Do guys really care about a girls sexual history?

[Stormieweather]

So basically, men are excused from whatever sexual misbehavior they engage in because the woman 'chose' them?

And that if women didn't say yes to men's sexual advances, there would be no promiscuity?

Further, men are too stupid to make their own choices and cannot be blamed for sleeping with any woman who 'chooses' him?

Oh and willful sexual acts (according to bmwmcaw) is part of the definition of being a slut. Only unwilling sexual participants can be considered decent?

The abuse excuse is not a valid reason for undesirable behavior. Women or girls who are raped or sexually molested should just forget about it and not let it affect them, right?

"Think of a man and take away all reason and accountability"? Doesn't that directly conflict with previous arguements? That women have GREATER accountablity? This quote seems to imply that we're unable to reason as well.

So, just shut the fuck up, learn to cook and keep our legs closed until Mr. Right appears to teach us everything we ever wanted to know about sex...after we're happily married, of course.

<damn, I'm glad there are plenty of people who disagree with you>

Stormie

[Trilby]

I told you guys he's a misogynist.

He's not getting laid, either. What a huge surprise.

[9th Engineer]

I really don't have any problem with people who have had sex within previous committed relationships. People repeat themselves, I trust someone (and I'm not differenciating here) to follow their past habits within a relationship we might have. So if someone has a history of rapid changeovers of sexual partners then I wouldn't expect them to stick with me for very long, or at least not monogamously. If someone has been in one or two steady relationships that involved monogamous sex then I would expect that pattern to continue. If someone I was interested in told me that's the case with them but that they average 3-4 boyfriends a year then I'd take that as a sign of a different problem. Or if I was older and they said they've gone through 15-20 dud relationships of that level I'd take another hard look at why they got into so many failed relationships.

I know guys generally like to commit more to girls who make them wait a period of time for sex (not sure of the exact underpinnings of that), do girls feel more attacted to a guy who turns down their sexual advances for a while?

[Iggy]

Originally Posted by bmwmcaw

Jack Nicholson said it best in the character he played in” As good as it gets."
He answers a women’s question in an elevator on how he's able to write about women so well "its as if you know us."

His answer..."I think of a man and take away all reason and accountability."

If anyone has ever explain women better I've never heard it.

So now you are quoting a movie to defend your argument? Yeah, that gives your argument credibility.

I see we will not come to an agreement. Willful sexual acts within a trusting, loving, and long term* relationship do not make a slut. I can agree with the "reckless behavior" part though. If any person (regardless of gender) is completely reckless with their bodies I would say they are a slut/man whore.

I think you are putting way too much stock in the "advantage" that women have. What about the ugly girls that have to fight with the man to get them to have sex with them? They obviously have to wait for the man to open the gate for sexual encounters, so should they be applauded for promiscuity? I think not. No one should be.

But you are going to believe what you want to believe since you don't have really have a reasonable argument anyway.

Edit: *By long term I am referring to at least over a year.

[DucksNuts]

Originally Posted by 9th

I know guys generally like to commit more to girls who make them wait a period of time for sex (not sure of the exact underpinnings of that), do girls feel more attacted to a guy who turns down their sexual advances for a while?

Not sure, the *chase* is a bit more exciting, but not sure whether the inevitable outcome will differ.

Seriously, I think I live on another planet at times....I've had long term relationships (3yrs+), plus a few shorter term ones (over 6mths) and except for the first one (aged 16), I havent withheld the sex.

**Proof reading would be a good thing

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Iggy

So now you are quoting a movie to defend your argument? Yeah, that gives your argument credibility.

Not just that, but a hateful, mysogenistic, antisocial character in a movie...

[9th Engineer]

The chase? That's it? So it all boils down to the hunt for sex then...

[Clodfobble]

Just to clear something up, bmwmcaw, I am assuming from your arguments that you are in fact a virgin, correct?

[footfootfoot]

Are, and will be it seems...

[DucksNuts]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

The chase? That's it? So it all boils down to the hunt for sex then...

Its not about the hunt for sex, but its been mentioned that if a girl doesnt put out straight away, she appears more unobtainable/ desirable....therefor, the *chase* is more appealing, because, well...there IS a chase I guess.

Whether or not there is a chase or sex is given up straight away, wont change if the relationship is going to work or not...IMO.

[morethanpretty]

Originally Posted by Elspode

Is that Pez *pieces* or Pez *dispensers*? Either way... Oh...and, interesting measuring system you've got there, lady.

The sticks that are used to refill the dispenser...I got bored with the Standard and Metric system...so I decided to make up my own. The full pez stick is now my inch and the single pez piece is my centimeter...I am on a mission to spread my new delicious form of measurement to everyone!

[morethanpretty]

Originally Posted by bmwmcaw

WOMEN CHOOSE AND MEN WAIT TO BE CHOOSEN.

I have chosen and waited to be choosen (is that even the correct spelling?)...I'm pretty sure I'm not a hemaphidite...wait one sec...*checks*...nope only a vagina...

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

I know guys generally like to commit more to girls who make them wait a period of time for sex (not sure of the exact underpinnings of that), do girls feel more attacted to a guy who turns down their sexual advances for a while?

My personal answer is no. It just wouldn't make a difference to me - I either find someone attractive or I don't. They don't become more attractive by not sleeping with me.

I've only been in that situation once - I was dating a Christian guy who had worked out his own solution to the sex/ chastity dilemma. He only slept with women he was prepared to have a baby with. If he would be willing to be connected to this woman throughout her life to raise a child, then he believed God would be satisfied with his choice. He had only had 2 partners and used contraception with both, but the criteria was there.

After 4 months I felt our relationship wouldn't progress any further and we settled for being friends. I find it pretty scary when the bar is raised that high, but I did respect him for it.

For the record, he also believed people should avoid masturbation. Not because it was a sin, but because satisfying yourself physically took the edge off the urge to search for your soulmate.

[joelnwil]

"For the record, he also believed people should avoid masturbation. Not because it was a sin, but because satisfying yourself physically took the edge off the urge to search for your soulmate."

Failure to ejaculate frequently, masturbating or otherwise, also raises a man's chances of prostate cancer later in life.

I think I know why (at age 70) I have never had any prostate problems.

But more to the point, I think that focusing on the other party's sexual history is foolish, and if either party does that then there is some kind of mental problem involved.

Of course, when religion is involved, there is no limiting the crazyness.

[Trilby]

[quote=joelnwilI think that focusing on the other party's sexual history is foolish, and if either party does that then there is some kind of mental problem involved.[/QUOTE]

Amen.