Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

How to hook up in real life

Page 2 of 5 [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Alliekit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Mar 2016
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,182
Location: England

18 Jan 2017, 11:21 am

nurseangela wrote:
Alliekit wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
What do they call male sluts, btw?


Studs.


That's too funny and sounds to be the truth. :mrgreen:


Promiscuous males tend to be seen in high regards... at least among other males. I've never heard anyone use "stud" in a negative manner.


I think I did point this out in another thread about how many sex partners people have had. It is a double standard and you just proved my point with your statement. However, I also don't have much respect for men who have had a lot of sex partners. I don't know if all women think that way or if they think the guy is more experienced. The more partners one has, I feel they take relationships too lightly for one and then I wonder if they are a walking STD for another. I just can't comprehend how one gets to the place of taking sex (the most intimate thing you can do with someone else) so lightly. Maybe it has to do with men being able to have sex without any feelings as I have found that men are more comfortable with polyamory than most women.


Casual sex and sex with someone you love are and feel completely different. I slept with a couple of people before meeting my fiance and it was more just a bit of fun. (Although I strongly believe in safe sex including using condoms and never having oral).

With my fiance it's more romantic and there is a deeper connection. That and it jsut feels so much better.

Basically I do agree sex in a relationship is ten times better but comparing those who have participated in casual sex to prostitutes could be seen as insulting.


Can't help how I see things - it will just have to be insulting then. It's my opinion, no apologies.


Fair enough but that means you can't be offended if people view you as a prude. (Not my personal opinion)



Sabreclaw
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Dec 2015
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,971

18 Jan 2017, 11:22 am

nurseangela wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Alliekit wrote:
Datalis wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Datalis wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Howdy. I'm a little bit naive here. What is hooking up?

No strings attached.


So, does this mean no date? You just say "hey, let's meet at this place and do the nasty and leave"? No money either? I'm confused. What is the difference between hooking up and going to a prostitute?

Hooking up is cheaper. Hooking up is more of a friend's with benefits ordeal. No, you have to tell them in a more subtle way. Sluts don't like to think of themselves as sluts, even though they are. I don't do this by the way, but I've witnessed my friend do this and I was young once and had the same mindset as OP.


Hooking up does not make someone a slut.

And nurseangela I think it's more of a mutual understanding that you both want to satisfy your lust but don't want to have a full on exclusive relationship.


I don't see it any different than prostitution. If you are going to spend quality time in bed with someone, might as well go have dinner first, don't you think?

This is all very depressing and makes me want to become a hermit forever. For myself, I am disappointed in women. Most women, from what I have read, psychologically will not feel good about themselves if they do this kind of activity. I understand that men can sleep with several women without it bothering them emotionally (how this is done I don't get and will never get), women are more emotional when it comes to relationships. How women have accepted this kind of "dating" is beyond me.


It's not the same. Hook-ups are based on mutual attraction, whereas prostitution is one person paying for sex. There's a huge difference.


I think it is nonsense. Just a way for people to get sex without having to deal with a relationship. No real difference in my mind looking at it from the outside.

I wish I didn't even know about all of this crap. Knowing it just makes me want to be a hermit even more. Any guy (IMO) who thinks this is ok, I wouldn't want to touch with a 10 ft pole - or longer. It just tells me they have no values. I don't care if you think I'm old fashioned or what, this kind of getting together I find revolting.


However shallow hook-ups may be, they still serve as a sign of desirability. Prostitutes only want your money, not your body. Surely you can see the difference between somebody wanting your body, and somebody wanting your money.

Or to put it this way: winners get sex, losers pay for sex.



nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,017
Location: Kansas

18 Jan 2017, 11:26 am

I'm having a problem with understanding how a person can have a lifestyle of "casual sex" with several people and have no strings attached and then go on to be "satisfied" in a relationship and having sex with just one person. Those are two totally different lifestyles. That would be like this: You all know how I feel about relationships (very serious and traditional). Can you picture me all of a sudden feeling good about myself if I started having several partners and one night stands? It would go totally against my belief system. That is why I don't believe that a person can be truly happy with just one person if they are used to having a lot of partners.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


Alliekit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Mar 2016
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,182
Location: England

18 Jan 2017, 11:27 am

nurseangela wrote:
See, the problem is a person could be with 100 people as a one night stand and just because they call it "casual sex" it is then considered to be ok to society, when in actuality, the only difference is that money didn't change hands.


I don't think 100 is seen as acceptable by societal standards that's a bit of a high number (anything above 10 for women is seen as extreme)

The difference is motivation and choice. Women who are prositutes are doing it as a desperate way to make money. They let themselves be bought and hand over control. (Use their bodies as a tool if you will)

Hook ups are simply twould consenting adults equalling working together to reach an end goal. There is no unequal of someone buying someone or one having control of the situation.

Also prostitutes aren't picky about who they have sex with



nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,017
Location: Kansas

18 Jan 2017, 11:31 am

Alliekit wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Alliekit wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
What do they call male sluts, btw?


Studs.


That's too funny and sounds to be the truth. :mrgreen:


Promiscuous males tend to be seen in high regards... at least among other males. I've never heard anyone use "stud" in a negative manner.


I think I did point this out in another thread about how many sex partners people have had. It is a double standard and you just proved my point with your statement. However, I also don't have much respect for men who have had a lot of sex partners. I don't know if all women think that way or if they think the guy is more experienced. The more partners one has, I feel they take relationships too lightly for one and then I wonder if they are a walking STD for another. I just can't comprehend how one gets to the place of taking sex (the most intimate thing you can do with someone else) so lightly. Maybe it has to do with men being able to have sex without any feelings as I have found that men are more comfortable with polyamory than most women.


Casual sex and sex with someone you love are and feel completely different. I slept with a couple of people before meeting my fiance and it was more just a bit of fun. (Although I strongly believe in safe sex including using condoms and never having oral).

With my fiance it's more romantic and there is a deeper connection. That and it jsut feels so much better.

Basically I do agree sex in a relationship is ten times better but comparing those who have participated in casual sex to prostitutes could be seen as insulting.


Can't help how I see things - it will just have to be insulting then. It's my opinion, no apologies.


Fair enough but that means you can't be offended if people view you as a prude. (Not my personal opinion)


That actually is fine with me because I am comfortable enough in my own beliefs not to be affected by that. I know what I can and can't live with not only in myself, but in others. I think society has come up with these names of "slut" and now "prude" to make others feel guilty for believing in how they want to believe and also to make other feel guilty about their lifestyles. I believe that people can live how they want to live, however, if they are to be a part of my life I want to know their history (and they shouldn't be hiding anything if they truly feel they are doing nothing wrong) so that I can make an educated decision of whether I want them in my life. I think that is fair.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,017
Location: Kansas

18 Jan 2017, 11:36 am

Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Alliekit wrote:
Datalis wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Datalis wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Howdy. I'm a little bit naive here. What is hooking up?

No strings attached.


So, does this mean no date? You just say "hey, let's meet at this place and do the nasty and leave"? No money either? I'm confused. What is the difference between hooking up and going to a prostitute?

Hooking up is cheaper. Hooking up is more of a friend's with benefits ordeal. No, you have to tell them in a more subtle way. Sluts don't like to think of themselves as sluts, even though they are. I don't do this by the way, but I've witnessed my friend do this and I was young once and had the same mindset as OP.


Hooking up does not make someone a slut.

And nurseangela I think it's more of a mutual understanding that you both want to satisfy your lust but don't want to have a full on exclusive relationship.


I don't see it any different than prostitution. If you are going to spend quality time in bed with someone, might as well go have dinner first, don't you think?

This is all very depressing and makes me want to become a hermit forever. For myself, I am disappointed in women. Most women, from what I have read, psychologically will not feel good about themselves if they do this kind of activity. I understand that men can sleep with several women without it bothering them emotionally (how this is done I don't get and will never get), women are more emotional when it comes to relationships. How women have accepted this kind of "dating" is beyond me.


It's not the same. Hook-ups are based on mutual attraction, whereas prostitution is one person paying for sex. There's a huge difference.


I think it is nonsense. Just a way for people to get sex without having to deal with a relationship. No real difference in my mind looking at it from the outside.

I wish I didn't even know about all of this crap. Knowing it just makes me want to be a hermit even more. Any guy (IMO) who thinks this is ok, I wouldn't want to touch with a 10 ft pole - or longer. It just tells me they have no values. I don't care if you think I'm old fashioned or what, this kind of getting together I find revolting.


However shallow hook-ups may be, they still serve as a sign of desirability. Prostitutes only want your money, not your body. Surely you can see the difference between somebody wanting your body, and somebody wanting your money.

Or to put it this way: winners get sex, losers pay for sex.


I'm sorry, I don't see it. If I desire someone, then I want them all to myself and not just once and I want to spend time with them doing other fun stuff. If they only want me for sex, I would be offended.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 32,886
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

18 Jan 2017, 11:49 am

This is very true.

Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Sabreclaw wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Alliekit wrote:
Datalis wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Datalis wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Howdy. I'm a little bit naive here. What is hooking up?

No strings attached.


So, does this mean no date? You just say "hey, let's meet at this place and do the nasty and leave"? No money either? I'm confused. What is the difference between hooking up and going to a prostitute?

Hooking up is cheaper. Hooking up is more of a friend's with benefits ordeal. No, you have to tell them in a more subtle way. Sluts don't like to think of themselves as sluts, even though they are. I don't do this by the way, but I've witnessed my friend do this and I was young once and had the same mindset as OP.


Hooking up does not make someone a slut.

And nurseangela I think it's more of a mutual understanding that you both want to satisfy your lust but don't want to have a full on exclusive relationship.


I don't see it any different than prostitution. If you are going to spend quality time in bed with someone, might as well go have dinner first, don't you think?

This is all very depressing and makes me want to become a hermit forever. For myself, I am disappointed in women. Most women, from what I have read, psychologically will not feel good about themselves if they do this kind of activity. I understand that men can sleep with several women without it bothering them emotionally (how this is done I don't get and will never get), women are more emotional when it comes to relationships. How women have accepted this kind of "dating" is beyond me.


It's not the same. Hook-ups are based on mutual attraction, whereas prostitution is one person paying for sex. There's a huge difference.


I think it is nonsense. Just a way for people to get sex without having to deal with a relationship. No real difference in my mind looking at it from the outside.

I wish I didn't even know about all of this crap. Knowing it just makes me want to be a hermit even more. Any guy (IMO) who thinks this is ok, I wouldn't want to touch with a 10 ft pole - or longer. It just tells me they have no values. I don't care if you think I'm old fashioned or what, this kind of getting together I find revolting.


However shallow hook-ups may be, they still serve as a sign of desirability. Prostitutes only want your money, not your body. Surely you can see the difference between somebody wanting your body, and somebody wanting your money.

Or to put it this way: winners get sex, losers pay for sex.



nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,017
Location: Kansas

18 Jan 2017, 6:00 pm

Alliekit wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
See, the problem is a person could be with 100 people as a one night stand and just because they call it "casual sex" it is then considered to be ok to society, when in actuality, the only difference is that money didn't change hands.


I don't think 100 is seen as acceptable by societal standards that's a bit of a high number (anything above 10 for women is seen as extreme)



Who made the rule that anything above 10 partners for women is seen as extreme? What's the cutoff for men? Infinity?


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


blackicmenace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2016
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465
Location: Sagittarius A

18 Jan 2017, 6:22 pm

nurseangela wrote:
Datalis wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Datalis wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Howdy. I'm a little bit naive here. What is hooking up?

No strings attached.


So, does this mean no date? You just say "hey, let's meet at this place and do the nasty and leave"? No money either? I'm confused. What is the difference between hooking up and going to a prostitute?

Hooking up is cheaper. Hooking up is more of a friend's with benefits ordeal. No, you have to tell them in a more subtle way. Sluts don't like to think of themselves as sluts, even though they are. I don't do this by the way, but I've witnessed my friend do this and I was young once and had the same mindset as OP.


In my mind, the men are just as guilty as the women. What do they call male sluts, btw?


Gigolos? I'm not entirely sure if there is an equivalent word to describe that word.


_________________
“Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell


blackicmenace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2016
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465
Location: Sagittarius A

18 Jan 2017, 6:38 pm

The problem with stud is it doesn't bring the negative undertones slut does. The stud is a one sided coin, whereas slut has two. Interesting how negative undertones fall only on one sex, the oppressed. Perhaps it's time to modify the definition of stud. If being sexually active equates to success, it should apply to both sides of the coin.


_________________
“Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell


Dave_T
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 19 Nov 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 94
Location: UK

18 Jan 2017, 6:43 pm

blackicmenace wrote:
The problem with stud is it doesn't bring the negative undertones slut does. The stud is a one sided coin, whereas slut has two. Interesting how negative undertones fall only on one sex, the oppressed. Perhaps it's time to modify the definition of stud. If being sexually active equates to success, it should apply to both sides of the coin.


This is down to who mainly holds the power when it comes to initiating sex. Trying to redefined words wont change this.


_________________
Dyslexia
Bipolar
Most likely Aspie.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 144 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 66 of 200


blackicmenace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2016
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465
Location: Sagittarius A

18 Jan 2017, 6:49 pm

Dave_T wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
The problem with stud is it doesn't bring the negative undertones slut does. The stud is a one sided coin, whereas slut has two. Interesting how negative undertones fall only on one sex, the oppressed. Perhaps it's time to modify the definition of stud. If being sexually active equates to success, it should apply to both sides of the coin.


This is down to who mainly holds the power when it comes to initiating sex. Trying to redefined words wont change this.


Why should the same action be defined according to sex? Both are successful, why shouldn't the definition reflect that?


_________________
“Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell


nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,017
Location: Kansas

18 Jan 2017, 6:58 pm

blackicmenace wrote:
Dave_T wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
The problem with stud is it doesn't bring the negative undertones slut does. The stud is a one sided coin, whereas slut has two. Interesting how negative undertones fall only on one sex, the oppressed. Perhaps it's time to modify the definition of stud. If being sexually active equates to success, it should apply to both sides of the coin.


This is down to who mainly holds the power when it comes to initiating sex. Trying to redefined words wont change this.


Why should the same action be defined according to sex? Both are successful, why shouldn't the definition reflect that?


Things are never going to change because there is a double standard with men. Men think other men are "studs" because it is hard for men to find a sexual partner easily and therefore, the more women a man can sleep with earns him more points with men. On the flipside, men would rather settle down with a woman who is closer to a virgin if not actually a virgin. Prostitutes are seen as sleezy and a last resort as a sexual outlet for men and it is usually kept a secret that they go to prostitutes (since society looks down on the practice). So if a woman sleeps with a lot of men that is seen as the same as a prostitute. Is this not true?

Would men here want to settle down and marry a woman who has been with 100 men?


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


blackicmenace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2016
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465
Location: Sagittarius A

18 Jan 2017, 7:13 pm

nurseangela wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
Dave_T wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
The problem with stud is it doesn't bring the negative undertones slut does. The stud is a one sided coin, whereas slut has two. Interesting how negative undertones fall only on one sex, the oppressed. Perhaps it's time to modify the definition of stud. If being sexually active equates to success, it should apply to both sides of the coin.


This is down to who mainly holds the power when it comes to initiating sex. Trying to redefined words wont change this.


Why should the same action be defined according to sex? Both are successful, why shouldn't the definition reflect that?


Things are never going to change because there is a double standard with men. Men think other men are "studs" because it is hard for men to find a sexual partner easily and therefore, the more women a man can sleep with earns him more points with men. On the flipside, men would rather settle down with a woman who is closer to a virgin if not actually a virgin. Prostitutes are seen as sleezy and a last resort as a sexual outlet for men and it is usually kept a secret that they go to prostitutes (since society looks down on the practice). So if a woman sleeps with a lot of men that is seen as the same as a prostitute. Is this not true?

Would men here want to settle down and marry a woman who has been with 100 men?


Thankfully, I don't let bias weight me down. Strip it all down to the base purpose without the negative impact society has deemed right and wrong. The base purpose of sex is to reproduce. Those that are successful at the act of reproduction should be seen as equal, as both are successful. Now add in the rest, if it's seen as negative, it should apply to both.


_________________
“Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell


nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,017
Location: Kansas

18 Jan 2017, 7:22 pm

blackicmenace wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
Dave_T wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
The problem with stud is it doesn't bring the negative undertones slut does. The stud is a one sided coin, whereas slut has two. Interesting how negative undertones fall only on one sex, the oppressed. Perhaps it's time to modify the definition of stud. If being sexually active equates to success, it should apply to both sides of the coin.


This is down to who mainly holds the power when it comes to initiating sex. Trying to redefined words wont change this.


Why should the same action be defined according to sex? Both are successful, why shouldn't the definition reflect that?


Things are never going to change because there is a double standard with men. Men think other men are "studs" because it is hard for men to find a sexual partner easily and therefore, the more women a man can sleep with earns him more points with men. On the flipside, men would rather settle down with a woman who is closer to a virgin if not actually a virgin. Prostitutes are seen as sleezy and a last resort as a sexual outlet for men and it is usually kept a secret that they go to prostitutes (since society looks down on the practice). So if a woman sleeps with a lot of men that is seen as the same as a prostitute. Is this not true?

Would men here want to settle down and marry a woman who has been with 100 men?


Thankfully, I don't let bias weight me down. Strip it all down to the base purpose without the negative impact society has deemed right and wrong. The base purpose of sex is to reproduce. Those that are successful at the act of reproduction should be seen as equal, as both are successful. Now add in the rest, if it's seen as negative, it should apply to both.


So would you marry a woman who has been with 100 men or even marry a prostitute?


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


blackicmenace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2016
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,465
Location: Sagittarius A

18 Jan 2017, 7:40 pm

nurseangela wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
Dave_T wrote:
blackicmenace wrote:
The problem with stud is it doesn't bring the negative undertones slut does. The stud is a one sided coin, whereas slut has two. Interesting how negative undertones fall only on one sex, the oppressed. Perhaps it's time to modify the definition of stud. If being sexually active equates to success, it should apply to both sides of the coin.


This is down to who mainly holds the power when it comes to initiating sex. Trying to redefined words wont change this.


Why should the same action be defined according to sex? Both are successful, why shouldn't the definition reflect that?


Things are never going to change because there is a double standard with men. Men think other men are "studs" because it is hard for men to find a sexual partner easily and therefore, the more women a man can sleep with earns him more points with men. On the flipside, men would rather settle down with a woman who is closer to a virgin if not actually a virgin. Prostitutes are seen as sleezy and a last resort as a sexual outlet for men and it is usually kept a secret that they go to prostitutes (since society looks down on the practice). So if a woman sleeps with a lot of men that is seen as the same as a prostitute. Is this not true?

Would men here want to settle down and marry a woman who has been with 100 men?


Thankfully, I don't let bias weight me down. Strip it all down to the base purpose without the negative impact society has deemed right and wrong. The base purpose of sex is to reproduce. Those that are successful at the act of reproduction should be seen as equal, as both are successful. Now add in the rest, if it's seen as negative, it should apply to both.


So would you marry a woman who has been with 100 men or even marry a prostitute?


Would you marry a man who has been with 100 women or even marry a gigolo? Who I would and wouldn't marry would be based on many things. I like to think I have an open mind and would be based entirely on the person no matter the labels society place on them.


_________________
“Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell