NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm just curious as to people's opinions on the subject... what do you think of it? Is it a good idea/bad idea, does it really depend on the situation?

*watches thread with interest*

I absolutely do not think it is a good idea. Says little about one's self respect.

Not on the first date...

I'm just curious as to people's opinions on the subject... what do you think of it? Is it a good idea/bad idea, does it really depend on the situation?

Depends on both the person and the situation. *Unprotected* first date sex however is generally a pretty bad idea.

I absolutely do not think it is a good idea. Says little about one's self respect.
Someone can't have self respect if they have sex on the first date? How do you figure?

Depends on both the person and the situation. *Unprotected* first date sex however is generally a pretty bad idea.
Oh yes, unprotected first date sex is definitely a bad idea I think. Unless there's some intensive medical testing beforehand or something...

To me it just says how desperate someone is to have sex, if they have sex on the first date

Slut.

No, just kidding.

It's 2006.
*counts carefully*
Yeah.. it ain't the nineties.
Promiscuity is in.
And monogamy and chastity are as deja vue as Clinton.

sex on the first date means that the entire "relationship" will be based thereon. if that's what you want, great. but don't expect anything much worthwhile to come out of it, except that.

Someone can't have self respect if they have sex on the first date? How do you figure?

It gives the message that you are easy. On the first date, there's barely enough time to get to know about who a person is. I'd like to know someone before I become intimate with them. Do you really want to share that much of yourself with someone youve known for a few hours?

*I say "you" not as in you personally, but as people in general.

Hmm... I've never thought of it as desperate. It seems that desperate would be hiring somebody to fuck you...

I certainly don't have a problem with it...

It gives the message that you are easy. On the first date, there's barely enough time to get to know about who a person is. I'd like to know someone before I become intimate with them. Do you really want to share that much of yourself with someone youve known for a few hours?

*I say "you" not as in you personally, but as people in general.
You go on dates with people you've known for a few hours?

It depends upon the parties involved, how well they know each other, how they feel about sex, the circumstances involved, etc.

I've had sex on a "first date" many times, sometimes when it was someone with whom I had numerous contracts prior to that "first date," and sometimes not.

Now, in order to have truly great sex, the parties need to know each other very well. Sometimes that can happen over the Internet, sometimes meeting each other IRL for the first time can be a rather intense experience on its own.

It gives the message that you are easy. On the first date, there's barely enough time to get to know about who a person is. I'd like to know someone before I become intimate with them. Do you really want to share that much of yourself with someone youve known for a few hours?

*I say "you" not as in you personally, but as people in general.

Totally agree with that, it's not as if you have to wait months or years or something, just a few dates maybe? is that so difficult?

You go on dates with people you've known for a few hours?

No-I dont go on dates. I'm married. You know what I meant.

Bad idea. Even if a person doesn't have a moral reason like 'waiting for marriage,' explaining herpes or some such thing to your future spouse would be awkward.

The problem with first dates and sex is, you're probably just drunk. If it's really the 'right' person, it can wait, if it's not the right person, you saved yourself the trouble of complications.

No-I dont go on dates. I'm married. You know what I meant.
I've never been on a date with someone I've only known for a couple hours though, usually it's at least a week or two...

It gives the message that you are easy. On the first date, there's barely enough time to get to know about who a person is. I'd like to know someone before I become intimate with them. Do you really want to share that much of yourself with someone youve known for a few hours?

You seem to be assuming that everyone considers sex to be something extremely intimate. Many people do not.

Bad idea. Even if a person doesn't have a moral reason like 'waiting for marriage,' explaining herpes or some such thing to your future spouse would be awkward.

How is "I had sex before" awkward ?

Totally agree with that, it's not as if you have to wait months or years or something, just a few dates maybe? is that so difficult?

Right- I'm not saying 'hey wait til youre married". But the truth is, if youre a woman and sleep with a guy on the first date, usually he will have no respect for you and think you are slutty. If you are a guy and try to have sex with a girl on the first date, she may be turned off and think thats all youre interested in. Note I said "most" and "some" not "all". Depends on each individuals standards.

But to each his own...

also keep in mind that you are receiving opinions of a largely diverse group. You will most likely get a different perspecitve from someone who is say 16 versus someone who is 31.

sex on the first date is unwise

counting "first date" as being with someone you dont really know. if its the first time you have been on a date with someone you have known for many years it might be different.

too many people turn out to be psycho or get too involved too quickly then its harder to get rid of them. too many who are willing to have sex on the first date are people who do it way too often and thus put you at risk for disease. too many just turn out to be someone who isnt worth having a second date with and so why did you establish an intimate relationship with a loser?

It depends upon the parties involved, how well they know each other, how they feel about sex, the circumstances involved, etc.

I've had sex on a "first date" many times, sometimes when it was someone with whom I had numerous contracts prior to that "first date," and sometimes not.

Now, in order to have truly great sex, the parties need to know each other very well. Sometimes that can happen over the Internet, sometimes meeting each other IRL for the first time can be a rather intense experience on its own.

I totally agree. :)

(except that unlike you, I didn't have many dates :/)

I think it's a bad idea. I would rather wait and see if this person is right for me.


then again, if all your looking for is a one-night-stand and your date is also... then it's not the first date, but the last.

...
How is "I had sex before" awkward ?

I tried to convey.. you would likely have a harder time introducing yourself successfully to the 'right' one in the future if you now have the handicap of baggage, they may then find you less apealing as spouse material and you never get the chance. One bad first date could ruin the rest of your dating life.

Incidently Dakini, as you recently started a thread saying you had a new date can we surmise that you have, shall we say, a particular reason for asking the question?

You seem to be assuming that everyone considers sex to be something extremely intimate. Many people do not.


please explain how you can possibly be more intimate than sex.

It gives the message that you are easy. On the first date, there's barely enough time to get to know about who a person is. I'd like to know someone before I become intimate with them. Do you really want to share that much of yourself with someone youve known for a few hours?

*I say "you" not as in you personally, but as people in general.

I think it's situational. What if two people have been friends for a long time, decide to start dating, and have sex on the first date?

It depends upon the parties involved, how well they know each other, how they feel about sex, the circumstances involved, etc.

I've had sex on a "first date" many times, sometimes when it was someone with whom I had numerous contracts prior to that "first date," and sometimes not.

Now, in order to have truly great sex, the parties need to know each other very well. Sometimes that can happen over the Internet, sometimes meeting each other IRL for the first time can be a rather intense experience on its own.

I completely agree. I have had sex on a first date once. It was with my current fiance and we had gotten to know each other very well via the internet and phone.

Before we met, we were very much in love and were both praying that there would be chemistry when we finally did get to meet in person.

There was more than just chemistry. We ran as fast as we could from the airport where I picked her up.

As for "Hey, we just met, wanna go have sex?"

I'll pass.

My moto has always been, if you just met someone, and they are willing to have sex with you, do you REALLY want to have sex with them? I mean, how many times have they done this?

I've never been on a date with someone I've only known for a couple hours though, usually it's at least a week or two...


Right... so say youve known a person for a couple of weeks, youre interested, he/she is interested. You make a date. Youre excited and anticipating the first date with a person who obviously has peaked your interests. First impressions are important, most people want to look nice and have some hopes for great conversation. If you go right into sex, it doesnt give either person a chance to see what each one is about. Youre basically getting a first impression as far as the dating scene goes. Ive known people for 6 months or longer then gone out on a date with them and they turned out to be quite different on a romantic level. No one likes regret. And what if after a couple of dates you find out "god this person is lame/cruel/crazy/not for me/whatever" wouldnt you possibly regret having sex with them?

Vegetarianistica']please explain how you can possibly be more intimate than sex.

There are two types of intimacy. You have physical (sex) which some people place no importance on. You also have emotional intimacy which other people place no importance on. Then you have people that think both are important, or neither.

I think it's situational. What if two people have been friends for a long time, decide to start dating, and have sex on the first date?


I dont know....I've gone out with a friend whom I was friends with for a few years. The first date was our first encounter on a romantic level and it was enough to just be able to let ourselves bask in that for a while. Having sex with them on the first date would have made us both feel awkward and perhaps made us question was going out on a date a good idea? DId we ruin a friendship? do we feel like we reushed it?

Even if a person doesn't have a moral reason like 'waiting for marriage,' explaining herpes or some such thing to your future spouse would be awkward.

Use contraceptives.

Use contraceptives.

Use contraceptives.

Don't they teach that in sex ed?

There's nothing wrong with sex on the first, second, and third date, as well as randomly screwing people in your class during break - as long as you use contraceptives.

I completely agree. I have had sex on a first date once. It was with my current fiance and we had gotten to know each other very well via the internet and phone.

Before we met, we were very much in love and were both praying that there would be chemistry when we finally did get to meet in person.

There was more than just chemistry. We ran as fast as we could from the airport where I picked her up.

As for "Hey, we just met, wanna go have sex?"

I'll pass.

My moto has always been, if you just met someone, and they are willing to have sex with you, do you REALLY want to have sex with them? I mean, how many times have they done this?

I can see that situation. I guess I'm talking about just a traditional, known each other a few weeks, have a date, jump in bed scenario. If you love the person and have built a relationship like you did, then you are already intimate and sex is just another expression of that.

Originally Posted by The Squeaky Rat
You seem to be assuming that everyone considers sex to be something extremely intimate. Many people do not.

Vegetarianistica']please explain how you can possibly be more intimate than sex.


no doubt. Even if you keep yourself emotionally detached, you are sharing bodily fluids, risk of disease, risk of pregnancy, risk of future complications from a partner that wants more than sex...blablabla.

Lets keep the facts in mind: You can conceive a child the first time you have sex with someone, even if you are using protection. So the question should be:

WOULD YOU RISK HAVING A BABY WITH SOMEONE YOU ONLY HAD ONE DATE WITH? (or would you risk getting an incurable disease for a few moments of pleasure with a stranger?)

Sex is not a video game. You screw up, you cant just hit the RESET button.

Lets keep the facts in mind: You can conceive a child the first time you have sex with someone, even if you are using protection. So the question should be:

WOULD YOU RISK HAVING A BABY WITH SOMEONE YOU ONLY HAD ONE DATE WITH? (or would you risk getting an incurable disease for a few moments of pleasure with a stranger?)

Several points:

1. The chance of pregnancy assuming contraception is used is INSANELY low. What's the chance of pregnancy when using The Pill + a condom?

2. Not all sex is vaginal sex. You're having oral sex iwth a person, what's the chance of pregnancy?

3. I'm bisexual. Does your argument apply to any dates I may have with males?

Its flat out wrong, christ have respect for each other, damn you!:rolleyes:

Rich

WOULD YOU RISK HAVING A BABY WITH SOMEONE YOU ONLY HAD ONE DATE WITH? (or would you risk getting an incurable disease for a few moments of pleasure with a stranger?)

Which is why I said that having unprotected sex on a first date is a bad idea. Not using contraception is also a bad idea on the 50th date or in the 7th year of marriage if you do not want children - though one hopes the risk of STDs is somewhat lower then.

Use contraceptives.

Use contraceptives.

Use contraceptives.

Don't they teach that in sex ed?

There's nothing wrong with sex on the first, second, and third date, as well as randomly screwing people in your class during break - as long as you use contraceptives.


No form of birth control/contraception is foolproof. Take it from someone who got pregnant while on the pill by a man who had a recent vasectomy.

One in a million is no consolation to the one who loses.

No form of birth control/contraception is foolproof. Take it from someone who got pregnant while on the pill by a man who had a recent vasectomy.

One in a million is no consolation to the one who loses.

I take it you have a serious objection against abortions ?

Several points:

1. The chance of pregnancy assuming contraception is used is INSANELY low. What's the chance of pregnancy when using The Pill + a condom?



Well, do the math. One out of ten with a condom, one out of a hundred with the Pill. Put them together and you still have a 1 in 1000 chance. That is NOT 'insanely low'.

Would you play russian roulette with a gun because there was only one bullet in 1000 chambers?

i wouldnt consider that 'insanely low'. Insane, maybe.

Yes, ubt you need to know the odds.

For instance, there's a chance every day that I get hit by a car in the street. It's greater then the chance of me getting a girl pregnant when using a condom. I still walk the streets.

There is a chance of me getting cancer by using a cellphone. But I still use a cellphone.

I am aware of the risks and I do things based on that awareness.

If your chance of getting a girl pregnant is 50%, don't f*ck her untill you're sure you want to have a long-term relationship.

If you can reduce them to 0.001% by using a condom or to 0% by doing oral instead of vaginal sex, f*ck each other's lights out if you want to.

I take it you have a serious objection against abortions ?

I have no serious objections against abortion. But i think it should be a last recourse. I do not recommend using it as your main form of birth control.

YOu must be male, otherwise you wouldnt think abortion is a good alternative. What woman wants to use abortion as birth control?

Hey if both like the idea; what the hell....

If neither are looking for commitment and both understand it's a one time deal and are just out to have fun why the heck not? As long as it's safe no harm done.

Faking interest to get someone into bed though is a no no.

For instance, there's a chance every day that I get hit by a car in the street. It's greater then the chance of me getting a girl pregnant when using a condom. I still walk the streets.



Where do you live that your chances of getting hit by a car when you walk the streets is greater than 1 out of 10???

I have no serious objections against abortion. But i think it should be a last recourse. I do not recommend using it as your main form of birth control.

Neither do I.

YOu must be male, otherwise you wouldnt think abortion is a good alternative. What woman wants to use abortion as birth control?

I didn't say it was an alternative; I just inquired to see if you objected to this last resort. Preventing it is of course less stressfull for the parties involved.

If neither are looking for commitment and both understand it's a one time deal and are just out to have fun why the heck not? As long as it's safe no harm done.

Faking interest to get someone into bed though is a no no.


WHY NOT??? Is 18 years of child support payments reason enough?

agian, there is no 100% safe way to have sex. Even oral sex can give you genital herpes on your mouth.

I take it you have a serious objection against abortions ?
abortion is a choice only women have. if a man gets a woman pregnant, he is at the mercy of that decision.

is THAT a position you really want to be in?

Well, do the math. One out of ten with a condom, one out of a hundred with the Pill. Put them together and you still have a 1 in 1000 chance. That is NOT 'insanely low'.

Would you play russian roulette with a gun because there was only one bullet in 1000 chambers?

i wouldnt consider that 'insanely low'. Insane, maybe.


Uhm. I hate to tell you but your math is a tad simplistic. You have to add in other factors such as when the woman is ovulating, etc.

It is harder then you think. Most pregnancy "accidents" happen because they weren't using contracetives as they didn't have any or got caught up in the moment.

Well, do the math. One out of ten with a condom, one out of a hundred with the Pill. Put them together and you still have a 1 in 1000 chance. That is NOT 'insanely low'.

Your numbers are too pessimistic. Three out of 100 women having intercourse using a male condom correctly as contraception get pregnant in a year. Note carefully that this is *per year*, not per sexual encounter.

Uhm. I hate to tell you but your math is a tad simplistic. You have to add in other factors such as when the woman is ovulating, etc.

It is harder then you think. Most pregnancy "accidents" happen because they weren't using contracetives as they didn't have any or got caught up in the moment.


I sure wish i had the statistics for how many men are paying child support (or fleeing child support) for children they had with women they didn't care about or intend to have children with.

Its easy to brush aside statistics like 1:1000 or 1:million as long as you are on the right side of that equation. If YOURE THE ONE, though, it sucks like hell.

Masurbation seems like a much better choice than taking that risk. But that's me. Some people like to drive fast on motorcycles and skydive, too.

abortion is a choice only women have. if a man gets a woman pregnant, he is at the mercy of that decision.

is THAT a position you really want to be in?

As long as she does it before the foetus develops the ability to feel or think it is her decision to make. I personally would prefer to prevent that situation though, since it is strenuous for her.

As long as she does it before the foetus develops the ability to feel or think it is her decision to make. I personally would prefer to precent that situation though, since it is strenuous for her.

Well, guess what? She doesn't want an abortion. She is in love with you. She is going to try to get you to marry her, and when you don't she will make your life miserable, and the courts will help her.

If youre a male, you get one chance to make a choice of whether this happens to you or not. Take your pants off around the woman and you're at risk.

Unfortunately for most men, Nature has you hardwired with a strong drive to procreate, and as males you are genetically predispositioned to promiscuity (males' best genetic strategy is quantities of offspring, females' best genetic strategy is quality).

Well, guess what? She doesn't want an abortion. She is in love with you. She is going to try to get you to marry her, and when you don't she will make your life miserable, and the courts will help her.

Then I will oblige. Your point ?

Then I will oblige. Your point ?

My point is that sex carries consequences beyond just those moments of fun and pleasure. Any decision that has consequences on that many lives for that many years should be taken into greater consideration than a one can give during the course of one date.

As long as she does it before the foetus develops the ability to feel or think it is her decision to make. I personally would prefer to prevent that situation though, since it is strenuous for her.

you are at the mercy of the decision no matter what decision she makes. if she decides to get an abortion at 18 weeks. if she decides she needs to terminate at 26 weeks. if she decides to bring the child to term and force you to pay 18 years of child support. if she has the baby then abandons it to you to care for. if she turns out to be a terrible mother who neglects your child or exposes it to bad influences (like one-night-stand after one-night-stand). if she turns out to be a psychobitch who teaches your child to despise you.

you are utterly at the mercy of that decision.

personally i think sex on the first date is a fabulous idea and i insist on it. of course, i also insist that all of my dates include copius amounts of alcohol and hip hop music at seedy dive bars.

but then again, maybe i'm just a slut. and maybe all the women i go out with are sluts as well. but ive never had a really bad first-date-sex experience.

personally i think sex on the first date is a fabulous idea and i insist on it. of course, i also insist that all of my dates include copius amounts of alcohol and hip hop music at seedy dive bars.

but then again, maybe i'm just a slut. and maybe all the women i go out with are sluts as well. but ive never had a really bad first-date-sex experience.


lol-well at least you are completely honest

Not on the first date, but the second date is fine. It's OK, I married him to keep him quiet... :D :D :D

I cannot recall a first date where I didn't have sex ... so .... *shrug*.

I cannot recall a first date where I didn't have sex ... so .... *shrug*.

well, good luck with that, then.

Not the first date!! just my view on that.

I cannot recall a first date where I didn't have sex ... so .... *shrug*.


:eek:

I'm speechless. For once.

I don't see the point of dates at all. I'll have the sex, please, no waste of time dinner or movie, or whatever. If you wanna get to know me, mention it afterwards and we might go out for coffee or something.

if it's an old friend, then go ahead: you already know that person well.

if it's someone you've recently met, or, say, a co-worker... it's prolly a no-no.

if it's an old friend, then go ahead: you already know that person well.

if it's someone you've recently met, or, say, a co-worker... it's prolly a no-no.

I would've put those the other way around, personally. If it is an old friend, and things get awkward because you had sex, that's a lot worse than having to avoid one person you'll probably never see again (OK, so that doesn't work for the co-worker part. meh)

In general, it's not something I would do, but that doesn't make it a bad idea. Nor can you generalise. Except to say that you can't generalise. Just keep it as a possible end, and see how it's going.

No sex before marriage or equivalent of marriage: You don't have to be married. You could live together.

I totally agree. :)

(except that unlike you, I didn't have many dates :/)
I USE to have all the dates I could handle, and then some. Operant phrase: use to. :(

My moto has always been, if you just met someone, and they are willing to have sex with you, do you REALLY want to have sex with them? I mean, how many times have they done this?
Don't discount the "experience factor." :D

No sex before marriage or equivalent of marriage: You don't have to be married. You could live together.

But why?

:eek:

I'm speechless. For once.
[ cheers wildly! ] :D

But why?

Yeah, why? What if they suck in bed? You kick them out? Divorce them? It's best to give them a test run first. As we say: "Köp inte grisen i säcken!" (~ "don't buy a pig in a poke", and really, this can turn out to be quite the unpleasant poke).

Well, do the math. One out of ten with a condom, one out of a hundred with the Pill. Put them together and you still have a 1 in 1000 chance. That is NOT 'insanely low'.

Where did you get these numbers?

if it's an old friend, then go ahead: you already know that person well.

if it's someone you've recently met, or, say, a co-worker... it's prolly a no-no.
I strongly recommend that you assiduously avoid any and all sex with "co-workers." The work environment is stressful enough already without adding sex or "romance" into the mix.

I can't give any general rules on sex with friends, since most female friends I have had became a "friend" after sex, not before. :p

You seem to be assuming that everyone considers sex to be something extremely intimate. Many people do not.

If sex isn't intimate, you're not doing it right.

I have no serious objections against abortion. But i think it should be a last recourse. I do not recommend using it as your main form of birth control.

YOu must be male, otherwise you wouldnt think abortion is a good alternative. What woman wants to use abortion as birth control?

All morality aside, abortion is really bad birth control. The body treats it as if it were a miscarriage, and still goes through all the chemical changes associated with that. How do you think those "early pregnancy detection" things work? They detect chemical changes that happen very rapidly upon conception. Those changes affect the woman's entire body and I believe the research says that women who have miscarriages or abortions have a much higher risk for breast cancer, and a few other types of cancer.

I absolutely do not think it is a good idea. Says little about one's self respect.

So - if I took you out for dinner and a movie... I'm going home alone...?

;)

... I believe the research says that women who have miscarriages or abortions have a much higher risk for breast cancer, and a few other types of cancer.
Interesting. Based on anecdotal evidence alone, I have tentatively concluded that childhood sexual abuse, sex at too young a developmental level, and unprotected sex with multiple partners can all trigger breast cancer, cervical cancer and cancer of the uterus.

Don't discount the "experience factor." :D

Yes, experience helps... remember your first time? Oh, it DEFINITELY helps. But is experience with 40 different people superior to experience with the same person 40 times? You improve either way.

If sex isn't intimate, you're not doing it right.

But it's so good when it's wrong.

So - if I took you out for dinner and a movie... I'm going home alone...?

;)


*refrains from answering that question for fear of looking hypocritical*

;)

Yes, experience helps... remember your first time? Oh, it DEFINITELY helps. But is experience with 40 different people superior to experience with the same person 40 times? You improve either way.
True, but sex with a number of partners will give you generalized experience which can then be applied to later partners, and ideas ... lots of ideas! :D

*refrains from answering that question for fear of looking hypocritical*

;)
IOW, she pleads the Fifth! :D

IOW, she pleads the Fifth! :D


in the words of the infamous Dave Chappell...


i plead the fiz-ith.

Interesting. Based on anecdotal evidence alone, I have tentatively concluded that childhood sexual abuse, sex at too young a developmental level, and unprotected sex with multiple partners can all trigger breast cancer, cervical cancer and cancer of the uterus.

I'd believe those, too.

I know they've recently said that breastfeeding a baby for at least a year reduces your risk for breast cancer significantly (I forget the numbers) - and breastfeeding (presumably multiple babies - heh) for a total of at least 5 years reduces it to practically nothing.

*refrains from answering that question for fear of looking hypocritical*

;)

:D

You know, some girls might not even need the movie or the dinner.... for some, poetry in an English accent, over glasses of wine, and under the stars... might be enough. ;)

I'd be interested to know what the gender split on this would be. Also the the age split. Do more men support sex on the first date? Do older people find that it's, at best, unwise?

I'd believe those, too.

I know they've recently said that breastfeeding a baby for at least a year reduces your risk for breast cancer significantly (I forget the numbers) - and breastfeeding (presumably multiple babies - heh) for a total of at least 5 years reduces it to practically nothing.
Interesting. My wife breast-fed all five of ours and hasn't had so much as a cyst.

If sex isn't intimate, you're not doing it right.

and I believe the research says that women who have miscarriages or abortions have a much higher risk for breast cancer, and a few other types of cancer.

1)If sex isn't wild, you're not doing it right.

2)Well, I guess that women will just have to drink an extra glass of orange juice every morning to balance out the risk of cancer from her abortion. Well i mean, for one that is an urban myth meant to scare women out of abortions, and two: everything these days gives you cancer. you're going to have to come up with something better than that. you're talking to people who eat at mcdonald's-- we obviously don't care about health risks.

Well, I've never been on a date period, so this is pretty much pure speculation. However, I just can't see myself trying to get sex on a first date in any situation. Maybe I'd want sex, consciously or unconsciously, but unless I was drunk or otherwise mentally incapacitated, I sincerely doubt that I would fail to keep myself in check. The other possibility is if she really, really wants to have sex and is determined to convince me to do so - I don't know if I would cave in because this is once again completely hypothetical.

In any case, if I did end up having sex on a first date, I'd probably regret it later when I was in a more rational mindset.

I'd be interested to know what the gender split on this would be. Also the the age split. Do more men support sex on the first date? Do older people find that it's, at best, unwise?

young, female, and all for it.

:D

You know, some girls might not even need the movie or the dinner.... for some, poetry in an English accent, over glasses of wine, and under the stars... might be enough. ;)


*gulp*

yes.......for some...I'm sure thats....just what they need.

and it helps if theyre tall and handsome like yo.........


oops.

I'd be interested to know what the gender split on this would be. Also the the age split. Do more men support sex on the first date? Do older people find that it's, at best, unwise?
Men, being the selfish bastards we are, generally prefer sex at any time we can get it!

Having said that, based on personal experience, sex on the first date is usually awkward and rather unsatisfying when compared to sex with someone you know better. Besides, the second "Horn's rules for sexual enhancement" says, "Gratification delayed is gratification enhanced!" :D

*gulp*

yes.......for some...I'm sure thats....just what they need.

and it helps if theyre tall and handsome like yo.........


oops.

Steady on, sweetheart... almost totally destroyed all the good work you've done in this thread.... ;)

True, but sex with a number of partners will give you generalized experience which can then be applied to later partners, and ideas ... lots of ideas! :D

Well - I dunno about you, but I'd rather have a specific experience anyway. If I only have sex with one person, I only need to know what works for us, not what works for other people. And ideas are good - excellent, even - but half of the fun of new ideas is trying them out together.

I'd be interested to know what the gender split on this would be. Also the the age split. Do more men support sex on the first date? Do older people find that it's, at best, unwise?

Yeah, I made a comment about that a few pages ago. Although now GNI has shot my credibility all to hell....

I said that keep in mind you are asking people from a very diverse group. Someone who is 30+ may have a different perspecitve on the situation than say a 16 year old. Also if you were raised more conservative, that will influence you opinion. I guess it isnt a one size fits all subject.

Well, I've never been on a date period, so this is pretty much pure speculation. However, I just can't see myself trying to get sex on a first date in any situation. Maybe I'd want sex, consciously or unconsciously, but unless I was drunk or otherwise mentally incapacitated, I sincerely doubt that I would fail to keep myself in check. The other possibility is if she really, really wants to have sex and is determined to convince me to do so - I don't know if I would cave in because this is once again completely hypothetical.

In any case, if I did end up having sex on a first date, I'd probably regret it later when I was in a more rational mindset.
Lust = mental incapacitation ( in most cases )! :D

Well - I dunno about you, but I'd rather have a specific experience anyway. If I only have sex with one person, I only need to know what works for us, not what works for other people. And ideas are good - excellent, even - but half of the fun of new ideas is trying them out together.
Good attitude. :)

Besides, the second "Horn's rules for sexual enhancement" says, "Gratification delayed is gratification enhanced!" :D

just as long as its not delayed for too long....like say....until marriage..or you meet their parents...or know their last name...

I guess it isnt a one size fits all subject.
ROFLMFAO!!!! Hahahahahahaha! Nope! I won't go there! Nuh uh! :D

just as long as its not delayed for too long....like say....until marriage..or you meet their parents...or know their last name...
Uh ... if you don't know her last name, I suggest you've made little effort toward getting to know HER! :p

ROFLMFAO!!!! Hahahahahahaha! Nope! I won't go there! Nuh uh! :D

You, sir... are a bad man.... :D

just as long as its not delayed for too long....like say....until marriage..or you meet their parents...or know their last name...

All I can say is, be careful. Protect yourself physically and emotionally. STDs are no laughing matter, neither is unwanted pregnancy (there is no foolproof protection from any of these short of abstinence).

You don't want to become jaded either. I've known a few young women with your (seeming) attitude. They have issues with commitment and self-esteem. This is not to say that you have these issues now, but ... be careful!

Uh ... if you don't know her last name, I suggest you've made little effort toward getting to know HER! :p

well....i can always ask her the next morning!

thats actually what i did with the girl im sort of kind of maybe a little bit seeing right now. i rolled over, extended my hand for a shake and said "sorry, i dont think i got your name"

and i mean, hey man, it worked!!

All I can say is, be careful. Protect yourself physically and emotionally. STDs are no laughing matter, neither is unwanted pregnancy (there is no foolproof protection from any of these short of abstinence).


Of course, choosing not to have sex, doesn't always equate to not having it... and sex is not the only way to contract an STD...

All I can say is, be careful. Protect yourself physically and emotionally. STDs are no laughing matter, neither is unwanted pregnancy (there is no foolproof protection from any of these short of abstinence).

You don't want to become jaded either. I've known a few young women with your (seeming) attitude. They have issues with commitment and self-esteem. This is not to say that you have these issues now, but ... be careful!

unless there are turkey basters involved, i should be pretty good in the unwanted pregnancy department. as far as std's go, i do have a complaint that i want to register with every grocery store ever: can we get some fucking dental dams, plz? nothing breaks the mood more than "oh do you have a pair of scissors and a latex glove? thanks"

unless there are turkey basters involved, i should be pretty good in the unwanted pregnancy department. as far as std's go, i do have a complaint that i want to register with every grocery store ever: can we get some fucking dental dams, plz? nothing breaks the mood more than "oh do you have a pair of scissors and a latex glove? thanks"

My bad. I was trapped in heterosexual mode.

(coughs)
Err. Right. Provided protection is used and you both like eachother, and provided your not a virgin (cos thats sorta special... methinks.) And provided you havnt used date rape drugs, sex on a first date is very good. Enjoyable.
Not that im the sort to do it!!!... much. (hides)

Y'know what's even worse than being a cheap prostitute?

Being a free one.

Y'know what's even worse than being a cheap prostitute?

Being a free one.

I'd say that being a cheap prostitute AGAINST YOUR WILL, would be the thing that was worst...

But, I guess that doesn't make a catchy, morally-restrictive, catchphrase...

Y'know what's even worse than being a cheap prostitute?

Being a free one.

When I was younger I used to debate that with myself. Would it be worse to be a prostitute or a slut? And I could never decide, because if you like sex, then you are making some mad dollars if you're a professional. But then at the same time, prostitution comes with so many catches, and you know, if you like sex, why not just do it for its own sake? so i concluded that the best of both worlds was just to have sex with rich people.

I sure wish i had the statistics for how many men are paying child support (or fleeing child support) for children they had with women they didn't care about or intend to have children with.

Its easy to brush aside statistics like 1:1000 or 1:million as long as you are on the right side of that equation. If YOURE THE ONE, though, it sucks like hell.

Masurbation seems like a much better choice than taking that risk. But that's me. Some people like to drive fast on motorcycles and skydive, too.

Um one night stands that results in a child a man is very much responsible for. I mean take every precaution necessary and know the risks. Weigh them logically. If he's had a vasectomy and use a condom, or two males orally, or two females? No commitment but precautions taken is where I meant my post to go.

You assume I see sex in one dimension.

You, sir... are a bad man.... :D
True, true. But I'm so damned GOOD at it! :D

Y'know what's even worse than being a cheap prostitute?

Being a free one.
Oxymoron. You can't "prostitute" yourself and not get paid for it, by definition.

Besides, what do you call a woman who just enjoys sex? A prostitute? Hardly. A slut? Why? Would you call a man who just enjoys sex a "male prostitute?" Or a "male slut?" Get over it.

True, true. But I'm so damned GOOD at it! :D

A wise philosopher once wrote:

"You think you bad but you ain't bad
I'll show you what bad is.
Bad is when you capable of beatin' the baddest.
I been workin' at it since I came to this planet
And I ain't quite there yet but I'm gettin' better at it".

:)

I'd say that being a cheap prostitute AGAINST YOUR WILL, would be the thing that was worst...

But, I guess that doesn't make a catchy, morally-restrictive, catchphrase...

Well of course, I'd say that any sex against your will is far worse than any willing sex. But this thread wasn't about unconsentual sex, or forced prostitution.

And to put some clarifications on my lovely little catch phrase: I was referring to those who don't want to know the person's name, don't require so much as dinner and a movie first (that's not something prostitutes do) and/or don't want to ever see the person again. Being a slut is one thing - being a free prostitute is another. Not that I condone being a slut, either, but it's not the same thing.

Oxymoron. You can't "prostitute" yourself and not get paid for it, by definition.

Besides, what do you call a woman who just enjoys sex? A prostitute? Hardly. A slut? Why? Would you call a man who just enjoys sex a "male prostitute?" Or a "male slut?" Get over it.

Ok, I'm over it.

A wise philosopher once wrote:

"You think you bad but you ain't bad
I'll show you what bad is.
Bad is when you capable of beatin' the baddest.
I been workin' at it since I came to this planet
And I ain't quite there yet but I'm gettin' better at it".

:)
Heh! Well, I can hold my own when it comes to virtually anything. Although I've never gone looking for trouble, I've come up against some who thought they were bad and have never come out a loser. :D

Well of course, I'd say that any sex against your will is far worse than any willing sex. But this thread wasn't about unconsentual sex, or forced prostitution.

And to put some clarifications on my lovely little catch phrase: I was referring to those who don't want to know the person's name, don't require so much as dinner and a movie first (that's not something prostitutes do) and/or don't want to ever see the person again. Being a slut is one thing - being a free prostitute is another. Not that I condone being a slut, either, but it's not the same thing.

so if a girl goes out to a dinner and movie first, do you call her a "call girl" instead of a prostitute? and what if there is some dancing involved between the dinner and the sex. is she elevated to "escort"?

you need to realize that when i was talking about not knowing their name, it was in jest. its not a regular habit.

so if a girl goes out to a dinner and movie first, do you call her a "call girl" instead of a prostitute? and what if there is some dancing involved between the dinner and the sex. is she elevated to "escort"?
No. You ask her name when you first meet her and then call her by that, or by any of serveral terms of respect and/or endearment, even if you're paying her for sex ( perhaps especially if you're paying her for sex! ). Just because a woman is a prostitute doesn't mean she has no feelings or is due no respect.

Just because a woman is a prostitute doesn't mean she has no feelings or is due no respect.

Oh my goodness, that is so sweet. When you really think about it, people treat prostitutes so poorly. But its just their jobs! I'm never like "Man, you're a such a electrician" as an insult. But you are right, they are people too.

I've read 5 pages so far. I say no, I would not have sex on a first date, unless it was a date with my wife..but then it wouldn't be a "first date"

Why do I say no?
-I like to enjoy the hunt equally as much as I enjoy the kill and the feast. I.E. I want to get to know her, see her on good days and bad, and ultimately enjoy a relationship that is sex-free. Because if it is sex-free, then what expectations do we have BUT to enjoy each other's company and hold hands and giggle and :fluffle: Sex will come if/when she feels comfortable and believes it is worth the risk for her life.
- I am pretty sure I do not like the kind of women who would have sex on the first date.
- SONFD usually disrupts your next day: every day I have to be up atleast by 8, I always, always, have errands, jobs, chores, classes that I must do. Waking up the next morning in her bed would be a bit disruptive to me day, I'd say.

Oh my goodness, that is so sweet. When you really think about it, people treat prostitutes so poorly. But its just their jobs! I'm never like "Man, you're a such a electrician" as an insult. But you are right, they are people too.

Yes, they're people too, contrary to popular opinion, but I don't think most of them actually WANT to be prostitutes... and I don't think that calling them by their name (usually not their real name anyway) gives them nearly as much respect as they deserve, merely for being human beings.

Yes, they're people too, contrary to popular opinion, but I don't think most of them actually WANT to be prostitutes... and I don't think that calling them by their name (usually not their real name anyway) gives them nearly as much respect as they deserve, merely for being human beings.

if you give them respect as human beings, wouldn't you refrain from using the word prostitute as an insult?

if you give them respect as human beings, wouldn't you refrain from using the word prostitute as an insult?
Yes. If you're a true gentelman, you treat all people as worthy of respect, just because they're people. I would never, ever call a prostitute that, nor would I ever refer to a woman as a "slut," "bitch" or "whore." It just isn't done, not by mature men anyway.

Yes. If you're a true gentelman, you treat all people as worthy of respect, just because they're people. I would never, ever call a prostitute that, nor would I ever refer to a woman as a "slut," "bitch" or "whore." It just isn't done, not by mature men anyway.

What he said. But it's not done by mature women, either.

Y'know what's even worse than being a cheap prostitute?

Being a free one.

respectful?

Well of course, I'd say that any sex against your will is far worse than any willing sex. But this thread wasn't about unconsentual sex, or forced prostitution.

And to put some clarifications on my lovely little catch phrase: I was referring to those who don't want to know the person's name, don't require so much as dinner and a movie first (that's not something prostitutes do) and/or don't want to ever see the person again. Being a slut is one thing - being a free prostitute is another. Not that I condone being a slut, either, but it's not the same thing.

And again.. however, you are allowing your fingers to type messages that your brain will not be able to cash...

For a start, some 'prostitutes' DO require dinner, and an evening of polite entertainment... some conversation, perhaps... maybe dancing...

Because they get those things.. are they still prostitutes? By law, since they solicit, and expect payment for the service... probably yes.

On the contrary - the person who ends up having a 'fuck-and-run' encounter will do dinner if they must, probably... will pay for it if they have to, maybe. What that person is after, is the act of release. Does this make them a prostitute? In very real terms - no... it really doesn't.. because they are doing sex for the sake of doing sex.

Call them sluts if you wish... if that is what you think a suitable term is... but that is not prostitution.


Personally.... I have too much respect for other human beings, and find it too easy to empathise with their desires, to DARE to have the hubris to call someone a slut.


All in all - it sounds like you think there is something WRONG with being a prostitute... like being a prostitute (or slut) somehow makes a person 'less'.


So - why did I make the point, first of all, about unwilling prostitution? Becuase a woman (or man) owns their body... and should be able to deal with it as they see fit... for money, if they wish.

The REAL 'sin', is when another 'uses' the body of a person against their will. To me... THAT is the problem... not quibbling about a person's motivation or character BECAUSE they LIKE sex (or choose to trade it).

No. You ask her name when you first meet her and then call her by that, or by any of serveral terms of respect and/or endearment, even if you're paying her for sex ( perhaps especially if you're paying her for sex! ). Just because a woman is a prostitute doesn't mean she has no feelings or is due no respect.

Agreed.

Would that more people could get it through their heads...

I second Eutrusca's sentiment - even the ones who do want to be prostitutes, like the more expensive ones do, in fact.

I'm just curious as to people's opinions on the subject... what do you think of it? Is it a good idea/bad idea, does it really depend on the situation?
Sometimes it works out. Hell, my girlfriend and I slept together before we actually went out on a date, and we've been together nearly six years now.

What he said. But it's not done by mature women, either.
Very true. :)

Incidently Dakini, as you recently started a thread saying you had a new date can we surmise that you have, shall we say, a particular reason for asking the question?
Now, a lady never kisses and tells.

Vegetarianistica']please explain how you can possibly be more intimate than sex.
Being emotionally intimate with someone? Physical intimacy isn't the be all and end all.

Right... so say youve known a person for a couple of weeks, youre interested, he/she is interested. You make a date. Youre excited and anticipating the first date with a person who obviously has peaked your interests. First impressions are important, most people want to look nice and have some hopes for great conversation. If you go right into sex, it doesnt give either person a chance to see what each one is about. Youre basically getting a first impression as far as the dating scene goes. Ive known people for 6 months or longer then gone out on a date with them and they turned out to be quite different on a romantic level. No one likes regret. And what if after a couple of dates you find out "god this person is lame/cruel/crazy/not for me/whatever" wouldnt you possibly regret having sex with them?
I don't have regrets. I make my decisions at the time and given who I was and what I knew at the time, they were the right decisions. This isn't just for relationships, it goes for anything...

Y'know what's even worse than being a cheap prostitute?

Being a free one.
You know what's worse than sleeping around?

Being a judgmental bastard.

I absolutely do not think it is a good idea. Says little about one's self respect.
What i was thinkig except what The Cats mother said was more subtle.:)

the reason i don't have sex on the first date is that i have no self respect. i'm deathly afraid of something going wrong, so i make people fall in love with me first, to insure they won't walk out on me.

the reason i don't have sex on the first date is that i have no self respect. i'm deathly afraid of something going wrong, so i make people fall in love with me first, to insure they won't walk out on me.
That isn't Self Respect that is Self Belief.

I voted.
It's definitely not something I would do
It's a bad idea
Only really promiscuous people have sex on the first date.
Your Poll sucks.

You know what's worse than sleeping around?

Being a judgmental bastard.

pwned

:)

I think it's situational. What if two people have been friends for a long time, decide to start dating, and have sex on the first date?

Bingo! My fiance and I knew each other two years as friends before we realized we were perfect for each other. Sex on our first date seemed the perfect way to complete the date.
Now had we just met through friends who thought we would be perfect for each other, hell no I wouldn't have slept with him!

Well Dak- whatever you decide to do, good luck on your first date. Just be safe and use your best judgement. And have a great time.

You know what's worse than sleeping around?

Being a judgmental bastard.pwned

:)
Not even ow.

http://www.soffici.it/_ricpersi/images/ifotfd.jpg

http://www.soffici.it/_ricpersi/images/ifotfd.jpg

LOL.....that is so bad.

there's no general formula for this, though i personally believe first-date sex would have a similar emotional effect to prostitution, had you not known each other for a long time before (courtship could be said to traditionally begin on platonic levels? well it used to anyway), so what's the advantage?

and on the first date, you're unlikely to know the risks of you contracting STDs. together with the likelihood of you regretting the action, given you don't have an opportunity to know that person well in just one date, is it really worth it?

you can sort out the worthwhile partners by those who have an interest in you rather than sex. it can never hurt to wait.

http://www.soffici.it/_ricpersi/images/ifotfd.jpg

Just... beautiful!

http://www.soffici.it/_ricpersi/images/ifotfd.jpg

THAT can get dates? **has failed at life**

When I was young, I had the Judeo-Christian attitude toward sex drummed into me by my parents, church, T.V., Etc. It didn't take. I don't believe that you need to be married before you have sex. I don't particularly value virginity. I do believe in committed relationships, though. And, I most particularly believe that I want to know and trust the man with whom I'm having sex. A person, male or female, is uniquely vulnerable in that situation and I, certainly, am not going to risk my well-being on a zipless fuck.

A person, male or female, is uniquely vulnerable in that situation and I, certainly, am not going to risk my well-being on a zipless fuck.
Do you have a Fear of Flying? :D

As in Erica Jong (whose book I never read)? I guess you could call it that. I have a healtlhy (I think) fear of letting a momentary lapse into stupidity lead to lifelong problems, but I suppose that's a function of experience.

Vegetarianistica']please explain how you can possibly be more intimate than sex.
I was going to comment on this earlier but got distracted IRL.

The greatest, most involving, most totally intense sex is almost always between those who know each other so well that sex becomes an extension of their knowledge of and love for each other. At times it can be so intense as to have what might almost be termed a spiritual element.

As a male, I have to say that even the worst sex I ever had was great, but there is a vast difference between casual sex ( which includes first date sex, IMHO ) and the sexual/emotional/spiritual union of two people who know, trust and love each other deeply.

As in Erica Jong (whose book I never read)? I guess you could call it that. I have a healtlhy (I think) fear of letting a momentary lapse into stupidity lead to lifelong problems, but I suppose that's a function of experience.
How very, very wise of you. I commend your wisdom. :)

Yes, Erica-baby. Whadda trip! :D

http://www.soffici.it/_ricpersi/images/ifotfd.jpg

To the gay guys out there: damn that's rough


Glad I'm a lesbo...:p

:eek:

I'm speechless. For once.

Meh ... don't be.

I'm a very affectionate person, I'm a very skilled and shameless flirt, am very charming, and have confidence in my looks and emotions. Plus, I'm a musician. The ladies love the drummer. ;)

Been years, though. I'm older now, fatter, and more grey, more married, and more indifferent than I once was. So ... *shrug*.

Oh ... and my accent doesn't hurt either. :D

Just because a woman is a prostitute doesn't mean she has no feelings or is due no respect.

That is one of the single most awesome things I've ever read on these forums.

Kudos, Cap'n.

You know what's worse than sleeping around?

Being a judgmental bastard.

*cheers and gives Dakini a cookie* Damn near anything>judgmental bastard

*cheers and gives Dakini a cookie* Damn near anything>judgmental bastard
w00t for cookies! :D

It's definitely not something I would do

It means you're easy, and have probably slept around quite a bit to do it. Its really about image, since if you have sex on the first date once with someone, whats saying you don't drop your pants on every date you go on?

It means you're easy, and have probably slept around quite a bit to do it. Its really about image, since if you have sex on the first date once with someone, whats saying you don't drop your pants on every date you go on?

How is that about image? Unless you're talking about the 'image' of 'not thinking sex is something to be rationed like war-time chocolate'.

And again, I think there needs to be seperation between 'just met first dating' and 'been friends for years, finally commited first dating'. Because if it's the latter, there's EVERY reason to assume you don't 'drop your pants' frequently.

Men, being the selfish bastards we are, generally prefer sex at any time we can get it!

HA! Tell that to the guy that snubbed me in bed a few weeks back :p
He was a selfish bastard, but for exactly the opposite of the reason you're suggesting ;)

Also, GNI, Eustrusca, Dakini and allll the other 'just because you have sex for a living doesn't make you subhuman' opinion-holders: you're all awesome and need to breed and produce more intelligent, compassionate people to dilute the rest of humanity. Or at least donate to the 'Cloning A Better Future' program :p (just a note: I'm not a prostitute; I'm just not used to people actually supporting my argument re: not treating people like subhumans just to feel morally superior)

No, I definitely wouldn't do it. Unprotected is a particularly bad idea. The sex will be a hell of a lot better if I wait and let the relationship grow deeper.

I'd be interested to know what the gender split on this would be. Also the the age split. Do more men support sex on the first date? Do older people find that it's, at best, unwise?
Good idea. I'm 19 and male and I wouldn't do it. I know the genders of several posters here and there seems to be no clear pattern of yes or no. Stereotypically my demographic would generally go for sex on the first date, but not me.

Men, being the selfish bastards we are, generally prefer sex at any time we can get it!
You can't mean this! I'm disproving it right now.

Having said that, based on personal experience, sex on the first date is usually awkward and rather unsatisfying when compared to sex with someone you know better. Besides, the second "Horn's rules for sexual enhancement" says, "Gratification delayed is gratification enhanced!"
You're bang on there.

I don't see how it's acceptable before marriage
Well that's the other extreme which I also disagree with. I think that before marrying someone you should make sure that the two of you are sexually compatible. I'm for knowing the woman you're going to marry.

I don't see how it's acceptable before marriage

I don't see how it's acceptable before marriage

I don't see how it isn't acceptable before marriage.

How is that about image? Unless you're talking about the 'image' of 'not thinking sex is something to be rationed like war-time chocolate'.

And again, I think there needs to be seperation between 'just met first dating' and 'been friends for years, finally commited first dating'. Because if it's the latter, there's EVERY reason to assume you don't 'drop your pants' frequently.



HA! Tell that to the guy that snubbed me in bed a few weeks back :p
He was a selfish bastard, but for exactly the opposite of the reason you're suggesting ;)

Also, GNI, Eustrusca, Dakini and allll the other 'just because you have sex for a living doesn't make you subhuman' opinion-holders: you're all awesome and need to breed and produce more intelligent, compassionate people to dilute the rest of humanity. Or at least donate to the 'Cloning A Better Future' program :p (just a note: I'm not a prostitute; I'm just not used to people actually supporting my argument re: not treating people like subhumans just to feel morally superior)

You think Dakini, Eutrusca and I need to breed? I'm not even sure how we'd do that... sounds pretty 'experimental'...

;)

I think everyone should feel the same way I do about it.... i.e. it's your body, to do with as you please... and if a girl wants to (or needs to) trade her assets, that is her option.

Personally, I think it should be government regulated, for protection... and should have access to medical and insurance programs.

But then, I live in a country that turns a blind-eye to illegal communication monitoring, but tries to impeach over a blowjob...

It means you're easy, and have probably slept around quite a bit to do it. Its really about image, since if you have sex on the first date once with someone, whats saying you don't drop your pants on every date you go on?
What's saying you do? Perhaps you felt a spark or got caught up in the heat of the moment? Personally, it takes a certain comfort level before I'll have sex with somebody and most people don't reach that level in a short time frame...
I also don't think sleeping around makes a person easy... I mean, what does that even mean anymore.

It's not my thing because I'm an Italian boy who was raised with strict Catholic parents and I might just be beaten by a rolling pin. Seriously though, I don't want to sleep with somebody I met a few hours ago, or spent no more then 5 hours with because I'm not sure how many other people they were so eager to have. Also, because of my religious background I don't mind waiting.

If other people want to do it that's their bag, let them be promiscuous. I'll keep my legs closed though.

You think Dakini, Eutrusca and I need to breed? I'm not even sure how we'd do that... sounds pretty 'experimental'...

;)
Hmm... as much as I'm open to threesomes...

But then, I live in a country that turns a blind-eye to illegal communication monitoring, but tries to impeach over a blowjob...
Yeah, wtf @ that? Isn't somebody's personal life just that, personal?

You shouldn't have sex unless you love the person and have been around this person enough to experience that love. You should establish that essential connection first...

;)

You shouldn't have sex unless you love the person and have been around this person enough to experience that love. You should establish that essential connection first...

;)
Why shouldn't you have sex unless you love the person?

You shouldn't have sex unless you love the person

Sex has nothing to do with love.

I voted "It's ok sometimes" and "Only really promiscuous people do it" but I do not view being really promiscous as necessarily being a bad thing.

Yeah, why? What if they suck in bed? You kick them out? Divorce them? It's best to give them a test run first.Couldn't you choose to try to teach them how to be good in bed or choose to accept that they're bad in bed but continue the relationship?

Sex has nothing to do with love.
I was going to argue that sometimes it does... but yeah, it really doesn't. It's something that people who are in love happen to do together, but people who aren't in love do it too. It would be like saying that eating a meal with someone has to do with love. I'm sure most people who are in love have eaten a meal together.
But love can exist without sex and sex can exist without love...

As I mentioned before, I wouldn't go for it on the first date, I don't think it allows that relationship to move past the 'fling' phase. I did surprise myself by sleeping with my now husband on our second date, but we were friends for six months previous, I knew his background, he knew mine.

It's a little unfair, when a girl drops her pants on a first date, she's easy, when a guy does it, he's hard.

A famous quote from I can't remember where: Men get laid, but women get screwed.

It's often true you know!

I was going to argue that sometimes it does... but yeah, it really doesn't. It's something that people who are in love happen to do together, but people who aren't in love do it too. It would be like saying that eating a meal with someone has to do with love. I'm sure most people who are in love have eaten a meal together.
But love can exist without sex and sex can exist without love...


Sex has nothiung to do with love, but it's better with! :p

Vegetarianistica']sex on the first date means that the entire "relationship" will be based thereon. if that's what you want, great. but don't expect anything much worthwhile to come out of it, except that.
Heh, 4 and half years and counting. Why on earth the relationship would be based on sex if you have it on the first date?

Sex has nothing to do with love.

Not strictly true.... sex CAN have nothing to do with love.

I've had sex with love, and without love... and the sex with love is so much 'more' than the sex without.

Not that I'm saying you NEED love for sex... I don't buy the whole 'no sex before marriage' idea, or think there is anything WRONG with sex just for sex.

But, it's like Haagen Dazs... once you've HAD Haagen Dazs, you can enjoy Ben and Jerry's, but, it's just not the same....

Heh, 4 and half years and counting. Why on earth the relationship would be based on sex if you have it on the first date?

If you have sex on the first date with someone, it'll be expected on subsequent dates. If you refuse, you'll earn yourself a bad name as a cock teaser/can't get it up as soon as the first arguement occurs - which shouldn't take too long...

Sex has nothiung to do with love, but it's better with! :p
Everything's better when you're in love.

If you have sex on the first date with someone, it'll be expected on subsequent dates. If you refuse, you'll earn yourself a bad name as a cock teaser/can't get it up as soon as the first arguement occurs - which shouldn't take too long...
Why would sex be expected every time after that? People aren't constantly in the mood...

If you have sex on the first date with someone, it'll be expected on subsequent dates. If you refuse, you'll earn yourself a bad name as a cock teaser/can't get it up as soon as the first arguement occurs - which shouldn't take too long...
That makes no sense what so ever. I don't think I would ever date anyone who's such an asshole in the first place.

I had sex with my partner on our first date. We have lived together about 3 years now. I think I know a bit better.

I have had sex on the first date before too (well, not even a date, complete stranger in a bar) and both of those relationships lasted over a year, the other one a bit over 3 years. Actually, all my long relationships have started this way. Maybe it's the key to a long, meaningful relationship ;)

But, it's like Haagen Dazs... once you've HAD Haagen Dazs, you can enjoy Ben and Jerry's, but, it's just not the same....

OMG, someone finally agrees with me! I've had arguements about those ice creams! OK, back to the arguement...

Not strictly true.... sex CAN have nothing to do with love.

I've had sex with love, and without love... and the sex with love is so much 'more' than the sex without.

Not that I'm saying you NEED love for sex... I don't buy the whole 'no sex before marriage' idea, or think there is anything WRONG with sex just for sex.



Oh so agree, sex for the sake of sex is physical only, but sex with love has a spiritual component in there somewhere. You know what they like, they know what you like, you spend more time pleasing each other.

Sex for sex's sake is purely physical. On the plus side, it's raw, animalistic, primative, emotion is not taken into account, and that's what's so good about it. But it does leave you feeling a little used and emotionally unfulfilled.

Either way, it's whatever floats your boat...

Couldn't you choose to try to teach them how to be good in bed

That's what pre-marital sex is for. You see if they can be taught. If not, well, shop around some more.

or choose to accept that they're bad in bed but continue the relationship?

Hell, no! That just leads to resentment and adultery, and what's the point of marriage then?

I've had sex with love, and without love... and the sex with love is so much 'more' than the sex without.

I think sex with hate is the best. Malice can be a lot stronger fuel for passion than love. And sex with love - meh. I've had better one night stands than sex with people I loved. Love is not something that automatically makes sex good - skill has a lot more to do with it.

But, it's like Haagen Dazs... once you've HAD Haagen Dazs, you can enjoy Ben and Jerry's, but, it's just not the same....

I prefer Lejonet & Björnen.

Why would sex be expected every time after that? People aren't constantly in the mood...

Agreed...but it doesn't take a huge amount to get a man horny. Speaking from a woman's point of view obviously....

It's happened to me. Previous relationship, we went out, I went back to his place - no sex, but fooled around, and that's as far as the relationship went. I still not sure if the name he gave me is right, when I tried to get in contact, he didn't exist anywhere. Yet, he told people he 'loved me'....dunno, think every date we went on was an attempt to get into my knickers...

I don't know what the situation is if situations were reversed, but according to my hubbie here, if a relationship starts with sex on the first date, it's a sexual relationship, and if she refuses to give out consistently on subsequent dates, she'll be going the way of the dodo.

Both people don't need to be in the mood, nor does sex have to happen on every date, but it will be expected at least some of the time, so if you want to hold out to get to know your other half better, best not jump in at the deep end on that first date

I have had sex on the first date before too (well, not even a date, complete stranger in a bar) and both of those relationships lasted over a year, the other one a bit over 3 years. Actually, all my long relationships have started this way. Maybe it's the key to a long, meaningful relationship ;)


Just out of curiosity ... what happened to those relationships? Did they end on a bad note? Did the relationships only last over a year? In my opinion, one year isn't a very long relationship.

I believe that sex should wait until marriage. That's just the way I've been raised. You guys have your own opinions, and you can do with your bodies as you please, but I feel that sex outside of marriage is wrong.

I'm not here to say you have to agree with me, and I hope you don't expect me or any other person with this opinion to agree with you either. (Mutual respect -- agreeing to disagree.)

On a slightly different note. I know that marriage these days isn't sacred ... it's far from it with the high divorce rates, and cheating that happens on a daily basis. But, I still believe that a relationship will last a lot longer if a couple waits to have sex until they're married. I don't have any evidence to back this up ... it's just a feeling. Dismiss if you wish.

That's what pre-marital sex is for. You see if they can be taught. If not, well, shop around some more.I don't see why there must be a correlation between someone's being bad in bed and the end of the relationship as the relationship itself should be about things other than sex.

Hell, no! That just leads to resentment and adultery, and what's the point of marriage then?Why should it lead to resentment and adultery? If you're more concerned with the relationship than with sexual gratification, you might choose to give up sexual gratification in order to keep the relationship.
Furthermore, I don't know of any marriages where the people getting married vow to keep each other sexually satisfied all of the time, or even at all.

I think sex with hate is the best. Malice can be a lot stronger fuel for passion than love. And sex with love - meh. I've had better one night stands than sex with people I loved. Love is not something that automatically makes sex good - skill has a lot more to do with it.
I've never understood how these sorts of things happen. (Sex with someone you hate) I mean, in the movies, it's always two people yell at each other and they get into a heated argument and then all of a sudden they just grab each other and go at it...

Is that essentially what happens in real life?

I'd be interested to know what the gender split on this would be. Also the the age split. Do more men support sex on the first date? Do older people find that it's, at best, unwise?

31 year old married female here... first date sex? done it, sometimes it was mind-blowingly great, sometimes it was dull. if i found myself unmarried and on a first date again? perhaps i'd do it again. depends on the chemistry really...
:fluffle:

Is that essentially what happens in real life?

No. For me it's either been an ex that I no longer could stand, but that had his shit together in bed, or just someone I don't like that much, but that has his shit together in bed. What you're talking about is a cross between angry sex and makeup sex.

I don't see why there must be a correlation between someone's being bad in bed and the end of the relationship as the relationship itself should be about things other than sex.

The relationship is all things - sex is a large part of the relationship. If that doesn't work, then the relationship is doomed. I don't see how sex is less important than love - nobody would be telling people to stay with someone they no longer love just because the sex is good, why then tell someone to stay if the love is good but the sex is bad?

I like relationships with both, and won't settle for either or. No one should.

Why should it lead to resentment and adultery?

Easy: You'll grow to resent the person for never being able to give you what you've got, and then you'll just go out and find somewhere else.

If you're more concerned with the relationship than with sexual gratification, you might choose to give up sexual gratification in order to keep the relationship.

Again - if the sex bad, the relationship is bad. Just like if the love is bad, the relationship is bad.

Furthermore, I don't know of any marriages where the people getting married vow to keep each other sexually satisfied all of the time, or even at all.

And I don't know of any vows that go "I'll sacrifice myself in a pit of despair and sexual anxiety because I think all there is to a relationship is loooooove."

Just out of curiosity ... what happened to those relationships? Did they end on a bad note? Did the relationships only last over a year? In my opinion, one year isn't a very long relationship.
I'm not saying a year is a very long relationship. But I'd say it's quite long for anyone under 25. I lived with them.
1. I moved out of the country
2. I moved out of town

Of course these relationships wouldn't have ended if everything was alright. But I just got bored with the first guy's unindependency and realised he wasn't the right for me. The other one was so selfish that I just couldn't handle it anymore. I thought he would change as he get older but it never happened.

And by the way, I'm not a guy.


I'm not here to say you have to agree with me, and I hope you don't expect me or any other person with this opinion to agree with you either. (Mutual respect -- agreeing to disagree.)
That's absolutely fine.

I can't agree with the marriage thing because I'm not sure if I'll ever get married. Socioeconomical benefits would be the only reason for me. Me and my partner are not members of any church so we see no reason to get married.

It's a bad...bad idea. You don't even know if they're the one or if you can trust the person completely.

The relationship is all things - sex a large part of the relationship. If that doesn't work, then the relationship is doomed. I don't see how sex is less important than love - nobody would be telling people to stay with someone they no longer love just because the sex is good, why then tell someone to stay if the love is good but the sex is bad?I would agree that sex is a large part of a relationship, but it isn't a large part as love is, and there are other parts of a relationship than just those two.

I like relationships with both, and won't settle for either or. No one should.I can't imagine a relationship where I wouldn't be settling in some area; if not sex or love then something else.

Easy: You'll grow to resent the person for never being able to give you what you've got, and then you'll just go out and find somewhere else.Or you could just learn how to please yourself.

And I don't know of any vows that go "I'll sacrifice myself in a pit of despair and sexual anxiety because I think all there is to a relationship is loooooove."I wouldn't view a lack of sex as equal to despair.

You don't even know if they're the one or if you can trust the person completely.

So? What does that have to do with sex?

*blindly jumps in the middle of things*

Having started three relationships with sex on the first date, I find that, like everything else in love, it depends on the partner. I have started three relationships that way and two of them have been the most egalitarian i've ever had. in retrospect I am not sorry that i didn't 'wait'.

I don't think sex on a first date is a good idea, generally. But if you and the person you're on the date with have had a thing for each other for a while, then maybe. So far I've been really happy with not sleeping with my exes on the first day.

I would agree that sex is a large part of a relationship, but it isn't a large part as love is, and there are other parts of a relationship than just those two.

Those two are the essential ones. If either doesn't work, the relationship is crap. Again: You shouldn't for a sexless relationship, or one with crappy sex, as little as you should settle for a loveless relationship.

I can't imagine a relationship where I wouldn't be settling in some area; if not sex or love then something else.

A relationship where you have to settle for crappy sex or crappy love isn't a relationship. It is a yoke. There is no point to staying in it and being miserable.

Or you could just learn how to please yourself.

Again: What's the point of having a spouse then if you're relegated to masturbation for good sex? Do you even read what you're writing here?

I wouldn't view a lack of sex as equal to despair.

Give it year, after year, after year without sexual gratification with the person who should be the one that sexually gratifies you. You'll see the dispair then. You'll also see what I've seen so many times: Adulterous spouses who were stupid enough to let the relationship go on for so long that kids eventually got involved.

Those two are the essential ones. If either doesn't work, the relationship is crap. Again: You shouldn't for a sexless relationship, or one with crappy sex, as little as you should settle for a loveless relationship.I disagree, it's entirely possible to have a fulfilling relationship with bad or no sex. If bad sex ends the relationship then what was the relationship based on in the first place?

A relationship where you have to settle for crappy sex or crappy love isn't a relationship. It is a yoke. There is no point to staying in it and being miserable.Love isn't equal to sex.

Again: What's the point of having a spouse then if you're relegated to masturbation for good sex? Do you even read what you're writing here?I don't enter relationships for the purpose of sexual gratification. If I wanted sexual gratification, I would most likely seek it through one night stands, or perhaps with in a "friend-with-benefits" type of thing.

Give it year, after year, after year without sexual gratification with the person who should be the one that sexually gratifies you. You'll see the dispair then. You'll also see what I've seen so many times: Adulterous spouses who were stupid enough to let the relationship go on for so long that kids eventually got involved.Perhaps if the individual feels that way, then the two of them can agree to have an open relationship? This wouldn't work for me, however open relationships can work for people if they want them.

The point of all of this isn't that I'm saying that people should wait until marriage before having sex, but rather that bad sex does not, and should not mean the end of a relationship.

I disagree, it's entirely possible to have a fulfilling relationship with bad or no sex. If bad sex ends the relationship then what was the relationship based on in the first place?

It was based on what every serious relationship should be based on: Sex as well as love. Remove one of them, and the relationship will be doomed.

Love isn't equal to sex.

And love alone is not what makes a relationship. And sex is not less important than love.

I don't enter relationships for the purpose of sexual gratification. If I wanted sexual gratification, I would most likely seek it through one night stands, or perhaps with in a "friend-with-benefits" type of thing.

That what you'll end up doing in a relationship where the sex sucks, anyway.

Perhaps if the individual feels that way, then the two of them can agree to have an open relationship? This wouldn't work for me, however open relationships can work for people if they want them.

There is no point to getting married then.

The point of all of this isn't that I'm saying that people should wait until marriage before having sex, but rather that bad sex does not, and should not mean the end of a relationship.

It does, and it should. Just like bad love does and should.

It was based on what every serious relationship should be based on: Sex as well as love. Remove one of them, and the relationship will be doomed.I maintain that if you want your relationship to be based on sex, primarily on sex, or even as much as on sex as it is on love then I fail to see how doing the work of making a relationship work would be worth it to you.

And love alone is not what makes a relationship. And sex is not less important than love.It must be less important than love, otherwise nobody would bother having relationships in the first place - they'd choose to have sex simply because it's easier to do so.

That what you'll end up doing in a relationship where the sex sucks, anyway.Not at all. If I had to have a relationship where we were celibate, I would, and I, at least, would be able to maintain that.

There is no point to getting married then.I don't know, while on one hand I would tend to agree with you, on the other I would say that an open relationship is better than no relationship at all.

It does, and it should. Just like bad love does and should.I disagree, there's no equating the two.

Sex has nothing to do with love.
There can be sex without love, but sex with love is much better, which leads me to draw the conclusion that there is a connection somewhere along the way.

It's a little unfair, when a girl drops her pants on a first date, she's easy, when a guy does it, he's hard.

A famous quote from I can't remember where: Men get laid, but women get screwed.
Yeah I hate that double standard.

I think sex with hate is the best. Malice can be a lot stronger fuel for passion than love.
Wow. You've actually had sex with people you hate? Bizarre! Did they hate you too?

I believe that sex should wait until marriage. That's just the way I've been raised. You guys have your own opinions, and you can do with your bodies as you please, but I feel that sex outside of marriage is wrong.
Why do people who think that sex outside of marriage is wrong never give any reasoning for their opinion?

The relationship is all things - sex is a large part of the relationship. If that doesn't work, then the relationship is doomed. I don't see how sex is less important than love - nobody would be telling people to stay with someone they no longer love just because the sex is good, why then tell someone to stay if the love is good but the sex is bad?

I like relationships with both, and won't settle for either or. No one should.

Now I'm confused. I thought you were quite into sex without love. I agree with the rest of your post.

I maintain that if you want your relationship to be based on sex, primarily on sex, or even as much as on sex as it is on love then I fail to see how doing the work of making a relationship work would be worth it to you.

There's no point in trying to make something work that will never work. And a relationship where sex is in the dumps will not work.

It must be less important than love, otherwise nobody would bother having relationships in the first place - they'd choose to have sex simply because it's easier to do so.

No, it doesn't have to be less important than it. It can be as important. You have relationships to get both. Not one of them. As you said: A relationship without love is just a fuck buddy, and a relationship without sex is just friendship.

Not at all. If I had to have a relationship where we were celibate, I would, and I, at least, would be able to maintain that.

Yeah, right. Good luck with that.

I don't know, while on one hand I would tend to agree with you, on the other I would say that an open relationship is better than no relationship at all.

You might as well just get a new friend if you're not gonna be having sex with the person you're supposed to be in a relationship with.

I disagree, there's no equating the two.

That's just naïve.

There can be sex without love, but sex with love is much better, which leads me to draw the conclusion that there is a connection somewhere along the way.

I disagree with that assumption, as I know it not to be true.

Wow. You've actually had sex with people you hate? Bizarre! Did they hate you too?

Not so bizarre. I wasn't looking for anything other than sex at the time. And they probably did.

Now I'm confused. I thought you were quite into sex without love. I agree with the rest of your post.

Oh, I'm into sex without love. I'm not into relationships without, and I'm not into relationships without sex. You need both to make a relationship work.

There's no point in trying to make something work that will never work. And a relationship where sex is in the dumps will not work.If the people in the relationship decide that the sex isn't as important as making the relationship last, then the relationship would work.

No, it doesn't have to be less important than it. It can be as important. You have relationships to get both. Not one of them. As you said: A relationship without love is just a fuck buddy, and a relationship without sex is just friendship.But if they were equally important, then people would be unwilling to enter relationships...or the corollary, people would do the same amount of work just to have sex.

Yeah, right. Good luck with that.<shrug> I control my libido, my libido doesn't control me.

You might as well just get a new friend if you're not gonna be having sex with the person you're supposed to be in a relationship with.Not if the sex is the only thing that isn't perfect or nearly perfect about the relationship. Good sex is easy to find, a good relationship is not.

That's just naïve.I suppose I don't know your relationship experience, but I have to assume I've had more of it than you have, so I don't know how I could be more naïve than you. (Not to say that you are, mind you.)

I find it totally amazing how many sluts are on this foum. Just to throw a little science in....the odds of a pregnancy increase in these cases because a woman is more likely to have quick sex when she is "ripe".

As a person who sorts mail, you wouldn't believe all the crude jokes about families made up of children, all of which have a different last name. Even though sluts with bastard children are common, they are still degraded.

I disagree with that assumption, as I know it not to be true.


Which is odd... because I know it to be true. Perhaps (despite what you may have thought you felt), you have never had sex with love?


Oh, I'm into sex without love. I'm not into relationships without, and I'm not into relationships without sex. You need both to make a relationship work.

Again... I think you are making assumptions that need not be true. I have known people with 30+ years of marriage behind them, that had celibate relationships.

Maybe you just live a more 'flesh focused' life...?

I find it totally amazing how many sluts are on this foum. Just to throw a little science in....the odds of a pregnancy increase in these cases because a woman is more likely to have quick sex when she is "ripe".

As a person who sorts mail, you wouldn't believe all the crude jokes about families made up of children, all of which have a different last name. Even though sluts with bastard children are common, they are still degraded.

Define 'slut'.

Where do you live that your chances of getting hit by a car when you walk the streets is greater than 1 out of 10???
Not that I really want to know, but what kind of condom do you use where the risk of getting the woman pregnant is greater than 1 out of 10?

As for the topic, I have braided a girl's hair a lot more intimately than I fucked another..are we going to establish Xth-date-rules for the former now, too?
Sex is right when both/all parties want it. When that's within the first 20 seconds that's just as swell as when it's after the first 20 weeks of dating.

I find it totally amazing how many sluts are on this foum. Just to throw a little science in....the odds of a pregnancy increase in these cases because a woman is more likely to have quick sex when she is "ripe".

As a person who sorts mail, you wouldn't believe all the crude jokes about families made up of children, all of which have a different last name. Even though sluts with bastard children are common, they are still degraded.

Interesting that you make a parallel between the WOMAN in the relationship, and 'sluttyness'.

Interesting and a little sad.

As for your science... you might want to hit the books again. For many women, the point in their cycle when they are MOST desiring intercourse, is during their actual menstruation... of course, they might not GET intercourse then...

Also - I find it sad that people whom sort mail are using it as some sort of vicarious opportunity for humour...

Again... I think you are making assumptions that need not be true. I have known people with 30+ years of marriage behind them, that had celibate relationships.


:eek: :eek: :eek:

How would a relationship like that work? Obviously, at least for one of them, sex is found outside the marriage. Understandable if one person has low libido, but two together? For 30 odd years? Surely the primal urge to procreate at some point in their lives would overcome even the lowest of sex drives?!?

I find it totally amazing how many sluts are on this foum. Just to throw a little science in....the odds of a pregnancy increase in these cases because a woman is more likely to have quick sex when she is "ripe".
As a person who sorts mail, you wouldn't believe all the crude jokes about families made up of children, all of which have a different last name. Even though sluts with bastard children are common, they are still degraded.
(emphasis mine)

Not saying that I'll have sex with any man, but if I would, I'd happily do so with a man who at least pretends to respect women on the first date than with somebody who so obviously doesn't do much respecting in any field on any date.

I find it totally amazing how many sluts are on this foum. Just to throw a little science in....the odds of a pregnancy increase in these cases because a woman is more likely to have quick sex when she is "ripe".
You say slut like it's a bad thing... and odds of pregnancy aren't likely to increase if you take proper precautions...

:eek: :eek: :eek:

How would a relationship like that work? Obviously, at least for one of them, sex is found outside the marriage. Understandable if one person has low libido, but two together? For 30 odd years? Surely the primal urge to procreate at some point in their lives would overcome even the lowest of sex drives?!?

I'm not saying they never procreated. One of the couples of which I speak, had intercourse for as long as it took to get their children. After that, their relationship was celibate.

Although I personally have a very active libido, it is now much diminished from what it was a decade ago... and yet, a decade ago, I was in a long-term celibate relationship, with a partner that I shared a deep loving relationship with, but with whom I did not have intercourse.

It is possible to have a relationship without sex. It is possible to WANT sex, and yet not have it.

Interesting that you make a parallel between the WOMAN in the relationship, and 'sluttyness'.

Interesting and a little sad.

As for your science... you might want to hit the books again. For many women, the point in their cycle when they are MOST desiring intercourse, is during their actual menstruation... of course, they might not GET intercourse then...

Also - I find it sad that people whom sort mail are using it as some sort of vicarious opportunity for humour...


As a woman, I concur - premenstrual time is a high point for libido, ovulation time is, strangely enough, relatively low...

As a woman, I concur - premenstrual time is a high point for libido, ovulation time is, strangely enough, relatively low...

The science being used by the other poster just doesn't fit with any I've read... and certainly not with my actual experiences.

In my experience, women tend to have highest sex drives at the onset of menstruation, during menstruation, and during the first and second trimesters.... none of which are especially good times in terms of conception...

I'm not saying they never procreated. One of the couples of which I speak, had intercourse for as long as it took to get their children. After that, their relationship was celibate.

Although I personally have a very active libido, it is now much diminished from what it was a decade ago... and yet, a decade ago, I was in a long-term celibate relationship, with a partner that I shared a deep loving relationship with, but with whom I did not have intercourse.

It is possible to have a relationship without sex. It is possible to WANT sex, and yet not have it.


I know libido drops as you age, but, still, 30 years is a long time to go without sex for enjoyment. I understand people who wait until marriage until they have sex (not for me, but I'm not everyone), I understand low libido. Was there something out of whack in this couple's relationship? I mean, I get crabby during my period because I don't get any, and it only lasts a few days!!! Can't imagine going 30 years!

The science being used by the other poster just doesn't fit with any I've read... and certainly not with my actual experiences.

In my experience, women tend to have highest sex drives at the onset of menstruation, during menstruation, and during the first and second trimesters.... none of which are especially good times in terms of conception...

Was speaking of my experiences as a sexually active woman, I do agree. I find, for me anyway, it's about 4-5 days before and for the first 2-3 days of menstruation, depending on length of period and cramps (total bitch). As I've never been pregnant (but hoping to change that soon), I can't comment on the 1st and 2nd trimester's being times of high sex drive, but I'll let you know when the time comes...:D

You say slut like it's a bad thing.
Actually, he didn't.

I know libido drops as you age, but, still, 30 years is a long time to go without sex for enjoyment. I understand people who wait until marriage until they have sex (not for me, but I'm not everyone), I understand low libido. Was there something out of whack in this couple's relationship? I mean, I get crabby during my period because I don't get any, and it only lasts a few days!!! Can't imagine going 30 years!

I guess people just have different needs... or the same needs, and different outlets.

I wouldn't want a sex-free relationship, but I've done it before, and I would not be too phased by doing it again, if the relationship was right.

Was speaking of my experiences as a sexually active woman, I do agree. I find, for me anyway, it's about 4-5 days before and for the first 2-3 days of menstruation, depending on length of period and cramps (total bitch). As I've never been pregnant (but hoping to change that soon), I can't comment on the 1st and 2nd trimester's being times of high sex drive, but I'll let you know when the time comes...:D

I was speaking of my experiences as a sexually active man, but based on observations of sexually active women... :)

I guess people just have different needs... or the same needs, and different outlets.

I wouldn't want a sex-free relationship, but I've done it before, and I would not be too phased by doing it again, if the relationship was right.

Based on my observations of sexually active men, most find it difficult to climb into bed every night with the woman they love without at least making an attempt on the odd occassion - hell, my husband even tried it on in his sleep one night (ended with a smack to the head to wake him up). Most say that sex is an integral and necessary part of the relationship, and if it's lacking, they'd go look for it elsewhere. Now, considering I'm in my 20's, I'm not enlightened in the ways and needs of older men, but I'm presuming that there are some needs that only a woman can meet that stay intact over a whole life time.

I do understand a woman's loss of libido over time - dryness, loss of ability to orgasm, loss of flexibility, hormonal changes, etc, etc...

I find it totally amazing how many sluts are on this foum. Just to throw a little science in....the odds of a pregnancy increase in these cases because a woman is more likely to have quick sex when she is "ripe".
So because a woman happens to enjoy sex and has plenty of it she is a slut?

But if a man has plenty of it he is a legend?

Oh yes, unprotected first date sex is definitely a bad idea I think. Unless there's some intensive medical testing beforehand or something...

**Ponders where one submits detailed medical testing to Dakini...... **

All your options are sweeping generalizations. People can have sex because of low self esteem, or high self-esteem, or because they don't attach any moral significance to it. You can't say that "sex on the first date is always: " without making the distinction between positive and negative concepts of sex any more than you can say "War is always:" without preserving a distinction between France and Germany in WW2.

I think there is nothing wrong with sex on the first date, or second, or third..
Whenever feels right for the individuals involved (be that two or more). The term "between consenting adults" needs to apply in my opinion but that is all.
There is much talk about what men think of women and what women think of men, but what is crucial is what you think of yourself! If you have self respect then why would having sex with another person cause you to loose that, or allow another to take that away?
Sex is not a dirty word and having it is a natural act, a celebration of life. Yes these days there are precautions that need to be taken for your health and if you don't want children, I am not so naive as to say free love lalala no worries about stds...
But, there are enough things going on in this world to worry about: war, global warming, famine, crime etc. Really, having sex is not such a big issue, and it's fun!:fluffle:

I'm 24, female, and my personal rule is I don't have sex with someone I don't know. But if I've gotten to know someone well prior to actually meeting them, and there's physical chemistry the first time I meet them, I may well have sex with them.
I like sex, it's fun, and I take precautions. I've never regretted choosing to have sex with someone. I have regretted choosing not to tho, and being in situations where it simply wasn't possible regardless of how much we both wanted to.
I think saying that having sex on the first date makes a woman a slut, as many have said variations of in this thread, is an outdated and ridiculous concept, and in many cases is a double standard as well, since quite a few people who say 'you shouldn't have sex on the first date' have differing opinions based on whether it's a man or a woman in question. Which has also been pointed out quite a bit in this thread.
As to sex being different/better if you're in love, IME, when you have a serious emotional attachment to someone, EVERYTHING is different/better when it involves that person as compared to when it doesn't.
And similar to Helioterra, every relationship I've had that meant anything to me, involved sex the first time I met the person face to face. They all also involved having gotten to know the person quite well prior to meeting, and sometimes, the relationship having been decided prior to the first meeting.

All your options are sweeping generalizations. People can have sex because of low self esteem, or high self-esteem, or because they don't attach any moral significance to it. You can't say that "sex on the first date is always: " without making the distinction between positive and negative concepts of sex any more than you can say "War is always:" without preserving a distinction between France and Germany in WW2.
How are they all generalizations?
I gave the options of yes, it's always good, yes, it's sometimes good, I'd never do it (which is really not saying whether it's good or bad), it's always bad, and "I have a negative view of those who engage in such activities" and of course "other" I'm not asking people to make judgments on why people have sex on the first date or anything. Why people do it doesn't matter as far as my poll is concerned. I'm asking what everyone thinks of it. If you think it's ok sometimes, but not other times, then vote for that option...

**Ponders where one submits detailed medical testing to Dakini...... **


Perhaps Dakini did not like the original response?? was simply meant in jest... Although if one were to meet Dakini, I would definitely bring said medical paperwork with me.... Perhaps she is toooooo irresistable not to?

I'm not about to have unprotected sex with you... with or without medical testing... I'd rather not have to deal with something like a pregnancy...

I'm not about to have unprotected sex with you... with or without medical testing... I'd rather not have to deal with something like a pregnancy...

silly silly friend, I wasnt making an offer, only defending your point originally, and then adding on a comment for fun.... that was a quick rejection by the way...

silly silly friend, I wasnt making an offer, only defending your point originally, and then adding on a comment for fun.... that was a quick rejection by the way...
Well, I'm not on the pill, any unprotected sex is bad...

Well, I'm not on the pill, any unprotected sex is bad...

so we just have to be safe then??? Leave a light on, I am on my way..... (just keep an eye out for the cute one, that will be me)....

so we just have to be safe then??? Leave a light on, I am on my way..... (just keep an eye out for the cute one, that will be me)....
lol
:fluffle:

so what is new in your world Dakini?? Boredom is overcoming me here.... although I will soon be moving on to homework... What is a goddess like yourself doing here this weekend? No hot date??

i think sex on the first date is a really stupid idea

i think sex on the first date is a really stupid idea


I think it depends skinhead, it seems the original author has had some experience meeting people from online, which i guess wouldn't truly make it the first encounter... but I have never met anyone from the internet (as of yet) so I am not really the right one to say... However the moment can overtake you, so I totally agree with the originator on it not being all bad..

so what is new in your world Dakini?? Boredom is overcoming me here.... although I will soon be moving on to homework... What is a goddess like yourself doing here this weekend? No hot date??
I had a date on Friday. A job interview yesterday and I've been procrastinating all today.

I think it depends skinhead, it seems the original author has had some experience meeting people from online, which i guess wouldn't truly make it the first encounter... but I have never met anyone from the internet (as of yet) so I am not really the right one to say... However the moment can overtake you, so I totally agree with the originator on it not being all bad..
I've never met someone from online...

So did you have the date? and......

Everybody should do what he/she thinks is alright!

As long as you both agree on having sex and you both enjoy it; well, I can't think of a good argument to disagree.

You only life once folks and in that time you should drink, smoke and have as much sex as possible in the time you have.

I had a date on Friday. A job interview yesterday and I've been procrastinating all today.
Well tell us about this date...... WE WANT DETAILS....

(having to live vicariously through others)

Everybody should do what he/she thinks is alright!

As long as you both agree on having sex and you both enjoy it; well, I can't think of a good argument to disagree.

You only life once folks and in that time you should drink, smoke and have as much sex as possible in the time you have.


That almost sounded like a Johnny Cash song....... Gotta love the man in black.

So did you have the date? and......
and we had a wonderful time... :)

I feel so comfortable around him and you know when you usually talk to someone you run out of stuff to say and then end up with these awkward silences...? yeah, none of that... he also surprised me in some good ways. The only thing is I can't remember how to go about dating type situations this early in the game...

and we had a wonderful time... :)

I feel so comfortable around him and you know when you usually talk to someone you run out of stuff to say and then end up with these awkward silences...? yeah, none of that... he also surprised me in some good ways. The only thing is I can't remember how to go about dating type situations this early in the game...


more details friend, we are battling an evil monster that is boredom here... If some guy gets to score with the sexy Dakini, we all want to hear about it..

more details friend, we are battling an evil monster that is boredom here... If some guy gets to score with the sexy Dakini, we all want to hear about it..
Like I said earlier. A lady doesn't kiss and tell.

That is one of the single most awesome things I've ever read on these forums.

Kudos, Cap'n.
Thank you. I was speaking from the heart on that one. :)

To each his own.

HA! Tell that to the guy that snubbed me in bed a few weeks back :p
He was a selfish bastard, but for exactly the opposite of the reason you're suggesting ;)

Also, GNI, Eustrusca, Dakini and allll the other 'just because you have sex for a living doesn't make you subhuman' opinion-holders: you're all awesome and need to breed and produce more intelligent, compassionate people to dilute the rest of humanity. Or at least donate to the 'Cloning A Better Future' program :p (just a note: I'm not a prostitute; I'm just not used to people actually supporting my argument re: not treating people like subhumans just to feel morally superior)
Thank you, nice lady. I'll take that in the sense that you mean each of us with someone who matters to us as individuals, not the three of us together, which, although intriguing, would be rather ... awkward! :D

Fortunately, I already have five children, each of whom is kind, compassionate and caring ... some moreso than others. They're raising their own children to be the same way, so if I have done nothing else in my life I have at least done that much. Since I can no longer father children, I see their very existence as the sum total of my gift to the future. :)

EDIT: Someone snubbed YOU in bed? OMG! What a total fool! Sheesh!