Hey folks, Doc here. This week, we’re doing something a little different. Instead of the usual dating advice, we’re having two guests stopping by to share their experiences and advice. One of the things I’m always saying is that one of the most important things when it comes to relationships is simply taking the time to understand people instead of just buying into these pre-packaged ideas about who they are and what their lives must be like. Today, we have Hope Nicholson – producer, author, archivist, publisher and all around geek – generously sharing some of her experiences with a subject that I know many of my readers can relate to: the anxiety, confusion, stress and frustration that comes with coming to sex and dating later in life.
Take it away, Hope!
When I was a kid I loved choose your own adventure books, but I’d keep my finger in the pages before choosing the next step. Invariably, I’d end up with each finger stuck at a different path marker, so I could make sure that I picked the ending I wanted before I put the book down.
When I read regular books, I would flip to the back and read the last three pages to make sure that I’d want to get to the end before beginning the book.
I also cheated at every video game I ever played, just so I could get to the final end-scene (which made playing Chrono Trigger with a dozen different endings, very frustrating!).
I don’t do any of that anymore, but I still felt that way about love for the longest time. In life though, you can’t look up the solutions to your problems. In regards to dating, I felt alone. Torn between the desire to date (“It looks like so much fun on TV!”) and undefined fear and anxiety about it. If you asked me at 24, why I hadn’t dated yet, I would have bolted out of the room. I had no idea why. There was no way to flip to the back of the book to find out. There was no walkthrough, no Game Genie, and the frustration of not knowing why I didn’t date gave me intense anxiety so I pushed it far out of my mind.
I suspected that the only way I would know these answers would be after I felt comfortable in dating. And it didn’t help me one bit at the time knowing that in retrospect I would have the answers! When I hung out with women, the talk would often turn to dating and I would scramble to relate the very few experiences I had to their own actual love lives and conflicts. I had a brief boyfriend at 17 where we mostly watched Family Guy and I let him lick my mouth while I tried not to show I was grossed out1, a few unwelcome but unresisted physical advances by male friends that I had panic attacks over at 19 and 21, and a few chaste, unfulfilling dates here and there. That was pretty much it.
I ended up hanging out with gay men, and women who didn’t date either (surprisingly, many of them chose gay men as their companions too). I avoided heterosexual men altogether for years. It left me feeling like a fraud. I didn’t like any of the very few and far between romantic or sexual experiences I had, and I didn’t know what to do.
Was I queer? I had a lot of crushes on men both real and fictional, but I never felt any similar type of obsession for women, so that seemed unlikely.
Was it body issues? I’m a plump girl for sure, but I’m pretty happy with the way I look. So I didn’t think that was a reason, or at least not most of it.
Was I asexual? I read so much slash fan-fiction, my laptop was likely to burn out, so that seemed unlikely.
So… I desired men. Yet, the thought of them being in the same room as me made my skin crawl. The thought of sitting across the room from a stranger no matter how attractive or likable made my stomach sink. What the hell? That’s not what Sweet Valley High told me romance would be like.
Where was the man I would swoon over, who would occupy my every waking thoughts? Where’s the brooding-but-sensitive Romeo who would reciprocate my feelings and bring me tokens of his affection (flowers, or really comic books are just fine too, thank-you-very-much)?
At 24, without the distraction of school and working three part-time jobs keeping my brain occupied, I started to force myself to deal with it. I made myself go on dates with strangers, talk about comic books and video-games, and wish desperately that the whole thing was over with. Then I’d go home and beat myself up for not being attracted to them, because I should be.
I told a few close friends who accepted my virginity as an unusual quirk, but could give me no advice.
Finally, after moving out on my own, I decided that there was no way I could figure this out and at 24, it was getting pretty clear that waiting around wasn’t working. So I went to a therapist. Who didn’t help.
I kept forcing myself to date. At one point, a remarkable thing happened: I had a date I liked! Who I was attracted to! Who I wanted to kiss my face! Who promised to call…
…and never contacted me again.
That stopped me dating for another year.
I tried another therapist. This one was a better fit, but there was still no solution. These visits were useful though. They helped me verbalize my vague fears and anxieties into actual words. Things are always scarier when they’re giant formless clouds above your head.
One of my greatest fears was that if I found a date I really liked, I would have to tell them I was a virgin. I imagined them treating me with pity, or feeling fetishistic about being the first one in. Both were awful scenarios. Both eventually happened.
So I talked. I talked to everyone. I started telling friends. I started telling strangers. Eventually I even started telling dates. The more I talked, the more comfortable I felt. The more I saw that people weren’t reacting with shock, the more I felt like it wasn’t that overwhelming. My anxiety became smaller, more manageable. I became then, more confident. It became an oddball story instead of a deeply seated fear. “Hello I’m Hope, I’m a 25 year old virgin. No, I like boys, and no I was never assaulted. No, I don’t want to hire a prostitute to take care of it.”
I became confident and open, and we all know that confidence, in men and women, regardless of sexuality, is a compelling quality!
I talked to more and more people, most of whom seemed to think my directness was strange but fun. Eventually, I kissed a boy, a friend of a friend, and it was like electric sparks!
Attraction happened.
Obsession happened.
Heartbreak happened.
Ouch.
Was I right to be scared of this initially?
But I jumped in and tried again. Every time it hurt very badly. But it became less unusual. I stopped fearing that after every breakup, I would never find a boy I liked again. It would have been nice if I could have learned that without, y’know, being smashed up that many times or to deal with scoundrels, but that’s what happened.
I found ways to increase the odds of finding that attraction. Men I already knew, who shared the same friends, confident but quiet, practical but creative, all were much more likely to spark attraction than any other type. Once I stopped going out with randos just because they were nice and looked fine, I started enjoying the process more.
I eventually found someone who didn’t care one way or another if I was a virgin; he liked me in all the ways I wanted to be liked. In retrospect, I know that for me to feel at ease in dating, I need to also feel respected as a friend, which is what he gave me. I need to feel that I’m not needed, that they are a complete human being with or without me. When I had my experience with him, it didn’t feel scary at all, because he was close to me.
I continue to be very open about my late past. And about my own attraction when I feel it, because I’m still surprised when it happens!
And yes, as I suspected before as a virgin, it is a lot easier to talk about it after you no longer are.
The amazing thing I discovered is that I’m not alone. When I talk about being a late bloomer in a group, there’s always at least one person who’ll tell me “I was/am one too.”
I’ve been told this by dates who tell me that I’m the second woman they’ve ever been with. I hear this from dates who tell me that a woman has never told them they’re good-looking before or that they didn’t know how to approach women they desired. I’ve been told this by women who fear their boyfriends will pressure them into sex, and they don’t know if they want it or not. I hear this from women who dated dozens of men for years with great anxiety before finding someone who felt right. I hear this from women who fall in love with their partner many months into dating. I hear this from women who finally feel a connection to someone of the same sex after years of feeling nothing towards anyone.
There’s no cheat-sheet. My reasons and my path to feeling comfortable with dating wasn’t their path and it might not be yours either.
I’ve met so many virgins, male and female, who are in their late twenties. Or those who aren’t but regretted their first experience and stayed away from sex and dating afterwards. Ones who’ve went years and years without having sex. More than I ever expected. They were relieved to hear my story; like me, they thought they were the only ones. They thought they’d have to have sex with someone they wanted to like but didn’t feel comfortable with. They didn’t know if they ever would like someone ‘that way’. And I was relieved to hear I wasn’t alone, that I wasn’t weird, that all of this is really normal variation, with no one set answer/reason to fit all of us. You might be queer, or asexual, or have to resolve past painful experiences. Or it might be that old adage of ‘not having found the right fit’. Or for whatever social or biological reason, you are finally ready to date and be intimate at a much later age than society tells you is average.
It’s awful that healing sometimes can happen only retroactively. I think if I had talked to any of these fellow virgins and late bloomers back when I was struggling so much, the pressure I felt to ‘figure it out’ would have eased substantially.
You’re not alone. I’m hoping that by telling my story, and telling you how I found out I wasn’t the only one, it will help some of you feel less anxious and more confident about yourselves.
And really, regardless of whether you have sex or not, that’s the most important thing.
Hope Nicholson is a Toronto-based, Winnipeg raised comic book publisher of Bedside Press. She has previously championed the awareness of 1940s Canadian comic book history with her projects “Nelvana of the Northern Lights” & “Brok Windsor”. Recently, she was the editor of the aboriginal comic book anthology “Moonshot”. She is also a film producer and researcher, previously a producer on the film “Lost Heroes” and currently a researcher for the film “Africville”. In 2015 she was named one of Flare Magazine’s Top 30 Under 30 Female Entrepreneurs in Canada.
Hope Nicholson is also the creator of The Secret Loves of Geek Girls, a Kickstarter-funded collection of comic strips and prose stories about the true dating lives of geek girls, featuring the talents of Margaret Atwood, Roberta Gregory, Gisèle Lagacé, Kate Leth, Sam Maggs, JM Frey, Danielle Corsetto, Cara Ellison, Trina Robbins, Mariko Tamaki/Fiona Smyth and many, many more. The Kickstarter is running until July 24, 2015, so donate today!
- Don’t let this happen to you! – Doc [↩]
A very touching story! And indeed very relatable. Disgusting "licking", panic attacks over physical advances, chaste boring dates… It's really great to realise that you are not the only one who struggles to find that person you can be attracted to. And who feels the odd woman out. But in truth we are not odd or weird or frigid. Our struggle is common human struggle. And there is nothing like realising you are not alone to make the shame go away. So, thank you for this post!
Thanks for sharing, Hope! I was a late bloomer too (not as late as you, although I felt the sense of falling-behind pretty hard), and I feel like I would have really appreciated reading this then.
Ma'am…I think you may, in fact, be my long-lost fraternal twin. Reading this was like running through a checklist of my own dating-oriented neuroses and fears. Reading DNL's articles about 'late-blooming' (because anyone who doesn't start boning at seventeen is developmentally delayed, amirite?) people and older virgins has been very helpful to me, but this feels so much more relatable.
I've always been sort of afraid that I just won't ever find someone I'm attracted to and compatible with (I've got Asperger's so I need a LOT of space sometimes, kinda like a cat, and that can be really hard for people to deal with so my potential compatibility pool is kinda small) and I'd either end up forever alone or in an unloving, sterile, or even hostile relationship.
Add to that the cultural baggage about men being nothing but ambulatory genetalia and being raised in a fundamentalist christian household and my conjoined twin worst nightmares are getting rejected by someone I've been dating because I'm a virgin in my late twenties/thirties or alternately getting rejected by someone who is much more intense about their christianity than I am with mine because I had sex with a past girlfriend.
I know DNL says this a lot, so it's odd to repeat it here, but it's always a load off my shoulders when I read stuff like this because it's proof that I'm not alone (or even that odd) in being a virgin at this point in my life. It also makes my decision to wait until I'm damn sure I'm with the right person a lot easier to bear (I want my first time to be something I'm happy with for the rest of my life, but waiting can really suck, let's be real).
Anyway, long and rambling post made short: Thank you for sharing a very personal story and giving frustrated nerds the world over some psychological breathing room and restoring our hope that we'll be able to find that person (or persons) that we're compatible with regardless of how many people we haven't been with.
You can’t draw the equivalency between female virginity and male virginity for the simple reason that women hold the gatekeeping power, while men don’t. This has resulted in the trend where women exclude more and more men from having sexual relationships because these men don’t meet women’s emotionally immature demands for drama, unlike the minority of bad boys, jerks, cads and thugs women seem to prefer for their early sexual experiences. Women turn to the nerds later for boyfriends and husband prospects, reluctantly and without enthusiasm, because the math doesn’t work out for the kinds of cool guys they really want. Hence all the sexless marriages and high divorce rates we see in modernized countries. Even then, because of generous welfare states and all the make-work positions for women these days, for example in corporate HR departments and government agencies, many women decide not to bother with marriage at all because they no longer need husbands for financial support and health insurance.
The trend towards mass male eviction from sexual relationships has progressed so far in Japan that reportedly a quarter of unmarried Japanese men in their 30’s have had no sexual experience. Hmm. What about geography? Why don’t these male virgins in fly to other Asian countries like the Philippines or Thailand to see prostitutes? Thousands of men from Western countries visit these places as sex tourists every year, and I have friends who have told me about their adventures there.
Perhaps because these male virgins, along with male virgins in Western countries, realize that prostitutes address the wrong side of the problem. A prostitute can give you sexual experience, but she can’t teach you how to get into sexual relationships with regular women. That has to come from dating experience, and yet more and more men can’t seem to acquire this experience.
And this has wider implications for society than just sex. The collapse in fertility derives from this, of course. But the male exclusion trend deprives men of the experiences they need to learn how to deal with women successfully in general, not just in sexual relationships. These skills don’t exist in isolation, in other words, but become the key components in what I call the adult man’s skill set. Women respect sexually experienced and confident men more than sexually in- or under-experienced men who project unease around women. You can see how this would have practical consequences for adult male vrgins in businesses where they have to work with women. They can pick up right away on the guy who has poor skills for interacting with women because of a lack of sexual experience, and they tend to feel contempt towards him as a “loser.”
For some reason Western sexologists show no curiosity about the growing population of sexually excluded men. The few scientific studies I have found about the phenomenon acknowledge this apparently willful neglect, compared with all the effort devoted towards studying what the politically organized and supported gay male population does. If I didn’t know any better, I would say that sexology has become politicized, and that its practitioners have the agenda of promoting feminism and normalizing deviancy, while throwing the male virgins with normal desires to the wolves instead of trying to understand their situation and help them with their personal development.
This image is delicious.
DNL, this is totally unrelated to this post, but if the guest author is going to become a thing, I am going to make some requests. It would be awesome to have a non-white guest poster (maybe Asian/Indian man and a black woman?), someone with a mental health issue, someone who has ASD, someone with a physical disability, someone who is asexual, and someone who is not straight.
Yeah, yeah, I know, I am demanding 🙂 But I think hearing those voices would be good for many of your audience.
In fairness to the good Doctor, he's had guest authors who fit some of those categories, but the focus of their articles wasn't on those particular aspects of their dating lives.
Woah woah, give the good doctor some time! All your ideas sound really great, I’d love to hear stories from people like this, but even tho the Doc may have a fairly good number of acquaintences from different walks of life due to his time writing, he still might need a little time to contact people who specialize in writing about certain issues (say, racial issues and dating, for example).
Oh no! I am not demanding immediate gratification or anything. I just wanted to toss some ideas out there in case guest poster is going to be a regular event. It will take time to find people of course
Did you just call anything that is not hetero sex deviancy?
HOLD MY EARRINGS
Still trying to figure out how the fuck "welfare state" fits in…
Because welfare exists women do not need men, maybe???? I dunno there is so much WTF in his post that I am grasping to find any logic
It's not fair that women get jobs and shit because otherwise how else would dudes get laid if women didn't depend on them for financial security, etc.
(see also: "why RooshV says he couldn't get laid in Denmark".)
But wait, that wouldn't be welfare state.
Welfare state would be sitting on your ass all day gatekeeping all the sex while the gov'ment pays for your house and your nice cars??
*brain explodes*
IIRC from reading about that Roosh Denmark thing, Denmark provides free or essentially free childcare and a ton of paid maternity leave. So that would be part of the welfare state of Denmark that makes women more financially independent than in many other countries. Maybe?
Perhaps.
I saw his username, and parts of his post gave me the impression he was referring to the US concept of welfare state. Everyone's explanations make sense.
I hear this almost every day (minus the excluding men part) from my parents. I used to believe it too, shamefully. Then reality happened.
I work in a grocery store and I end up having to help people find the stuff that's covered by food stamps occasionally, mainly because the stuff isn't very clearly labeled in-store and the packets that they're given don't keep up-to-date with any packaging changes. It's best described as humbling. I've gotten to know a few of the families over the time I've been working there and they're easily the easiest customers I have to deal with.
Contrast them with people who walk into the Employees Only back room and start pulling apart our overstock pallets to find something they want (yes, really), kids who scream bloody murder at you because you won't get the cheetos they want while their mom isn't looking, or people who come in drunk and yell and give you the finger because the store is out of their favorite coffee creamer (I wish this only happened once) and you understand why I really get sick and tired of listening to my parents ranting about the welfare system.
Adam, I just want to say how awesome it is the way you've unlearned so many harmful things you were raised to believe. I think it speaks very well to your compassion, your insight and your general decency as a human being.
It's hard not to change when a six year old has to translate a request from her her ~80 year old Vietnamese grandmother who is learning english secondhand from said six year old (can we just take a moment to appreciate that?) in order to find the right kind of orange juice, cheese, and bread. It also doesn't help that the packet they were given was six months out of date, and the stupid little signs we use for the WIC applicable stuff (slightly thicker post-it notes, really) keep falling off in the cooler section because the cold screws up the adhesive. I spent about a forty five minutes of a seriously time-crunched pre-thanksgivng week (or, as we in the grocery business call it, Hell Week) shift going through the store and helping them figure out what they needed and then manhandling a thirty pound bag of rice out to their car. I got yelled at by the asshole head stockboy for 'slacking off', but basically fuck him. I don't regret a second of it. Plus, the store director knew what I was doing and told stock-up-his-ass to cool it.
Lots of people do find it hard, though, so I think it says something pretty great about you regardless.
Eh, I was what I would politely describe as a total shit when I was younger. Think stereotypical tea party republican joined with the worst kind of teenage the-whole-world-hates-me emo bullshit plus Asperger's patented lack of mind/mouth filter and the most brutal of brutal honesty. If I didn't improve I couldn't live with myself.
And I admire you for it. Many, if not most, people are not interested in evaluating the "truths" that they were raised with. And achingly few people have the degree of empathy you show in the above posts.
You are a good man, Mr Adamhunter1223. Would that there were more people like you in the world.
I have to second reboot and enail. The more I find out about your family/upbringing/etc., the more impressed I am that you managed to fight a lot of that toxic stew.
I didn't really start until I hit transition school. The cirriculum there was focused on preparing the students for life after school/college (which is something that, I think, every student needs but very few actually get) and going there plus going to college exposed me to just about everything my parents wouldn't allow. After that, well, guilt is a hell of a motivator for self-improvement, I'll put it that way. I suppose it also helps that we started going to a new church that (for all that it's still very conservative) isn't nearly as fire and brimstone as some of the ones we went to in the past, and the 'teachers' mom started listening to were so blatantly conspiracy theorist that I didn't have much of a choice but to start examining things more closely.I don't know about you, but when I hear people talk about how they were given dreams from god that helped them interpret the book of Revelations and how the trees they planted in their yard to symbolize hope and faith died so Obama's liberal agenda and the demons that came along with it were at fault (I shit you not) I start to get leery.
Well, yeah, I'd be pretty leery, but I also grew up in a fairly liberal area, with moderate, not overly religious parent, so I was basically brought up to question that kind of stuff.
Makes me think of working at the public library. Everyone assumed it was the homeless folks who'd be the big problem, when for the most part, no, they were very polite (some of them have mental issues that can cause trouble, but mostly they just want somewhere quiet to sit out the heat/cold/rain and read a book). It was the upper-middle-class folks who were horrifying.
Wait you mean I should be getting paid for NOT having sex? Where's my check?
I saw though "We hunted the Mammoth" that nauseating post where RooshV was bemoaning that as men can no longer attract women through the old noble ways of Provider Game, he has to resort to Clown Game. Provider Game being where woman had to turn to him for financial support, Clown Game dressing up, being witty and trying to charm them. He is actually repulsed that women are now choosing their partners based on attraction rather than the fear of starving to death.
Vomit.
Because sex is no longer commodified (well, in society as a whole it is DEFINITELY a commodity, but in more forward thinking circles not as much) but sex is no longer a commodity because women can now get their needs met in other ways (because obviously women don't want relationships with men because *gasp* they like the idea of men or sex or having a life partner who can provide both life partnerstuff and sexy times) so sex is devalued as a currency.
Rampant Sex Inflation- band name.
It's like these guys simply don't grasp the concept of love or even generally liking a person and caring about them and wanting to be around them. Have they never cared about a friend or a family member? Or do they just think women aren't regular people and don't have those kinds of emotions?
SKRULL
WE ARE ALL SKRULL
SKRULL SHRUBBERY!!!
Skrubbery?
Better than schrull
Skrull or shrubbery, but never, ever humans
death to humans and also the kree empire!
Haven't we been over this? Women aren't people. Or…some women aren't people. I can't remember which.
#notallwomen
Seriously though, after engaging with some of these sorts, I'm not sure they all have? Like… they were shielded from all emotional work their whole lives and have trouble with close emotional friendships, so the idea of "liking" someone is in fact rather foreign.
Which I would have a lot of sympathy for, if they didn't deal with their loneliness by ranting about how terrible, mean and demanding women (and in this case, welfare) are and suggesting that it's a great wrong that women are able to make sex and relationship choices based on something other than dire financial need. Loneliness is tough, and it can be hard to figure out how to form connections with other people.
Patriarchy: it hurts men too!
And I think the biggest lie it ever told (besides that it doesn't exist) is that the solution to loneliness is women.
Me too. The idea that it is unfair that people are not obligated to pair up with someone out of financial neccesity makes any sympathy I might have had burn up in a rage inferno.
Because women get welfare for having babies from one night stands with Bad Boys (TM) they secretly don't respect and thus they get to sit pretty on their welfare checks every month while Real Men/Nice Guys Like Him/Nerd Guys have to support them with money that's unfairly taken out of their hard-earned paychecks even though the Real Men/Nice Guys Like Him/Nerd Guys aren't getting the benefit of easy sex because they're not Alpha/Bad Boy/Rich/*insert quality here* enough to get the hypergamous women to sleep with them.
Yeah, I mean, I know that I purposely get pregnant just so I can get welfare/child support payments. Sounds legit.
If you're my parents, then absolutely yes.
Oy. There are people who take in foster kids just for the money they get out of it which is…one of the most vile things a person can do, I think.
When you get to that level of assholery the differences between what's worse than what become marginal.
If you have enough babies, you'll get to be a millionaire!
This sounds like an excellent life plan. Sign me up!
(Please do not sign me up, ever.)
Life plan, hell, that sounds like a reality show. We've had jon and kate with eight, the duggars with nineteen (or whatever the hell its up to now), the only way networks can keep spinning money out of that format is to up the number of kids involved.
Side note: I fucking hate that branch of reality television. Well, I hate reality television in general, but the whole 'look how many kids they have! Isn't that wacky?' shit in particular.
Pretty!
I'll want them back eventually, but thanks!
*hold earrings*
well, his name is "redneck…"
Yeah, I also get this weird vibe, like if this dude is trying to guilt me if I ever decide to end up with a woman or a trans person (I’m bi/pan) I’m somehow taking some poor chumps chance at getting his dick wet. So he’s using an article that’s trying to make people feel better about their virginities and their chances to find love to fish for pity, I seriously wonder what could be wrong with his love life.
But guys, let's hear him out, okay? Because I want to know just how much the Men have discovered about our Feminist Conspiracy to deprive men of sex and experience in relationships with regular women (because obviously sex workers are irregular women or possibly Skrull.) How can we adjust our tactics if we don't know how much they've figured out.
Serious response: Everything you're talking about with confidence breeding attractiveness and the old "have to have experience to get experience" problem is there for women as well. Poster just described exactly that phenomenon, and she is a woman. So it's not some vast conspiracy or a male exclusion trend. It's just called "Life: Sometimes It Is Uneven"
Don't ask, don't tell.
How is green shapeshifter a BAD thing in a date?
To be fair all the sex workers are currently busy getting requests from Gawker Media to help ruin their competitors’ employees’ lives.
If you're a troll you failed because this is way too long-winded and you sound like you just plagiarized this by copy-pasting from a few different blogs like a desperate highschool slacker trying to put together a last minute homework assignment. If you're serious…then all I can say is that I'm glad you'll push any woman away in the early stages of a relationship because no one needs that shit in their life.
Yeeeah, I got a sentence in and checked out, and usually I'm good for reading some hilarious nonsensical sexist rants when I don't have my mid-day tea to wake me up.
Yeah I got to “because women are the gate keepers” and then skipped the rest of the post and went straight to the comments. Seems fair since he clearly didn’t read the original article.
I laughed so hard at that.
Yup, men are just lining up for booty and I'm just turning them down left and right. Totes what's happening. yup!
*facepalm*
You're actually a cartoon villain and not a real person, right? Because real people wouldn't come in here and state all this silliness and MRA stuff just so blatantly like that, would they?
Gotta be a cartoon.
I'll bite. Where is the evidence of the "growing population of sexually excluded men"? Keeping in mind that the plural of anecdote /= data.
More importantly, where's the evidence that the population of excluded men is disproportionately larger than that of excluded skrulls. . . er. . . women?
There are male skrulls. F'example, Captain America is one of us
I mean…… You can trust Captain America. Look at his star!
I kind of lost track during Secret Invasion when it looked like the Skrulls were infiltrating America to convert everyone to Islam. I'm sure it worked out to be something more interesting and nuanced than that but "we are conquering you because God loves you all" was where I gave up.
I have NO idea what you're talking about. There is no Secret Invasion. Nothing is going on. Come in this room, and I'll answer all your questions and concerns.
Let me just say first that the skrulls are a great and noble people and I would happily have my genome remapped. Shapeshifting is MUCH eaiser than crunches.
*I look sideways at the other womannotskrull standing next to me and we nod*
Come on in.
"Shapeshifting is MUCH eaiser than crunches."
Hah. So *you* say.
Must be a West Coast thing.
*goes back to Pilates*
Plus, the passive tense, OMGGGGGGG the passive tense.
"the male exclusion trend deprives men of the experiences they need to learn how to deal with women successfully"
"deprives men of the experiences."
o.O
o.O
o.O
OMGGGGGGGGG. You are not "deprived" of your experiences. YOU HAVE FAILED TO GO OUT AND GET THEM.
Do doooooods like this honestly, seriously think someone is going to HAND them their "sexual experiences", like they were handed their presents at Christmas when they were three years old??
You learn (active!!) the social skills to interact (active!!!) with other people, and that way you earn (say it with me!!) their trust and foster (one more time!!!) interactions with them.
I just can't. The wimpy "somebody haaaaaand me it" coupled with the absolute entitlement of "I deseeeeerve it" just makes me want to retch.
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1133076481/w…
2/2
For some reason Western sexologists show no curiosity about the growing population of sexually excluded men.
[CITATION NEEDED]
The few scientific studies I have found about the phenomenon acknowledge this apparently willful neglect,
[I'd love to see these studies. Links please.]
compared with all the effort devoted towards studying what the politically organized and supported gay male population does
[are you suggesting that straight men aren't politically organized or supported? Uh, it's called government.]
If I didn’t know any better, I would say that sexology has become politicized, and that its practitioners have the agenda of promoting feminism and normalizing deviancy
[Aaaaaaaaaand I'm out]
, while throwing the male virgins with normal desires to the wolves
[there you go, with the ridiculous buzz-words again]
instead of trying to understand their situation and help them with their personal development.
[why is it the responsibility of anyone to help men with their "personal development" of being able to interact with people without banging them? Seriously, if you can't talk to women without sex being (at least potentially) on the table, that's your problem, and a problem *you* need to solve, by coming to regard people as people, not holes to put your penis in. It is not the responsibility of anyone else around you to "solve" that problem for you by…. what? Making women have sex with men they don't want? Going back to the "Good Olde Dayse" when women didn't have a choice in who they married or had sex with? Yes, rampant violations of human rights, that's a GREAT solution.
God, the ridiculous, utterly ridiculous fear campaign buzz-words you throw in here "thrown to the wolves" "male exclusion trend" "male /eviction/" I just…. I can't take anything you say seriously, even if it wasn't rife with unsupported claims and even if you didn't try to "prove" what's going on in white America by making an appeal to stats from Japan, which incidentally, have an extremely different dating and sexuality culture. Extremely poor logic there.
Lol go troll elsewhere, we're too smart and too well educated for you here.
Insert joke about eviction notice from socialized vagina here.
That's a lot of words for 'No one wants to touch my penis because I'm an asshole'.
Yeah, after reading that it is easy to see why there is a lack of social and sexual success
[insert Orson Welles clapping gif]
http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/201…
You're welcome
I like you 😀
Yeah, that's basically always the translation for these Sexual Poverty types.
Please tell me more about the TRVTH! I MUST KNOW IT!
I'm starting a band called 'mass male eviction from sexual relationships', who's in? Women and jocks only, of course.
I'll play the drums. With a whip.
I think a riding crop would be a bit easier, but if you're that good with a bullwhip sign me up for tickets. Go indy all over that drum kit!
Will your hit singles be called 'Sex Tourist' and 'Collapse in Fertility'?
Those are the opening bands
Special guest appearance by the Vogons.
They changed the lineup a bit. They're now called Jefferson Poetry Slam.
Honey. Reread your post. The wimmenz aren't the ones oppressing you. "That women hold the gatekeeping power," This is bogus
I, too, would like to be part of the ever-growing list of people on the internet telling you that this is silly and you are also silly.
There isn't a problem with the collapse of fertility. Human population is growing exponentially. I also don't get what virginity has to do with business interactions. Someone who isn't confident isn't going to get far, whether in business or relationships, but the men are more likely to be the ones holding him back from promotions/raises/etc. than women are.
No, no, no- the words come out of the OTHER end.
I am SO using this in the future!
Beep boop females are illogical beep boop. *smokes cigar, wears hat indoors*
You will never live up to the virtues you preach, none of you ever do. Your ideal world is one in which an external locus of control is frowned upon, you wouldn't fit in there no matter how many skulls you buy to LARP manhood.
Since I haven't done this yet. . .
See my profile picture? This is Grimer. Grimer is a pokemon made of sludge. Grimer has never raped anyone, never violated anyone's boundaries (because pokebattles are weird dog fights but consensual ones), never drugged a woman, in fact never used force on a human being or uttered a single inappropriate comment. He's kinda cute with his big eyes and eager, smiley expression but not particularly conventionally attractive. Before you go blaming the Skrull Socialist Gynarchy for your dating woes, ask yourself what traits you posses that Grimer does not which your potential date in particular (since people have unique preferences) would find interesting?
Japan has nothing to do with men being evicted from sexual relations. Hundreds of papers have been written about the declining birth rate in Japan. Long story short, the majority of women in Japan would like traditional marriages and the types of jobs that allow for men to provide for an entire family are harder to come by. Not mass eviction from sex, whatever that means.
"This letter is notice that American Vaginal Management, LLC, has effective immediately terminated your lease and all associated rights thereof, of the vagina and all littoral regions of A. Nonname. You are required to vacate the premises and render in fit condition posthaste."
This is the exact opposite of everything I've read. Many Japanese women don't want to marry because traditional marriages are still expected & women get the shit-end of the stick in them.
From the Economist article "Asian Lonely Hearts" http://www.economist.com/node/21526350
Majority might have been an oversight
"The chief reason for the dearth of births is the decline of marriage. Fewer people are opting to wed, and they are doing so later in life. At least a third of young women aim to become full-time housewives, yet they struggle to find men who can support a traditional family."
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains…
I suspect the full truth of declining marriage rates in Japan are a combination of both those factors. Jobs that support a single-income house are hard to come by, and require (most of them) 60-80 hour work weeks. Men are not interested in having a two income household where they also have to put in an equal share of housework or (what research I have done also says this) the amount of emotional work that women are looking for in a marriage. Women who are looking to get married aren't interested in working 70-ish hours a week, and want a partnership.
Nope, sorry, not dealing with a second thread of this, and multiple posters have already given you plenty of information on what's going on in Japan.
Try addressing the information they've already given you, or if you don't want to address it, that's fine too.
As somebody who only started dating a couple of years ago (at 25), and didn't end up in a relationship until a year later, I'm glad to know that my experience isn't that unusual. According to most fictional portrayals, dating and sex are things that start happening before you're out of your teens, so it always felt a bit weird that I wasn't interested in that stuff.
First, your username aptly describes my backpack starting from middle school. Second: not being interested in romance in your highschool years is probably a blessing given the drama-filled status of most high school relationships. (There are exceptions of course, my middle cousin's married to her highschool sweetheart, who is, incidentally, one of the most awesome guys I've ever met in my life).
In hindsight, I think there were one or two gals who were attracted to me like that, but I tend to hang out platonically with women more than men, so the idea of a romantic relationship developing with any of them just never occurred to me.
The platonic-romantic jump can be a hard one to make, and isn't something to be undertaken lightly.
In high school, I called my bookbag a bookbrick* because during school I had to load up for my classes (school was one story but 1/4 of a mile long, and I'd often have two classes near each other but my locker on the opposite end of the building, with only 5 minutes between classes. And I always got tons of homework, so I'd have to cram the books in there and zip the bag around a cube-shape.
* Well, described it as such, since I named it, too (Dirq)
I HATED the idea of dating in high school and the pressure put on teens to just do it. I had two relationships in college, but after the second one turned particularly terrible, I've taken my time with dating for the last 8 years. It's weird to be 30 and really starting to think in terms of "OK. Maybe now I'm ready to be in a relationship, if the right one comes along" but only because of the stupid ideas society has about it. I know a lot of people who go into really terrible relationships, or who stay in relationships they know aren't right just hoping that after enough time it'll just work out who turn around and bash my perpetual singlehood. But my life isn't a movie, and I'll never fit into a fictional portrayal.
It's not weird at all that you weren't interested in it before; it's weird that society would rather pressure people into fitting some stupid, dramatic mold than allow them to just be happy.
I was 21 when I had my first real girlfriend and lost my virginity. I respect how examined you are, and the fact that you have a complete understanding of what the important issues were, and how you overcame them. Interestingly, I have no idea how it happened to me, and have yet to make it happen again since (28 now). For whatever reason the lessons or issues don't seem to be very clear or definitive in my experience, so it is interesting to see someone else's examination of a similar experience. Thank you for sharing.
To all the guys who believe it much easier for women to have sex with men because of female sexual gatekeeping: I'm super relieved to hear guys finally admit that they have zero requirements for a sexual partner and are willing to overlook nearly everything for a sexual experience with any woman who may come along offering. It's a refreshing change from the typical lists put forth by men claiming a woman's sexual worth can be determined by things like her past romantic partners (be it too few or two many… I'm going to go ahead and call this the Sexual Goldilocks Conundrum…), intelligence (be it too low or too high), success, and clothing choices, and that he refuses anyone who does not fit into tiny parameters.
Oh. Wait. No? That's not what you meant? Oh….
Man, I look forward to having my pick of dudes in 50 years when I am close to 80 and even fatter. Plus, I can forgo hygiene!
*burns bra, throws razors into a chasm*
I'll keep the bra- that one's more for me than for them. Too much jiggling otherwise. I wouldn't mind not plucking my eyebrows, though.
While I have been dressing for myself and not THE PATRIARCHY I've been wearing sports bras. Hard to get on, but so so supportive.
Incidentally, sport bras are hella sexy
I tell myself that as I barely avoid strangling myself with my own underwear and I shout "IS IT SEX YET"
Mr. Celette just stares in barely disguised horror.
Thats the part where seeing something is sexier than seeing the process of it getting done.
Case in point, pretty much all things hygene
Flossing. D:
WaterPik!
😀
Too busty for those – a sports bra for me is like a boob tourniquet.
New band name!
So many good ones this time.
I'm not sure which part, but I think I'll go with "Too Busty For Those"!
I like that one too, but I meant Boob Tourniquets
Me too! Apparently a craniofacial birth defect never mattered and my lack of romantic success was my gatekeeping, so if I just stop gatekeeping I can hop on that cock carousel. Yipee
Word to the wise: don't just hop on the cock carousel. Use lube. Warm up.
Wondering if DNL could get a fitness expert to write an article on the best stretches to prepare for all these cock carousels we're going to be on with our new found sexual freedom to have intercourse with ANY DUDES WE WANT.
Kegels for the Hypergamous?
Cock-fit.
Nice, very very well done
Another band name, perhaps?
Good point *grabs astroglide*
I somehow read that as "astrolabe" and was like, woah, that is the most science-oriented sex life I've ever heard of 0_o
It's not the size of the boat, it's the relative position of the north star!
Bahahahahahahha!
Hey no kink shaming my navigation fetish 🙂
Hey, whatever gets your evinrude running.
I. . .um. . .I'm not quite sure what you'd use the astrolabe for but considering stars and a ship are necessarily involved, I think I like this idea.
It's like that compass from the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie. To find, well… you know, the treasure.
If I need a compass to find. . .you know, the treasure, this date is already in trouble.
It *does* bring new meaning to the term “shipping”.
"my inclinometer don't want none unless you got stars, hon"
"I want your azimuth on my horizon, I think your meridian is absolutely celestial!"
I like the cut of yer jib!
Whew, for a moment there I was worried I was hoist on my own petard!
That was me, I still like the cut of your jib, I just can't see straight.
Y'all are giving the whole "Star Wars" thing a whole new meaning over here.
"Warm up."
*brings space heater*
I'm glad you said "cock carousel." That and "Obummer" were all I needed for bingo.
" so if I just stop gatekeeping I can hop on that cock carousel."
That just sounds … like you're potentially courting more than a minor injury if you do all that at once.
Ow.
XD
It feels like society wants women to walk some invisible itty bitty tiny line, where every step could put you too much in either side.
Showing too much skin? SLUT!
Showing too little? Prude bitch.
I can only imagine what's its like growing up with all these conflicting messages, must be like limbo!
Yup.
I definitely felt that way to me my entire life. The fear and conflict in my brain until I was about 25 between "am i too much? am i too little?" about every aspect caused a lot of my anxiety and depression issues. I was put down for not having even so much as kissed anyone by the end of senior year, but somehow I was still a slut if I didn't like a guy who liked me, or if I had a crush on a guy out of my league.
I could probably tell a lot more heartbreaking stories guys on here wouldn't even believe, but it all comes down to the fact that it's true that girls and women are told they're too much or not enough since childhood, and we internalize that toxicity to a vast extent. We have all been victims and we've all been bullies. I really wish I could apologize to the girl in 7th grade whom I helped call a slut after she tried to help explain how to use a tampon in the gym room before we had to swim in PE because someone convinced us that girls being able to comfortably use feminine items created to ease their natural cycle means she's a whore.
I know you're just kidding, but it can get really depressing to consistently hear this kind of thing (Men: "I'd have sex with anyone! I have no standards!") and STILL not be good enough for those guys when I attempted in the past, and then be told that women like me don't exist. Shrubbery.
Or skrull. Skrull is now definitely a possibility.
And you know what's the *best* (worst) part about it? Because women are supposed to be more empathetic listeners, guess who my guy friends came to when they wanted to complain about their lack of girlfriends?!?! Yours. Truly.
So, is it like the prince and the frog?
When you kiss a shrubbery, a 10 conventionally attractive princess comes out?
The thorns might be a problem though.
we emerge, like venus on her clam shell, and angels sing.
Oh man, there are a few times I wandered into AskMen threads where the advice to lonely "Forever Alone" guys (at 17 years old, natch) was that they ask out ugly/fat girls as "practice." So, use the ugly/fat girl for experience and sex, and then they can ask out the girls they actually want to date!
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee115/pulsar43…
But how will they find us if we just register as shrubbery?
….Monty Python's Holy Grail takes on a new meaning
"But how will they find us if we just register as shrubbery?"
There's a … registry now?
(Does that mean we get presents too? )
I hope so. It seems unfair that just because I might not ever get married, I can't demand that people give me fancy knives.
This is exactly what I’m saying.
“I know, I know … Ginsu knives. They can cut cans.”
-Ghost of Christmas Past, Scrooged
Oh obviously that's the solution.
You must be careful when spying on the enemy, lest you become one yourself!
…. I have no idea what this means.
Lurking in MRA forums, that shit is poison
Nah, boo. That's Opposition Research, that's what that is.
You have to know what's lurking in the wild so you can spot 'em from further away and hence, be able to get some advance yardage on that getaway.
"Mutual of Omaha's Doctor NerdLove."
Advanced tactics right there, watch and learn ladies and gents!
http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxxhbhv0BR1qcws…
I think I'd rather be shrubbery, all things considered.
*minor spoilers for OitNB*
I was horrified when Sophia told her son to do this. I was all, "You're a transwoman! Why are you teaching your son to be horrible with women?!"
Thank you for this post, Hope. It's so important for people to be able to look at this kind of thing and know that they aren't alone.
I do have one nitpick though. Reading slashfic, watching romantic movies, or even watching straight up porn does not exempt somebody from being asexual. I understand that you aren't ace, and that's totally cool. The fact that you even knew about asexuality to question it is also cool (since it took me a reeeeally long time to realize ace was a thing because of lack of info out there at the time).
I just don't want somebody who thinks they might be ace to read this and feel they are automatically excluded because of that kind of thing. (I'm ace, and I read ALL the fanfic)
Good point! I was using a very narrow definition of asexuality in my story as being without sexual desire in general, rather than not having it for other people. I understand there’s a great deal of diversity in the asexuality spectrum, and my definition was the most literal but not necessarily fully accurate.
FYI, this is usually a distinction I see people outside the ace community making, not those within it. At the end of the day, things like whether you're romantically attracted to anyone or how you feel about the idea of having sex make a much bigger difference to your life than whether or not you check out 18+ media in your spare time or enjoy masturbating, you know? And, seeing as it's really not uncommon for people to argue that you can't be ace if you have "any sexual desires", as you put it, and as a result it can be *very* hard for asexuals with a libido – which is a lot of us, possibly the majority – to figure out their orientation, this is a distinction I rather frown on seeing. Especially in the context you used it in.
And of course it wasn't the point of your post and this is all a tangent, just… I wanted to point out that I had the same nitpick, and that your explanation doesn't make it any better.
Thank you for mentioning this. As someone who is somewhere on the ace spectrum who adores fanfic, it was one of those, "but I like reading about it, so why does the doing seem so uncomfortable" things that I struggled with early on.
You can’t draw the equivalency between female virginity and male virginity for the simple reason that women hold the gatekeeping power, while men don’t.
[CITATION NEEDED]
This has resulted in the trend where women exclude more and more men from having sexual relationships
[CITATION NEEDED]
because these men don’t meet women’s emotionally immature demands for drama, unlike the minority of bad boys, jerks, cads and thugs
[CITATION NEEDED]
Women turn to the nerds later for boyfriends and husband prospects
[CITATION NEEDED]
, reluctantly and without enthusiasm,
[CITATION NEEDED]
because the math doesn’t work out for the kinds of cool guys they really want.
[CITATION NEEDED]
Hence all the sexless marriages and high divorce rates we see in modernized countries
[CITATION NEEDED]
Even then, because of generous welfare states and all the make-work positions for women these days, many women decide not to bother with marriage at all because they no longer need husbands for financial support and health insurance.
[*snort* uh yes, how terrible that adults are no capable of being self-sufficient instead of being literal property.]
The trend towards mass male eviction from sexual relationships has progressed so far in Japan that reportedly a quarter of unmarried Japanese men in their 30’s have had no sexual experience.
[Please don't try to tie Western "problems" to the experiences of men in Japan. It's nonsensical, and will require so many more sources than even exist. Also, "eviction"? *snort* what a ridiculous buzz word.]
Hmm. What about geography? Why don’t these male virgins in fly to other Asian countries like the Philippines or Thailand to see prostitutes? [why do you imagine there are no prostitutes in Japan?]
Thousands of men from Western countries visit these places as sex tourists every year,
[CITATION NEEDED]
yet more and more men can’t seem to acquire this experience.
[CITATION NEEDED]
And this has wider implications for society than just sex.
[CITATION NEEDED]
The collapse in fertility derives from this, of course.
[CITATION NEEDED]
But the male exclusion trend deprives men of the experiences they need to learn how to deal with women successfully in general, not just in sexual relationships.
[CITATION NEEDED] [Because /obviously/ a man not being able to get a girlfriend means he can never have any experience talking to female coworkers, bosses, friends, or family members. Don't you know that when a woman says she's not interested, she plants a pheromone on the male that repels literally every other woman in his life??]
These skills don’t exist in isolation, in other words, but become the key components in what I call the adult man’s skill set.
[CITATION NEEDED]
Women respect sexually experienced and confident men more than sexually in- or under-experienced men who project unease around women.
[CITATION NEEDED]
You can see how this would have practical consequences for adult male vrgins in businesses where they have to work with women.
[No, actually, I can't. As I satirically pointed out above, not being able to get a girlfriend does not actually prevent men from learning how to interact with women. Any "problems" working with women exist solely in the man's head, and that's where they need to be dealt with.]
They can pick up right away on the guy who has poor skills for interacting with women because of a lack of sexual experience,
[CITATION NEEDED]
and they tend to feel contempt towards him as a “loser.”
[CITATION NEEDED]
1/2
I feel like you must be out of breath after all that. I just wanna hand you a cup of water like you're a marathon runner or something.
Did I miss something?
This was supposed to be a reply to redneck cronyism, or whatever his name was, except that my computer decided to make some hilarious errors about 1) where I was posting, 2) what account I was posting under (my Facebook account, instead of my this-comment-section account, preventing me from deleting and reposting in the correct places.
Relevant XKCD.
I'm halfway tempted to give it a shot, I'm sure I could find some citations for at least some of those claims. But, it wanders off into assuming that the most visible section of a particular population is everyone, everywhere. The effects he describes often exist within certain populations, but they rarely apply to the whole of society. And stuff that just doesn't seem to follow at all. And I've got another long day at work tomorrow and better things to be doing with my evening.
"The effects he describes often exist within certain populations, but they rarely apply to the whole of society. "
Exactly. I mean, I'm sure that some of the things he claims happen somewhere, sometimes, because people are infinitely capable of being assholes. But his lack of logic, sense of scope or proportion really just make this post laughable.
Once is a trend, twice is a problem, three times is a vast conspiracy!
So serious comment. I was also a late bloomer (and a 27 year old virgin but that was for different reasons than my blooming) and I always hated that phrase (not hating on you, OP, just the terminology and thought process society tries to forcefeed us on this issue) because it suggests that our lives didn't *really* start until romance kicked in. Heck no! I was living life, doing shit, being awesome, enjoying myself and then one day I thought "Hey, I'd also like to have a romance be part of this!"
Not that it was easy exactly to learn all the ins and outs of romance and dating and sex that I "missed" by being a late bloomer, but no way can society tell me that my years pre-bloom were wasted or not awesome.
Just a word of encouragement to everyone out there who sees themselves in this post or their past selves or whatever. I was an awesome, virgin, relationshipless cool person doing sweet things. (traveling, living abroad, achieving career goals, knitting- you know, awesome stuff.) Plus, I now know myself, as myself, a lot better than all my perpetually dating friends who never went single for more than a few months at a time. I have lived with myself, sat with myself, and become comfortable with myself. And that is invaluable experience.
Yup. All this. Regular commentators will know how upset I get when certain posters imply that having a first real relationship later in life isn't as great as having a young love situation. Because for me, my current relationship, I wouldn't give that up for young puppy love or whatever for anything. I had a great life despite my lack of romantic and sexual success early on, and I love my relationship so much that to trade it in for anything else upsets me too much. At the time it was really difficult, being single, being a virgin, all of that. The same pressure the OP faced I relate to so much. I'm not saying it was easy. But I also had other things happening in my life, wonderful things, and looking back now I can honestly say I don't regret the "late blooming". I am glad things happened how they did, even if at the time I was so frustrated. Where I am now is awesome. And there ain't no way I'd trade that in for anything.
Yeah, and I think about what I wouldn't have done/would have missed out on/would have had a hard time with if I HAD one of those puppy love relationships… shudder.
Meanwhile, I was able to enter a relationship knowing myself and how to assert myself and how to care for other people (because I had really strong friendships already) and it was so much easier than 19 year old celette would have managed. 19 year old celette was awesomesauce, but maybe a bit too much for other people.
I find it really weird how people think being in a relationship when you're young is so much more magical and special than one when you're older. I met my wife when I was pretty young and so theoretically had that puppy love sparkly whatever-it-is…. but it's the same relationship now, when I'm a wizened crone scarred by time and weary of the world. We had tough things and other priorities to deal with then just like we do now, we have fun and discovery and passion together now just like we did then.
Things have changed some, of course, both because the relationship has had a long time to evolve and because we've each changed as individuals and our situation has changed. But you don't stop being able to feel sparkles and hearts and flowers once you hit 30.
If anything things get better? When you're older? Both in terms of a single relationship and in terms of your ability to relationship well. Older, wiser, smarter?
And a lot of relationship skills can be learned outside romantic pairings. Hell, if you can navigate roommates, you can navigate 95% of partner problems.
I kind of think maybe "relationshipping well" sounds like it's an unfun, work kind of thing rather than just having things go more smoothly and less stress, resentment, frustration and hurt.
Things are better! Because you have the life experience to appreciate what you have!
And also (hopefully) the relationship skills (as you say, learned outside romantic pairings as well as inside) to nurture and keep it!
🙂
" But you don't stop being able to feel sparkles and hearts and flowers once you hit 30."
Thank god.
I know my high school relationship was nowhere near magical or special. It turned out to be a huge headache and a lot of heartache that young me didn't need and had never learned to cope with prior. There were nice moments of course, but I didn't exactly gain any special knowledge or experience that I couldn't have obtained if I had gotten involved at a later age.
Yes, I find this odd as well. I still feel sparkles and hearts and flowers. If anything, the change has been that I'm a little kinder to my partners as an adult and have gotten better at identifying people who can be kind to me.
"and have gotten better at identifying people who can be kind to me."
An extremely underrated skill, imo.
Please do not down vote this. This is just my personal opinion. If you don't agree, just respond without down voting.
The idea that young relationships are better come from several fears. One is that when your older, the responsibilities of life like work, saving for retirement, or really anything else could really cut into the time you have to enjoy the fun parts of being in a relationship severely. At least personally, the idea that all the fun parts have to be carefully scheduled because of the demands of life isn't that appealing. This may or may not be the case but it is a fear.
Another fear is that your going to be less special or important to somebody if you started latter. Western culture favors young romance over older romance. At least for me there is going to be a nagging thought that your not going to be really that important. Tim was the boy she had her first romantic experience with, Brandon is the one she engaged on her voyage of sexual discovery with, Jonathan was the first man she lived with, Steve was the man she attended all her friend's wedding with, and Henry was her first husband and the father of her children, and what does that leave you exactly? To put it crudely, it seems like your getting the remainder of what is left. A big part of this fear is that even though you might be in a relationship, you won't really be a couple in the way that your partner might have been with his or her previous partners. That your partner will never refer to you in the plural or that other people will still basically see you as, not exactly single but not really in a couple. This is kind of hard to articulate but some couples create more of perception of being together than others.
A related third fear is that your partner isn't going to have much patience for your needs and they might approach your needs with an air of "been there, done that." That even though your partner had his or her voyage of sexual discovery that doesn't necessarily mean they are going to let you have yours. A lot of it is about not getting what you consider your fair share.
Who actually wants this comments section to turn into another round of "Let's all console Lee that his fears are all in his head"?!?
Can I have a show of hands?
Oh, no one?
Let's try and keep the discussion more topical this time around, how about it people?
Yeah, we have been in this rodeo before. No reason to ride it again.
It's not like it's a cock carousel.
"Where does that leave you exactly?"
Best case scenario?
As the man she chose.
That'd be enough for me, I think.
^This.
So much that it's not funny.
"As the man she chose."
If you're the one this hypothetical she is with, then that is what's important, and making sure she's the one she always wants to be with is more important than anything that came before.
And if you (generic you) can't handle that you shouldn't be in a relationship.
Yes, I always viewed someone with a high number as having been thorough in their comparison shopping:)
And likewise, I was satisfied.
MIC DROP
¿Ya sabes?
😀
http://media.giphy.com/media/um7PuMhNZEuR2/giphy….
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view6/4510868/obama-sw…
All the upvotes.
What's left is the man she actually wants, the man she is deeply in love with. I can't believe I'm engaging this with good faith but . . .
My friend lost her virginity at 13. Had a lot of wild times growing up. Married and had kids. Divorced.
She re-married at 40. I have never seen anyone more in love in my life. And they are traveling the world together, have sex every single morning, and look at each other like they are that quintessential young and in love you're looking for.
You are fearing the things that happened to you in an abusive relationship. That is reasonable. What is not reasonable is to draw conclusions from that that older people don't have wonderful romances, that late in life true love doesn't happens. Further making it unreasonable is the number of people here who have shared why being older and in a relationship is awesome. So you have actual evidence right now in this thread that it is possible later on.
People make so many mistakes when they are young. What happens when you get older is you stop making those mistakes and find yourself in a relationship where you love and respect the person. You don't have to lie to them or yourself. You are finally sure in what you want yourself, what you want from others, and you don't settle. So that the partner you end up with is by far the best. That partner isn't given all that remains, as if people get used up or something. That person is special. They are the chosen one. Not the one that the person thought, "Well I've never done this before so this must be good right? Right?" Having had experience with other people and knowing that this person is the best compared to all of them? Isn't that awesome? Isn't that kind of the pinnacle?
Here are my responses.
1. For all the media images of carefree young people partying their college years and twenties away, I know a lot more people who were buried in schoolwork/paying off massive student loans and working all hours to do so. Life in general cuts into your opportunity to have fun. I personally had a lot more fun when I was older and had disposable income. It's hard to do cool things with no money.
2. Maybe it makes you her second husband, or the man she spends the next forty years with but never marries because neither of you want to get married? How many people have an early marriage that they look back on and say, "well, it was a terrible idea but I have learned from my mistakes, plus my second marriage is so much better and happier?" As for not being a couple in the same way, IDGI. Are you saying that a second marriage is somehow less valuable? That someone who has had a few partners must devalue the ones that came later? If you want your partner to refer to you in the plural, you could always ask them to. It's not that complicated. You can't control how other people see you- if they see you as somewhere in the middle, does it really matter what they think?
3. If your partner is impatient and takes a "been there, done that" attitude towards your needs, then they are what we call jerks and you might want a better partner.
It depends on what you mean by "voyage of sexual discovery"- if your partner had a threesome in a previous relationship, they don't "owe" you one to keep things equal if they've decided that they don't want to do it. If they did things previously that they didn't enjoy, or even that they did enjoy but don't anymore, then they have a right not to do those things. If they discovered that poly doesn't work for them, they don't enjoy having their face slapped even though they used to or that X position might look hot but plays merry hell with their knee injury, then they can say no. Their new partner can ask for things, but should accept a no like a decent person would. Limits exist in any relationship.
Please lose the word "fair" from this dialogue. Fairness is not an operating principle of dating.
Seriously. Point "1." Scream it from the mountain tops. I'm not even *that* young anymore and I can promise you that people in their 20s (read: their college years) aren't living a 24/7 bohemian bacchanal, regardless of what the Electric Daisy Carnival and Burning Man promo videos are promising.
I knew people who were doing cool things careerwise, but that didn't necessarily translate into more money. A lot of them were at nonprofits which they loved but found exhausting. Disposable income didn't become disposable till much later.
"At least for me there is going to be a nagging thought that your not going to be really that important."
It sounds like you're always going to have that thought because that nagging thought is your own lack of self-esteem, and your SO can maybe help with that but if are determined to be miserable you're going to be miserable.
If you meet someone who loves you and wants to spend their life with you but you're too hung up on not taking her to the prom or buying her first drink for her or whatever…basically that you can't deal with your SO having a life before they met you, then nothing that they say or do is going to help, but you should also realize that it really has nothing to do with your SO and everything to do with you.
Your fear will be the thing that drives you apart and creates that sense of fear or dread that you're not good enough or whatever.
And if they love and care for you, which if they're with you then they do, then it's not going to be "been there, done that", and that attitude is more than a little dismissive of the very humanity of other people, in this case specifically women, as well as ignoring that millions of couples don't have this issue which is completely a creation of your mind.
"To put it crudely, it seems like your getting the remainder of what is left. A big part of this fear is that even though you might be in a relationship, you won't really be a couple in the way that your partner might have been with his or her previous partners. That your partner will never refer to you in the plural or that other people will still basically see you as, not exactly single but not really in a couple. This is kind of hard to articulate but some couples create more of perception of being together than others."
….
WHAT
"A related third fear is that your partner isn't going to have much patience for your needs and they might approach your needs with an air of "been there, done that." That even though your partner had his or her voyage of sexual discovery that doesn't necessarily mean they are going to let you have yours. A lot of it is about not getting what you consider your fair share."
How do you not realize how paranoid and ridiculous this sounds? Like if you feel this fear fine, but you must realize how irrational it is, right? Right?!
Also I love how you begged people not to down vote your post because it's only "your opinion". If people find your opinion shitty you will get down voted. Begging won't stop that and it makes it seem like you think people are committing the "crime" of disagreeing with you.
I personally am glad that neither I nor my boyfriend are the same people we'd been in previous relationships. I know for myself, I was a needy basket case with other guys, and so the relationships would end before they even started. I learned SO MUCH from those mistakes. I think we're all different people in different relationships
Also, the idea of someone being all "been there, done that." If someone is like that, then you shouldn't be in a relationship with them.
Okay, genuinely curious, not snarky: why does it matter to you if the post gets downvoted or not, or at least moreso than being responded to negatively?
It kind of bothers me when I see lots of upvotes stacking up on comments that exist solely to mock people (I.e. not constructive at all) but meh.
Oh, I usually react more strongly to the content of comment than to the up/downvotes. The one exception being if I or someone else is getting downvoted and I don't understand why at all. It makes me think I'm missing something, since I usually have a sense of why something might be getting downvoted even if I don't agree with the reasons.
I agree, nearly takuan. Downvoting is in some ways impersonal; upvoting mocking comments enhances the local reputation of the person mocking and encourages more of the same. So it goes.
Yeah, I was having trouble describing the thought, but I think you've hit the nail on the head (so to speak). It's positive reinforcement for a culture I'd prefer not to have. (And for the record, not exactly giddy about it when my own comments along such lines get upvotes either.)
"To put it crudely, it seems like your getting the remainder of what is left"
It's not like each women has, say, 10 vaginapoints, and everyone sleeps with takes one away and leaves no for you, though.
Wait, what happens to the women when we run out of VaginaPoints?!
Purely asking for a friend…yeah…
We start getting cats and wear sensible shoes?
Can I get dogs instead? I'm allergic to cats.
I sure hope so, because I am, too. Corgis for everyone!
I want a corgi, and a Belgian sheepdog, and a sheltie, and a border collie- I'm sensing a theme here. You need sensible shoes to keep up with herding breeds.
I don't want a herding breed but I DO want livestock. . . hmm. My shoes are already somewhat sensible, though not impervious to manure.
You buy the livestock and I will bring the dogs to herd them.
My mom used to do herding, but dad declined to acquire sheep because he wasn't getting pets for the dogs. Mom ended up agreeing.
I remembered this years later when a friend with a border collie bought sheep and ducks to keep her dog occupied.
Since I am over 40 and my VaginaPoints, if any remained, have expired and have a cat and a dog, I say yes to dogs, ferrets, birds, reptiles and any pet.
FERRETS!!! http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbdqnoalbn1rgj5…
Rats! http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01448…
Well
damn
*dies laughing*
*looks at wedges*
*looks at email from the Humane Society accepting my application*
Hmm. My boyfriend's going to be getting some bad news soon, I guess.
Get him out of there. Repeated and Regularized Man Visitation Violation.
We have a warrant. Get him out of there, I say.
*grabs own wedges, makes for the door*
I've got the cats, but i love me some power heels. All the better to kick the patriarchy. As my brother says "Dangerous from both ends!"
I am so getting that on a shirt.
(And also crushing on your bro. :-))
Do you (BiSian or other commenters just above) think Lee's objections are just an elaborate form of slut shaming? Real question, because as a man I'm not going to read him the way a woman might. Is that the consensus among others who object to his preferences? I could see that interpretation, but sometimes I think Lee is just afraid that he's missed out, and regrets that, in all caps.
I understand regret, and there are parts of my past that I'll be damned if I can glean any positive anything from. I can relate to wishing that I could have figured out relationship stuff sooner, but I can't see making assuaging that regret my life's obsession. Had I done that, I likely wouldn't be in the happy relationship I'm in, which started when we were both past 40.
Not BiSian, but while I don't think his objections are only a form of slut shaming, I think many of them are heavily influenced by slut shaming attitudes.
As much value as Lee is placing on the voyage of sexual discovery and early relationship formation experiences, he doesn't want his first relationship to be the one he commits to for life, not even if he can find a sexually inexperienced woman who's willing to reenact youthful dating. He views women who've had these experiences as inherently less valuable relationship partners. This means that his ideal first romance is one that will turn his partner into the sort of person he fears, to be some other man's boring, sexually uptight problem. He's never really gone into what will happen to him after he's had his first sexual experiences and attended a few weddings with a woman, or considered whether this will kill off any interest he has in fun sexual experimentation for the rest of his life (and if not, why he is somehow different from women in his dating pool). That reeks of double standards.
I can see that. I said something similar in another comment elsewhere, to the extent that if Lee had had more experiences he'd still be dealing with all of the same issues unless he had stayed with his first, once young love.
From my perspective there's something heartfelt about his desire to be "special" that cuts into my sense that he's more than hurting and coping really poorly.
I think that's there too. I also think there's a certain amount of jealousy toward people whose relationship histories are different from his and misunderstanding of what youthful dating involves, and also some fears that seem like they stem from his ex.
I think he'd have an easier time perhaps getting past some of these concerns if he were willing to separate them out and find other ways he could imagine being special to someone. That being said, he doesn't seem very interested in doing that, and in the meantime does make quite a lot of comments that are slut shaming or that are outright hateful toward women who are sexually experienced.
You can be hurting and partake in slut shaming. The two are not mutually exclusive. Also, just because one is hurting does not make shaming or judging others OK. Being hurt does not give one a pass on bad behavior.
I agree, he probably is hurting a lot. However, his hurt is being expressed in really unhealthy ways, and the attitude that he's somehow "owed" his "fair share" is both unrealistic and kind of creepy. I think this site has really reached the limits of what it can do for him, but he's not interested in professional help.
When I first started lurking here I actually thought Lee was actually into very young women and too embarrassed to say so although frantically trying to justify his tastes. After the many years worths of posts elaborating on his hang-up I think there are a whole lot of fear of mortality/ fear of intimacy/ overly romantic view of first love issues going on, rather than that kind of uncomplicated sexism. Even if he doesn't seem to have resolved many issues he's much more articulate about his wants and barriers and I can empathise with regret too. I actually think his problems are well beyond a website's pay level to disentangle though. And the end result is effectively sexist, even if not consciously so.
I think at the core it's a terror of being left. He thinks that an inexperienced woman won't be able to dump his ass and he'll have the upper hand.
And this isn't me armchair analyzing–he's said as much when pushed.
Plus what everyone else has said.
It's a convaluted mess that no one here is trained for (or being paid enough) to untangle.
You know what is really sad? I didn't tell my boyfriend I was a virgin until we were about to have sex because 1, I didn't feel like it was his business and 2, because I was terrified he'd have a really creepy attitude about it. Either he'd be appalled – which would be mortifying, or he'd be thrilled, which would be even worse. Someone valuing inexperience is totally creepy to me. And it is even worse when it is valued because you think the inexperienced person won't understand how bad things are and so they won't leave. Inexperience doean't make you stupid or makes you incapable of having perspective, just has having lots of experience doesn't make you smart.
Older virgins, please at least do the favor of mentioning it to your partner some time before having sex! If there's going to be an awkward moment, better it come when your pants are still on. If there's going to be physical discomfort, better your partner is prepared to help you ease into it.
And yes, this has happened to me.
"If there's going to be an awkward moment, better it come when your pants are still on. "
Repeated because it is a good general rule for all things, not just disclosing your experience level.
Johnny's Rules Of Life #17!
I also know some things a woman can do to make it easier if she doesn't want to reveal, for whatever reason.
Regaining a sense of control can be really important, and sometimes it doesn't matter what your partner does, it's more about you feeling comfortable and things that you can do to help yourself feel comfortable.
I go back and forth on this, honestly. If I ever had the good luck to meet someone I really wanted to sleep with and whose opinion I really cared about, I might disclose. But for casual partners, I'm not at all sure I would, to be honest. At my age, I've moved past "late bloomer" to "possibly mentally ill" and "unsuitable as a partner to anyone," which is what happens when I discuss with anyone. I'm in my late 30s, so I'm very, very much the minority in my age and the fact that standard dating just doesn't work for me.
But if I were able to have sex casually, I think I'd want to be treated like any other sexual adult who has an idea of her likes and dislikes and can give some directions – which is true in my case. I wouldn't want to open the can of worms that is "virgins don't understand sex and don't have any idea what they like."
My ex told me she's glad I didn't tell her until afterwards (was 35).
Agreed on the inexperienced doesn't mean anything besides inexperienced. If there's anything that my bouts of online dating have taught me, it's that non-virgins aren't necessarily more understanding of a partner's needs, or even better at considering someone else's pleasure. I once discussed sexual likes and dislikes with a guy who didn't think foreplay was too important – women only needed oral and a bigger penis to get off. He was convinced all his partners had genuine orgasms too – at least he was confident in himself, even though I considered those claims, uh, unlikely.
Your vagina is knocked out and you have to cast Revive or use a Playtex Down.
I chuckle every time I scroll past this comment.
I'll never look at Final Fantasy the same way.
Don't call it a comeback.
It IS a comeback.
What now, LL?
You have to start denying sex to men to build your points back up until you've got a full bar for your Limit Breaker.
Well, since I'm a Slutty slutty Non-virginal Slut-person, I'm going to need some advice on how to deny men sex.
Like, do I just approach men on the street and yell "YOU! I WON'T HAVE SEX WITH YOU!" ??
*That would probably just confuse them considering most random dudes around me don't speak English.
Just read a PUA book and do everything they accuse women of doing EXCEPT having sex with PUAs.
OK, I'll take a swing at this but let's not turn it into a big thing, ok? You're stating your issues pretty clearly without blaming anyone else. Yes, we've heard this in bit and pieces before but you went to the effort to write out "these are my fears" as opposed to "this is how it is", so I'm going to do you the kindness of discussing them civilly.
First – yeah, I get it. I did get to be the wild, traveling (perpetually broke) starving artist. It is harder for me to date or go do all sorts of crazy things now that I have a career. I can't do big trips every weekend without taking more half days off than I can afford to if I want to do big events. Dating has to be either someone I can call randomly or scheduled weeks in advance. The thing is, that's my choice. It means I have A/C (not optional in Vegas), a really comfy place to live, I can afford to pursue my hobbies, restore an old military truck. . . and when it comes to dating it means I can take someone out to a high end steakhouse, a Vegas show and drinks now and then instead of looking for free movies in the park or whatever. If more free time is really that important to you, it can be had. It just means sacrificing other things you're comfortable with in order to work less. The decision to save for retirement (or whatever) is the one you made and you can unmake it. Now you may not want to make a different decision and it may suck to you that its an either/or thing. That's fine. At least start by acknowledging that you could make that change if you wanted to. It might not be easy and it'd certainly impact your lifestyle but there are options. You could take fewer cases (and change companies if necessary to get that), go freelance, write a book. . .you've got options if you want to free up your time.
I can't speak to everyone but I can tell you Mandy (yes her full name, yes named for the Barry Manilow song that Angel performed) was my first, Dez was the first one I lived with and she got the dog when we broke up, Karen was Mrs Robinson, Natalie was this weird on and off thing over years, Ebony I met at a LARP. . .etc but my current partner is always the special one because she's the only one I get t make new "she was the one that. . ." memories with. If you're in a mutually committed relationship, YOU are the one they're making NEW memories with. All those other stories are things that already happened with guys who weren't special enough to stay with, like you are. You have already won this imaginary fight with the exes. You don't have to Scott Pilgrim deathmatch them to prove your worth.
If your partner is bored or contemptuous of your needs, you have the wrong partner. Lee, you're never going to get "what you consider your fair share" because your idea of "fair" necessitates changing the past. Its your idea of fair that's getting in your way here.
Yes! Probably not a geeky enough reference for this blog, but maybe its time to (re)read the Great Gatsby and give up on the green light. Greater (if fictional) men than you have wasted lifetimes on this kind of fantasy so that you don't have to.
So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
Hey, there are Lit geeks, too!
Life doesn't have to be about work and responsibilities and saving for retirement. Your life is, because you made those choices, but not everyone's is. Furthermore, your life would still be full of those things these days if you'd had a college romance. What good is love if it's something that only matters for a 5 year period of your life?
If you meet a woman who's still hung up on Tim or Brandon or Jonathan or Steve or Henry, I'd agree you shouldn't date her. It's a lot more likely that Tim and Brandon are vague memories, she doesn't live with Jonathan anymore for very good reason, thinks Steve is kind of an asshole, and Henry is someone she speaks pleasantly of for the sake of her children but secretly wishes she didn't have to talk to quite so often. I've had some filler boyfriends over the years – and honestly, those filler boyfriends are a lot more likely to be the unserious ones where the relationship was closer to your ideal – but I've never even thought about settling down with a guy who didn't seem like the best thing that had ever happened to me at the time.
I think this perception that "what's left" will never be good enough, even if someone is madly in love with you and reminds herself how lucky she is every day that she was single when she met you, is very deeply tied up in ideas of female purity. It sounds like you don't want your first relationship to be your last one, but would someday like to marry and have children. If someone who's had previous partners has less to give, won't you be doing a disservice to your future wife by giving her merely the leftovers of your youthful passion?
Your ideas about adult sexuality are very strange indeed. Older people generally do have better boundaries. This is a good thing, because I'd hope you wouldn't want your voyage of sexual discovery to include something that unexpectedly traumatizes your partner. Older people are generally also a little more open-minded, especially about kink. I'm also going to again ask you how you think you can be a good long term partner if all of this is true and double standards don't apply. Once you've had that first sexual relationship, are you planning to become a sexual bore who has no concern for anyone else's turn ons. If not, why do you assume a woman will do the same?
If someone doesn't marry or stay with the first person they date, don't the conditions you fear always prevail? I kind of understand your concern about being at different stages in your relationship development, but your "what iffing" that concern is almost certainly interfering with your dating life, and it alienates people here.
But I really do get that as a logical concern. Not that your fun will be robbed from you, because that's really in your head. I'm glad I was old and wise enough to wrap my head around some of the stuff I've done passed 40 because it might have scarred me, in a sort of good way, when I was younger. That part of your concern, that the fun is done, is unfounded unless you intend to be an entirely passive part of a couple AND you get together with someone who is no fun. You have a say in that.
The more reasonable fear that your lack of experience may be a challenge for you or her in some way is just that, a potential challenge. Invest your energy in meeting that challenge, and in overcoming the less reasonable fear mentioned above.
I am probably a little older than you (late 30s) and still haven't found a serious relationship in spite of online dating, blind date set-ups, meeting friends of friends, doing activities I enjoy, and just "living my life and not worrying about it." Needless to say this makes me very odd indeed. In fact the vast majority of my peers have married and finished their childbearing already, and one or two are going through divorces at this point.
In spite of my late night worries about being a woman approaching 40 and feeling freakish, I still look back on my high school/college/20s infatuations with amusement. (That none of them turned into anything was mostly crappy luck. I was also considered MUCH less attractive by men when I was ages 16-25 than I am now. Go figure.) If I had had the chance to date any of these guys, I would have had the same experiences of being dumped, having my heart broken, wasting my time on assholes, etc that most people do at that age.
Had I dated in high school, I would have figured out pretty quickly that Hunky Athlete and I had nothing whatsoever in common.
Had I dated any of my crushes in college, one would have become the Great Lost Romance that I thought was such a big deal at age 21, because he lived in a different freakin' COUNTRY. Not exactly the stuff of a happy adult relationship for the long term. If the other crush had become a serious long-term relationship, we'd STILL have broken up, or be divorced by now if we'd married, because I didn't quite get at age 22 that love/lust doesn't solve all compatibility problems. Really big compatibility problems, such as money and children, how to spend leisure time, where to live, and so forth.
Had I dated some of my questionable post-college crushes, I could have ended up supporting a guy who just wasn't motivated enough to pursue the kind of job that would give him the lifestyle he wanted. Or I could possibly have had run-ins with the law, since my rock star-wannabe crush had some drug and alcohol problems. In short, it's debatable whether I'd really be in a different place as far as relationship status by now.
And in spite of my feelings of nostalgia and the romance of young relationships, none of them really were romantic in the end – it was mostly a fairy tale I told myself. To be sure, I have a few friends who are still happily married many years later to college sweethearts or spouses they met while young. But that wouldn't have worked out in my case – that's my two cents about youth being "better".
I agree fully! My anxiety about dating and sex was always present, but rarely did it consume me, I had work,friends, school and video games. Not having sex didn’t mean I didn’t go out and interact with the world.
As someone who lost his virginity last year (at the age of 26), while I most certainly don't think that my life till then was "wasted", I do think that at least in my case, I do see my first time as an amazing experience. Today I realize that I am an exception to the trend, that most peoples first time isn't that great and some also didn't really like that much thier first time and I was blessed with a loving and understanding partner that was very communicative with me and I was more than happy to return the same level of communication. This experience pretty much shattered all these so called "beliefs" I had about relationships and sex, thus seperating my life history to my life "before" and my life "after". I am not saying that my life "before" was objectivley worse than my life "after" (on the contrary, I always knew how to have fun, traveled abroad with my family and more) – but I do think that it has forever changed my perception of several topics that I never really understood till then.
So my point is that while I don't think that I was some sort of hopeless loser before having sex (which is to say that if I did believe that then I'm 99 percent sure I wouldn't have had sex the way I did in the first place, if at all), I do see this point of my life as an important crossroad in my life's history so far.
P.S. – I also would like to add to the voices saying having sex at a later age is most likely much better than at an earlier age. I am SO SO happy that I had sex when I had it, because I truly believe that it happened exactly when it needed to happen – which is to say, when I was emotionally and mentally READY for it.
Hey, my first time was celebrated with texts to friends, congrats from therapists, a high five and a shout of "CONSUMMATION!" and a lot of relief. But we'd been married for months and I'd been to doctors and physical therapy and on hormones and all sorts of shit to get to that point. So… group effort?
So, it's really hard for me to separate out life before from life after, because so much of the change is related directly to the reason I wasn't able to have sex in the first place, and that reason was hardly universal?
celette482, I wasn't trying to minimize or undermine YOUR experience and how it was for you. Like it was made clear in the article itself, everyone has thier own experiences and reasons as to why they had sex or why they didn't have sex yet. I was just trying to explain my personal experience and how I see it today, that is all
I think it will be interesting to see what changes if any do show up. It's not been even a year for me, so it's a bit early for me to think "Ohhh back in the day…."
Shit, after going through all of that you deserve a good bottle of champagne too.
I'm pretty sure, based on what you've said in the forums, that I have the same, or similar, issue, so…behold, my future! :/
It wasn't nearly as difficult as I expected… once I actually started things. And my insurance covered it (because it was technically also affecting my ability to have well-woman visits). Still. It took a long time to get diagnosed and a long time to find people who could do anything besides shrug. I'm something of a crusader now on the topic.
I think i have a similar problem to yours and thanks to some of the things I’ve read here I’m finally pursuing treatment. My first appointment with a specialist is next month!
Everyone lives full lives, the idea that people's sexual activity somehow defines them, is frankly, totally subjective.
Does it make asexuals any less, well, alive?
The thing I do like to emphasize, is that everything and anything is an experience.
Some value a long trip over a sexual relationship, some value sexual relationship over a great career achievement.
It's all subjective to each and every person's personal preferences.
What I'm trying to say, and probably failing, is that there's nothing wrong with someone being late in their sexual activity, nor is it wrong for someone else to put more emphasis on it.
This hits on something that annoys me about the way Christianity is portrayed (and, unfortunately, acted out) a lot of the time. Your goodness as a person is almost completely tied to your genitals. What kind of genitals make your own genitals warm and tingly, are you okay with other people who feel differently, are people free to use said organs to while preventing children and STDs. If you answered anything but 'The opposite, no, and no' in that order then YOU'RE GOING TO BURN IN HELL SON.
-Oh and also, some stuff about unconditional forgiveness of sins and grace and such but mainly-
GET READY TO SWIM IN THE LAKE OF FIRE, 'CAUSE YOU'RE GONNA BE A LONG-TERM RESIDENT. BREAST STROKE? I BET YOU'RE AWFUL GOOD AT THAT SINCE YOU'RE SO OBSESSED WITH THEM! PIKE DIVE? YOU WERE SURE READY TO DIVE INTO BED BEFORE YOU PUT A RING ON IT. LAPS? YEAH, YOU KNOW ALL ABOUT LAPS DON'T YOU, DEVIANT?!
All religion has that sort of thinking into it.
They came originally as a form of giving answers to things that could not be answered easily, making rules in all the chaos (which is why you find so many religions have VERY similar rules).
Today, they emerge as more of a spiritual thing (Thank god *pun intended*), rather than a structure of rules and regulations.
People who still follow the rules for the sake of not going to hell, are the same people who follow blindly.
Finding real faith, questioning it and answering the tough questions, that is a much stronger set of rules and morality, as you define it yourself.
Academically I know this is true, but Christianity being portrayed like this (and people acting like this) hits a soft spot for me because, well, I am Christian. I'm sick of the two base modes for my faith being Ned Flanders and the Imperium of Man from 40k.
Comon man, the Imperium of Man is awesome! look at them pauldrons!
Heh, well, if I was independantly wealthy I would totally be an Imperium of man player (Spehss Marines, space wolves or salamanders specifically, because they're the most likeable of the bunch. I would play ultramarines but…matt fucking ward). Unfortunately, I don't have thousands and thousands of dollars to spend on that hobby (fuck you games workshop, there's a reason your profits are tanking and that reason falls squarely in your boardroom). So I settle for the Ciaphas Cain novels and the Xbox game with Captain Titus.
Pfffft! Spehss Marines! They show up in time to mug for the cameras but when its time to crawl through the mud and get the real dirty work done, its the Imperial Guard who gets the job done. The expensive, expensive artillery packing Imperial Guard. Give me 9 Basilisks and initiative and I'll win the fight for you. http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Drive_137842_335…
Somewhat more seriously, for fun miniatures on a budget with great flavor and mechanics, check out Malifaux. Doctor Frankenstein and Jack The Ripper analogues are playable leaders.
I've tried to get into other tabletop games, but 40k is the only one that I've ever been able to get into. I love the lore behind turning your average kid into a biologically enhanced spehss catholic, along with the different flavors of each chapter (I even like the ultramarines, sort of, despite what matt fucking ward did to them…bastard), and the concept of powered armor has always fascinated me. It probably has to do with the fact that I got teased so much as a kid, but the idea of encasing myself in powered and computerized armor just makes something deep inside my nerdsoul perk up and sniff the air hungrily like an ork that just heard a good scrap start up.Also, to counter your point about Spehss Marines, I give you Captain MOTHERFUCKING Titus! :https://data.archive.moe/board/tg/image/1338/65/1338653328952.pngYour argument is summarily invalid.
He's not bad but can he hide three basilisks behind a tree? http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/…
I am sad GW dropped Kill Team. I found it to be a really fun, quick and notable much less expensive game with the same figures.
Geedubs has way to much of a money fetish for them to have kept kill team. Frankly I'm surprised they're still in business anymore. Granted, I heard that they may be bought out sometime soon. I hope it's hasbro that does it too, because then they'll be owned by the my little pony people and that seems like fitting revenge for those bastards. Plus, it would open for door for a My Little Pony: Friendship is HERESY! game, and that would be amazing. Commisars vs. pegasi, who will win? (psst, it's gonna be the commisars)
I'm having a hard time picturing how Hasbro can de-Nazi the Imperium enough to fit their brand.
Eh, tone adjust the commisar uniform a bit and the overt nazi factor goes down. It's the different regiments of imperial guard that would be interesting to see them try to fix. Some of them are pretty blatantly racist, and the Imperium itself is extremely whitewashed, but I have to admit I'd still like to see the Space Wolves going to town on ponyland for the Emprah.
I think if you are not an introspective person and not inclined to learn about yourself, you won't learn about yourself, irrespective of your relationship status. I also think we learn different things about ourselves when we're single versus when we're in a relationship.
But yeah, my life isn't all that different now that I'm in a relationship than it was beforehand. Being a very late bloomer – as in, over 30 – I definitely felt stupid, still do actually, dealing with relationshipy things. But on the other hand, I have the emotional maturity to deal with things, in a way I didn't if I'd started younger.
I also know that if I'd met the guy I'm with at an earlier point in life, I either would have rejected him when I met him or I would have royally screwed things up very quickly.
Anyway, I really think that every person and ever relationship runs on its own timetable.
supposed to be a reply to redneckcryonicist, second part is up there.
Totally understand, since I've experienced both sides of your situation.
I get so tired of hearing the welfare state bs and what it's supposed to imply. This is admittedly the first time I've seen it referenced in the same post about sex issues though.
I really wish someone had told me sooner. All those years from 6th grade on worrying about my weight, my clothes, my appearance… all the money spent! And I could have been having just as much totally pleasurable and satisfying sex!! Ugh. Foiled again.
((I also particularly love how guys tell women that the fact that even if said woman *could* have sex "anytime" (what a rare unicorn she must be…) but wanted a loving relationship, that is not the point; Yet if you ask these same men why they can't just hire a prostitute, there are even less reasons involved ("I don't want to *have* to do that," "that doesn't teach me how to have good sexual relationships with real women" (stated in another comment here), etc etc. But. Ya know. I'm now just "shaming" men for their hypocrisy in shaming women…))
Hiring a prostitute is risky and illegal. That's a poor solution for men that aren't desirable. And yeah, it's obviously easier for a woman to get sex than a man. But that doesn't mean relationships are easier.
How is it easier for a woman to get sex than a man? I see this mentioned a lot and I'm always wondering where this "fact" is originating from.
Mostly observation to be honest. Just go on any online dating site and make two profiles, one a woman, one a man. The woman will have many more messages and men wanting to meet up than the man will. Most men cast a wide net while women cast a much smaller net.
I mean, what you're talking about isn't necessarily sex though. You're talking about "Women can get attention from men, whether or not they want it and whether or not said attention is safe or desirable"
Yeah, I definitely could have given out a BUNCH of blow jobs in my OKC days. A bunch.
"Yeah, I definitely could have given out a BUNCH of blow jobs in my OKC days. A bunch."
Exactly. I'm not saying it's necessarily a good idea, it's just easier. In comparison as an average looking kinda boring guy I can't get a single blow job on OKC (last time I had sex was like 4 years ago).
Is it easier though? Because there weren't a lot of promises of reciprocity, nor was there much to recommend the askers. Even assuming they were all *safe* people and weren't going to just rape me, why would I want to blow some rando for no reason?
I mean, you're basically saying "It's easier for women to give men sex than it is for men to get sex" which, accurate.
"I mean, you're basically saying "It's easier for women to give men sex than it is for men to get sex" which, accurate."
Yes. Good sex is probably harder to get, for both men and women.
Mmmm. Bad sex is where things get awkward or whatever.
BJ (in this particularly context) is performing a service.
Aka treating women like prostitutes you don't have to pay.
Um you do realise a blowjob is not exactly sex for a woman right? I mean there are lots of women who enjoy giving pleasure to men that way, who even enjoy the power of being able to give pleasure, but it's still a one direction kind of pleasure. The woman isn't getting off on giving a blowjob. There isn't something in the back of a woman's throat that makes her orgasm. The fact that a woman has the opportunity to give blowjobs does not actually equate to the opportunity to have sex.
I was just playing off her BJ example. I'd imagine if she were in that situation it wouldn't be too far off from sex (unless she decided she didn't want to have sex). How many men wouldn't want to have sex in that situation either?
Many. In fact many men only want a BJ especially if it goes to completion. A lot of guys only want a BJ, there are competitions in highschools for guys to see how many they can get and how many girls can give.
Another question: for you and also for others who say that women have it easy because they get offered sex so much. If you as a man were offered sex but with the caveat that you would not enjoy it at all. That you would not get off on it, that you would feel no sensations of pleasure, that you would just basically be the equivalent of a dildo for someone else, would you say yes to that? And would you count yourself as lucky you got to have sex?
Yes I would. I get it that infrequently.
Explain to me why. The woman doesn't care about you. She doesn't make eye contact with you. You do not get off at all. I mean it, you don't orgasm, you don't even really like how it feels. You aren't even getting turned on by her getting turned on. You feel no pleasure. You aren't enjoying yourself.
What do you get from it? A notch on your bedpost? Bragging rights?
Your example is a little bit ridiculous because it's not like my nerve endings get turned off. I also get turned on by women getting turned on. So it's impossible for me to say that this wouldn't happen.
Hell I don't even care about getting off half of the time, if that's all I'm looking for there are more efficient ways of going about that that don't even involve a woman.
As for whether or not the woman like me or gives me eye contact, no I wouldn't care. Most women are indifferent to me. I'd be fine with helping a woman get what she needs.
Okay, so you can't picture what it's like to be asked to do something vaguely-to-incredibly unpleasant for someone who doesn't give a shit about you as a person, save for your genitals, but then doesn't even care enough to pay attention to said genitals, and then be told to chalk that up as a win…..?
And don't forget that doing that thing carries a negative social judgement, not a positive.
Oh right. Plus, you know, a non-zero risk of death!
That had been my plan to point out had he agreed that the reason he'd do it was for bragging rights. Something like "Now imagine even those are stripped away, you tell someone about your adventure and they think worse of you, your reputation is tarnished, people talk about you behind your back for having had sex. Would you still do it then?"
Probably a better comparison would be the man doing unreciprocated oral or manual sex, or using a vibrator on the woman, or using a strapon while he's in a chastity device or something, so that there isn't any physical stimulation. Some guys would still go for that, but it wouldn't have as universal of appeal.
The comparison I tend to make is that I like eating dinner with someone, but if the only things on the menu are foods I hate, I'd rather go hungry than eat them. Some women might love the oysters, escargot, broccoli, and okra they're offering, but I'd just be trying to politely say "no thanks" while thinking "eww, gross!"
Being critical of other people for not wanting what you want shows a lack of empathy. I suspect those people would be especially horrid in bed.
Except what I'm doing is trying to explain what it's like to be a woman having sex with someone she doesn't want to have sex with. Nerve endings might all be the same in men, but as we know orgasms for women are much more complicated beasts. So no, of course for you this question is ridiculous because it's simply not a possible situation (so long as you are doing it willingly and it's not rape). But it's NOT ridiculous for women. Not ridiculous for women to agree to have sex with someone because they feel they should but for us not to experience any pleasure. For us to not orgasm, not be turned on. For us to feel like little more than a blowup toy for someone else to get off on.
That was my point. Men always say, "Oh yeah well maybe they don't want to have sex with the guys who want to, but they still could" and my point was would you honestly have sex with someone in that situation.
Now you say you'd be happy to help a woman get what she needs, well that's lovely of you. But not everyone is as generous. Is as willing to sacrifice their own pleasure and sense of self worth to be used as little more than a sex toy. And to suggest that women just do that because hey at least they are getting to have sex of some description is not fair. It's unkind. And it lacks any empathy.
"Hey ladies, shut up about how you can't get laid. You could have sex if you wanted to. If you wanted to not get any pleasure from it and feel used, you could totally still be a hole for someone." Yeah. That's totally reasonable.
It's a wee step from "women can get sexually assaulted so they can always get sex"
What is this "orgasms in women are complicated" thing that is accepted as fact everywhere? Where is the science showing this to be true?
So men that have problems orgasming don't exist and they can all nut at the drop of a hat?
I think the statement that's a little closer to truth is that women on average have more difficulty having orgasms during partnered sex than men do and considerably more difficulty having orgasms during PiV sex.
You're right there are plenty of women who don't, and there are also plenty of men who have trouble.
What you say makes sense, and sounds a lot more reasonable than:
"Nerve endings might all be the same in men, but as we know orgasms for women are much more complicated beasts."
This says to me that it is common knowledge that all nerve endings are the same in men, but in women they are not? How is this common knowledge? That is what doesn't make sense to me. It also sounds highly implausible.
Nothing there says anything about PiV in particular, just a straight up statement that all men have identical nerve endings and women don't, which is ridiculous.
I said that they were all the same because that's what the poster implied. That nerve endings were nerve endings. I was using his proposition to argue back with him. I actually agree far more with you. That there are men out there who have difficulty as well, but he was claiming otherwise so I was using that to explain that fine, let's say for argument's sake nerve endings are the same for men, but for women orgasming can be much more complicated (just as eselle above explained). And it is relatively common knowledge and there are studies that show that on average men way prefer one night stands and are more satisfied from them than women. This is for many reasons, including the fear that women face about their personal safety along with their reputation. But one of the reasons is that in general it is easier for men to get off in such a situation than women.
That was what I was talking about. I was trying to talk the same language as the poster with whom I was having a conversation.
oh I see. Thanks for clearing that up.
Okay, fine, how bout this: pretend it's with a woman you find repulsive. Whatever that would entail, the idea of touching this woman makes me cringe. Now are you still excited by the prospect of her offering sex?
Wow, I can't understand how your milkshake of sexual indifference isn't bringing all the ladies to the yard.
"Your milkshake of sexual indifference"
I really hope they don't serve those at Sonic.
There's an In-n-Out joke in there somewhere…
Or a Five Guys one…?
He's a "Famous Star" for his Indifference Milkshakes.
someone was talking about band names earlier, I think "Milkshakes of Sexual Indifference" should be one. I might start a band just to have that band name. You are invited to the shows if they happen if you want James.
I dunno, I think it'd be better for your band's album title instead.
'Your example is a little bit ridiculous because it's not like my nerve endings get turned off'
That is totally not how sex works. Nerve endings don't distinguish between pleasure and pain, context does that. It's not like you're going to magically come because someone touches your genitals long enough.
For the same reason people Catfish others, knowing full well they couldn’t possibly ever meet them without giving it away.
Being able to be someone else online fills the void, or whatever you want to call it, of loneliness for 48 hours or so – no promises are made or hearts broken – and then the profile disappears with a note with some made up but good intended excuse for doing so. Being able to repeat the process once every couple of months (or as and when the loneliness creeps in again) has changed my life.
I have never had that offer at all. The times I had sex I had to chase hard. So between the two of us, you, the man, have had it easier because people offer bad sex infrequently and I, the woman, have never had anyone offer at all.
And that's data, right?????
Antecdata, at least 🙂
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/it…
And I'm probably not your equivalent male counterpart. I'm a average looking, in shape, slightly boring man with a good job, etc. I don't know what you're like so I don't know if you can compare our situations. Nowhere did I say that all women have it easier than all men, maybe people are assuming this?
People are assuming it because you said:
"And yeah, it's obviously easier for a woman to get sex than a man. But that doesn't mean relationships are easier." -your post above
You did not say some women, you said a woman
"I'm a average looking, in shape, slightly boring man with a good job, etc"
You've just described most men the world over, unless you're trying to make the 80/20* argument, aka the Pareto Principle, fit sex, which has been discredited so many times it's not even funny.
No, that doesn't describe most men. Most men don't have good jobs. Most men aren't necessarily in shape.
And yet, you seem to be arguing that it's hard for you to find sexual partners.
Out of shape men have sex. Men with lousy jobs have sex. Men with little to no money have sex. Sometimes men who fall in the middle of that Venn diagram have sex.
I'm trying to figure out what your argument is beyond a vague "it's obviously easier for women to have sex", which it doesn't really seem to be based on first hand accounts.
And by the same token as men across the board having and not having sex, there are plenty of women across the board in the same boat.
I don't think it can break down as simply as women "obviously" having more sex or even the "opportunity" for more, or that framing it in those terms is really helpful.
It makes a lot of assumptions about what individual women and men want, for one thing, and ignores a lot of real world problems facing women in the dating world.
You mentioned not getting a single blowjob off OKC, but were you looking for BJ's or were you looking for a relationship? And there's the problem that for a women there's a much higher level of potential danger associated with "Go blow/screw random guy off OKC" than for men.
Framing it as "women could have sex if they wanted to" is kind of…weird, and unhelpful, and it shows a lack of understanding about a lot of things that knowing could probably help you in terms of your own dating.
The thing is, on average its about as hard for men to get heterosexual sex as women since you need one of each. When you say women have it easier, it seems like you mean something along the lines of "the women I'm interested in have an easier time getting sex than I do".
Which, fine, quite possibly true but the wording is implicitly "all women have an easier time finding someone to have sex that they enjoy with than all men." That just doesn't add up.
I don't dispute what you are saying, but what about the distribution of sex?
For example, for 100 sexual encounters between 100 men and 100 women, it is possible that every woman nailed some guy once, but only 40 dudes managed to get it, with some banging more than one woman.
That wouldn't fall into the "it's easier for women to get sex" per se, rather "only some men have an easy time getting sex, while all women have an easy time getting sex."
Again not saying this is the case, but couldn't it be possible?
Okay, so in this hypothetical world, on any given night, 40 men and 40 women are getting laid and the other 120 people are out in the cold?
So any given woman has a 2/5 chance of getting laid and any given man has a 2/5 chance of getting laid, on any given night.
No, I said there was 100 encounters, so 100 women got laid and 40 men got laid (some multiple times) while 60 were out in the cold.
Or you could flip it and have 100 men get laid and only 40 women get laid.
Again, not saying that this is true, that's not the point. The point is that there would be other scenarios other than strictly "everyone gets a turn" so using a purely mathematical argument is not sufficient.
I stopped at "the distribution of sex".
o.O
So … go you.
I think.
Here's one for you, one for BiSian aaaaaaand. . .we're all out. Everyone else will have to wait for the next air drop.
LOL oh no.
Now you know I am a monogamous lady, and you know you are a handsome charismatic flirteous dude, GJ, and when I have a dude looking over my shoulder booming out "Who is that guy from Vegas who sent you that package?? By air drop, even???" now what am I supposed to saaaaay?
😀
Well, shucks, thank ya, miss. I suppose you could just distribute it fairly to one of your unattached friends. The drone return service isn't online yet.
Well. . .
1. Sex is not a fungible commodity. Its not "distributed". Might as well ask about the unequal distribution of muscle mass, mountains or tennis partners.
2. Your math is horrible. If one woman has sex with 100 guys, that's 100 encounters and 99 women had sex with no one (or vice versa if you prefer). HOWEVER. . .
3. Your hypothetical example has no bearing on reality because sex isn't an act performed by forming two lines and pairing up. Its an experience that you have with someone that you (ideally) will enjoy it with. Your distribution model implies that someone should have sex with someone else who might not be a satisfying partner, that they find unattractive etc.
4. Again, it sounds like "the set of all women I am attracted to have an easier time finding partners than I do". Which, ok, fine. That may be true. There are also plenty of women who do not have an easy time finding a partner they like. They're in the comments here. They're in Denny's at midnight. The fact that you're not attracted to them so you don't notice them doesn't change that,
5. Dating and sex is complicated for everyone, even people who don't have much trouble finding partners.
There is no implication that someone "should" do anything in particular. I completely agree with #5, and I'm not saying anything about my own situation or anyone else's.
My point was that in order to make the case for "it is hard for both parties to have sex" you would need additional evidence. It would not be sufficient to say "Sex happens in pairs, so it's equally hard for everyone." And this is because a person can have (and enjoy) sex with more than one partner.
You made the claim that one side has it easier. You're trying to convince people. Burden of proof is on you, Sparky. I don't really care if I change your mind or not. You might, however, wish to consider how your belief in this fact will impact your dating prospects with women who don't find their milkshake bringing all the boys to the yard.
At the end of the day, I think that's the real point. We each have a competing mythos here. Fine. Your story is (really) about how easy it is for you to get a date (or sex but I'll continue to use the word date for simplicity) compared to how easy it is for the people you want to date. Mine is about how easy it is for me to get a date compared to the set of all women I know.
So what really matters isn't the objective TRVTH which, necessarily has to account for the asymmetrical nature of the dating game. What matters is how this myth, this story gives you a guide for living you life. Just like the message of Odysseus is cunning over brute force or Icarus and Daedalus is a warning against hubris, both our stories teach a lesson.
Your story says (basically) that you're inadequate and there's very little you can do about it. Taken to its logical extreme, its "20% of the guys get 80% of the women". If that encourages you to overhaul your lifestyle, get in shape, dress sharp, work on your social skills, get a better job and a swank bachelor pad so you can be in that 20%, great. Go do that. If it makes you feel powerless or lke you have to trick women into sex because they'd always choose someone else otherwise, this story may not be serving your needs.
My story is that men and women basically think the same way and want the same things – basic survival needs, creature comforts, self actualization, internal and external validation and love. It says that yes, some people have an easier time getting dates than others on both sides and all else being equal, attractive people have an easier time. My story encourages me to understand each woman I'm interested in as a whole person with their own needs and desires, to look for ones that are compatible with mine. It encourages me to approach the woman who's alone at the bar, not because she's my best shot for some repetitive genital friction but because she's probably lonely and trying to meet people, too. It teaches me that its ok to get rejected because the earlier you work out that you're not compatible with someone, the better.
So. . . yeah, stories, guides to life, insert Sandman quote here. Pikc the story you want to star in instead of the ones where you're just an extra.
I made no claim that any one side has it easier, in fact if you read the first comment I said "I don't dispute" what you said.
I just constructed a hypothetical scenario showing that what you said in the first comment was insufficient to show that both sides have it equally hard.
All I was saying is that you cannot use the argument you presented in the first comment *alone* to prove the point. Obviously you have presented other information to support it, so it doesn't really matter anymore.
That wouldn't fall into the "it's easier for women to get sex" per se, rather "only some men have an easy time getting sex, while all women have an easy time getting sex."
That is absolutely the "20% of the guys get 80% of the women" scenario with the specific numbers filed off.
This continues to fit my above example just fine because my argument is that factual accuracy is not as important as the effect of the narrative itself. I don't even care if you're factually correct. You can support your argument all day and it won't change my mind because the statistics do not matter to my life one whit. I know believing and acting on my "wrong" narrative makes it easier for me to get laid.
You want more sex? Go to swinger parties. Hell, use the Craigslist personals.
Factual accuracy doesn't even come into what I was saying. I don't even support my own "argument" that there is an imbalance. In fact, I support your idea that both sides have it equally hard. That is because you are completely missing the point of what I am saying. Let me explain one more time:
Regardless of the factual accuracy of either scenario A "everyone gets a turn" or scenario B "some people get more turns than others," the point is that *both are possible.*
If some red pill asshole reads what you said in the first comment, it would be trivial for him to rewrite it in his own head as scenario B, which is why ADDITIONAL evidence is needed.
Has nothing to do with me and having sex personally, and I have made no statistical arguments because I haven't presented any data to support anything.
OK, so what is your point?
Here is the point:
To make the case for equal difficulty between the sexes, you need more evidence than just the fact that sex happens in pairs.
Other evidence could include "finding enjoyable sex is difficult for both parties," "not all people are available to one person due to geography or other factors," "the set of women that you know is very small compared to the ones you could have sex with."
All of these are things that you have said or implied, *outside* of that first comment.
Ah, gotcha. Well, just assume everything above was aimed at those MRA's reading silently, then.
Yeah, I recently found out about these things called "rainbow parties", which are basically what you're talking about, but with women wearing different colors of lipstick. That sounds like one dude who's able to get a lot of sex, and a lot of women getting no sex.
I heard about those too, but I admit I assumed they were scaremongering rumors among the parents of high school girls. . .
Yeah, I read about them in the Atlantic and figured it was pearl clutching bait. Which is not to say it has never happened anywhere ever, because everything you can think of has probably happened.
Besides, it is not like lipstick rings would survive through another BJ, so the concept is a bit silly
I heard about them from a guidance counselor, so I assumed she had might have some credibility about what's going on with middle/high school students.
And I would not be surprised if it had happened, but wonder how common it is.
And wonder how they do not smear the lipstick left by the prior woman during a BJ 🙂
Maybe they use the kind with chemical sealants? I kind of assumed that the rainbow thing didn't actually work, just that it was a really disturbing image to give (or something they think will impress other teens to talk about?)
It kind of struck me as something kids who do not know much about blowjobs or lipstick would think was possible 🙂
Or like one of those things teenaged boys tell teenaged girls (like "semen is good for you!")…
Ah, whereas I heard about them from the mom of a teenager, who has historically been a bit. . . er . . . *tense* about what hijinks her child might be getting up to. Some extra salt may have been applied.
Ha, that rainbow party thing has been going around for a decade or three by now.
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/13/anatomy_of_an_urb…
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/life…
I'm interested to know if it's ever actually been done, and how the colour scheme turned out in the end if so. And sort of grossed out at the way adults seem to enjoy thinking up bizarre sexual escapades that they imagine teenagers to be taking part in.
My fingerpaint experiments from childhood suggest brown. Muddy brown.
And it was always so disappointing, the muddy brown from the bright blues and yellows.
Especially after reading all that Leo Lionni.
Probably the biggest reason I switched to crayons.
(That and that sharpener. :-))
Or the hidden pigments that meant this blue isn't SOLELY blue and so on for every color. So no matter what, any color you tried to mix had a strong greyish cast to it.
The idea/urban legend behind rainbow parties goes back at least twenty years when it was the old hemp bracelets that supposedly colour coded them.
I've seen the lip gloss variation, then there was the bead bracelet variation and then the gel bracelet variation, all with lip gloss or lipstick colour being a stand-by.
Of course, if and when these ever happen in real life, they probably happen because of articles like that.
I remember when there was a big deal about cough syrup that had DXM in it, and suddenly small town white America realized (a few decades too late) that some kids knew if you drank the right kind of cough syrup you'd get a really crap high.
So they put flyers up warning parents that this cough syrup would get kids high.
And all the kids who had previously had no idea this was a thing were suddenly coming to school with the clearest sinuses around.
I remember the bracelet one from when I was a kid.
And although I'm sure somewhere there were probably some kids who copied it after hearing about it, I always remember thinking those stories were creepy and said more about the adults who liked to repeat them than about teenagers.
A. I used the bJ example because that was in fact the majority of the propositions. Beside the occasional anal.
B. Nothing suggested that "orgasm for celette" was on the table.
What we have here is a failure to communicate: for many women, enjoyable sex isn't something you can get with a one night stand, let alone a blow job. Men? They pretty much always get off.
Lots.
Again: No. "I'd imagine…" is not facts. Many men will take a blow job from anyone. Men can be cruel, and say things like "I wouldn't fuck her, but I'd let her blow me."
Just because you dont see these things, haven't lived these things, and are apparently selfishly ignoring all of the women on this site who have and are saying otherwise doesn't mean you're right.
Well, as you said below, women are complicated. Some do enjoy BJ's enough to be aroused by it or even orgasm from it, but usually only if they're in a relationship with the guy, and they still would be unhappy if that was the only aspect of their sex life.
In general, though, I agree with you that what you're discussing sounds really one-sided and no fun at all for the women involved.
One directional pleasure would be a good band name…or not, too much one direction crossover. Nevermind.
I love giving women oral sex. If a woman offered to let me do that, and nothing else, I very likely would. That's despite my expectation that she would probably think I'm pathetic for doing so.
But here's the ironic thing: just because a man sends out a message doesn't mean he's actually up for random sex.
In my OKC days, I go very few messages (like to note: I am a woman.) I sent out far more messages than I received. The messages I DID receive were from guys that clearly didn't read my profile; they seemed to message anyone that was anywhere near their age range and geographic location.
Now here's the fun bit: even in cases where the guy messaged first, and spread a far net, I discovered that even if I responded, they didn't always write back. *They weren't always interested.* Me writing back gave them a chance to actually evaluate me and, in most cases, find me wanting. They just waited to do the evaluation until AFTER they sent the initial message.
That's the funny thing about "guys with no standards." They have no standards, until a woman actually responds to that, and then suddenly, standards appear. It's frequently:
"No women are interested in me!"
"I could be interested in you."
"…. No, I mean like an actually *attractive* woman."
Now don't get me wrong, I don't want to fault guys for having standards. Standards are a good and blessed thing! I just find the dishonesty around actually HAVING them kind of weird.
This is a really good point. I've responded to quite a few guys who've never written back, and I'm pretty sure I didn't say anything horrifying. So unless they all got into terrible car crashes or something, it's likely they were doing what you're talking about here.
I think it's not even dishonesty but something sadder: The fact that for some men women who they consider unattractive are invisible. In order to be able to say 'some people want me, but not the people I want' you have to be able to see people you don't find sexy as you know, people. This guy doesn't. So 'some people want be but not the ones I like" turns into 'no one wants me' because the rest of them don't even count as people.
^this, and since so many of them have their own egos tied up in sex, then if they have sex or admit to having attraction to someone who isn't seen as conventionally attractive or more than that, they feel like it's a slight to their own egos.
Not just physical attraction, but many get stuck with the idea that they need a certain type of woman, and then proceed to chase women who are utterly unsuited for them.
So besides just making sure they can take her home to mother, their idea of a woman becomes someone who elevates them by being of a certain status.
Despite their protests that they want a "nerd girl", in my experience a lot of nerd guys blot out women who actually DO care about their nerdy things (no matter how attractive they are) because of a sense that they're either "one of the guys" or somehow not the sort of woman they should be going with.
(I'm using both girl and woman because I've seen it among young and old, and the young boys who ignore the nerd girls only get worse as they age…or can't understand it when the women who are into the same things they are started looking elsewhere, or can't understand why women are turned off by the locker room smell of a lot of nerd culture)
So, yeah, there's a point at which women just become invisible, and I knew and know a lot of women who'll dress in scrubs for the hospital and our co-workers don't even see them, but Saturday night at the bar…and it's sad/funny watching guys work out that, yes, that is the same girl who tried to talk to you and you ignored.
See also way too many sport playing girls and women I knew who would switch from tomboy looks to something more fem and the different reactions were obvious, sometimes even from guys who already knew them both ways.
So what you're saying is unfortunately depressingly true.
Its also considerably less risky for a man to have sex but that doesn't seem to come up as much.
Yeah. Let's all sit around and discuss that there's no such thing as NSA sex for women.
One night stands? Sure. Sex without a relationship? Sure. Sex with no expectations of emotional connection? You do you, lady. You do you.
But no strings? Aw hell naw. Pregnancy, STDS that carry with them a risk of infertility (and cancer!!?!?), plus the risk of violence? Sex is never without its strings, and women don't forget that.
I've always thought that was such an odd euphemism for "I don't want this sexual encounter to lead to a very serious relationship."
I'd be sort of surprised if many of the people who used it would be all that happy if the message 10 minutes post-orgasm was, "Okay, time to leave now. I mean…I guess you can wait here for your cab if you want to, but there are some really comfy chairs in the lobby. Nope, don't need your number. I mean, it was fun but…oh, you mean in case of medical issues? Nah, let's just deal with anything that comes up separately."
Yes. There's a trust that your partner won't do that shit to you, and I guess that's my point. That whenever you're talking about sex without a relationship, you're taking it on faith that the other person isn't gonna vanish into the ether if something happens, and since women bear the burden of the consequences, it's a thing they have to remember.
Men can get STDs and have to deal with a pregnant partner, so it's not like they get to get off scott free all the time, but they are more likely to be able to dodge a bullet. PLUS they get the benefit, where the woman may or may not get the benefit.
I mean, in the days pre-modern medicine and birth control, sex was basically a man saying to a woman "Risk your life for my momentary pleasure and the off chance you'll have fun too." Thank Jeebus it isn't like that any more… but it still can be? To a certain extent?
And some guys are really bad at giving off the impression they won't orgasm-and-dash.
"Sex is never without its strings, and women don't forget that."
This needs more upvotes.
*votes*
Very true. I have strings attached without sex, though!
"I'm always wondering where this "fact" is originating from."
Women who admit to being into casual sex. "When you're female you can always get laid" are the exact words I heard from one.
Maybe you have no friends who are into it, or will admit it to you.
Waves.
Hi!
Lady-person who likes casual sex.
I HAVE said that. To my friends. Who aren't complete dumb-fucks and therefore understand the concept of hyperbole used for humor.
The truth is, I can OFTEN find someone to have sex with. If I throw out ALL my standards and go plop my ass in the right bar til closing time. No guarantees as to the quality of said sex (see conversation upthread about how unpleasant sex can be for lady-parts havers). No guarantees that it will always happen.
Funnily enough, this applies to many dudes.
It isn't that gendered boo boo.
I don't think she was joking. I was there, I heard the tone of her voice, I knew the context of the conversation. Of course "always" was hyperbolic, but in a conversational, not humorous way.
As to me being a "complete dumb-fuck", you are entitled to your opinion.
Was she conventionally attractive and good at flirting?
I happen to be both of those and in all honestly I still can't get laid WHENEVER I want.
It's annoying as shit to listen to bitter dudes bitch and moan like "It's Rainin' Men" is nonfiction.
Wait it's not.
*throws away industrial-strength umbrella*
*throws away industrial-strength umbrella*
*and then does the Boxwood Dance*
(Can a girl get a remix around here? XD)
Ah ha! That explains all my issues! See, in Vegas, bars don't close for anything short of Armageddon.
Actually I was questioning when people, often men, come in and lay that "fact" out as a reason for why women have it easier.
Yes, I know about women and casual sex; nothing I said has anything to do with whether or not my friends are willing to tell me they do it.
Also, one woman told you that so it means women who have casual sex have an easier time getting it than men?
Women can generalize and be sexist too. Women have varying degrees of privilege. Some of them do have a very easy time finding sex partners, and they're less likely to know or empathize with women who aren't in their position.
Hell, I know a couple of guys who have always had a very easy time finding women to sleep with them, and they sometimes struggle to understand that some other men find it quite difficult.
I have a couple of men friends who are very, very successful with women and they are absolutely clueless as to why other men might not be able to do the same. Their (not so accurate) summary is that the ones who cannot do the same must be assholes or are ungroomed troglodytes
Wait. . .stop the presses! Wait, digital doesn't use a printing press? Crap!
Anyway. . . so unsuccessful guys assume that successful guys are assholes and women like assholes AND successful guys assume that unsuccessful guys can't get laid because they're assholes? Its almost like its possible to be a decent guy and honest about your interest in having sex!
Men are kinda risky too, as it turns out. Not illegal. Not… yet.
I am a woman and have never had an easy time finding sexual partners. Maybe on average it might be a bit easier for conventionally attractive women to find sex partners, but that is not all women.
Guaranteed your male counterpart has an even harder time.
Oddly enough, in the support group I am in for my condition, most of the men are partnered and most of the women are single, sometimes lifetime single and often virgins at 40+, 50+. So you might want to reconsider that guarantee.
I'm wondering (general) you determines someone's male/female counterpart, considering how subjective things like attraction can be.
I honestly do not know. The closest I could think of for a male equivalent to me was a man born with the same birth defect, but, if it was not for that shared trait, I have no idea how I would define equivalence
That was mostly a general question (maybe aimed just a bit at unwanted) about how anyone could make an argument based on that kind of comparison.
I think its based on who you'd be most capable of performing in a comedy duo with. The only time I can think of the word "counterpart" being used conversationally is C-3PO referring to R2-D2.
I don't know what you're condition is and how it would affect you're love life. Maybe it's worse for women than men. Being short is worse for men than women. Being obese is usually worse for women than men (though it's still not great for either). Not everything is necessarily equal.
"Being obese is usually worse for women than menBeing obese is usually worse for women than men"
…this kinda disproves your point, no?
Yep, it pretty much does.
How is that? All it means is that not everything is equal. Unless you mean to say that because being obese is slightly worse for women (and I'm not even positive about that) it must mean that women have it worse.
You know that no one but you is claiming one gender has it worse than the other right? That the point that everyone is taking issue with is you claiming a woman has it easier than a man on a dating site? Men have it hard too, not saying otherwise. It's the fact that you think women have it easier that is the problem. Can we not just say it's hard for both men in women for many reasons and one doesn't have an advantage over the other? Or do you really really want to continue with your generaliations for which you have offered no stats or anything to back up and are based solely on your personal experience (which again you are claiming is the norm, but then denying that anyone else's personal experiences could be too)?
It means that on average,things would even out.
Nobody has it worse. The challenges for men and women are different but equal, and equally frustrating for both men and women.
"Unless you mean to say that because being obese is slightly worse for women (and I'm not even positive about that)"
Well, I'm going to send you some evidence. It's a summary-analysis of 160 different studies that compare the experiences of obese men to the experiences of obese women in all areas of life – work, romance, social, etc.
Educate thineself: http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~rothblum/doc_pdf/weigh…
tl:dr obese women are viewed negatively in all areas of life at a much, much higher rate than obese men.
I definitely believe the stats that thinner women have an easier time than fatter women. I find the findings on high school boys in the relationship section to be suspect though. I wonder how many of the boys surveyed exaggerated their dating experience.
For what purpose? Surveys like these are generally anonymous and filled out individually. Who would they be showing off to?
If the answer is, "themselves" i.e., they don't want to admit, even anonymously their lack of experience, that's… pretty sad, that you feel that way about men and boys.
I mean, here you are, a man, anonymously admitting your lack of experience. Many other men have come on here, admitting their lack of experience. Many *highschoolers* have written in to DNL to talk about their lack of experience. In fact, some guys on here are arguing that they are doomed to being ForeverAlone ™ even after they've been successful at dating and even getting girlfriends.
Plural of anecdote etc etc, but that suggests to me that men are perfectly capable of being honest in anonymity, at least. You, like, pretty much everyone is.
"In fact, some guys on here are arguing that they are doomed to being ForeverAlone ™ even after they've been successful at dating and even getting girlfriends. "
o.O
And what … is the Kernel of Logic at the center of *this* canard, pray tell…?
In all fairness, this sounds like distorted Jerkbrain thinking that many of us are subject to. I've been in a relationship, had many intimate friendships with men, been on many pleasant dates, and I still am not too enthusiastic for my prospects in the future. It's all too easy to argue yourself into thinking those were one-offs, random acts that will never be repeated, OR that they don't "count" because they didn't end with a fifty-year marriage (which is a particularly pervasive and vicious societal narrative, I believe.)
what sgoch said.
I wish I could upvote the research, but downvote the depressing findings…
And being tall is worse for women than men…in fact, in my experience being tall for a woman shuts down a lot more potential avenues than being short for a dude does.
Even being slightly overweight can be harsh to women thanks to societal expectations, but to men it's a "dadbod".
Okay this is where having my FB profile linked up is kind of useful.
Take a look at me. When I've polled strangers, I've been ranked somewhere between a 5 and a 7, depending on amount of effort (7 is my ceiling; 7 is the result of professional make-up artists and hair stylists.)
I've also polled people on random guys around us to find my "equivalent", aka the 5-7 guy. I've then either approached the guy, or if it's the Internet, inquired to 5-7 self-identified guys how frequently they can get dates or get laid.
And I've discovered that the guys, almost unilaterally, do better than I do. 5 guys get dates more frequently than I do at a 7. Shockingly enough, their looks don't always play into it; some 5 guys do fantastic, and some 5 guys do middling-to-average, and it has a ton to do with their personality and social circle.
So, is my experiment enough that we can FINALLY bust this myth?
I wouldn't believe too many guys about how many dates they get. How many of these guys said they get 0 dates? Any? Just as a comparison, looks wise I'm closer to a 7 when I groom myself properly. 0 dates per month on average.
Fine I'll be painstakingly specific:
When guys did the *same things I was doing*, aka, messaging about 5-6 people a week, going to "group gatherings" with similar interests, canvassing their friends, doing cold approaches, and generally spending 2-3 nights a week out among people, they got more dates than I did.
These guys are supposedly the same "level" as me, with similar behavior, and yet they had an easier time getting dates. Also, these guys who I approached who were apparently "my level," were not interested *in me.* So there were situations where they COULD have gotten a date, and declined it, and I COULDN'T have gotten a date. AKA, they were already 1-up on me.
And, if you were paying attention, Marty said that the amount of dates often had to do with things besides looks, like personality!
*gasp*
So you are saying that because it doesn't (or does) happen to you then it doesn't (or does) happen generally. Yet when others say what does or doesn't happen to them, that's only their experience and something that is the exception not the rule?
*blows whistle, throws flag, makes ref hand signal*
HASTY GENERALIZATION
Not enough numbers on the field to represent the whole!
Baby needs to know how many yards for the penalty.
*smiles sweetly*
15. Dead ball foul.
baaaaaahahahahaaaa
I'm not the exception to the rule, if I were sites like this wouldn't exist.
Okay, so you assume since sites like this exist that therefore when women speak of their experiences they are the exception then. Because you most certainly cannot be. First of all I didn't accuse you of being the exception. I said you are accusing everyone else of being one (ironic since we are getting quite a few numbers, what is a group of exceptions if not the rule after a while . . . ).
Did you read the OP at all? Did you click on the link to the kickstarter? Did you read why this anthology exists in the first place? I did. But I'm a woman, so I guess I had a vested interest in checking it out. It would seem to me that maybe the need for such an anthology in the first place would be a sign to you that women don't often talk about this stuff publicly and that THAT's why you don't hear about it. Not because they are the rare exception when they finally do.
Here's what it says in the About section of this anthology:
"I find myself very optimistic whenever I see an article on advice or information on geeks and dating. But soon this excitement turns to disappointment; the articles are almost always written with only the male geeks in mind.
There is a desert of information geared towards the women in fandom. Yet when I get together with my friends at events or over drinks, one of our major topics is how we handle relationships and crushes, rejections, unwanted advances, and general romantic and sexual entanglements.
The Secret Loves of Geek Girls anthology is written for the geek girl who wants information and stories on dating and love. It's a compilation of tales told from both sides of the tables: from the fans who love video games, comic books, and sci-fi, and those that work behind the scenes: creators, and industry insiders."
If women who don't get laid are the exception to the rule, then why are there literally MOUNTAINS of women's magazines and dating advice aimed at women that give lots of tips on how to get sex? If the majority of women are getting sex just by existing, why is there so much advice given to women socially about how to be sexy, act sexy, and attract men?
Because said magazines are geared toward giving women advice as to how to have sex (and thereby retain) the men that they actually want – which kind of goes back to the very point other ladies and some men in the forum have been making: that while it may be true that most women can get sex in itself with relatively little difficulty, getting it with the kinds of men they actually want, under the right conditions, etc, is a much higher hurdle to jump.
And is advice on this site and the Internet aimed towards nerdy men also not geared towards helping men have sex with women they find attractive?? I say again, there are plenty of guys I've run across who complained that they were sex-less who I would have slept with, and THEY weren't interested in ME.
Also have you read any of the ladies' magazines I'm citing? The advice is frequently NOT geared towards getting an "attractive" man. It's literally about getting any man at all. There is constant pressure from female-geared advice to "settle", to attract the "good guy." Advice for women is filled to the brim with warnings and stories and anecdotes about the good-looking player and how you should stay away from him, and how you should dress "sexy but classy" to attract the "good" kind of guy.
Any dick with a penis, amiright, ladies?
u r rite.
NOT.
Which … as numerous on numerous have said, the same thing applies to men. How are people not getting this?
"Unattractive men don't get sex." Moan, groan.
The shudder-inducing crassness (for some of us) of the phrase "get sex" aside, there is the easiest fix in the world for that.
You'd think it was rocket science with a side order of transfinite mathematics, honestly.
Were you trying to open a dialogue with women on OKC or were you just looking for blowjobs?
Women may get more messages on OKC, but consider how often those messages, even from guys in the 7~10 range, go from "How are you tonight?" to " You want to fuck?" to "WHY HAVEN'T YOU FUCKING ANSWERED?!?!" it's small wonder why men, in general, are getting fewer responses.
Are you only looking at OKC? Because OKC and OLD in general have loads of issues that make it hard for both men and women to find the right person.
In all of this you haven't really talked about how personality plays a role, except to say you think you're boring, and I don't know if you mean personality wise or your life or what.
If nothing else, there are a lot of people who have far better luck IRL as opposed to OLD, so maybe you should take a stab at that?
And in terms of OLD in general and OKC in specific, a lot of my guy friends go after the absolutely wrong women for the wrong reasons, either they're going after women who they have nothing in common with or they're just trying for hook-ups with women they probably wouldn't be happy with emotionally buy just want to fuck.
But even going by compatibility, compatibility on paper is a lot different than in real life, and because it's through the medium of being online there's a lot more "selling" of yourself going on through OLD, which makes it harder for both men and women.
Yes I would open a dialogue. I would read their profile and try to start a conversation about a mutual interest or something interesting that they put in their profile. If their profile was sparse (most of them were) I'd introduce myself and ask them a question about themselves. I can count on one hand how many responses I'd get a year.
I don't do online dating anymore, deleted all the profiles I had. I don't even worry about or go out of my way to meet women anymore, after trying to date for 20 years I'm done with it. And before anyone accuses me of having too high standards, most of the women I messaged weren't very conventionally attractive. I know attractive women aren't in my league.
Why wouldn't someone respond to "How are you tonight?"
1. Because they looked at your profile and don't think you are compatible.
2. Because they looked at your pictures and don't think you're attractive to them.
3. Because they're busy and don't come online much and only see your message weeks later and it seems awkward to write back then.
4. Because they find this to be a bland and boring opening to a conversation that puts the onus on them to do the social work of finding something to talk about and they don't feel like it.
5. Because they've experienced people writing "How are you tonight?" as code for "I want someone to touch my genitals and you'll do. Plus I'll quickly become lewd and/or creepy"
In my case?
Because my profile is currently blank while I get myself ready to jump back in the dating scene, except for a single sentence that basically says: "hey, there's nothing here right now so any messages you send right now are gonna get deleted without a response."
And I STILL get messages.
I don't know what's more frustrating, the ones that are obviously form letters or the ones that make it seem like he's actually trying to talk to me, when the ONE thing I basically said was "don't message me right now."
That said, when that's not in play? I still wouldn't respond to "how are you tonight?" Ever.
Firstly, it smacks of a blanket send-out, like the sort of thing you just copy-pasta'd into a bunch of inboxes. Secondly, it seems like the sort of thing that indicates that you didn't read or care about my profile. If you did, and the only question you can come up with is "how are you tonight" then you're not much of a conversationalist, and sorry, that's a high priority for me. It's bland, it's dull, and it…frankly, it seems like the sort of conversation that, in OLD circles, only goes a handful of ways.
Thirdly, you're a stranger, so…what. Do you ever ACTUALLY tell random strangers who ask how you ACTUALLY are? Hell, even for most acquaintances, "how are you" is a bland pleasantry that's supposed to be met with, "fine, thanks, and you?" It's not actually a conversation starter.
And finally, like BiSian said, it tends to almost always lead into some kind of near-immediate sexual come-on.
Seriously, why even BOTHER sending a message like that? It makes you sound BORED.
Thank you for proving the point: that women, even those who aren't even trying(!) get far and away MORE messages using OLD than do men, all other things being equal. This has been demonstrated and proven over and over again. Much appreciated! 🙂
For the last fucking time, messages does not equal INTEREST.
There are at least two other women in this very comment thread talking about how guys would message them, and then show absolutely no interest in continuing the conversation. In other words, the guys will literally message ANYone female, but are not actually interested in every single female.
Why do you guys get this fucking idea in your head that message must absolutely mean guaranteed date/sex?
Yes? So?
Firstly, that point is moot. "more messages" doesn't actually mean anything, as other folks here have discussed–frequently, those guys aren't even actually INTERESTED in you, they're just blanket-spamming all the girls in their area of a certain age-range. It's like going to your car in a parking lot and finding a flyer on it. It's not like someone personally wants YOU IN PARTICULAR to come to their car wash. They just want people to come to their car wash.
Secondly, I don't see how my saying that I've gotten a handful of messages from rude people proves anything.
Thirdly, take your smarmy attitude and shove it. It's cute that you think you actually made some kind of winning point, but you look like a dude who just pushed a pawn straight to his opponents side in one move and said "King me!"
I never respond to messages that don't contain some indication that the dude has read my profile. The only people who start with "hi," "how r u" or "ur beautiful," are accounts that have so little on them that there's no way for me to know if they're run by spambots, serial killers, or just incredibly boring, irritating people. At this point there's no point in looking at the account instead of going directly to deletion.
6. Because they have a limited amount of time to answer the 100 messages in their inbox, so they went with the guy who whose message mentioned specific things they're both interested in, showed a sense of humor and suggested an activity that she would enjoy.
The ragebots in this thread are sooooooo not gonna like that answer, GJ.
Well why aren't those ragebots messaging 100 people a day? I mean, they're nice women. If the ragebots just gave them a chance. . .
I took you up on your offer and came to a conclusion: I am jealous as HELL that you got to go to CVG.
Ok, now that I've seen you, I'm pretty damned shocked that you're ranked so low.
Wait…. YOU FOUND THE RULE 63 UNIVERSE?!
Ah, man, I totally want to see what dude!thathat looks like! (I mean, I have a sneaking suspicion it's just me with short hair and fewer curves, but I dunno, maybe he went into acting or comedy or something like I wanted to do when I was younger before I realized I'd never sing in the lower range.)
>>And yeah, it's obviously easier for a woman to get sex than a man. But that doesn't mean relationships are easier.<<
This is factually incorrect. Online dating, as you mentioned below, and your "observations" are not a good indicator of how it is for the majority.
It may be true that it is easier for *some* women to have more sex just as it is true that it is easier for *some* men to, but that doesn't mean that it is easier for women than men. The DNL forums are filled with amazing women who point out how difficult it has been for them. Ms. Nicholson mentions in this post how she wanted it and met men she wanted it with, but it didn't happen. And this idea of "Women could have sex whenever!" is toxic to women who find it to not be the case.
The reason men believe this is for several reasons: 1. Women are less likely to discuss their difficulties, especially online with men who can (and will) harass them. So what you're seeing isn't a good reflection: the true data points lie in what women aren't telling you.
2. When a woman has a difficult time, men either want to fuck this woman and believe she is exaggerating because "I want to fuck you, so everyone must," or believe she has impossible standards–OR–men do not want to fuck this woman and therefore she becomes, as we say, "shrubbery."
Just because men will send women sexual comments all the time doesn't actually mean much as far as willful sex goes.
It also ignores that women are told by society that they shouldn't have sexual desires. A woman who is forward and asks for sex is often considered a slut. Just look at the amount of men on this site who say that they wouldn't be ok with a forward woman because it "means she's promiscuous," aka: yucky yucky! don't come near my precious penis.
Take some time to actually talk to some of the women on this site who have stated over and over that it has been difficult for them. Having an actual idea of people's real, lived experiences may be an eye opener for you. I'm not saying it's a breeze for dudes, but this idea that women can snap their fingers and have all the awesome sex they desire is a myth that hurts all genders.
Difficult for them to achieve what? A relationship? Sure. Sex? You'll find far more men here with that problem. Just because it's easier on average for women to get sex doesn't mean every woman is getting sex. And no one said anything about awesome sex, if anything I've said the opposite in a couple of posts.
>>You'll find far more men here with that problem. <<
Yes, because men on here are more likely to have those issues. It's a condition of the population you're seeking results from, not the truth of the outer world. That's like me going to a Dolphins football game in their stadium, looking around and going, "wow! There's mostly Doplphins fans here. So it goes to state that most there are more Dolphins fans than fans of the team they're playing against!"
If you will notice, many, MANY women have also said HERE that it is or was incredibly difficult for them to lose their virginity. And you aren't listening when you're told that this mindset of "it's easier for women" is hurtful and toxic, to both men and women.
Heck, this entire conversation started because a woman posted a blog post about her difficulty in losing her virginity.
Exactly. I feel like there some people on here try to make everything relate to them somehow, and ignore the parts that conflict with their mindset, totally ignoring the fact that the whole post is about exactly what they're saying isn't a thing.
There's a reason DNL decided to go with a week of women's voices. This fact seems to be lost on some…
YES BUT WHAT ABOUT THE MENNNN
And since we're at it, how come there's no white history month?
"Heck, this entire conversation started because a woman posted a blog post about her difficulty in losing her virginity."
I read the post as about a woman who chose to delay losing her virginity because she was frightened and ambivalent about sex. Example:
"I avoided heterosexual men altogether for years."
People are complicated. It's very common for people to on one hand very much want sex or love, and on the other hand to fear those things. Some of those people end up unintentionally setting up their lives in ways that make it very unlikely that dating or sex will happen. Not all of those people are women. I've seen quite a lot of men here who both very badly want to be having sex and who are very unsure around women and have relatively little day to day interaction with them. That doesn't mean they don't want sex. They're just not up for pursuing it, or are lacking some of the social tools that are required to get from "wanting sex in a theoretical way" to "actually has some opportunities to have sex."
*snicker*
Don't confuse those poor guyze with actual facts, now.
Also, apologizes to everyone who had to muddle through my messed up sentence. Turns out I can't edit proofs at work on one screen while writing a comment on the other…
And also, your stating "Difficult for them to achieve what? A relationship…" etc. is just straight insulting. I didn't say that. I said sex. But you've made it up in your head that all the women telling you otherwise must be wrong because you've decided it.
Like I said: Take some time to actually talk to and LISTEN TO women. you may be surprised that women's lives aren't what you've made up of them in your head.
So you're saying it's easier for women to give pleasure but not receive it than it is for men to receive pleasure but not give it. Not exactly a "Eureka!" moment, I'm afraid.
Yes, pretty sure that's what he's saying.
Are you claiming that having sex with random strange men at bars/etc. isn't risky for women?
I don't think he's even thought it through that far.
"Hiring a prostitute is risky and illegal. That's a poor solution for men that aren't desirable."
I was de-virginized by a hooker at the age of 26. I greatly enjoyed the experience, and I wish I had done it sooner.
The chances of getting busted are pretty low, and you can cut them further by being careful. Other than that, I don't see that it's riskier than any other sex with a stranger.
I think prostitute sex is much underrated, and widely condemned by people who have never tried it.
Point of curiosity. I have no idea how the rating system works here, and I don't care what ratings my comments get. My previous comment was at -70 the instant it was posted. Plus or minus, I'm curious how such a large rating gets attached to a comment the instant it is posted.
Your personal rating comes from your posting history. That's the left number.
A new comment starts with a +1 and then gets affected by people's ratings. That's the right number.
Thank you.
I thought it might be something like that, only that would mean my personal rating went from +2 to -70 in the fairly short time between my first and second comments. And now it seems all the comments show the same personal rating. When the second comment appeared, it showed -70 while the first one still showed +2. I guess that was just a lag.
Thanks again for the explanation.
Its kind of a bell curve. The irst 50 points in either direction are easier, posts with big downvote counts effect you more than the same number of downvotes spread across more posts. . .basically its a big black box that kinda-sorta tracks with your overall reception.
I grew up about 1.5 hours from the eastern NV border. I think most of the guys in my HS lost their virginity in a legal NV brothel. As long as the workers are 18+ and voluntarily working, it is no big deal IMO.
That may be, but the point is that it is indeed illegal. It does not have the full legal and social sanction of our society, and I personally know men – highly educated, highly successful men – who don't go that route for precisely these reasons. Asking them to risk getting arrested or worse, is a lot, don't you think?
Eh, just take a vacation to Nevada if that's really your only objection.
LOL, GJ. Those "highly successful, highly educated men" don't know how to figure out where Nevada is. It is not on the HS/HE Man Map.
Also, since that is a Black Dude Bawl-Whining … what about that whole "let's taunt the Black women by going to Brazil for our sex vacations where women are just soooo pleasant and accommodating to us Black American men (*cough* because we wave dollars at them and we've taking advantage of the rathole state of the Brazilian economy these women find themselves in *cough*) that was splashed all over the covers of Essence and Ebony and Black Enterprise and La Raza and Latina some while ago, hmmm? What about *that* version of prostitution? Do we not call it that because … nobody's crossing state lines, or something?
Oh, what – we don't call it prostitution because those women are just being "gracious to generous men of color of their own accord", or some other equally stupid stupidness?
(At least until those men started being as crappy to those women — including physical abuse — as they were to the women they were trying to date at home, and got their butts pretty much kicked out of the country en masse and no one wanted to invite them back once people started finding out about it?)
And what about the "executive" call girls the Wall Street boys use? Are there no "highly successful and highly educated" men who work there …?
(Although I will admit that some of what's happening globally to the American dollar might devalue my thesis a little there, because even if these men are "highly successful and highly educated", they are doing some awfully stupid stuff contributing to that currency's plunge … but I digress.)
/so stupid I can't anymore
Rooo, I can't tell, do you think this is stupid?
LOL. Don’t tease. You know I think it is one of the stupidest stupids that ever stupided.
It needs to move in with The Stupids.
Oh, all that, too. I know a particular American consultant to [East Asian Country] who gets seven figures whenever he comes out for a consult and one particular call-girl flown in from [location]. . .ok, that's not true. I know the call girl. I know there's plenty of illegal but otherwise safe and upscale sex work in this country and completely legal elsewhere. I'm just saying if that's Bro's only objection, it doesn't hold up.
Stupid question, though, what's HS/HE?
You described my dating experience to a T; I'm unquestionably attracted to men but when it finally comes down to it doing anything sexual makes my skin crawl and I don't understand it. How can I be so attracted to someone one moment and so repulsed the next? Why does this happen? I'm still young enough that I'm not overly concerned about still being a virgin, but I have wondered if I'll be an older virgin if I don't get over this… whatever it is.
Honestly, I'm just relieved I'm not the only one and that it can be overcome.
It was definitely a process. I swung wildly about the same guy. One minute being all hot and bothered and the next thinking "Wait, you do what….? With what? Where now? And there's… ew"
Someone who is patient and crazy about you is your best bet. Someone cool with whatever you can swing and definitely down to hear and respect NO when you realize that you just aren't there yet.
Celette has good advice, to which I would add that if you're in a position where it's possible to see a therapist it might be a good idea. Otherwise, don't settle for anything less than someone whose cool with waiting until you're ready and okay with stopping the instant you need to stop.
And despite this message out there that all dudes are horny all the time/only care about sex or whatever, every guy I've dated has been, (despite many other flaws) extremely patient and kind in this area, so I'm pretty sure that message is based on, well, nothing,
Urgh, that's one of my top five pet peeves, and the main reason I can't watch Big Bang Theory (surprisingly, not Howard, who I find to be actually pretty funny, but Raj and Howard). Also, what gets me is that back in the day it was women who were supposed to be the lustful ones.
Dude, I just spent the weekend with a crew of female footballers. I can firmly attest that some women are still the Horniest of Pervy Hornballs.
I can believe that. Also, I meant I don't mind howard but leonard annoys me because…well, him and penny just don't work and they're really assholish to each other.
Every time it hurt very badly. But it became less unusual. I stopped fearing that after every breakup, I would never find a boy I liked again. It would have been nice if I could have learned that without, y’know, being smashed up that many times or to deal with scoundrels, but that’s what happened.
Oh man. This is sort of where I am and this is the exact answer I feared, but hoped wasn't true.
My anxiety about dating and relationship is pretty heavy. I want to be involved, until I get close, and then I desperately want to get out of the situation. I went on a date earlier this year and I stressed about it for days before and, while I was fine during it, at the end of the date, my anxiety level shot through the roof. He walked me to my method of transportation and I babbled the whole time, but I have no memory of the conversation. When we reached my spot, I quickly kissed him on the cheek and scampered away as fast as my legs would carry me. I was so relieved to be out of the situation, not because of anything about him, but because I couldn't handle the anxiety anymore. Unsurprisingly, we didn't speak again.
I'm doing the therapy thing and I'm hoping to figure it out, but I've been beginning to think that if I want to get through this… I have to force myself to do it over and over again until I am just numb to the anxiety. I've hoped that there would be a cure, that there would be a moment when I entered this situation with a more genuine desire to be in it and less anxiety.
Hearing that the answer might just be to be uncomfortable until the feeling passes, and to humiliate myself and get hurt (perhaps badly) in the process… yikes.
I'm in this weird place where 50% of me would rather avoid the discomfort that dating and relationships bring along and 50% of me really wants to give myself a shot at this. I only wish I knew how to break the tie and permanently move a few percentage points into the wanting-dating-and-relationships column. I'm 31 years old and it feels like I'm a long way away from even having step on figured out.
I love your screen name here! I spent a lot of time in the attraction/repulsion scared phase, but was able so sort through a lot of it back in Jr. High and High School. It took a lot of introspection and effort though, and some guys making a point of being kind to me and then backing off a bit and letting me figure things out.
Thank you 🙂 I like yours too!
I think the introspection/effort place is likely where I am right now. I'm kind of figuring out what I really want and what work I am willing to do. The answer so far has been not much, but… we will see.
Perhaps it naive of me, but I think having a guy who was kind and interested, but also not pushy would help. Maybe. I have real trouble expressing interest in someone because of all this, so it usually just comes out as anxiety and/or avoidance. Most guys have seen that (as they rightly should have) as a signal to back off, but I kind of feel like if just one of them had been able to see the anxiety for what it is, things might have been different. At least a little. Or maybe not, but it sounds like the closest thing I can think of to a magic bullet, haha!
It isn't a magic bullet, but it helps a *TON*! Hmm, if you try OLD, you might be able to connect with guys a bit, and share your anxieties and stuff before you meet them, while the "rejection stakes" are still low, if that makes sense? You do have to be picky/careful though, since you don't want them to see you as vulnerable and a perfect target to attack either, though. It's a balance of how much info you share. I think going into emotional detail but not sharing your full name/addy/etc. is usually fairly workable for me, but ymmv.
Thanks for this 🙂 The only kind of dating I have done is OLD, so what you are saying definitely makes sense. Mostly, OLD has been a flop for me, but I always go back to it when I am ready to try. There was a guy in 2013 that I went on a couple of dates with, and I did freak out and cancel once (and then wanted to reneg on my cancelling), so I explained to him about my anxiety, and he was cool about it. Unfortunately, the anxiety got too strong and I did what I could to push him away.
What you are saying about walking the line between being open and being vulnerable to bad types is extremely smart, and just good advice for everyone (anxious or not)!
I have a couple of suggestions for you. Try to come up with date ideas where you'll have fun almost independent of the other person. A movie you especially want to see, museum, indoor rock climbing, something that will take up your focus and give you things to talk about. Coming up with rewards for getting out of your comfort zone might help a bit, too.
I wrote a poem of sorts years ago. I won't quote the whole thing, but this part might speak to you:
"If I make it strong, I could keep away the shrieking pain
But also love and joy. I would be empty, only the shell would remain.
So I curl myself up, into a paper ball, and throw myself into the world."
Try to come up with date ideas where you'll have fun almost independent of the other person.
You know, back in the olden days of. . .the early 2000s, I used to have a newspaper subscription just so I could look for cool events coming up that I wanted to go to. It worked great for dates, too.
Yep! I've met a couple of dates at events I wanted to attend anyway, and it usually works out well even if I don't really click with him. I have had two bad dates recently, though. 🙁 For one of them, I had two other dates lined up in the same city on the same evening, and both of them were fun! The other, I met up with a friend afterward for a bite to eat and a walk out on the waterfront. 🙂
I had one date, years ago, to go salsa dancing. I was upfront with him that I'd never tried it before, though I'd done other forms of partner dancing. We met up for coffee first, and it seemed ok, but he got annoyed/frustrated at me from our first dance. I wasn't stepping on his toes or anything, but I was too stiff/not moving my hips enough. One of the other ladies offered to dance with me to give me some pointers, and it helped a little, but not enough for his tastes. He made his excuses and took off. I stayed, danced with a bunch of people, and had a blast! Everyone else was super nice about my being a newbie, and I started getting the hang of it and relaxed.
At the time, I was in the greater DC metro, so there was ALWAYS some science or culture or whatever thing going on and a nice relaxing hour train ride to book end it. I remember going to a presentation by the architects who designed the 9/11 memorial for the Pentagon, a cultural fair where my choice for lunch led my African American date to say "I didn't know you were black," the Natural History and (my favorite) Air And Space Museums, the zoo. Sure those were all with the same person but there's no reason they had to be. Any decent sized non-Vegas city will have events and locations like that nearly every weekend as long as you can get past the idea of daytime dates.
There is a lot of sense in that little poem! And thank you for the ideas… I do try to have more activity dates and less "staring at each other over coffee" dates, but mostly, I am just too anxious to actually even put ideas into motion. If I am ever less anxious again, I think going to a museum and such is a great idea!
Yes, that's exactly where I was. Therapy only took me so far without practical applications.
I had a panic attack on my first date with a boy I liked because he talked about his (very vast!) sexual experience and I started hyperventialiating. Not fun! But it did get easier, the more I went out. And after a bit of discomfort with getting hurt, I'm pretty open to asking anyone out without fear of rejection, which really, is a superpower in of itself I like to think!
That is definitely a super power! I think it is so great that you were able to get yourself to that place.
I'm wigged out by rejection, but also by acceptance? weirdly enough. The best I can figure it, I am afraid of bigger, higher stakes rejections, so when I see something going well, my brain only thinks "Well, now we are just going to fall from a greater height! Get down from there, quick!"
How did you get past the initial anxiety, if you don't mind me asking? From the article, it seems like openness was really your ticket to confronting and moving past your fear, but what gets you (or anyone) to the point where you can confront it? I think what you said about needing the practical applications to make it work was very astute, but this is where I end up feeling like a total dummy when I read about this stuff or talk to my therapist or my friends. The answer always seems to be, even from my therapist, that you just have to force yourself to do it, even if it is extremely unpleasant. It is like getting a shot; you just woman up and do it because you don't want to come down with polio
But I cannot imagine ever doing that. That feeling of discomfort is too great; it wins, every time. Is it that I just don't want whatever (or whomever) it is I am going after badly enough? That if I really wanted it, I would be able to force myself to do this, even though it is excruciating?
I hate to think it is that because then I feel like it is never going to change. It is the bootstrap theory for overcoming anxiety and I have misplaced my boots.
(Sorry, this turned into a bit of a ramble. Clearly, I have had this running around in my head too much lately.)
Hmm…I guess it was always a balance between the intense feeling of dating discomfort and the desire to try and see if it could be pushed past (keep in mind I didn't know if I could or not either)
Weirdly enough, looking back, I started to gain confidence after I did projects that had nothing to do with dating. I started making films and they were getting praise and I realized I could DO things. And if I could do these things that I thought I never could do, maybe I could get up the nerve to confront this other part of myself too?
Thank for you this reply… what you are saying makes total sense.
In general, I am not especially confident and I am attention/spotlight adverse, so being able to feel confident about anything else would probably give me something to build off of in a dating context.
You asked Hope, not me, but http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2015/06/5-things-me… and http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2015/06/5-things-me… go into a bit more detail about the process I went through, and some things that helped me. I did find the "push myself to do it, even though it was uncomfortable" did help me find a new comfort level. It isn't perfect. I'm usually a social butterfly now, but I still have my asocial cocoon/awkward moments! To some extent, you can borrow bootstraps from your friends.
Thank you for sharing you story with me. You went through some really tough stuff and I am so glad you survived it.
I am lucky where I am not so afraid of men, in general. I can have casual, social interactions with them, though I definitely feel more comfortable in situations with women. When it comes to having a deeper interaction or letting someone in, that is where I struggle, with both dating and friendships. If I have something to talk about, I always wait until the last few minutes of a conversation to bring it up, and I downplay my own feelings a lot. I try to be a person my friends can rely on, without my ever needing to rely on them, which is madness.
For example, my therapist recently asked me how I would feel about making a list of things I like about myself/am proud of, and (shockingly, hehe), I didn't feel this was something I could do. She then asked me how I would feel about asking my friends to help me with some items for such a list, and I said I would never ask them that. I did end up telling my closest friends about it though, and every one of them told me that they had things to list, but that they knew I would be uncomfortable if they did it. And they were right. Perhaps I need to learn to be uncomfortable around them first!
Accepting being uncomfortable and awkward around friends and others and learning to manage it is a superpower. Useful in dating, of course, but also work and in the day to day.
Sounds like therapy that was emotion and attachment focused would help a great deal – something like AEDP (accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy) for example. Do you know what kind of therapy you are currently receiving? I of course am fairly ignorant as to your situation (just what you've posted here) and I am not a clinician but I am quite adamant that if they are telling you to "just do it" they are a part of the problem. Relating to yourself as an object that you throw around and control is not salubrious.
My current therapist is a person-centered family/relationship therapist with psychodynamic training. I read a little bit about AEDP because I hadn't really heard the term before, and it sounds somewhat similar to her way of thinking. To say I've been a fairly resistant client though, would be accurate, so it has been a slow dance.
Also, I am probably misrepresenting her attitude a bit, through my own anxities. It isn't so much that she has told me to just get over it, but just that she is fairly straightforward that if I want to get over it, I am going to have to do somethings that make me very uncomfortable and have some experiences I probably won't like. The friends I have confided in about this and the very smart people commenting here seem to echo this. I haven't wanted to admit that it is true, even though it makes total sense (how else could we learn to tolerate and survive discomfort without being uncomfortable first?), because I have always found my ability to tolerate being uncomfortable to be low to non-existent.
If it helps make sense of how I have handled this stuff so far, a friend once said that I learned to tolerate being uncomfortable just as much as was required to function: to have a job, to take care of myself, and to not be socially isolated, but then I decided everything else like dating and trying new things and pursuing my interests were just optional risks that I could live without.
I think that trying new hobbies and pursuing new interests is a fantastic way of learning to handle risk – the risk of most of them (unless you're getting into skydiving or something) is pretty low. Would any of your friends be willing to go with you to the meetings/lessons/whatever? Maybe find some online groups for those hobbies and start exploring that way? Some things look scary and risky, but are actually quite safe. 🙂
I started pursuing gymnastics in my 30's. I'll never be as good at it as the people who've been practicing since they were toddlers, but it's a *LOT* of fun!
It looks like others have already added the productive stuff, so I just wanted to stop in, give you a hug and a pat on the back, wish you luck and remind you that you can do the thing.
Thank you for all of that 🙂 That is very kind of you. I am not sure I can do any of this, but even if I can't knowing that people believe in you is always a good thing to remind yourself of!
http://24.media.tumblr.com/be23fe06200dec8e601223…
Also worth noting, if you only do things you know you can do, you'll never do anything new.
Thank you for the cute potato picture. I'm having a really hard time these days and that made me smile.
I have unfortunately been on the "avoid anything new" bandwagon for most of my life. Ah, anxiety… what a fun companion you are, hehe. But we will see if I can ever get myself off it!
I'd also recomend Boggle The Owl for cute pick-me-ups dealing specifically with depression and anxiety.
You are a truly excellent person 🙂 Thank you for sending me that… I am going to go home and build a blanket fort and watch a movie based solely on a suggestion from the owl.
If I could, I'd buy you the lunch of your choice right now.
Boggle and blanket forts got me through some rough times.
Boggle is the best.
This is the most fabulously timed article in the world. I'm 26 and just started dating a guy who definitely wants to have sex and I'm panicking over what I'm doing since I have never had PIV sex. It's reassuring to know I'm not the only one out there who has gone this long in life without sexual experience, and the passages about being attracted to men but still going on chaste dates without ever doing anything speaks to me.
One thing I decided after I had had PIV sex is that I retroactively changed the date that I lost my virginity, ha. Because the other forms of sex were just as, if not more so, physically intimate and scary as that one heterosexual act that everyone tells you is 'the one' But that's hard to accept until after.
Yeah, I've been there done that with the whole kinda terrified thing.
Definitely agree with Hope that PiV doesn't have to be THE BIGGEST DEAL, just depends on how things go.
I am right there with you. (Minus the actually dating a guy right now part. The last time I was dating a guy, there was more than a little panic on my part, until I kind of made peace with the fact that I didn't actually WANT to do anything squishy with him, and we let that go.)
“Where’s the brooding-but-sensitive Romeo who would reciprocate my feelings and bring me tokens of his affection”
I thought women only wanted a positive attitude?
Brooding-but-sensitive isn't generally thought of as a non-positive attitude, though. I associate it more with poetry and philosophy – it can be dark, but in a deeper, thoughtful way. It doesn't come across as whining and blaming women, and wanting a therapist/girlfriend.
Also, I feel like "brooding" is something that a lot of women sort of outgrow wanting. Like, still fun for fantasies, but in terms of actual reality, anyone who's dealt with "brooding" starts to think of it more as "sulking" pretty fast.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that line was meant as a kind of self mockery of the media she'd consumed and the general love story that is often perpetuated out there as if that is what we should all expect and want.
The women I know who crushed on Angel back in the day have mostly moved on to healthier role models (I mean, god knows he had reasons to brood but at some point Cordelia should have hauled him into a therapist. At least back before she turned into Saint Cordelia Who Also Boffed His Son. Ew.)
A therafriend, or a girlpist, as they're called.
A fuck-apist!
Sorry guys, I haven't had my coffee yet. (slinks off to coffee maker)
Caffiene addiction, it's killer.
"Brooding-but-sensitive" takes some pretty advanced social skills to do correctly. For someone who struggles with positivity, if you try to be brooding it'll just come off as relentlessly negative.
Be positively into being brooding but sensitive.
"Be positively into being brooding but sensitive."
This made me LOL.
P.S. Sensitive about OTHERS' feelings, not just sensitive about his OWN, too — can we get some of that?
Haha!
It's ok if the guy is super hot.
Yup, and no man has ever excused the crappy behavior of a woman because she was attractive.
What happens when I agree with these Eeyores?
Yeah you're sooo right!
Too bad you're ugly or you could totally be an asshole to women and they'd still be begging to fuck you.
Luckily sensitive brooding is best done from the shadows in an envelopingly floppy shirt, thus concealing the actual hotness level of the brooder. If you need extra help turn your back and brood softly into the corner thusways: http://static.artfire.com/uploads/product/6/596/3…
Like this? https://englishblogmmg.edublogs.org/files/2014/07…
A true master! I'd welcome him into my bed in a cold night.
As long as he didn't insist on sleeping across my neck.
Nah, that one's ginger. More like this:
http://i.imgur.com/jat2W.png
Okay, can you teach my cats how to brood? Because at the moment, they are all up in my face at all times. Go, sulk!
Are puffy shirts a thing again? Because I'm totally down for that!
Arrrrrr!
I just can't disconnect brooding from the common sub-Byronic brooding vest, but if speaking their name helps summon them back into fashion:
PUFFY SHIRTS!
PUFFY SHIRTS!
PUFFY SHIRTS!
Please don't say this in front of a dark mirror. There are some depths of brooding that mortals eyes were never meant to see….
http://everythinglabyrinth.tumblr.com/post/252206…
This is where I can share one of my favorite trivia bits!
When Lord Byron attended Trinity College, he was REALLY pissed off that they explicitly forbid dogs on campus (he loved his Newfoundland Boatswain so much that he commissioned a marble funerary monument larger than his own for the dog and requested that Boatswain be buried with him in his will)
…
So he got a PET BEAR as a screw you to them because the rules didn't mention bears being forbidden on campus. HA!
The Skrull Socialist Gynarchy took a vote. It was close but they added "brooding-but-sensitive" to the list of acceptable male traits.
Fenris?
I didn't get a boyfriend until college, and even now, looking back, I am so glad I ended up being a slightly-late-bloomer. It got me past all the immature, rushed, and overly passionate infatuations that made up dating in high school*. College had mature dudes who actually gave a fuck. I was so happy. I imagine that starting out later might have those sorts of benefits sometimes, and maybe to give the latecomers some boost, hey, you'll be able to go out there and hopefully find some secure people who have figured their shit out! 🙂
I really want to write a nice long comment about this, but I also want to wait until I'm not at work, but the short version is wow, I relate.
Thank you so much for this guest post! It really speaks to me, but it doesn't really make me feel better. I'm in the exact same position as Hope was, I'm woman who turned 23 this summer and I'm still a virgin. Since I'm 19 I'm wondering if there's something wrong with me.
I'm straight, not ace, I get attracted to men, but being actually interested enough to date a guy or be in a relationship with them really doesn’t happen to me often. In fact, most times when a guy is interested in me, which doesn’t happen often either, I get uncomfortable. I have no idea why, but I can’t find myself getting in a relationship with a guy I barely know and wait for the unease to go away- which I know it won’t.
The guys I'm interested in are never interested in me and my circle of friends I have at this moment is really scarce of men. I tried okc, got a date with a guy I was interested in, but it didn't go anywhere. I'm not that good at making friends in my classes; I found out that I don't even know how to flirt. I'm really getting desperate, frustrated and sad.
Some people say I'm too picky (i.e my family), but can't I be with someone I actually find attractive and want to be with, is it too much to ask? I tried the 'give him a chance' multiple times because I thought that eventually something would happen, but the only thing happening was making me more uncomfortable. I also thought of going to a therapist like Hope to see if there's something different with me. I'd try dating advice blogs for women but I don't know that many. I know my only choice is to try okc again.
Thank you again Hope for your shared experience we have many things in common in your past situation and mine I just hope I won't still be a virgin at 25 but it's looking like I will be. I don't know what to do to make my situation change.
I also wanted to say that I’m a long time lurker and how I find the comment section of this website one of the best I’ve encountered. I don’t like to comment, but I had to at this one, maybe someone could help me.
Well to say I've been in your position is to put it mildly, I've felt EXACTLY those same feelings of confusion, and awkwardness, and aversion! And a lot of people I have talked to have as well. Therapy did help in some ways for me, not because there was something wrong I needed to fix, but because I needed to talk it out and actually put it into words.
In the end, I was both lucky and unlucky. Lucky in that I was eventually able to find someone I connected with who made me want to be intimate with. Unlucky in that I tried to force myself many times before with guys that it just wasn't happening with. I still feel that urge even now, but because I've been through so many dating/romance scenarios, I know that they really are just a bad fit. There are a LOT of bad fitting guys in the world!
It's totally fine to only be attracted to some people! But if the proportion of people who trigger pantsfeelings in you is relatively small, you need to a) figure out some common characteristics of those people and develop a strategy which will help you meet and attract those people (which we could probably talk to you about if you can come up with some characteristics), or b) Find ways to cast a really wide net (using OLD a lot, being willing to contact people who live really far away from you but seem high-compatibility, being willing to move to be with somebody.)
The unease whenever somebody feels interested in you seems to be a separate problem– I'm sorry if this is a standard answer you hear a lot, but you should probably talk to a therapist about it.
This is a great post!
Like you, I really wish there were more awareness about this kind of thing. I remember being sixteen and realising that there were these feelings everyone insisted I *should* be feeling by now but wasn't… and the only label I was given to deal with it was "late bloomer". And by the time I was eighteen, "late bloomer" wasn't enough anymore – I was legally an adult, I *must* be ready to date and have sex now!
Not so, but that didn't sink in easily. I ended up inventing the word "asexual" on my own when I was eighteen and reeling from a sexual encounter that I hadn't wanted, tried to force myself into and that had ended terribly. I've never quite forgiven the world for that.
…I get so het up about the lack of awareness of asexuality in sex ed, I think I forget about all the other people who could use alternatives, who maybe aren't asexual but still struggle with dating and sex when they're sixteen, eighteen, twenty, and older, for whom the model we're given just doesn't *work*, even if for other reasons than it didn't work for me. I admit the focus on virginity doesn't mean much to me (not actually planning to have sex ever, so it's a bit of a weird/meaningless concept for me), but there was still a lot in this post I could identify with. Thanks for writing it, and it's given me a lot to mull over.
(above-mentioned nitpick that reading slash =/= not being asexual stands.)
24 years old and counting over here. I still have yet to find someone I feel comfortable with.
In my teen years I was pretty much a misfit in just about any groups. I was the weird kid not even the so called nerds wanted to hang out with. With no friends and no group to belong too anxienty becomes a problem for a teen. That summarizes my teen years pretty efficiently.
As I rolled out of highschool and into college I tried and tried and tried with clenching teeth to fit in somewhere to the point I created a fake alter ego for me. Sadly enough since I had pretty much little to none social experience I was not aware people could spot a fake from miles way. I once again had my own little corner and soon after I dropped out of college to wallow to self pity.
As I was sitting at home being lonely and depressed both my triplet brothers got girlfriends and their own set of friends in their succesfull collegehood. I was feeling the pressure rise as the gaze of the entire family started to shift to me. I was sitting at home day in day out only playing videogames and being a cranky SOB till my parents got fed up and got me a job.
They got me a job at a hotel to work in its respective restaurant. This wasn't some small hotel either but a rather large one with one of the biggest restaurants in my country. I was terrified of the amount of strange people there and it turns out that shaky hands weren't the best for holding plates. I was terrified. So working tables wasn't really my gig but since management couldn't get rid of me( my parents pulled some strings to get me there in the first place ) they had to put me to use elsewhere. That's when I started barbacking.
As I mentioned before the restaurant was one of the biggest in the country so during buzy days it was impossible for even the most skilled bartender to keep up the pace behind the bar. On those days I was called in to help. I had to clean glasses, restock drinks, make sure the bartop wasn't dirty etc. As I worked more and more and felt more at easy at work and started doing better to the point I could run the bar on my own on quiet days. During those days I got to know my coworkers and made some friends out of them along the way. I was finally making rapid social progress. I finally felt like i belonged somewhere.
In that I finally found my confidence. But knowing is only half the battle. I just threw out my entire (terrrible) wardrobe and spend my paychecks on an entirely new one to fit my newfound me. After that I did a 180 on my hairstyle, grew a small beard and got hooked on all kind of grooming products, fragrances, skincare products and much much more.
Midway 2014 I also started working out and with the help of the good Doc I started online dating. Datewise I am doing pretty well by my standards and getting some attention ain't a problem either but finding someone I feel truely secure with is a totally different thing. I suppose deep down inside of me there is still this fear of being an outcast again that I never really open up to people and thus never really can feel safe with them.
For now I'll just keep going on with dating in the hopes of finding someone that can relate to my experience and move from there.
I'm happy to see you making progress.
As for fearing anxiety and all that, relax, everyone's got that clench in their stomach when they start hitting it off with new people.
That feeling, Will they like me? Will they find me funny? Am I being an asshole? Am I being creepy?
It's ok, let those feelings be there, just be yourself, the self that you like most, and it'll shine through.
As for girls, I always tremble (A LOT) when kissing a girl for the 1st time, it's my thing, the moment I play it off as something that really is my thing, they take it lightly and even find it quite charming (in the cute kind of way *shrug*).
So let fear be a part of you, it's not bad, it has it's uses.
I am in no way an expert, but it sounds like you are on the right track to me. Think of it this way, feeling truly comfortable and secure with someone… that isn't going to happen with everyone you (or anyone!) meets, or even the majority of people you meet.
Right now, you are learning to recognize those signs of someone you can really trust and bond with. Some people you meet (as friends or in a dating context), may turn out to be someone you can bond with over a shared interest or who you enjoy going to the movies with, but who aren't quite right to make it into your inner circle of the people you trust and care for the most. That is okay, because we need all sorts of different relationships in our lives.
But eventually, as you are meeting more people, you will find some who become tried and true friends who you can call on for anything. And you will hopefully meet someone who you click with and who gets you and supports you, and who you get and can't help but support… and things will fall into place. Right now, you are doing the work to make that happen, so… keep up the good work!
Reading your story makes me feel a little better about myself. I’m 24 and I think about my condition everyday. In realty I am pretty happy, I have friends and a life, but I always fear other people reaction. I had one boyfriend at 17 years old who broke my heart, since then I’ve completely lost faith in boys, and that doesn’t help my shy personality either. Sometimes I feel awkward around boys, I like them of course, but I haven’t had a crush on someone for ages. So here I am, struggling to find someone who loves me and to love back.
Scorpio, all I can say is that outside of high school most people aren't immature twat-waffles. Meaning that most people don't care if you're a virgin or not–it's not really a shameful humiliating secret and you shouldn't feel like people you care about will sneer at you for it.
Mind, there are dickheads everywhere–but they are a small portion of the population.
Put me down as yet another person who felt JUST like Hope when I was young. I somehow (still don't quite know how) got through it a few years earlier than she did but I've definitely been there done that with the whole–WHY don't I like any boys? WHAT"S WRONG WITH ME!?!?!
Well, I'm older than that, but I'm still struggling with the feeling that I just don't really like other people. I've got past the types of thinking you're not supposed to do – oneism, putting them on a pedestal, over-rating first impressions, over-analysing tiny signals. But without that, there's nothing there – the whole edifice of attraction comes crashing down for me.
I know that "What's wrong with me" feeling too, as I had only vaguely sexual feelings and no actual sexual attraction to anyone as a teenager. I think our society really underestimates how normal this is, even if its still a minority on the developmental curve. With the end result that probably a lot of people have sex before they should, which is much worse than being a slightly older virgin.
More than once I've seen things where people are asked to post the stories of their first kisses. I've been through the replies, ignoring ones that were people obviously trying (and failing) to be funny.
Some of them were genuinely sweet, romantic experiences. But that was definitely the minority. The majority were unpleasant and disappointing – many of them would technically count as sexual assault. I don't think that avoiding an experience like that should make you a failure.
Losing virginity stories can often be pretty unpleasant too, and yeah, many of those sound like they could be described by an outsider as sexual assault as well. And not all the people who sounded like victims have been women.
I agree with this line of thought that not everyone has gotten a handle on their sex drive (the bridge between generalized horniness and actually wanting to have sex with people they might reasonably meet, how their taste might differ from what society tells them is attractive, how to be ethical to others when seeking sex).
There's quite a bit of collective delusion about it.
People in successful relationships don't say "I found an ethical arrangement that gets me some of what I wanted, albeit not all." Certainly not in public. They say "my wife is the most wonderful person in the world and I'm so lucky to have met her". Even experts in psychology, who go around lecturing other people on expectation management, say that.
You can understand why they exaggerate, but it perpetuates the myth that if you're in a relationship / having sex, that automatically makes you a much better and happier person that someone who isn't. So the single people get more and more depressed and insecure, and the cycle continues…
While I would consider myself worse off then the writer of this article, it definitely hits home. I'm a male, 26 and still a virgin. Even worse, I'm a virgin to dating, kissing and romance of any kind. And no I don't have a lack of desire or fear. I know of one person in my entire life that liked me more then a friend, and she moved far away. I get really nervous talking to females and I completely lock up at the thought of approaching them when I have an attraction. It's awful. And to boot I'm basically an introvert. I work far too many hours and then I go home exhausted, relax and then do it again the next day. I don't have the time nor funds to go places all the time. I tried online dating but I'm pretty sure I contacted every single woman who was of even slight interest to me and got no response, and that was on a few sites. It physically and mentally pains me to think about how lonely I am. I'm around people all the time, between work and living with my parents, I'm rarely alone but this feeling inside just kills me. I just want someone that I can love and spoil with gifts and who will love me back for being me. The sex comes with a relationship, that part I'm not concerned with, even though the desire is really overwhelming at times. My fear of being a lonely old man is painful and frankly gives me emotions and somatics that I don't know how to respond to, except play video games and try to think as few thoughts as possible. I've liked plenty of women and every single one has shot me to the ground so of course while I have an immense desire to have a relationship I also have a fear of that pain and heartache which is more painful then any physical pain I've ever experienced in my life. In short, life sucks and I suck at life.
I've gotten shot down by hmm..maybe 75% of the men I've approached? It's hard. But don't take it personally, any time anyone is attracted to someone, it is very much a roll of the dice, and the odds aren't good that it will be compatible.
Sure some people get lucky! Some people also win the lottery! You can increase your chances by being confident and not needing anyone (that's really the key, as I say in the article I'm attracted to men who are independent, and I think most women I know are the same) It's scary to be put on a pedestal for women, so just treat us like we're buddies and see where it goes from there. The more female friends you have, who are legitimate friends, the more comfortable you will be when you want to approach a woman for a more romantic encounter, and the more comfortable she will be with it.
Yeah… I know it was meant well and I know there was an "everyone's reasons are different" disclaimer attached, but… reading all this "I forced myself to go on dates" and "I had to date a bunch of people before I finally figured out what I was looking for" is… more discouraging than not, for a person in my position. :/
I know what you mean, but honestly, everyone has to go through that. Some people don't have the anxiety or fear, and obviously that's massively helpful, but everyone keeps failing until they succeed.
And when you do succeed, which we'll just say that means a relationship and sex, there's always a chance of it failing and then you're back in the same cycle again.
Sometimes I think people don't realize that everyone is in the same cycle, whether they're having sex, kissing someone, in short relationships, whatever, because there's plenty of people who are dating loads and completely miserable because they haven't found a relationship that works.
So, not to minimize what you're saying, and I don't know if it helps or not, but for me, it was helpful realizing that I wasn't some sort of outlier, I was going through the same process everyone goes through, just at a different stage…and I know some people who have been lucky enough to have a string of relationships and they're as bitter as anyone could be because despite dating they haven't made that connection they see other people having.
The basic structure of what we all go through is pretty similar, and most all of us just want to be happy, it's just putting in the work and time and maybe it's on the third go around or the thirty third hundred. I know on the face of it that might not seem too encouraging, but I always felt that knowing I wasn't alone and that the people who were supposedly getting what I wanted weren't always happy either helped me to make peace with things and get more comfortable. YMMV.
Of two minds here. Maybe more.
I don't find other people's misery uplifting in any way. No expectation of life ever being "fair" in the first place, so a mindset of "this sucks" has almost nothing to do with how much things may or may not suck for the Joneses down the block….
On the other hand, it's easier to avoid obsessing too much about the Riemann Hypothesis knowing that mathematicians smarter than I'll ever be (plus swimming in tutors, instead of like…mostly self-taught and then by sheer luck meeting mentors in high school and college) have been fussing over it for centuries. (Other cool stuff has come out of the attempts, though!) So maybe "make peace with" is the right approach.
It's not other people's misery, just the fact that everyone is in the same boat…or maybe the same pattern.
I used the word "miserable", but that's just their reaction to the situation. I see a lot of people who view themselves as somehow unfairly missing out on life or some aspect, or just unhappy at the work they have to do to potentially get the things they want, but when for me, realizing that no one is "special", either put upon or gifted, and that even people who supposedly have the things we're told to want can also be unhappy, it's somewhat freeing, because for me it gave power back to me. The power to decide how I'd face things.
And there are people who are better off than me in any number of ways and people who are definitely worse off in any number of ways, but there's a definite sense of liberation in no feelings marked out by life.
Without getting too far into that though, I think the basic message, that everyone faces the same things in terms of what they need to do and facing unhappiness and the like, is basically true. Even the person who, on the outside, looks like they have everything going for them, may not have found that happiness that they, or me, or you want.
Everyone says it's not about the sex, but about finding that person they connect with, and when it comes down to that from everything I've seen in life we're all playing the same game.
IDK, for me, there's something very liberating in that idea. I'm certainly not saying it'll work for everyone, but maybe knowing that everyone goes through the same stuff to different degrees can help some people.
I guess I have a hard time seeing it as the same problem when it seems like the solution in one case doesn't translate at all to another.
And I also don't see much of a choice in how I face things, really. There's stuff I can do, and stuff I can't do, and I discover what's in the latter category by putting a lot of effort into it and getting nowhere. Like being on one of those excessively dramatic fictional prison islands: I'm not in a cage, but there's nowhere I can go….
I just don't see how I'm supposed to hope I'll meet someone I "connect with" at this point.
It sounds like you don't really have a lot of social connections in general that make you feel happy and not alone; maybe it would help to try and work on making some new friends, both to have more people you can care about and be cared about by in your life, and also because getting to know more people in general can also help you meet more people you might be into who might be into you.
The whole social connections, especially being friends with women, is so important, imo.
One of the big things that helped me was just being comfortable around people in general, but especially women. I see so many of my friends (and strangers) who just go into brain-lock when they try just talking to someone new. Men and women, it doesn't matter, if you don't get a chance to show someone new who you are because anxiety or fear or just lack of practice gets in the way, you'll never get over that.
Everyone's different and everyone has different obstacles, but just building that social circle is really helpful and important.
Pretty much everything Hope said; making friends, just friends, with women will help you with the confidence thing.
It's not a contest though, in terms of someone having it worse or not, and there are people who don't start until late for any number of reasons, so the good part is, don't lose hope.
The other thing is that it sounds like you work an awful lot, which can just take a toll on you, so don't beat yourself up too much, because part of dating is sometimes just having the time and energy into to take care of that side of your life.
It's been said a thousand times, but things like that fear will just cause you to naturally freeze up worse or send out subtle clues that put people off, and I know for me it was when I really stopped looking that I started realizing there were more people than I'd even have imagined who were open to various levels of relationships. They weren't always good relationships, but eventually things worked out.
"I just want someone that I can love and spoil with gifts and who will love me back for being me. "
Just be careful if you do meet someone you don't put them on a pedestal. That happens to a lot of my friends, who they maybe go through a thin patch and meet someone and they get blinders on because all they want is to make it work.
I can't tell you how many people, men and women, who I've known (and me personally) who couldn't find someone when they were looking, and then they either gave up or just decided they weren't going to try and suddenly they met people and things start happening.
The biggest thing is just learning how to be calm around women and not triggering that mental lock, because that fear and your jerk brain will shut you down every time and maybe you don't even realize the signals you're giving off? But good luck, and just know that other people have been where you are and found wonderful people.
i've been there man, even though in a different setting: until i was 18 oh my god,LOL, most girls would never look at me. i'm not saying all, because i had maybe 2 or 3 that liked me among the years, but i found none of them attractive. until i reach university i was feeling completely transparent, and i still think i was. however, i coud talk with girls, i just didn't know what to say to them in personal terms. i didn't know how to switch a casual conversation to flirting. and most of my conversations were unappealing to them, like critizing the music most people were hearing, the crappy books, and i couldn't talk about my personal interests with almost no one. they were totally different! i didn't like enrique iglesias or nicholas sparks! i always liked to write, i wrote stuff at high school, but except the school things i didn't show anything to anyone. nobody in my high school know i use to write poems. but well, not even my mom knows that. she just suspects.
when i reached university, well it was mostly a girls one, so i wanted to make friends, even with the low social skills and naiveness i had. the problem was: they could start seeing me differently, but my mind switch was still in high school. the whole time. heck, even today that setting comes to mind very very often. the first time i really kissed a girl, i was 21 and it was a friend of mine that i had no idea found me attractive. i was pretty lucky because it just came out of nowhere, and it was someone i really knew well, so i wasn't enormously nervous.
the problem was: the switch was still there. i always tought i was ugly and undeserving the whole time. i still feel that.during university, i had more affairs with girls. i spent there lots of time, i've been in the student's union, so at the end i was kinda popular there – we don't have exactly fraternities in portugal, but in a way you can say i was a fraternity veteran in your language(without most of the sexism and things like that, at least from my part). now the problem turned: most girls i was hooking up thought i was more experient than them. in kissing, at a certain point, maybe: not on the rest. i got truly afraid of having sex, i even avoided one or two girls because of that. i had an awful experience with a condom, and i told myself i couldn't pass by that shame anymore.
i believed i could lose my virginity getting drunk and high, hooking up with a girl i would have some chemistry with, and then let's go. why? because if things went wrong, i could blame i was drunk. if things were bad, i could say i was drunk : knowing i was a virgin was a truly embarrassment. i never tell no one. no friends, no sister, obviously no other family, no one. not even my girlfriend knew i was a virgin when i hooked up with her. she doesn't know today, as we speak. it's something i still feel very embarrased and ashamed. i'm 30 now, and this was one year ago.
how did i get her? well i went to live abroad, and it happened she was doing the same volunteering project as i was. we lived in the same house for one month. so we talked a lot and built chemistry with that. we were always the ones going to bed later at night. the thing is: i'm afraid that i might pass again for the whole thing, if i get single one day.
just to end: the two things i think are fundamental is being nice. smile, being polite, don't care too much about the girls you end up talking (as in they're just people, not greek goddesses, it's very hard but you have to see yourself at the same level as them), and mostly be yourself. this last one is a cliche but…if you try to hide who you are, you'll probably would find very hard to have a relationship. because it's impossible for everyone to have a relationship with someone they don't know. people that are very afraid of rejection, prefer not to show how they are, because they're afraid the other won't like it anymore. but even if you get rejected, smile. and make fun of that. people have always extra points when they can laugh at their own pain, i think. good luck man!
Maybe you should just throw away the trappings?
Find a basic type of job someplace far away with normal work hours.
Perhaps a call center or something similar. Live minimalistic and free. Sell your stuff and rent a cheap little room.
It can be very liberating to just let go and let everything you've been guarding up until now collapse on itself.
Since few people in their mid-twenties actually look for someone to settle down with, it doesn't benefit you much to be securely tied down, especially not if maintaining that means you have to work so much you can't meet people anyway.
If you get that minimalist lifestyle, you can go out several times a week and act on a whim more often.
What I'm saying is, if you don't really treasure that which you have or the obligation that comes with, start making a plan on how to get rid of it.
I understand your loneliness but I'm kind of curious about the amount of focus and pressure you're putting on that, perhaps at the deterrent of improving other areas that might also, in turn, help your dating.
Just from what you've said, it sounds like you 1) don't have a lot of hobbies, introvert-focused or otherwise (time or funds)
2) work a very emotionally exhausting job
3) don't socialize a lot, even one-on-one, with friends
4) don't have a lot of available funds in general
5) live with your parents
Now don't get me wrong, there's nothing blatantly wrong with living with folks, but I will say that I think it does make dating harder, if only because it can be hard for you and a partner to bond independently.
Just out of curiosity, have you considered taking some focus on the dating/relationship part, and instead focus on improving other areas of life? Meeting new people, just for friendships, exploring new hobbies, having a travel adventure or two, getting your own space (even if shared with a roommate), finding a job that isn't such a time-or-feelings suck?
I have to admit I'm not sure how all the aspects of your situation add up: you work full-time and live with your parents, don't have any hobbies, and yet you don't have any money (or at least not enough to start doing a hobby you'd like). Where is all the money from your job going? I know car payments and student loans are expensive, but they're not that bad if you're working and not paying rent. If you are paying rent, I recommend moving out. Even if your folks charge less rent than a studio apartment near your job, I think it's worth an extra couple hundred bucks a month for the bonus to your independence and your sanity.
Some people work a surprising number of hours for very little money. Some areas are crazy expensive (like if you make less than six figures you'll never be able to make rent).
The first is true. The second is not, though it depends what one's definition of making rent is. If we're talking about the US, even New York and San Francisco have areas that are both safe and where people making more middle class incomes can live.
The first problem is a difficult one to solve, particularly if someone has two minimum wage jobs rather than one supposedly professional one with an abusive hours/pay rate. The second problem has more solutions, including roommates, reconsidering neighborhoods, and in the long term looking at relocation. Again, these are tough problems to solve, but I think people who want relationships at least need to consider changes when there's really no room in their life to find a relationship. People in those situations who already have relationships tend to either lose them or have lots of relationship problems.
I made that comment because a lot of people seem to think it's easy. "Live at home and don't have a girlfriend? Just move out, it's easy, what's wrong with you". The previous commenter seemed like one of these people. But yes, if your life is a mess and you want a relationship you probably should focus some of your attention on your life.
No need to look for implications in my comment, I said exactly what I meant: in the story as he told it, he has income but very few expenses, yet he still can't afford a hobby. That doesn't add up. The money is going somewhere.
I suggested he move out if he's already paying rent, because a relatively small bump to your monthly rent is worth the benefit to your life. If he's not paying rent and really can't afford to move out, he has bigger problems than not being able to find a girlfriend.
It sounds like it might be time for a lifestyle makeover, or at least trying to put together a plan that would allow you to have a very different lifestyle in a few years. Introversion, working long hours, living with parents, mentioning only video games as a hobby, not mentioning friendships, and the focus on giving gifts as part of a relationship…none of those things is a huge problem by itself, but in combination, it sounds like they add up to the kind of life that isn't going to seem appealing enough to many women for them to want to sign on. (And while the usual fantasy is that having a partner will fix most deficiencies, women are generally wary of that, both because it's a great deal of work to fix someone else's life and because the result frequently ends up being that their partner doesn't change because old ways are more comfortable.)
It's kind of unclear what your financial situation is, but I think you may want to reconsider your work/life balance. If you're paying your dues in your field or struggling to get out of debt, then you may want to focus on the future and set an endpoint for this situation. If it's more that you're focused on saving for a house by Age X or something more of that nature, you might want to spend some time weighing your various priorities in life, including your desire to find a partner.
ps: and it's very hard not to take personally something you grew up taking personally. i had many problems in finding a job, because i didn't want the pain of knowing there were better people than me. not taking things personally it's one of the hardest things there is in life, in my perspective. it's not magic and pop! healthy self esteem to anyone.
It's not about learning not to take things personally. IMO, that is the wrong angle to start from.
What really screws you over is adhering to standards and normality hierarchy. Example, I find myself falling short of a standard because I didn't date successfully when people normally do.
Another guy never had that problem at all but instead dropped out of high-school to become a low earner.
Now, put us together and we both feel inferior to one another, for different reasons, because we both imagine falling short of some universal standard. This may not end well if we both have inferiority complexes. Perhaps we'll preemtively kick each other where it hurts and take it damn personal and be absolutely oblivious to how the other person feels.
If however we've both learned not to generalise life trajectories after imagined standards, we probably discover we don't really consider ourselves or the other as lower tier for any of these reasons.
And if someone would say something dumb, your gut reflex isn't to take it personal, so this is suddenly very easy.
Instead you immediately pick up on the insecurity or ignorance behind the stupidity.
That's what healthy self esteem is partially. Self mastery and realising there's not really any hierarchies.
Obviously you also stop to clump together disappointments, rejections etc. with one explanation but clearly realise how all situations are different and happen for different reasons.
Rejection from girl 1 was because I lost my cool and acted weird – Kinda embarassing
Rejection from girl 2 was becuase she realised before me that we are after totally different things – Not embarassing at all.
But what you described, is kinda the learning process i was thinking about. You dont put yourself in the same level at the beggining, you have to process that information ( from some place you found it, because that switch is not the easiest foi flip, mostly if you dont know there is another way of thinking) and go along with that, trying to rationalize more, also put yourself in other people shoes… Im kinda though that right now.
Yeah, I hear you on that. Noone in their right mind should expect others to make this flip quick and easy.
It's past unfair really.
As you say, if you don't have an outside perspective, it's hard to imagine something else.
The other problem is that these self-imposed prisons of ideas actually do have short term benefits you don't want to lose even if it cripples you in the long run. Maybe you don't feel like you have much going for you so you at least want to have that. It's a bit like smoking perhaps?
If you are married to the idea that you are lower rung, you at least get the sense that you don't have much accountability and also, disappointments can't creep up on you since you consider it par for course.
Even if things remain gray, they are predictably so and there's comfort in that aswell.
I've noted an inverse problem with those who ended up on the other end by the sorting hat (or self-sorted), the cool kids of Christmases past. Some of these guys obsessively reminisce their good old days and deteriorate while doing so, like all was right in the world back then and now reality is false. If they just believe enough, these days can come again (not really).
There's probably more reasons to take into account, but I think this is why it's nigh impossible as an outside part, even if you can sort of sense what ails somebody to make them take your word or at least become open to new ideas.
Not only must an unhappy person actually want things to change, he or she must also be prepared to have ideas they've held for a long long time to be taken away from them, and be replaced by…. no new script, no new straight answers but acceptance that situations, people, even themselves are constantly in flux.
The game genies, the looking up endings in books (to borrow from the article) all go out the window,
You're right, it's insanely hard all this.
This was a great article! Thanks Hope! I too was a late bloomer (no sexual experience until 24), and really, I'm only just now ready to run the gauntlet of dating by pushing through my insecurities and past *stuff.* Hopefully it turns out well, but I know I can't control for everything. Over time, I have gotten better at being assertive, determining people's character and reading context clues (ie, what people AREN'T saying because they are polite), and that ultimately has made me more confident and better poised to deal with it all now. I think that society often pushes people before their ready, and now, at 31, when I'm really starting to date frequently, I'm running across a lot of people who have been divorced, and I have noted that the grass is not always greener. I just managed to take the scenic route instead of the highway.
"I ended up hanging out with gay men, and women who didn’t date either (surprisingly, many of them chose gay men as their companions too)."
Why is that surprising?
I once knew a woman who described herself as a "fag hag", said "all heterosexual men are obnoxious" and she could have "real conversations" only with gay men. But she did have sex with straight men (not including me) and was confident interacting with straight men (including me).
You just said it yourself, most women you knew who hung out with gay men were actively pursuing heterosexual sex. That wasn’t the case here, hence the surprising part.
Ahhh Haa! I found it!
This is a really cool, super-nerdy checklist of relationshipy and sexy things. It's exhaustive and bound to be adorkably awkward.
I highly recommend printing it out and going over it with your partner some evening (while wearing clothes and drinking tea/beer/coffee]. http://www.discordcomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2…
A PDF even?
Please accept this from the committee.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/e7…
This is great!
This post basically sums up who I was before I started university. I was a virgin until I was 24 years old, and had had zero girlfriends before that time. I got my first kiss when I was 22, and even then it was sort of "forced" upon me. I still really don't have any experience with "dating", as the concept of dating is fairly different in Norway (where I'm from) than the image I have of dating in the US.
I've only had the one girlfriend, and now that I'm single again I realise I still don't really know anything about dating and meeting women. But I'm hanging in there, hoping things can work out if I just try to meet new people and experience new things. 🙂 And maybe I can be of help to people like me along the way.
I loved it. Great piece.
It's both affirming and depressing to see how similar this experience is for people.
Alot of us probably do ourselves great damage because of this, but it's corrolary, not causality. It's the stigma, the shadow cast from the BS idea that sex is universally bloody cool in every circumstance unless someone comes back crying.
There's the self-induced ideas that you're so weird, behind the curve, that even giving out the slightest hints would make people gag, and frankly, it's not strange to end up with that line of thinking when the general vibe is you are likely:
weird, pathetic/manchild, kind of perverted or.. if you're a woman,
broken, will cling to first-sex-guy like band aid, frigid…
…or a religious nut. (That one goes both ways).
You start to develop a defence mechanism that makes you inoffensive and asexual with other people. That's my default mode now and I can only shake it with conscious effort.
I didn't solve this gracefully. I let my longings rot until I effectively became the one who cares less, and that makes dating ALOT easier all of a sudden, but at a hefty price.
It means that you can't fully appreciate it when it finally happens. Your date or partner is flying on cloud 9 but you only get a few thrills. What do you care about being the one with most power in the relationship. You feel guilty for not being as invested and jealous on the opiate she's having, but not you.
Even to this day I can't relate to people sexually (except my girlfriend, kinda), but I don't know if I care to go backwards and untangle that knot. I fear that would only turn me into just some other idiot who NEEDS to rack up numbers.
It's better to let it be.
The point is, I agree with the article. If I could have been open about it earlier, built my own support network, I wouldn't have needed to become this messed up. If you walk around with these feelings in secret, you better damn tell somebody, not cement it by adding years to it or make your own homecooked solutions that end up causing more damage, even as it gets the job done.
I definitely also lean towards the "inoffensive and asexual" mode. I never mention dating, romantic relationships, sexual attraction… or anything related really outside of talking to my closest friends. When I am in a conversation where someone does bring it up, I dismiss it by acting like I would never be interested in being in a relationship.
So many people in my family and family friends think I am either "too smart" or "too independent" to want to be "tied down" now because it was just easier and felt way better to have them believe that.
Yeah, be careful with that.
If you are anything like me, what you project can actually become true eventually.
There's nothing wrong with turning into a borderline asexual, but the existential anxiety that you may be on the wrong track, things could be different/better doesn't go away but grows over time. Also, there's going to be more than the ordinary roadblocks to break into a sexual life with somebody. Hope you're prepared for that.
On the plus side, it's a bloody relief to be able to walk around and not be the slightest turned on by other people. You also become enormously well suited for monogamy, but that's boons you enjoy when you're already there, so to speak.
But I recommend at least to some extent to keep up physical affirmation with other people, namely your friends. You don't really need to have sex with them, but if you can establish asexual and nurturing intimacy, that really does the job. It's typically more easy when you have no motive of actually sleeping with them, and unless there's insecurity about orientation, you can kind of do that with guy friends aswell.
It's a little unorthodox to some but..
How do you establish that? Well, go in for the hug every time your friend is down or happy about something.
Verbal sexual affirmation that's not out of line "Don't wear that shirt. This shirt however really makes you look hot!".
After a while, it comes back to you, and all in all, it does wonders to keep your body image and sexuality in check.
And if there's any misunderstanding "Chill, I like you and I'm just being affectionate. Not trying to get into your pants, jeez"!
I guess another option is to take evening massage classes..
DISCLAIMER: I don't come on here because I think I have perfect advice to each and all. A large part of everything I write is me trying to make sense of myself. I just hope it's win-win and occasionally helpful for others so I don't need to feel like I'm a sponge.
Just wanted to say, I don't think anyone who comes here thinks they have perfect advice to each and all (I certainly hope not, at least!), and I think your thoughts are very interesting!
So, I'm old and I did feel very awkward about dating and sex initially, but that was so long ago I barely remember.
That "wanting to know the ending" story at the beginning was very illuminating since I have an awkward, teenage sort-of stepson (whose sex life or lack thereof is none of my business, and hell no, I don't bring that stuff up with him. My sweetie-pie constantly asks me for advice on dealing with his son, though. I suppose I'd like it if the kid saw me as a confidante some day).
Anyway, with the author, the issue seemed like not so much lack of desire as just fear – fear of lack of control, specifically (because emotions are messy in the best of circumstances, and particularly if everything's really new and you have no "been there, done that" basis of comparison, like, "Remember when you were so heartbroken about that one dude and then you forgot his name two months later?").
Anyhoo, just popping in, gotta get back to packing for my big move.
Anything in the general vicinity of an insult or an attack on guests who've been kind enough to write guest blogs for us and answer questions will not be tolerated.
Find a better way to bring the subject up and don't direct it at our guests. If you want to bring something up to our guests be respectful.
I'm going to have Zero Tolerance for anything directed at our guest bloggers.
Welcome to the Mod Squad, James! I had to hit one with the magic eraser already today.
what happened? did I miss something?
It is customary for new Student Council members to give acceptance speeches after they are nominated.
James is more like a hall monitor?
Heh, yeah, I like that better.
Does anyone know when the tryouts for marching band are?
I should probably find out where detention is. I did spend something like 70% of high school there, so just in case history repeats…..
Don't go turning James's victory lap into the setup of a porn video, now. . .
I think he would have preferred a porno to the shit-show below…
Brown chicken brown cooooowwwwww
Not a prefect? Does that mean we aren't at Hogwarts?? 🙁
If you have to ask, that means you're getting sorted into Hufflepuff.
https://i.warosu.org/data/jp/img/0108/60/13684546…
Or do I just want you to think I've been sorted into Hufflepuff?
Anyway, I've long made peace with the fact that I'd either be the World's Worst Hufflepuff, or the World's Worst Slytherin.
They're at five in the morning, just like they always are.
Don't even play like you don't know.
🙂
oh cool! congrats james!
BTW, in case you were worried, you were fine, I just didn't want that particular brushfire you responded to getting heated again.
Oh good haha, I was a little worried when I commented and it didn't show up. I commented in a blind rage before I could see that the discussion was shut down lmao
Does thinking critically lie in the general vicinity of an insult or attack?
Consider it a learning experience for dating; learn how to talk to people better.
You're free to start a discussion on it and/or find a better way to express yourself, especially to our guests.
I would love to learn. In what ways specifically could I have improved my comment? All I did was question the relevance of her story to the problems of many readers. Was that wrong in itself, or was the problem in the phrasing?
Phrasing, mostly, although I'd take issue with the content, it was the phrasing and the fact it was directed at her that earned it a delete.
Thanks. I'm surprised it was the phrasing, I honestly thought I was being very respectful about it. I'm still not sure how I came off as insulting, was it the assertion of privilege? I'm accustomed to acknowledging my straight white male privileges, it seems strange to me that people would be insulted by the idea that they have advantages. But I suppose it happens.
What I mean is, it passed the "do unto others" test. If I was making the mistake I think your guest is making, I would want to be called out in exactly the way I did. How do I avoid inadvertently insulting people when the "do unto others" test is insufficient?
Also, telling someone their personal fears are irrational is just not on. You can speak to your life experiences, buy denying someone else's life experiences, especially telling them that their fears are irrational, just isn't going to go down well, whether it gets modded or not.
In general, not denying someone else's painful life experiences is a really good side to be on.
Really? Knowing that my fears were irrational was the biggest step towards conquering them. If I knew with my rational mind that nothing actually bad would happen, I could force myself through them. This is how CBT works, you deliberately attack the automatic thought with questions like "what's the worst that could happen?".
When a fear is irrational, that doesn't mean the fear isn't real. It's not a claim about anyone's painful life experience. It's a claim about reality. Fear of flying is irrational because flying is statistically the safest mode of transport. I don't get why that's a bad thing to say.
And I don't just bring it up for no reason. It's important for my point. The treatment plan and expected prognosis for someone with an irrational fear is different than that for people with a rational fear. Someone with a phobia of peanuts probably shouldn't be giving advice to people with peanut allergies. Acknowledging this difference doesn't diminish the actual life experiences of either group in any way.
As I said in the other thread, I think you're seriously missing the fact that for women there are very real fears attached to sexual violence which potentially go along with dating.
It's also making it seem like you missed the bits where she progressed past her fears.
Applying CBT from a woman's POV and lived experiences is going to get you a far different set of potential dangers, and rational ones, than applying the same CBT technique to your, or at least the average man's fears. I use the same CBT technique you're talking about to deal with anxiety in my life. I'm perfectly familiar with it, but I think the application of some empathy and understanding would help you immensely.
I think if you try to see even that much of the POV you'll be further ahead.
I'd also maybe examine why your reaction to this essay is so strong.
That said, again, thank you for rewriting it. It at least shows you're willing to have a discussion.
If someone wants to have a discussion they can log in.
Does that include pointing out that you made out that men have the privilege of not having to worry about the threat of sexual violence?
Yup.
Which, I didn't do.
Sexual violence against men is a serious issue, and one that has for too long been reduced to a laugh track or outright ignored.
The need to make sexual assault laws clear so that they protect men as well isn't up for debate, but realistically, most men are not refraining from dates out of fear of sexual violence.
Attempting to score points by intimating I don't care about male sexual assault and rape is cheap at best.
Heterosexual men have not, on any sort of regular or sustained basis, complained of worries of sexual assault from dating unknown women.
Women, however, always have that as a potential threat in their minds when considering whether to meet with someone they don't know.
Oh this is pretty woeful.
So in the sentence "I would say you're not taking into account the immense privilege you have as a dude who doesn't have to worry about the threat of sexual violence from randos", the "privilege they have as a dude" is what exactly? Because the very next bit seems to suggest it's not having to worry about sexual violence.
You can't parse that sentence?
Because it seems pretty clear to me in relation to internet dating and why a woman would be more reticent than a man in meeting people they don't know.
This isn't exactly an earth shattering observation since women routinely report fears for their safety.
If I made a mistake it was not including the risk of stalking and physical violence that women have to weigh when considering whether or not to met someone they don't know and have never met offline.
That doesn't mean that men never have to fear the threat of sexual violence, it was contingent on the situation under discussion.
Oh I did parse that sentence and the result was me believing your comment had the intellectual merit of a piece of faecal matter.
So are you picking a fight with a mod just to see how long it takes you to get banned or is there an underlying point that you think you can make that will cause us all to see THE TRVTH!?
Oh cool, you decided to change one of the letters in the word "truth" and put it in all capitals with some questionable punctuation.
Luckily having mod powers means you can probably edit that typo and we'll pretend it never happened.
Boo boo, Johnny's a mod too.
That's what that pretty blue bar means.
Also, FUCK YOU for using male victims of rape as a cheap pointing scoring ploy.
My friends have enough shit dealing with the crap attitudes toward male sexual assault without having to deal with every whiny baby on the Internet using them as a soapbox for his misogynistic stupidity.
Yup that's me! I hate all men and have a academy where I teach other budding feminists to do the same!
Since you're apparently too stupid to understand sarcasm
STOP USING MALE VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT TO ATTACK FEMINISM.
Feminists are the only fucking group doing anything to help any and all victims of sexual assault.
Why dontcha write to your representative to complain about the cut funds? Or talk to people IRL to fundraise for these charities?
Or do anything but blame feminists for not doing E-FUCKING-NOUGH TO FIX A PROBLEM THAT YEAH SUCKS BUT ISN'T YOUR FUCKING ANTI-FEMINIST SOAPBOX!!!
That's enough from everyone.
So once again, welcome to the team, James. You kinda caught us on a heavy flow day.
Thanks!
I just found the spam folder, which made for hilarious reading when I was juggling other things.
Amazing that we get plastered with that much junk mail on a daily basis.
I can't ban you but I can really annoy the piss out of you by deleting as you post for the rest of the night. Put a fork in it, 'cause you're done here.
Men have the privilege of not having to worry about sexual violence in anywhere near the amount women do.
Men have the privilege of not having to worry about sexual violence every time they step outside their door, and if they are sexually assaulted they do not have to worry that they will be blamed for their own assault.
I can go on and on and on.
Thankfully this thought process hasn't spread to people with the ability to withhold money from charities that work on these things. Oh no wait, the UK government cut the country's biggest male rape charity's funding by 100%.
Presumably men have the privilege of not having to worry about that too though.
Cool, glad to see you can't see the difference between "Men don't have to worry about sexual violence in the same ways or amounts that women do" and "men don't have to worry about sexual violence and funding to them should be cut"
Cool
The cuts to Survivors UK is ridiculous, but unfortunately follows the path that the Tory government has taken starting with the cutting of women's domestic violence charities and others in the last four years as well as cuts across the board on other public services from the NHS and more.
It's unconscionable and I would hope that anyone able to do anything about it do what they can to stop further cuts to charities and public services as well as getting those services and charities that have been cut refunded.
Yeah, it would help if you knew how charities worked and how funding is tied up, especially when it comes to how money is allocated, especially when you're dealing with creating safe spaces for people of different genders and sexualities, which is why you have charities that service the straight community and ones that service the trans and different parts of the LGBQT spectrum.
Many times funds get (annoyingly) locked into specific uses due to how charities' bylaws are written up…but that's probably a deeper discussion than this, and by this I'm referring to your comments, really deserve.
Oh, get off it, you've made runs at the site all day as an anon and got pushed into making an account.
The discussion is over, and that goes for everyone in the thread.
For those reading along, non-profits that exist to help female victims of domestic violence and/or assault often DO work with male victims. However, they have to weigh their duty to their existing clients against their ability to help everyone. AND they typically are pathetically underfunded.
Maxi-Twat is just being an asshole, and showing that he knows fuck-all about the reality.
Reading MRA reddit rants don't count as research, Sparky.
For anyone else, I actually have some experience in this area. James is right: balancing building a safe space while offering assistance to the most people you can is a terribly tricky thing.
Someone disabuse me of this notion. I'm probably wrong, but not sure how.
It seems to me that this success story is very much not relevant to the majority of 26 year old virgins. Her virginity was essentially self imposed. She didn't date because she didn't want to. She chose to hang out with gay men instead of men who might be interested in her sexually. She went on dates and decided not to have sex with them. She had the amazing opportunity of being able to talk about her virginity without being judged an undateable loser, which no Western adult male has. She had enough interest in her sexuality that she was able to turn away "randos [who] were nice and looked fine". All she had to do was say "yes" and she would have had sex.
My suspicion is that most 26 year old virgins don't have all these opportunities to turn their noses up at. When I was a 26 year old virgin, I simply could not get a date. No one even bothered to flirt with me. From this perspective, her story reads like an epic triumph over first world problems. Even today, 10 years later and experienced I'll jump at the chance to go on a date with a rando who is EITHER nice or looks fine. Opportunities to say "yes" are few and far between, despite putting a lot of effort into finding them.
Honestly, this sounds like a "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" speech from a rich white guy who has no idea how many advantages he actually had.
Did you actually look through the comments section? There are quite a few people here – and yes, many of them are women – who identified strongly with our guest author's experiences. Does every experience of a virgin need to be directly applicable to you for it to be valuable?
Additionally, there are several male virgins who've described situations somewhere between the extremes of "I'll sleep with anyone, anyone, and I have lots of female friends and ask women out all the time"* and "I'm purposefully waiting to have sex." There are guys here who admit that they don't have any female friends and who don't seem to be putting making some very high on their priority lists. There are guys who have difficulties with their living arrangements or struggles with mental health who aren't actively trying to date. There are guys who are frightened of women and who don't know how to talk to even ones who might be interested. There are guys who have standards for their partners, even for casual sex partners. It's not at all uncommon for people to want sex on one level but lack the social and emotional tools to actually have it, and being able to comfortably interact with people who are sexually interested in you is one of those tools.
This isn't someone who's necessarily speaking for you, just someone who has a different experience. As to why her experience might be interesting, it may be worth considering that some of the more awkward and inexperienced women in the dating pool may have similar experiences.
*But, yes, there are some people here who are at the extremes. They exist, but they aren't who I'm talking about.
Very fair comment, thanks. I suppose I read an implied "If I can do it, you can too!" there where there's not necessarily one. For those that relate to this story, I'm glad.
Yeah, I didn't pick up on that reading of it at all, but I can maybe see where expecting a story like this to be aspirational in that matter might drastically change the reading.
Again, thank you for approaching your initial comment differently as well as taking the time to think about how you were reading it vs how it was meant. I appreciate your willingness to reevaluate the discussion.
A fair number of the people who post here who are virgins and believe they have no chance at finding someone who will be interested in them sexually turn out to have similar anxieties about intimacy and avoid trying to meet potential partners based on that unproven assumption, so I think it's quite relevant to the DNL audience. (ETA: not to mention all the people who are aware that those sorts of fears and anxieties are a challenge for them, several of whom have spoken up in this very comment section)
I wouldn't be surprised if many of the people for whom that is true will fail to recognize themselves in this article, because they often seem to construct reasons why avoidance is the only rational option for them (to be fair, sometimes because they are legitimately not in an emotional state where they're able to try to find partners in a healthy way). But I think it's worth giving them the chance to look, and if they do, they might find it quite helpful or heartening.
I think a better comparison may be "middle class". The majority of Americans consider themselves "middle class"; they recognize that they have some advantages, but they're also painfully aware of how much easier life is for a drastically more wealthy group. (Leave aside for a moment the difference that in this particular example there's a far greater degree of deliberate and unapologetic exploitation going on…)
The middle class of the U.S., regardless of what anyone would define as the "true" middle class, does not live on the poverty line, and maybe their complaints sound like insensitive "first world problems" to those who do. But they are still problems. Frankly, relationship woes of any kind are first world problems next to "Isis is planning to raid my village tomorrow", but I assume you'd want your own issues to be viewed as legitimate here. This is my answer to your "do unto others" question, by the way.
These women who have a hard time finding good relationships do worse than the public narrative claims they should. That is sufficient to be disappointing and sad. It's a real experience and some people will find value in corroboration and commiseration.
Maybe not us. Maybe we're not in the same class or living at the same level of society. Maybe you feel a strong impulse to crash their bourgeois parties. But…it doesn't earn you any goodwill, so there really isn't much point.
I understand and agree with your point as it applies to women who struggle to find good relationships. I don't think that even this is a very correct comparison for this particular guest author. She had a substantially more difficult time finding her first sexual partner than the average person of either gender does.
To me, this almost seems like people who are all at the poverty line, but who have difficult struggles. Some people have concrete steps they could take to get better jobs, like getting additional educational credentials or having someone spell check their resume. Some people are looking too narrowly. Some people are applying for every job they can and doing the best they can and are still having trouble. And some people are struggling to find work because depression or anxiety are making it difficult for them to go through the various steps in the job search. We're talking about someone who was having panic attacks here, and frankly, it seems like there are lots of people of both genders whose struggles with dating include internal barriers to success as well as external ones.
I generally sort of get your point about doing unto others, but I find the classification a little awkward. Are men whose mental health issues (or even just internalized and unaddressed fears) make it hard to date also middle class?
I dunno, she also said elsewhere that she only got shot down by 75% of the men she approached, and in other cases there were some making advances. Reads to me like the problem was just finding a good relationship, 'cause forcing herself into bad ones apparently was an option. I see the same narrative in the writings of other women who've talked about their relationship woes here, and yeah, that can't have been easy, but it still seems strange to me that it'd be thought of as a similar problem. Equally legitimate, sure, but I don't get why there would need to be comparison beyond that.
That's actually unclear. We know she went on some first dates. We don't know if she had the option of going on second ones. She states she wasn't ever attracted to her dates, but she didn't clarify whether any were interested enough in her to ask her out again.
There are guys here who belong to the population of "has been on a first date" who still classify themselves and are generally accepted by others as in the group of people who are struggling rather than bourgeois (a comparison brought up in your first post). I mean, I'd put myself in that middle category, but the narrative here is one that's very different from mine or even someone like Marty's. I'd be fine dropping the comparisons, but I'd ask to drop the class thing then as well, because I really do see these as problems that are different in kind rather than degree.
Sure, that's fair; the intent had mainly been to contend with the "pull yourselves up by your bootstraps" rich man analogy. Point being that it's all problems, whether or not you agree they're the same "degree" of problem.
Fair enough, that makes sense!
But until age 24 this was her mental state:
"Torn between the desire to date (“It looks like so much fun on TV!”) and undefined fear and anxiety about it. If you asked me at 24, why I hadn’t dated yet, I would have bolted out of the room. I had no idea why. "
She was in a state of panic about dating, despite wanting to do it. Add to that:
"So… I desired men. Yet, the thought of them being in the same room as me made my skin crawl. The thought of sitting across the room from a stranger no matter how attractive or likable made my stomach sink. What the hell?"
And odds are that until after 24 she was not approaching anyone because of fear and anxiety. So she is not much different than any other person who did not start working on his/her/zies dating issues until after 24. Her comment about being turned down 75% of the time is likely about her experience after trying to improve her dating life, not before.
She did, however, go on dates before 24, "chaste and unfulfilling" but still there. Seemed kind of weird to me that she'd frame it as "hadn't dated yet", t' be honest. Guys she hadn't wanted to date are shrubbery, if I understand the term's usage.
I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that anyone commenting here doesn't also consider their own current situation to be "after trying to improve [their] dating life, not before," but I disagree. And I disagree with trying to relate one person's "before" to another's "after".
Based on Dancing Fool's comment about "opportunities to turn their noses up at," I would wager you won't be very persuasive trying to argue Same Thing Both Sides on this.
I was mostly addressing her being rejected by the 75% of men she approached and you thinking she was lucky because that means 25% accepted. She only got to that sort of success by pushing her limits and asking out a lot of men and feeling uncomfortable, being open about being a virgin, and lots of therapy. Your comment and Dancing Fool seemed to be dismissing the amount of work she put in to get to that point.
Her problems, before, during, and after, are legitimate. I don't see how it's dismissive of me to have said that and left it there. Can we leave it there? I am not about to agree with you or eselle that there is no difference of degree here; to me, it seems like you are dismissing (or otherwise making assumptions about) the amount of work I've put in to get nowhere. 25% is sure as hell better odds than I've ever seen. And I don't know what else you want me to say.
Fair enough. And you are right, I have no idea how much work you put in or if you had the same degree of fear/anxiety around women as she had around men. I kind of went with the idea that you and she probably started at equivalent (but not identical) places as far as social skills go, but she is older than you now and has made more progress. But there really is no reason for me to think that, so my apologies for my error.
I mean, I obviously don't know what all she's been through, either.
I just feel like I've done all I can, and then some. I hate initiating interactions, even with people I already know pretty well. It is always awkward, at least for me. I do it anyway. Got into a small circle of friends out of almost no context in college. Did it again with a few more randos afterward to build up more social circles and improve my career prospects. To this day, I have somatic reactions to high-pressure situations of any kind, but I could never afford to let that matter. My side of "forcing myself to date" consists of having to do more of that, only for it to not matter anyway. I'd have an easier time seeing a basis for comparison if I had any choice in any part of it.
In the almost-decade between her boyfriend at seventeen and her experiences at twenty-six that made her retroactively realize that the sex she'd had before was also sex, it reads to me like there was a lot going on.
I'm not twenty-six yet, sure, but I've had one "unwanted physical advance" ever and it was way before I understood the first thing about sex so my reaction was pretty much just "…huh?".
So that is what I (and, I assume, Dancing Fool) mean by "opportunities": choices, events to learn from, and, heck, variety in the types of available interactions with other people. It is not to say that it's not possible she had to work very hard to win those opportunities. But for me, gaining access to anything close to that seems to be downright impossible. If I'm "behind" on a similar timeline, it's by a minimum of eight years.
I really want to thank you, because I think that's probably the best way I've seen you lay it out yet, and I appreciate that you shared that.
I do think part of the frustration and pushback comes from a sense that, whether intended or not, rather than speaking about your experiences some people react to the speaker's, whether it's Hope's, another commenter, etc in a way that comes off as dismissive.
I think maybe we're so used to trying to find commonality that this turns into an instinct to look for that and then pushback when we don't see it.
Using Hope's story as a jumping off point to tell your own is a lot different than trying to cast her, and/or women in general, as some sort of sexual/romantic middle class that doesn't realize the problems the lower class are going through.
And it may be that there's not much Hope's story can offer you, and that's unfortunate, but it's not a competition, and I really do think it does your experiences a disservice trying to slot them against Hope's, and perhaps trying to find communality isn't always as effective as we would like it to be when someone's experiences are off to one side of the curve.
Again, though, casting her story as "Well, she got a guy to lick her face, that's more than I got", and reading her story as having "a lot going on" in a positive way really does seem dismissive of what sounds like a very rough time emotionally, and me saying that doesn't take away from your experiences or pain.
That's like if you had a dog and I said; "Well, at least you had a dog that could lick your face, I didn't even have that", it sounds totally dismissive of what you've done through. Casting a guy she wasn't into licking her face as her somehow having one up on you and other men in your situation…that doesn't read as dismissive to you?
And all that ignores all the emotional pain and complexities of all this.
I'm not going to insult you by pretending that I have anything right at this moment that could be useful to you and your problems, but I hope maybe you can see how casting it the way you are can seem callous and dismissive, especially to people who don't know you.
And I say that trying to honestly be helpful because I do believe that you're not trying to be dismissive. I think you're really trying to square that circle for yourself, and I can see you working on it at least and I respect that.
Well, I did go to college. A lot of people I know weren't able to go to college, even though they tried really hard. I don't feel like it's dismissive of the considerable efforts I had to make to get that opportunity when they complain on the Social Media about the shitty wages they get for the shitty jobs they'll probably be stuck with for a really long time.
Roommate hates interviews way more than I do and has consequently chosen not to go to interviews that might've gotten him moving toward better jobs than the one he currently hates. It'd still be wrong to accuse him of not putting himself out there, or claim he has no "right" to complain about the boring jobs he's getting that he is ludicrously overqualified for.
But sure, this is different, and the reason is the usual: this blog post isn't aimed at people like me. "You aren't alone" is the core message of the piece, and the target audience is limited to those that's true of.
Actually, that sounds like an excellent analogy and I'm not sure why it would be wrong to chastise your roommate. If he's happy with the jobs he's overqualified for, good for him. If he's whining about them but not willing to put in the work to change, no.
I'd agree…but the guest author isn't whining, either. She's past this problem. If you had been her friend during those years, I think you would have been within your rights to set some boundaries and ask her not to talk about the subject with you anymore. This is a blog post, though.
Thing is he is willing to put in the work and he does. Sometimes. But sometimes he can't, for internal reasons, and that is also okay.
It's okay that Hope turned down some dates with dudes she might've ended up liking. She wasn't feeling up to it at the time. That doesn't make the problem she was having "self-imposed".
For me the problem is mostly external; no matter how many times I "successfully" push past the internal anxieties that make the initial encounter miserable in the first place, what happens next is not up to me. Having that externally-presented choice is always going to look like a significant advantage to me. But perhaps others would view having the sort of anxiety one can consistently "push past" in the first place to be a relative advantage.
I didn't mean to dismiss your experiences. I actually wrote my comment in an attempt not to include you, since you've been hammering me really hard on the "some, not all" lately, even recently in a case where I used "many." I thought that you and I had perhaps agreed to drop attempts at comparisons and agree to disagree. You think that first dates are a meaningful metric of success. My personal experiences have suggested that a series of bad first dates with disinterested people aren't really much different, at least not if someone is stalled at the, "What am I doing wrong?" phase. Those are different interpretations, both based on some experience, and I don't think it's productive to fight over whose are most accurate.
Ultimately, though, I find it a little frustrating that your responses are posted in reply to someone who's essentially asking why this is here, given that it doesn't apply to him. Why did we even need to bring this class type stuff into it? You acknowledged from the start and seem to still acknowledge that this isn't something you find helpful. The poster who started the conversation seems to get now that this isn't really meant for him. My comment at least made a good faith effort to specifically carve out you, since I suspected you'd respond. These lengthy discussions…well…to me it seems the same as if threads about losing one's virginity were overtaken by complaints that most 30 and 40 year olds didn't have these concerns and vague suggestions that posts aimed toward this group should focus on people in serious relationships that have trouble or dating after divorce or something of that nature.
I also think it takes the personal experiences argument a bit far to claim that when we're talking about men who aren't you (who've been on first dates themselves, or who've never asked anyone on one…and I'll say again that I was specifically trying to carve out you when I wrote my comment) and women who aren't me (who are virgins at 26), I must accept your opinion.
Yeah, I did see that very specifically targeted footnote. 😛
In that clause I wrote after the semicolon, the "you" was aimed solely at reboot. I can see how the phrasing made it appear otherwise; sorry about that.
I mean the way I actually feel has less to do with economic class and more to do with species,* but I figured that'd go over even more poorly so I went with class. The purpose in any case was to provide that same explanation of "the problem domain in the article is a separate thing from what you're talking about", but I feel like that point kind of got lost when you decided it was really important to say there's no difference in degree.
*Y'know how it's totally acceptable to call a pet dog "cute" and pet it and feed it in front of your Significant Other, and nobody mistakes that for flirting or gets jealous about the interaction because it's a fairly reasonable assumption that you'd never