl have it right here... a lot of people on this forum have the mentality that if you ever view any woman in a positive light it makes you a "beta" and makes you pathetic. This is a ridiculous notion that makes absolutely no sense.

Also I want to address one stupid thing that people mention a lot on this forum to make a point - people often ask "what does a woman have to offer other than her pvssy? nothing!". Any man who ever says this has nothing to offer a woman, or anyone in the world for that matter, besides their d1ck because they are literally retarded. And I do mean literally. Literally, as in they probably have an IQ below 70, which classifies them as mildly mentally retarded.

If you honestly can't think of anything a woman can offer a man besides sex then you are blind. Women offer men the same amount that men offer women.

 

[dasein]

Its funny how guys expect girls to sleep with them on first dates when you both hardly know each other....

As Desdinova posted, it has nothing to do with pressure, but what both really want to do anyway and facilitating that. Healthy women want to have sex with healthy men. Unhealthy women use sex as specie to leverage their own archaic transactional agendas selfishly.

A decent girl with values and morals wont just open her legs for you on the first date regardless of how charming you are! Even so the ones that do are either wh0res or low self esteem girls..

To repeat, the phrase "values and morals" for women, other than a tiny minority of sincerely fundamentally religious, is just whitewash over a transactional agenda and an archaic view that sex is "a man taking something from a woman" for which she should exact compensation. Those are the true wh-res, the very denotation of prostitution, with an unhealthy disposition towards other human beings and the act of sex, regardless of how much time status quo culture spends kissing the female ass to the contrary.

Another thing to consider is, theres no blacklash on guys sleeping around, with women its different we have our reputations to consider,

Complete cultural myth. If there ever was a double standard generally, it no longer exists, and hasn't for some time. Now it's true that women who have impulsive sex are judged harshly, but that is usually a "got drunk and pulled a train" or "giving random guys BJs in plain view in the parking lot" scenario. Women are not judged for having a normal sex life today by most men, and the men who do judge so aren't good bets for women anyway. Moreover, in the status quo, it reeks of hypocrisy for any woman to single out double standards that detriment them as many HUGE double standards as there are to women's benefit today.

Moreover, impulsive promiscuity in women is comorbid with other types of undesirable impulsivity and disordered behavior more often than not. Not so for men, or at least not so for men who can't have sex whenever they want just for the asking like the average woman can, 9X% of men.

The "double standard" excuse is just more whitewash over the same transactional, archaic prostitute's agenda, i.e. "I use sex to trade for what I want, and am judged harshly for having it anyway which curiously and coincidentally justifies my transactional mindset."

The way the genders seek and obtain sex is entirely different. One gender can have as much sex as it wants merely by laying around at home and dialing numbers on their phone. The other gender must always be seeking sex, or get none at all, and has no idea when efforts will pan out. Women who engage in sex impulsively are the equivalent of gluttons. Men who engage in as much sex as they can get are successful hunters. Now for the tiny % of men who have the same sexual opportunities as the -average- woman, they are held to the same standards of gluttony by society. Society deems that those who have opportunities for unlimited sex and take advantage of most of those opportunities are debased, immature and frivolous human beings because there is so much more to life and spending one's precious time than the sex act, which past a point, is a huge timesink.

Also some of the guys on here saying how girls are only useful for sex and nothing else is truly degrading to females

That's simply understandable backlash. Imagine the attitude one might have if there were a cultural bullhorn blasting lies about the nature and relations of the genders in the ear for 50 years. How loud would you yell to drown out that bullhorn?

 

[BraddH]

It is funny how a chick is attacked from every direction the moment she posts something here. Whether she is wrong or not, you must love her very much!

 

[Stagger Lee]

If men judge a woman for having sex quickly it's because consciously or subconsciously men know if she had sex quickly with you, then she has and will have sex with other men quickly.

My experience is women have sex fairly quickly with a guy or they never have sex with the guy. Women claim they don't do this, but that is just deception and it pisses me off. Women never put their money where their mouth is, and say one thing and do another.

If women really did wait to really get to know a guy before having sex, then most women would be dating one guy and in relationships. This isn't really happening that much. For women to pull this off they would have to lower their super-hypergamous standards in order to find a matched guy willing to invest that much time and effort in one female.

Women take men for complete fools if they think we'd buy the baloney they're trying to sell.

 

[SamTheHobit]

If a women sleeps with me on the first date than 90% of the time shes fvcked plenty of men. <10

In that case I wouldn't be interested in any form of long term relationship.

I'm guessing a lot of guys here are comfortable with fvcking slvts. So its all pretty subjective. I'm also guessing it doesn't matter to them because they haven't developed an "Emotional bond" of sorts.

 

[BraddH]

If a women sleeps with me on the first date than 90% of the time shes fvcked plenty of men. <10

In that case I wouldn't be interested in any form of long term relationship.

I'm guessing a lot of guys here are comfortable with fvcking slvts. So its all pretty subjective. I'm also guessing it doesn't matter to them because they haven't developed an "Emotional bond" of sorts.

Enough said with this one. Perfect.

 

[djgirl]

What most guys need to understand though is the modern day woman has to work these days to survive even if she has a family and kids, so then why should she come home and get lumped with everything? eg cooking, cleaning, taking care of the kids while the guy sits on his ass watching tv/playing video games? how is that fair?

True you might find women who have been on a long dry spell who might sleep with you just like that but generally it isnt a good look on her....she comes off as "easy", no girl wants to be known as that.

I have had plenty of guys on first and second dates try to lure me into sleeping with them and i wouldnt do it, not because im playing hard to get but because your still a stranger in my eyes and i dont just want a guy to sleep with me then decide if im worth it.

A guy would be more attractive in my eyes if he was actually keen on getting to know me, enjoy spending time with me and wasnt so thirsty about trying to get in my pants. Id be more inclined to go for him then the other thirsty men trying to get me.

thanks for all the guys sticking up for me too! im not trying to flame anyone, just trying to get you guys to see things from a ladys point of view. And btw my tattoos and being bi has really nothing to do with it. Dont stereotype

 

[Skyline]

Woah, let's stop right here...

The experienced guys on here generally know better than to "pressure" a woman into sleeping with them. The goal is to make the woman want to sleep with them without even mentioning it. The girl I'm currently seeing had no problem fvcking me on the first date.



You seen to think that "charm" is something that a woman consciously recognizes. It isn't. True "charm" (or in this case seduction) focuses on the unconscious of the woman. It works more on her emotionally, and makes her feel the desire to sleep with the man. There is generally no verbal mention of sex. To her, it just feels right.



The girl I'm seeing doesn't qualify for either category. According to her, she hasn't had a man in the last 3-4 years and is currently chasing after a higher position at her workplace. The day I met her, she was instantly attracted and made out with me within the first 30 minutes.



It's not degrading, it's the truth. Women who are physically attractive but have the personality of a sand blaster are NOT worth keeping around.



If a woman isn't willing to clean the house and cook meals, then she's unsuitable for mating with. She needs these traits to give her child a good home. If she's unwilling to be a "slave" when it comes to keeping a good home, then she's not suitable to be a "slave" to a child who's dependent on her to change diapers and breast feed.

This post is fantastic. Pack it up, no more debating even needed.

 

[fuzzball]

you know i do agree with the original thesis presented by the OP.

on this site it seems men need to be emotionless drones almost. it also seems women have no use beyond sex which i can understand because I have met a fair amount of women with the personality of a toaster. then again I have met a fair amount of men with a personality of a toaster as well so that cuts both ways.

I also have to say and am shocked no one brought it up but the relationships i know that have lasted 40+ years are those that get this....WAITED to have sex until after marriage...this is actually what the honeymoon was meant for originally. the strongest marriages I have seen have waited for sex till after marriage. its also documented that that sex is not even the number 1 reason for divorce or why marriages stay together....i dont even think it hits the top 10 reasons for either one.

so lets cut all the crap....you dont have sex with a girl to get to know a girl. it hasnt statistically worked out....it hasnt historically worked out....it just flat out does not work out.

furthermore as the OP said you cant expect quality women and then demand they all screw your brains out on the first date. if you are seducing her you are just as guilty for the sex as she is. being the man I might argue you are more guilty.

it also seems this site has something against families in general which is quite unhealthy. while i understand the "i need to sow my wild oats mentality" the ultimate goal of both sexes should be to pair up and start a family(this doesnt mean marry the first girl you see). constantly trying to get laid by a new girl every night goes contrary to natures design. yes so does feminism but Im not talking about that right now. I think both sides are quite guilty and this site unless people are ultimately going to use it to start families and make the family unit stronger they are as guilty as the accusations they lash out at feminism for.

so while this site rightfully puts blame on women for acting nuts and cracks the female code.....unless men right the train again and put it on the proper track then really we are just as guilty and honestly since men are the ones setting the tone for the dates and are the leaders of the family I think a bit more blame falls on men for letting the sickness of feminism and the desire to bang every girl we see mentalities control us. if as this site points out.....we as men are the controllers of the relationship then we should reflect back at girls high quality and high standards and morals. but it seems we'd all rather just get laid for the infinite time.

you cant expect high quality LTR girls when you yourself are not a high quality LTR man and history seems to tell us that means waiting till the honeymoon to do it with her. you can argue with me on that all you want but the facts are the facts.

 

[Stagger Lee]

you know i do agree with the original thesis presented by the OP.

on this site it seems men need to be emotionless drones almost. it also seems women have no use beyond sex which i can understand because I have met a fair amount of women with the personality of a toaster. then again I have met a fair amount of men with a personality of a toaster as well so that cuts both ways.

I also have to say and am shocked no one brought it up but the relationships i know that have lasted 40+ years are those that get this....WAITED to have sex until after marriage...this is actually what the honeymoon was meant for originally. the strongest marriages I have seen have waited for sex till after marriage. its also documented that that sex is not even the number 1 reason for divorce or why marriages stay together....i dont even think it hits the top 10 reasons for either one.

so lets cut all the crap....you dont have sex with a girl to get to know a girl. it hasnt statistically worked out....it hasnt historically worked out....it just flat out does not work out.

furthermore as the OP said you cant expect quality women and then demand they all screw your brains out on the first date. if you are seducing her you are just as guilty for the sex as she is. being the man I might argue you are more guilty.

it also seems this site has something against families in general which is quite unhealthy. while i understand the "i need to sow my wild oats mentality" the ultimate goal of both sexes should be to pair up and start a family(this doesnt mean marry the first girl you see). constantly trying to get laid by a new girl every night goes contrary to natures design. yes so does feminism but Im not talking about that right now. I think both sides are quite guilty and this site unless people are ultimately going to use it to start families and make the family unit stronger they are as guilty as the accusations they lash out at feminism for.

so while this site rightfully puts blame on women for acting nuts and cracks the female code.....unless men right the train again and put it on the proper track then really we are just as guilty and honestly since men are the ones setting the tone for the dates and are the leaders of the family I think a bit more blame falls on men for letting the sickness of feminism and the desire to bang every girl we see mentalities control us. if as this site points out.....we as men are the controllers of the relationship then we should reflect back at girls high quality and high standards and morals. but it seems we'd all rather just get laid for the infinite time.

you cant expect high quality LTR girls when you yourself are not a high quality LTR man and history seems to tell us that means waiting till the honeymoon to do it with her. you can argue with me on that all you want but the facts are the facts.

OK but it is a FEMALE responsibility to choose one guy,wait for sex and to further a LTR. You are putting all the responsibility on the male. Females are the selectors and have the option, not males.

You are missing the point that most females do not want to pick ONE stable and sincere guy, do not want to wait for sex, do not want to further a LTR.

It works kind of like this. Guy: "Let's have sex.". Girl: "I'm not having sex until marriage." Guy: "OK let's get married!". Girl: "I don't know you that well yet." Guy: "what if we were still dating after 2 months and got married?" Girl: "OK if we're still dating after 2 months then we can get married.".

But the point is females fundamentally get to be the selectors and set the timing of sex. It's their choice. Most women are choosing many short term mating with guys too attractive to be available for anything else.

 

[pinkfl]

It boils down to the fact that men are not providers in this day and age. Face it, if you want to go ahead and say that a woman needs to have all these feminine traits and being domestic goddesses, then you need to be a provider. You need to be able to be a breadwinner.

That means having your life together and having a real job and supporting yourself. But most men aren't in this position in life. Partially, we can blame the economy...it really does suck right now. But I don't like placing the blame there, because a real go-getter can get a job if they put real effort in. How do I know? Because I've witnessed it. My father's company closed, and the very next day he had another job lined up paying better. He didn't come crying home to my mother and then lie around drinking beer. He put his big-boy panties on and went out there and got a job. And I have the same work ethic as he does. If I want a job, give me a week. I'll have at least 3 job interviews lined up and I'll get to pick where I want to work.

So, am I going to settle for a manchild? No.

Because face it, biology means I have a chance of getting pregnant. Sure, birth control and condoms are super effective, but there is ALWAYS that chance, and I don't believe that a child is a "punishment" for having sex. It's a gift, and that child deserves a home and a loving family. So, for my future generation, I'm not going to lie down with some guy just because he's "hot" and gives me tingly feelings. I'll do it when he's committed.

If a girl is smart, she knows how to ignore those tingly feelings. She knows how to say no.

And that is why a quality woman will NEVER sleep with someone without higher levels of commitment, NO MATTER WHO HE IS. You can fool yourselves all you want thinking that she'll want Brad Pitt or some other celebrity, but the truth is she won't.

And a quality man is willing to wait for that woman. He's able to recognize that screwing some floozy isn't rewarding. You complain about getting stuck with all these unstable girls...but that's the type of girl that's going to screw you on the first three dates.

I keep wondering when some of you are going to realize that you can't pay cubic zirconia prices and expect a diamond.

 

[youngmack]

I'm not going to lie down with some guy just because he's "hot" and gives me tingly feelings. I'll do it when he's committed.

If a girl is smart, she knows how to ignore those tingly feelings. She knows how to say no.

I'm sure that's what every female says, but turns around and does the opposite.

 

[dasein]

So, for my future generation, I'm not going to lie down with some guy just because he's "hot" and gives me tingly feelings. I'll do it when he's committed.

If a girl is smart, she knows how to ignore those tingly feelings. She knows how to say no.

And that is why a quality woman will NEVER sleep with someone without higher levels of commitment, NO MATTER WHO HE IS. You can fool yourselves all you want thinking that she'll want Brad Pitt or some other celebrity, but the truth is she won't.

What a load. You have women on a ridiculously high pedestal. News for you, women are no better than men, and in most cases significantly worse in the "wisdom and self-control of the faculties" category. Quality women get banged by men they hardly know constantly. I've banged many, and if I were halfway as competent as I am now when I was in my 20s and early 30s, would have banged dozens if not hundreds more.

The mistake you are making is that in the age of cheap abortions and the morning after pill that pregnancy or the threat of it still "raises women's awareness" somehow in the vigilance of being the gatekeeper of sex. BS. Men have FAR MORE risk in sex with strange women today via wayward sperm and rape accusations, yet still go at it. Women are no different. They hesitate to have sex because 1. they aren't attracted, 2. they are physically intimidated to a point, concerned with physical safety, 3. they have something better or several somethings already going on. That's about it today, no "danger of pregnancy" trite BS.

 

[TheODB]

What a load. You have women on a ridiculously high pedestal. News for you, women are no better than men, and in most cases significantly worse in the "wisdom and self-control of the faculties" category. Quality women get banged by men they hardly know constantly. I've banged many, and if I were halfway as competent as I am now when I was in my 20s and early 30s, would have banged dozens if not hundreds more.

The mistake you are making is that in the age of cheap abortions and the morning after pill that pregnancy or the threat of it still "raises women's awareness" somehow in the vigilance of being the gatekeeper of sex. BS. Men have FAR MORE risk in sex with strange women today via wayward sperm and rape accusations, yet still go at it. Women are no different. They hesitate to have sex because 1. they aren't attracted, 2. they are physically intimidated to a point, concerned with physical safety, 3. they have something better or several somethings already going on. That's about it today, no "danger of pregnancy" trite BS.

Howdy, dasein. It's TheBigQuestion from LoveShack. I've decided to take a self-imposed exile from that place and see what this site has to offer. After all, I was often accused of being a troll from here. Maybe now I will actually become one.

I think pinkfl's post makes more sense when you take it in its entirety as opposed to focusing in on her exaggerated paranoia in regards to getting pregnant. A lot of the people in this thread have said that the primary roles of women in a marriage or long-term relationship are to be (1) domestic and, if applicable, (2) maternal. In other words, they believe a woman should enthusiastically embrace her traditional roles. There's nothing wrong with that, but pinkfl is right when she says that the amount of men who are actually capable of "bringing home the bacon" in the traditional sense has dwindled dramatically over the past few decades. Of course, legislated feminism has alienated many a man and is thus at least partly responsible for this development. I suppose that women aware of this reality who would not mate with these types of guys could be "quality."

Essentially, if we're playing armchair philosophers, pinkfl isn't entirely incorrect. From what I've seen, women, regardless of whether they are "quality" (wtf does that mean anyway?), regardless of what walk of life from which they emerge, will have sex quite early on in the process of getting to know a man.

 

[casaanova]

I've found that the length of time a girl makes you wait and her actual chastity are inversely proportional. If she hasn't been with that many guys, she won't put a timestamp on "how long you have to wait" to have sex, she'll just let it happen naturally (like it should). However, if her number has already crossed into undeniable slvt territory, that's when they start putting up fences and rules dictating how you'll be fed her leftover morsels (if you end up being fed at all)

Guys expect to have quality girls and they expect the chick to give head within the first or second date? That is simply stupid. If the chick is really quality and don't wanna share their intimacy just with any stranger, then you next her and say that she is a bad chick? Sometimes I wonder whether this whole forum is a hypocrisy.

Where has all the love and friendship gone to? Is it true that love and friendship is not accepted here? Just biology? Animals? We are human beings for god sake.. Why in the hell would you drag humanity down to animals again.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink

 

[Alvafe]

It boils down to the fact that men are not providers in this day and age. Face it, if you want to go ahead and say that a woman needs to have all these feminine traits and being domestic goddesses, then you need to be a provider. You need to be able to be a breadwinner.

That means having your life together and having a real job and supporting yourself. But most men aren't in this position in life. Partially, we can blame the economy...it really does suck right now. But I don't like placing the blame there, because a real go-getter can get a job if they put real effort in. How do I know? Because I've witnessed it. My father's company closed, and the very next day he had another job lined up paying better. He didn't come crying home to my mother and then lie around drinking beer. He put his big-boy panties on and went out there and got a job. And I have the same work ethic as he does. If I want a job, give me a week. I'll have at least 3 job interviews lined up and I'll get to pick where I want to work.

So, am I going to settle for a manchild? No.

Because face it, biology means I have a chance of getting pregnant. Sure, birth control and condoms are super effective, but there is ALWAYS that chance, and I don't believe that a child is a "punishment" for having sex. It's a gift, and that child deserves a home and a loving family. So, for my future generation, I'm not going to lie down with some guy just because he's "hot" and gives me tingly feelings. I'll do it when he's committed.

If a girl is smart, she knows how to ignore those tingly feelings. She knows how to say no.

And that is why a quality woman will NEVER sleep with someone without higher levels of commitment, NO MATTER WHO HE IS. You can fool yourselves all you want thinking that she'll want Brad Pitt or some other celebrity, but the truth is she won't.

And a quality man is willing to wait for that woman. He's able to recognize that screwing some floozy isn't rewarding. You complain about getting stuck with all these unstable girls...but that's the type of girl that's going to screw you on the first three dates.

I keep wondering when some of you are going to realize that you can't pay cubic zirconia prices and expect a diamond.

most men have stable and can win his bread and for his family, but not buy a new car each year, a new Iphone each 6 months plus travels, new dresses to each time they go out, simple put woman can't control they cost, is not a hard thing to think why almost all advertising have woman as targets, they will spend all they money without care, men will save his money for something he find worth to have it also come to my mind why its easier find a men have savings or have insurance named to his wife and childrens, women is pretty hard you even find one with simple pig bank.

plus why a guy nowadays will be a provider? no woman is worthy the hassle, and since we are bend to lose half of our money if your wife feels like grassing on that greener pasture. woman today have all rights no reponsability, and when we try to make then to have more obligations they complain its too hard.

one thing I think I undertand why woman selebrate they 15 year so hard, it to tell everyone, see her? she will not mature past this point.

 

[DonGorgon]

all you need to know is hat while she makes you wait for sex she is Fing man other dudes on the first night.. it all depends on her level of attraction how fast fro has sex with you

 

[BraddH]

all you need to know is hat while she makes you wait for sex she is Fing man other dudes on the first night.. it all depends on her level of attraction how fast fro has sex with you

You certainly must have never known what love is. Your mother must have missed you. I feel sorry.