Questions to the guys of 6gc Options

[BlackCelicaGT94]

I found this article on msn that asked these questions to guys. I just would like to see your guys answers


Thanks in advance


Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?

This post has been edited by BlackCelicaGT94: Jul 18, 2007 - 3:51 PM

[playr158]

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?
Ummm too easy, and probably not long term material

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with
her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?
no <---but this question confuses me?

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?
yes

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?
Meh no sexy time before the marriage time

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?
eh

[Supersprynt]

Doesn't impact me at all. Do it when it feels right.

Basically this is asking about a one-night stand. Yes theres potential, but unlikelihood that it will be very serious.

I don't think it matters.

There is no "appropriate" time. Its whenever the two individuals feel right about it.

This is assuming falling in bed early is a bad thing. It takes 2 to tango.

Seems to me that this whole questionnaire is biased. Both men and women will sleep with each other early, but the girl gets the bad rap. Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

[JonCars17]

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?
Too easy, I prefer them to wait a bit actually.

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?
Yeah I guess, but they tend to not work.

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?
Yeah

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?
A month is good for me or sometime around that.

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?
Sex is Sex, lol

[cHinaman727]

Doesn't impact me at all. Do it when it feels right.

Basically this is asking about a one-night stand. Yes theres potential, but unlikelihood that it will be very serious.

I don't think it matters.

There is no "appropriate" time. Its whenever the two individuals feel right about it.

This is assuming falling in bed early is a bad thing. It takes 2 to tango.

Seems to me that this whole questionnaire is biased. Both men and women will sleep with each other early, but the girl gets the bad rap. Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

You are totally right. I agree 100% with this.

[tin_foil]

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

Wow....that's an absolutely absurd statement. Perhaps your forgetting that monogamy is fairly common among animals, and even some insects. For someone to say this suggests not only lack of any measure of personal morality, but a lifestyle significantly lower in conduct than that of most animals.

...thus said, I think you could guess my stance on the topic question. I'm with playr on this one.

[IGloo]

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?
Thanks?

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?
There definately are, but still, it all depends on one´s opening up for a new challenges...which most relationships in the beginning in fact are...I´d give a chance for that! Especially if the sex indeed was great!

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?
No! I never liked fun and games when it comes to human emotions...even if they are as basic as those of a sexual nature, and if the fact of the matter is simply trust, I find that very easy to gain, since I never lie about anything...and it shows (those female extra senses really do come in handy every once in a while )

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?
It really doesn´t matter to me! The longest time for me not getting any in a relationship was eight MONTHS (when I was 19), and the shortest was about two or three days before the relationship actually started!

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?
Of course! Cook breakfast in the morning! (I´m reall not a sexist pig all the time... )

[lagos]

there is a flaw to these questions. it implies that the problem will only be with how the guy sees the situation.

in my experience, if a girl is willing to sleep with you on the first date, then thats just what kind of girl she is, and she wasnt looking to develop anymore more then that. same can be said for the guy too... so the relationship will probably not last.

btw, we can all tell whats on your mind. these kinds of "my friend has this problem..." questions always show through.lol

[BlackCelicaGT94]

lol i have a boyfriend of 9 months and everything is fine in that department so these questions are just kinda just a curiousity thing not cuz im thinking of getting down early with anyone

[celicaST]

this poll makes it though the woman is at fault if a couple has sex early. and these questions are backward from most of the girls ive been with. im usually the one that makes them wait initially. ive comfortable having sex early on in the relationship, depends on the girl, but i usually wait a month or two if i have serious interest in the girl.

This post has been edited by celicaST: Jul 19, 2007 - 1:34 AM

[creis]

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?
Depends, its really a personal choice some girls are very open and others are closed. I think its too fast but it does not mean it cant be a long term thing. It seems like the faster things start the faster things stop.

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?
Great sex is not enough to make a relationship last, you have to really connect in most all other sicrumstances[bad spelling] for it to last, however great sex is needed for it to last. to anser more directly, personaly I would always be open to a serious relationship and it would take a lot to get me in bed that fast so I would deff have to see potential.

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?
Yes, but I dont think its ok to "Make you wait" it should come when both people are ready for it not when one decides the other can have it. best if you let nature decide where your both comfortable.

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?
I waited 3 months with my current g/f, either of us wanted to rush anything so we just took it slow and let things happen as we wanted. worked out great I think, but its very much a person to person thing, I say 1 month maybe little more or less depending on how comfortable you are

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?
Most important thing in a relation ship is to be yourself, no sence hidding who you really are to get the other one to like you, because there gana find out eventualy why waste time if its not going to work. Best I think would be to not make it a regular thing and make it known you want something serious. give it effort and dont play games.

This post has been edited by creis: Jul 19, 2007 - 2:16 AM

[jgreening]

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

So what? Are you advocating avoiding marriage and monogamy because they are unnatural? I am sure you will agree that having offspring is "natural". If so, can I assume that you advocate having bastard children? And, when the parents get tired of one another, then it would be "unnatural" to stay together, right? Probably a great move for the "natural" desires of the parents - or at least one of them. I am not so sure about the kids - but screw them, right?

The position is symptomatic of a real problem in our culture. Many people are too quick to do whatever "feels" good at the time regardless of their prior committments, the long term repercusions, or the effect that their decision has on others.

[malpaso]

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?

No.. no impact. Even woman is just human

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?

Sorry... to complicated English

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?

No

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?

Depends on many circumstances...

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?

No affect onto period of relationship at all...

[Supersprynt]

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

Wow....that's an absolutely absurd statement. Perhaps your forgetting that monogamy is fairly common among animals, and even some insects. For someone to say this suggests not only lack of any measure of personal morality, but a lifestyle significantly lower in conduct than that of most animals.

...thus said, I think you could guess my stance on the topic question. I'm with playr on this one.

Your right. Monogamy is prevalent in many animals. It is less prevalent than polygamy. Some monogamy is also due to environmental restraints, where several partners are either difficult to obtain or unneeded. The reason for multiple partners is to spread their genes across as many lines of ancestry as possible, for the good of the species. If many animals resorted to only one partner, their species would diminish. Luckily for humans, it feels really good, so this is not an issue.

As for your calling me immoral and lifestyle "significantly lower in conduct." Thats outright absurd, and shows how little you actually know. My moral standards have zero to do with what nature has determined. My lifestyle, has zero to do with what nature has determined. This is one BIG problem among people who have their heads up their asses regarding morality & natures. As if someone can't be moral and atheist. If you believe this, then theres absolutely no talking to you.

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

So what? Are you advocating avoiding marriage and monogamy because they are unnatural? I am sure you will agree that having offspring is "natural". If so, can I assume that you advocate having bastard children? And, when the parents get tired of one another, then it would be "unnatural" to stay together, right? Probably a great move for the "natural" desires of the parents - or at least one of them. I am not so sure about the kids - but screw them, right?

The position is symptomatic of a real problem in our culture. Many people are too quick to do whatever "feels" good at the time regardless of their prior committments, the long term repercusions, or the effect that their decision has on others.

I think your way off base. Your wrongly aligning people who care not of anything but themselves, to people who hold a position about the true natural instinct of human beings. This is common among people who think you can't be moral w/o christianity and a god, and its absurd, purely absurd.

You basically took something I said, and made up your own conclusions about things that have nothing to do with the argument at hand. You made a helluva lot of assumptions based on very little fact.

You first off, assume I'm anti-marriage, anti-monogamy. I'm not, btw. Cute little fact for you to chew on. I said they were unnatural for us, not wrong. I've been in long-term relationships, and will get married someday. I assume you didn't know that.

Secondly, you assume I advocate bastard children? How ridiculous could you possibly get. You go off on saying how you assume I hold a stance on children which says "screw them." I'm so glad you've come to this logical fact based conclusion.

So basically, you traveled this path that started out by my talking about humans in their ID-only, society-less form, to TELLING ME WHAT I BELIEVE about children and my position of marriage, monogamy & choice-making based on how I feel at any given time.

Way to make up nonsense.

[Kadett]

Damnz, a lot of words here for something as basic/primitive/instinct as the copulation of a species

I don't care about the past or future (not in a long term anyway) of any girl. The time is now not tomorrow, for all you know you could be dead tomorrow. Live every day in joy and take things as they come.

Thats my vision on life.

[Supersprynt]

Hear-ye.

[cHinaman727]

These questions were sorta biased in the first place. Topic should be closed to avoid further arguments IMO.

[Consynx]

too much reading, but if i get it within the first couple dates, means that someone else could just as easily swoon on a bad week or something.

Not For Me
aka, Not Toyota Reliable. . .

This post has been edited by Consynx: Jul 20, 2007 - 4:34 PM

[jgreening]

You first off, assume I'm anti-marriage, anti-monogamy. I'm not, btw. I said they were unnatural for us, not wrong. I've been in long-term relationships, and will get married someday.

I wouldn't have guessed when you proclaimed that marriage and monogamy were unnatural that your true feelings were that you actually planned on living by these concepts some day. It makes me wonder what the point of the statement was if not to be critical of the concepts??

Everything else in my post is a logical extension of the implication that persons should not practice monogamy or get married. If you didn't intend that message, you didn't communicate it well at all.

[SlowCelica94]

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?
Yup. If she's that easy, she's usual no relationship material. Besides, I love the chase.

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?
Brunch? People actually take their one-night-stands to breakfast? Hell, I thought I was being a gentlemen when I offer busfare.

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?
Yup. Once their's an emotional connection, sex is far better

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?
2 weeks. Not kidding, but this is considering about 4-6 dates in that amount of time. That's when you really hit off tho and treat it like a potential relationship

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?
[/quote]
Yeah. If she's has an attractive personality, we'll go out with you again. But we'll (guys) be expecting sex. Don't give it up, but you better be sure to make an impression on him to wanna chase you all over again

[3WayStunna]

Sounds fun, so here is a long answer

I found this article on msn that asked these questions to guys. I just would like to see your guys answers


Thanks in advance


Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?

#1) I still see her as long term material, but it depends on what she looks for in life, and if her head is on straight....And as far as how i see her from then on.....just depends on how things go from that point on...

#2) Same as the first answer

#3) Since i am not married yet, and therefore not in a 'long term' realtionship, i would have to say, it dosent matter...its not as much what she wants later on, as what i want....i mean, besides my veiws on long term are marriage...dating to any extent dosent mean squat if the ring isnt on.....

#4) It dosent matter....if two ppl feel comfortable enough to do it, then they should...dosent mean he or she is a slut, just means they know what they want...

#5) lol, she can just be herself.

lol, these questions had to of been thought from a woman's mind..a guy cant think this hard...but anywho, i believe that a woman who knows what she wants, is long term material. Any woman that can be steady, has good values and all of the stuff YOU or WE expect from a partner..lol, its silly to think that if a person gives it up on the first nite, they are automatically out of the bucket...if that is how you think then good for you, but hey, it eventually comes down to what we want...the end.

**** so many ppl have had sex with a person on the first nite, and ended spending there live together...and then there are even more (i think), that have done the same and and nver looked at each other again

And to keep it goin, there are those who wait months and years to have sex with their b/f or g/f, only to have them cheat or leave them..and then those who have the opposite happen..lol

Well i have my standards and they are pretty loose...is it good..eh, depends on how you look at it..will i date a hoodrat , nooooo, cause usally they arent bout shiz...would i fuk her if she appeared to be as such, noooo, cause prolly everyone on the block has, and she might have the crabbies, lol

then again im a young fool who dosent know jack, soooooo

[6gcSTVT]

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?
No, if a girl is so easy to hop into bed with me, How many times has she just hopped into some other guys bed?

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends? My last relationship was like this, sex off the bat and up to 4 times a day and we only lasted 6 months, sex was great enough to keep us together that long but then I was finally able to look through it.

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?
My gf of 2 years now made me wait the longest of any girl I've been with and while waiting, I got to know her and what kind of a head she has on her shoulders. Learning from her, if I'm single again and horny, i won't be hoping into bed with any girl till i find out whats going on inside that pretty frame.

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?
Depends on how much you see each other, such as seeing each other 3-7 times a week for a month or maybe 2 is a pretty good time compared to the average I think. But if you see each other 1-2 times a week, how can you really know the person your having sex with? Thats how single parents are made.

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?
She has to be a girl that doesn't fall into the other thread that talks about what we don't like in a girl.

[Supersprynt]

You first off, assume I'm anti-marriage, anti-monogamy. I'm not, btw. I said they were unnatural for us, not wrong. I've been in long-term relationships, and will get married someday.

I wouldn't have guessed when you proclaimed that marriage and monogamy were unnatural that your true feelings were that you actually planned on living by these concepts some day. It makes me wonder what the point of the statement was if not to be critical of the concepts??

Everything else in my post is a logical extension of the implication that persons should not practice monogamy or get married. If you didn't intend that message, you didn't communicate it well at all.

There's very little logical about the argument you've tried to make. I actually am slightly bewildered at what your trying to say. From what I gather, you believe it's wrong for someone to practice & support something socially created because it's not where we started from. This same can apply to almost anything in this modern world. Laws, morality, cars, technology. All created by man. Should I not use this things because I say right now, that we invented them? Of course not, thats ridiculous wouldn't you agree. Same holds true with my point.

I said they were unnatural. That's it. I didn't say don't do it, never said it was wrong. So I must conclude that you took personal offense to the statement. If that is true, it was not intended.

[kerosene]

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?
A: I wouldn't sleep with one early on...especially since they first have to gain my trust, and that in itself is hard

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?
A: Nope, no excuses

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?
A: Not necessarily, it all depends on the girl, she might be one of those "good girls" and not want to do anything afraid daddy will catch them...

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?
A: About 3 months...at least

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?
A: Would never allow it to get anywhere, would stop it, and have stopped it...if i do not trust the person, there is no way i can be with them....(kinda sound like a chick)


Additionally i was reading and there was talk about monogamy... even though it is about being married to multiple men/women ...Well, my opinion on this is not to cheat on anyone under any circumstances, this opinion came to me because, after 3 years, i was cheated on... even though I did move, after 2 1/2 years, it wasn't like i expected it, and when i did find out, it hurt like hell...I don't know how it's possible for a guy or girl to cheat on their partner... so yea, thats also now why it's so hard to gain my trust... well, one of 100 different ones....

This post has been edited by kerosene: Jul 22, 2007 - 10:57 PM

[yarik83]

I have a question to those who posted above. I understand that Danny is a romantic.. he was always like that but what makes others deviate from a horny men syndrome? are you all under 20 and in school or are you older than that? what do you consider a relationship and how far are you willing to take it? And lastly I have a question. for all those who posted about waiting for intimacy.. ... why.. just why?

Edit:
Would your answers be different if you were not a virgin or if you are not do you wish you still were?
Do your religious beliefs and or upbringings influence your answers on raised topics?

This post has been edited by yarik83: Jul 23, 2007 - 10:54 PM

[tin_foil]

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

un·nat·u·ral
adj.
1. In violation of a natural law.
2. Inconsistent with an individual pattern or custom.
3. Deviating from a behavioral or social norm: an unnatural attachment.
4. Contrived or constrained; artificial: smiled in an unnatural manner.
5. In violation of natural feelings; inhuman.

Therefore, by definition, marriage & and monogamy are not unnatural for humans.

I don't really understand what point you were trying to make with all your other tangents about atheism, Christianity, morality, not living in accordance to your philosophical beliefs, others illogical and absurd statements, and making use of all things created by man, etc. If your objective is to spark disputes among the other members holding different beliefs than you, than good job. But if you're just trying to have logical discussion, may I suggest you try and be a little more clear, and a little less verbose.

[yarik83]

It is important to mention that individual beliefs are culturally defined. For example native tribes in amazon walk around naked with little covering, while most of what we call civilized world considers nudity inappropriate. In many muslim countries it is ok to have more than 1 wife, while in most christian based its absurd.

I think in certain ways cultiral trends that we abide by hurt us more than we think. A good example would be a huuuuuuge increase in divorce rates in past 60 years. Huuuuuge decrease in population for some areas because of the trends. For example female rights have been defended for a good half of century now and what we have arrived at would be dramatic decrease in child bearing for female population on a global scale. Countries like France and Egypt are seriously scratching their heads as their naturla population increase is almost 0 and in certain cases in negative zone.. meaning more native people die than children are born. That phenomenon was triggered by house wife generation phenomena migrating into need to get schooled and work on career before everything else. We do not feel it in usa but in certain places of the world only positive increase in human population comes from immigrants, thus dilluting indeginous gene pool. Divorce rate is also attributed to trends we set. It is ok to divorce left and right because we set those trends right after baby boomer generation stopped popping babies out.. about 1970's era. Men cheat on their wives/GF more than I think they were back in the day. Before it was almost a guaranteed success of ... now ladies are more prone to saying go away because of current trends. So men wait a month.. 6 months, a year and then they go and find themselves a lady on the side. (Not all of course)

Sometimes I see couples who are together for 40-60 years and limp their humpy goiter ways into places.. and it makes me wonder if couples of modern era will ever live up to being married for over 25 years without divorce.

This post has been edited by yarik83: Jul 23, 2007 - 11:27 PM

[Consynx]

[IGloo]

[Supersprynt]

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

un·nat·u·ral
adj.
1. In violation of a natural law.
2. Inconsistent with an individual pattern or custom.
3. Deviating from a behavioral or social norm: an unnatural attachment.
4. Contrived or constrained; artificial: smiled in an unnatural manner.
5. In violation of natural feelings; inhuman.

Therefore, by definition, marriage & and monogamy are not unnatural for humans.

I don't really understand what point you were trying to make with all your other tangents about atheism, Christianity, morality, not living in accordance to your philosophical beliefs, others illogical and absurd statements, and making use of all things created by man, etc. If your objective is to spark disputes among the other members holding different beliefs than you, than good job. But if you're just trying to have logical discussion, may I suggest you try and be a little more clear, and a little less verbose.

I very much wanted this to die. You see there are 5 definitions to choose from, you so nicely underlined the ones that applied to your argument and decided to ignore the others, such as artificial. I used the term unnatural to apply, again I say this, to humans before social norms & constraints. If this word is unsuitable, your welcome to find another word, I do not know of such. Again; something is taken out of context, and applied to modern-day social expectations, and thats incorrect.

The point I was trying to make with the tangents that someone else started, was that many of such arguments are due to religious background. IE when someone told me I had low morality. So I wasn't taking the tangents, just responding to them. I don't intend to start these types of discussion, but I'm not afraid of them. I think it's good to argue as long as its done properly.

If you think these are verbose you should see what I type before cutting it down.

[jgreening]

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

So what? Are you advocating avoiding marriage and monogamy because they are unnatural? I am sure you will agree that having offspring is "natural". If so, can I assume that you advocate having bastard children? And, when the parents get tired of one another, then it would be "unnatural" to stay together, right? Probably a great move for the "natural" desires of the parents - or at least one of them. I am not so sure about the kids - but screw them, right?

The position is symptomatic of a real problem in our culture. Many people are too quick to do whatever "feels" good at the time regardless of their prior committments, the long term repercusions, or the effect that their decision has on others.

I think your way off base. Your wrongly aligning people who care not of anything but themselves, to people who hold a position about the true natural instinct of human beings. This is common among people who think you can't be moral w/o christianity and a god, and its absurd, purely absurd.

You basically took something I said, and made up your own conclusions about things that have nothing to do with the argument at hand. You made a helluva lot of assumptions based on very little fact.

You first off, assume I'm anti-marriage, anti-monogamy. I'm not, btw. Cute little fact for you to chew on. I said they were unnatural for us, not wrong. I've been in long-term relationships, and will get married someday. I assume you didn't know that.

Secondly, you assume I advocate bastard children? How ridiculous could you possibly get. You go off on saying how you assume I hold a stance on children which says "screw them." I'm so glad you've come to this logical fact based conclusion.

So basically, you traveled this path that started out by my talking about humans in their ID-only, society-less form, to TELLING ME WHAT I BELIEVE about children and my position of marriage, monogamy & choice-making based on how I feel at any given time.

Way to make up nonsense.

Who brought up Christianity and religion? You did.

I never said I assume you advocate bastard children. It was a question. I also, never said that you hold a stance on children which says "screw them". Again, it was a question. Likewise, I never told you what you believe about children, marriage and monogomy. Its difficult to have an intelligent exchange with someone who resorts to personal attacks rather than focus on the issue at hand.

You said marriage and monogamy are unnatural. I asked "so what?" Like, what is your point? The reason I asked this is because it appeared to me (and a number of other readers too, I might add) that you were being critical of marriage and monogamy. I wanted to understand the logical extension of your argument. If you were trying to argue that marriage or monogamy should not be practiced, then the questions regarding child rearing were right on point.

Apparently you weren't trying to make that argument because then, somewhat surprisingly, you took the hypocritical stance that you plan to get married someday (and presumably practice monogamy although you didn't commit to that - no surprise) despite the fact that you think they are unnatural. What?

In any event, you never explained what point you were trying to make by proclaiming that marriage and monogamy were unnatural. If you can keep your commentary to answering this question, I would be interested in your considered response.

[Supersprynt]

You said "can I assume..." and then argued the point that you already did. So even though you asked the question, you really didn't wait for an answer; you basically answered it yourself. I felt this was not fair. Still you argue that because I made a statement that marriage & monogamy are unnatural that I can't and won't participate in it? I already said this and for the sake of being repetitive, because I make a general statement about the origins of marriage does not reflect my personal opinion on the subject. Like earlier, I can say that fruit juice is not a natural substance but that does NOT mean I don't thoroughly enjoy drinking it.

You have no grounds regarding personal attacks. I do not make them unless I myself have already been attacked:

Wow....that's an absolutely absurd statement. Perhaps your forgetting that monogamy is fairly common among animals, and even some insects. For someone to say this suggests not only lack of any measure of personal morality, but a lifestyle significantly lower in conduct than that of most animals.

Thats really not a fair or true statement. All of a sudden I have lack of morality and lifestyle lower in conduct that most animals. First off, MOST animals aren't monogamous (roughly 4% of mammals). Secondly, I have very high moral standards and it has no bearing on my stance on issues as these. It was a completely unfounded statement and I took offense to it.

I would only be hypocritical if I were to say I won't every participate in marriage and monogamy. I was never trying to make the point that either of those are wrong. Again, and again I've stated this. I'm starting to think theres a loss of translation. So to be absolutely clear; I am not against marriage nor monogamy. I stated that both of those things, in regards to primalistic human beings, are unnatural. As in the beginning of humanity, not now. If your arguing this is not the case that monogamy and marriage were not a product of society and evolution then I can better understand your position. Which honestly, I'm not exactly sure of, considering I'm not anti-marriage/monogamy?

Also: I feel as though this is isn't well placed on a forum. If you, and anyone else would like to continue talking off board, I'd support that. I can provide an email.

This post has been edited by Supersprynt: Jul 24, 2007 - 11:29 AM

[jgreening]

I understand that you are now taking the position that when you state that something is "unnatural" it is more of a statement of condition as oppose to judgement. For instance, if someone were to say "Cindy is an idiot" he wouldn't necessarily being making a value judgement about whether being an idiot is a good or a bad thing. On the contrary, he would just be describing the fact that Cindy has an intellectual capacity similar to that of people who are definitionally idiots.

The problem with this position is that words like "unnatural" and "idiot" strongly imply a derogatory context from a point of view of disapproval. People typically use these words when they are criticizing. Here is a sentence: "Tom said, 'Cindy is an idiot'." Was Tom criticizing Cindy? Most people would say yes despite the fact that detached, logical and overly anal Tom might protest up and down that he was only trying to describe her mental condition accurately. I wasn't trying to say I don't like her!

I guess you could say that your position is unnatural.......but that doesn't mean I don't wholehartedly endorse it.

[ILuvMyCelica95]

When is anyone going to understand when it comes to these arguments if you give Erik and inch he takes a mile.

oh and greening, you are my hero.

[neKronos]

These question are kinda stupid especially the last one, because it doesn't take into account what one or other wants in their life eg, One night stand, someone for a booty call, a real relationship, &c. Basically people need to communicate about what they want and are looking for, be it through physical and verbal communique. It also helps if the two aren't idiots and are mature enough to understand the concepts of sex. If they can't then I can not fathom how they would be able to have a successful long term relationship.
And these so called problems stem from our ever changing society in which sexual activity is becoming more commonplace, and socially accepted, due to the mainstream media. I also like the double standard for sex in itself where if a girl enjoys sex and has it often she gets labeled you know those fun derogatory words like whore and slut. But if a guy does it gets praised, but the term man whore has finally come around to describe that. As a society we are constantly evolving and lets not forget religion no longer has its death grip on the world like it used to.

But hell after writing all that I might as well answer them

Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?
No impact, I did the same thing didn't I?

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?
To have had sex in the first place we would've had to hit it off prior to the sexin.

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?
No not especially.

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?
Whenever the two decide to consent to it. From the first glance and however long it takes to get the rubber on, all the way to never.

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?
Does she want a longer relationship? Use them words you learned.

Also lets have you replace all the instances in the questions where woman is used, and put man in and lets see your answers.

And remember children Life is Sexually Transmitted.