I have a Problem - Page 3

You could use the Feynman method and simply ask, "Are you going to sleep with me later on tonight?" If the answer is yes, get the check.

This thread is pure awesome.

The word is out there.

nothing wrong with that. I hope you banged her sore.

Hypocrites. Y'all talk about one men having casual sex as acceptible, but if a woman wants to do it she's "Mt. Whore"? Hell, it's closer to prostitution if you get your sex in exchange for paying for a date.

I'm not saying anon should be into this girl, they both have problems. Especially since he is wanting an emotional relationship and she does not, sex will only get him in more emotional entanglement and make it harder for him to walk away.

However, y'all should decide if casual sex with someone you're on friendly terms with is acceptible or not. It's not a gender-specific thing; ok for men to do but not women. Either all sex should be within the context of a committed relationship, or casual sex is ok.

I don't think casual sex is generally the healthiest way to go, especially on a repetitive basis, because it tends to turn into a complicated relationship-esque thing with weird emotional, proprietary, and social issues. If you're going to have relatively casual sex, though, doing it with someone you know and trust is better than a prostitute or random pick-up at least in terms of lower risk to your health and your ability to continue to contact them in case you have later disease or pregnancy issues. Some people and some friendships can tolerate including casual sex in the mix. I don't think anon's is one of them.

Casual sex is fine for both males and females. I never got the whole whore thing either pertaining to girls. I always felt as long as you weren't in a committed relationship, go have as many one-night stands as you want, but if you're in a relationship and you're cheating, male or female, you deserve any deroggatory name applied to you.

Anon, man, take it from someone who's been there.

Don't waste your fucking time.

I mean that literally.

My sophomore year in college I got hung up on this girl who lived in the next dorm room over. I was relatively new to the game (having lost a lot of weight the year before) and totally had my heart ripped out by this girl, who was getting over a long relationship and just wanted to fuck anything with an erection and a wallet (mastodons beware). She was just stringing me along like the Christmas Lights of Doom. Bad times.

A couple years later I found a great girl who somehow hasn't kicked me to the curb in all the years since.

I look back at that time and realize I could've spent those early years having much more fun if I weren't so goddamned self-serious about The One Who Didn't Care.

Like I said, don't waste your fucking time. If she's not into it, don't let it keep you from enjoying what there is to enjoy. Don't let yourself regret anything.

Personally, I'd rather have some meaning with my fornication. As for sex in exchange for covering the check, you sound like you speak from experience.

Tell her to eat dick, and then move on buddy.

Except don't mention the word 'buddy', too confusing.

All kidding aside, the term "date" implies the possibility of romance and/or sex. If there is no such possibility, then you're not on a date. You're hanging out with a buddy of the opposite sex. And buddies pay their own way.

Yes, the term "date" implies the possibility of romance and/or sex. It is also the term used by "girl friend experience" whores for their tricks. However, the term "whore" means sex in exchange for payment. Therefore, a woman who has sex with a man because he buys her things is a whore. That is not to say that partners can't exchange gifts or pay for dates, etc, but some women use men for money and truly are simply a glorified whore.

If one were to call a women who has casual sex "promiscuous" or "slutty" that would be a more accurate insult.

Also, while I agree buddies pay their own way, I personally have no problem with both paying one's own way on a date and/or alternating who treats. I also think it is only reasonable that both parties take into account relative disposible income and the nature of the activity (e.g. don't make him pay if you're the one dragging him to see []bMusic and Lyrics[/b]).


I'm actually not a whore, thank you.

I personally prefer it that way, too, but there is a difference between preferring a higher level of emotional connection and presuming that a woman is de factopromiscuous and unsafe in her sexual practices if she wants to have casual sex with a friend. This thread's scenario isn't likely the best example (probably because the story is not likely fully accurately represented). However, the comment remains that I don't see you boys immediately rushing to condemn any man that has casual sex as a disgusting object everyone should stay away from due to his promiscuity and likelihood of having an STD.

This thread is analagous to a thread started by a blind person (or someone pretending to be blind) about the merits of 3-D movies that's responded to by the one-eyed.

You actually try to respond rationally to this kid who's sexual experience obviously goes as far as his wrist ?

My hat's to you, Bele. You're way more patient/polite than I could ever be.

Yes Andre, haha... nobody here knows anything

I have FOUR eyes, pal! Why, my glasses prescription is so strong, I can burn the ass of a creature on another planet!

Actually the response you just quoted was in reply to CrackintheCrown, Timothy225, Nordling, KaPable, et al. who made remarks to the effect that the woman was diseased/indiscriminant because she was open to casual sex with a friend.

That said, yes I try to have polite and considered replies to these sorts of things. The reason is that both anon and possibly a lot of lurking Chewers might actually benefit from some considerate and rational thoughts on the subject. If, for whatever reason, they are coming here for advice, perhaps it would help them to actually find some.

CrackInTheCrown implied that you were a whore. I would have expected some verbal beatdown.

I'm all for giving advice to any standing member, but coming here since the guy actually had to register to post that, I'm always amused by a thread such as this.

It's pretty funny that a girl fooling around is a considered a whore while a guy doing the same thing is a perfectly normal guy who's looking around for fun. In this case, who the hell knows. For all we know, Anon never saw daylight.

Bele, if I offended, I apologize.

Once I heard the term "fuck buddy', it made me question the integrity of the girl. She was going out with anon for a couple of months (his words) which implied they were in some sort of a relationship. If you're in a relationship with someone, why screw around behind their back? To throw that term out there raised a red flag to me.

Granted, I don't know anon or this girl, or what's going on between the two of 'em. I called it like I saw it. See my earlier post - no matter what sex you are, as long as you're not in a relationship with someone else, and you want to be promiscuous, mazrel tov. Live and be well. AND use protection, regardless.

Yeah, I'm totally going to post with all the sensitivity and empathy that an anonymous post about "fuck buddies" deserves. You read into that what you like.

The very, very, very last place I would post any perceived relationship/sexual problems is the CHUD Sex Forum. So I'm gonna mock the shit out of most if not all of you, and you're going to take it and smile with each inch.

Well we all know that when says to her friends: "The guy I really like won't be my boyfriend... but he did say he'd let me have sex with him on a casual basis", all the other women say "Well done girlfriend, you found a keeper!"

So yes... hypocrites ye be.

You didn't offend me.

And I'm not saying we can't mock people, or poke fun at the entire situation.

I was just struck by the fact that when a man says he had or was anticipating a sexual encounter with a woman with whom he was not in a committed relationship (that is, a woman who was a friend, acquaintence or stranger), many of the Chewers/men in general don't automatically assume he as herpes, for example. Or at least, we don't seem to post to that effect much.

Yet that seemed to be the immediate conclusion here. This board has its own biases - like that most of one's fellow Chewers are virginal asocial geeks who live in their mother's basement. I just found it interesting that we didn't assume the girl was strange, socially inept, or whatever (as we did with anon) but rather that she was indiscriminant, unsafe, and diseased.

Someone mentioned that women don't think a man offering to be fuck buddies makes him relationship potential. I don't think I ever implied that this situation would be a healthy relationship. I just feel that women are more likely to judge promiscuous women and men equally badly, and men are more accepting of other men being promiscuous but women - although you want us to be willing and eager to engage in whatever activities once you've got us - are supposed to be relatively virginal the rest of the time. Which is rather absurd in my mind.

I guess I am just feeling sexist at the moment. And rather tired - sorry it has taxed my sense of humor.

He's not worth the bother. Also, I don't know him, so there's a chance he thought I was a man commenting on the whorish behavior of money-grubbing women.

I'll buy that.

Regarding your other point about double standards regarding promiscuity, I agree that a double standard does exist whether we think it's just or not. Here's a half-baked theory as to why that is: for men, sex is a fundamentally external enterprise. Men see the female side of sex as a different matter, because women allow people to actually be inside of them. It's more personal than it is for men, particularly since heterosexual men see their interior as inviolable. The idea that a woman would gladly let anyone in is so alien that they look upon the idea with a type of horror.

Quasi-amusing closing quip #1: Personally, I'm holding out for Oscar Bluth. He seems so sensitive!

Quasi-amusing closing quip #2: Either that, or it's simply the reflexive subjugation of yonic power by the patriarchy.

I'll buy that.

You could make a buck or two by writing a thesis on that and selling it to the college kids.

Any college kids who can't knock out a quick 20-30 pages on that simply by kowtowing to their professor's politicial sensibilities aren't worth their weight in beer.

Then again, who am I to talk? I once shot myself in the foot by entitling a mid-term exam essay, "Why your question is wrong."

If a girl won't hold your hands, give you good hugs, or let your grope her or kiss her....why the FUCK would she want to be fuck buddies??

To be fuck buddies, there has to be some fucking going on.

This is a girl with some problems.




Truth be told, we'll probably see her on some college co-ed porn site doing two guys and some serious anal.

I'm shocked.

Shocked!

I think Nick should stop his revamp of the site, liar! Still one of the best threads ever...

anon should write a column in some magazine like Maxim entitled "fantasies from the friend zone."

So long as the words "Fantasies" and "CHUD" were in the same sentence, everything would be ok.

Well, as long as you're screwing something. Like your yourself.

Now you see what you did, anon? You shocked poor Frank. Just look at his avatar - he's pale as a ghost!

I may never recover. You can only lose your innocence once.

No...but you can help multiple people lose theirs.

Dream big, brother....dream big.