Do you know any women who admit to sleeping with over 100 men? (boyfriends, couples)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,920,441 times
Reputation: 40635
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCUBS1
Nope, I did not veer into mushiness either, no mention of hopeful soul mates, etc. I simply stated that having more lovers does not necessarily mean more skills. Why is that so hard to understand? "Practicing skills" twice a day with the same person over many years may improve your "skills" over a series of ONS, or maybe not Maybe self-pleasure/erotica/porno/toys, etc. could improve your "skills" over a series of ONS, or maybe not. As I have said, I see no correlation with the # of partners, and increased "skills" (unless we are talking going from zero to one). Sex isn't really all that complicated - it usually doesn't take a skill workshop for 2 sensual people who are wildly attracted to one another, giving and eager to please.
With the bolded. It isn't hard to understand. No one ever claimed it is. That's the strawman. You're fighting for a point that no one on this thread debated. You're the only one harping on it.
With the italicized, it isn't a perfect 1:1 correlation by any means, but in my experiences I do see a strong correlation.
The sex I have now with both long term partners and short term is in no way the same quality as the sex that I was having in my 20s. Haven't taken any workshops, except what I've ;earned through experiences over the years.
You really believe there's no benefit to anyone else's input? That there is nothing to be learned from an additional lover? You're certainly welcome to disagree, but that boggles my mind.
Never said that. One can learn anywhere. But I do think one is just as likely to learn from experimentation with a single giving lover, or a series of LTR, as one is with 100 ONS... I just don't think the # (or LTR vs ONS relationship type) matters. I don't see a formula, just individual personal characteristics/sexual attraction that create a good lover.
It would boggle my mind if you think that one cannot learn just as much from one wildly creative, sexually giving lover whom you are inconceivably attracted to, then from multiple ONS. Do you think it is impossible to be an ongoing sexual learner/experimenter with one single partner, even for a lifetime?
With the bolded. It isn't hard to understand. No one ever claimed it is. That's the strawman. You're fighting for a point that no one on this thread debated. You're the only one harping on it.
With the italicized, it isn't a perfect 1:1 correlation by any means, but in my experiences I do see a strong correlation.
The sex I have now with both long term partners and short term is in no way the same quality as the sex that I was having in my 20s. Haven't taken any workshops, except what I've ;earned through experiences over the years.
Yes, someone mentioned there is some optimal formula of combination of ONS, LTR, experience. This is what I disputed. The sex I had in my 20's and am having now has always been high quantity and high quality.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,920,441 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCUBS1
It would boggle my mind if you think that one cannot learn just as much from one wildly creative, sexually giving lover whom you are inconceivably attracted to, then from multiple ONS. Do you think it is impossible to be an ongoing sexual learner/experimenter with one single partner, even for a lifetime?
Are you a guy or a girl? You seem to think that one person can be as variable as a few dozen. When you learn with one person, even over 20 years, you're learning to please that person. It's still just one person, and what works for people sexually is widely different. Incredibly different. Things I've done with some lovers that worked well for many years, techniques, approaches, even mindsets would do absolutely nothing for other women. People, at least women, are so incredibly variable.
It is pretty simple, really. In some cases they aren't monogamous. I was in a relationship years ago where we were lovers for 8 years, but we both had other partners that came and went. That isn't that unusual. Our relationship was stable, just not monogamous.
Other people arein open marriages where they're together for decades. Or in a fet or swinger scene where they're partnered and play with others. Or poly and their primary partner is stable, but their tertiary or secondary partners might change over time. There are lots of examples of people being in stable, loving relationships and yet having many partners during those relationships.
The simplest of course, and these are incredibly common situations, where people date/have sex a lot when single, and when they meet someone they really like they stay monogamous for the period of that relationship. A person that has a gf/bf for 2-3 years, then breaks up, and dates for a year or two sleeping with 6-12 people over that time, before meeting a new bf/gf was really the norm in my 20s from everything I saw. Do that a few times and you're in the 30s before you reach 30.
This is true. I know many people in the lifestyle who have been married or otherwise together for years. Are they all stable with ironclad relationships? No, of course not. But neither are all the monogamous couples.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,920,441 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCUBS1
Yes, someone mentioned there is some optimal formula of combination of ONS, LTR, experience. This is what I disputed. The sex I had in my 20's and am having now has always been high quantity and high quality.
I read that post, and it in no way is contradicted by or contradicts what you're stating.
I thought I had amazing sex too in my 20s. Some was good, but damn, that was being young and naive. I had probably slept with less than a dozen people by then, so of course I was too ignorant to know better. I'm sure the best is still to come.
Are you a guy or a girl? You seem to think that one person can be as variable as a few dozen. When you learn with one person, even over 20 years, you're learning to please that person. It's still just one person, and what works for people sexually is widely different. Incredibly different. Things I've done with some lovers that worked well for many years, techniques, approaches, even mindsets would do absolutely nothing for other women. People, at least women, are so incredibly variable.
I know that, which is why going around trying to learn all these specific "techniques" for the endless variables out there would not IMO be as fruitful as focusing on how to be a more overall sensual, attractive, teasing, sexually creative, communicative, pleasure giving person who can successfully feel/listen and adapt action/response for the moment...Even for a ONS it starts with the mind....
Always. And if we're talking about politics, I do find I disagree with conservatives on many issues, from gay marriage to religion (I'm atheist). But on this, I can't see any reason to be "liberal".
Likewise, on such matters, myself and some others feel the exact opposite. But you're of course free to take a conservative stance for yourself, and if that means having only one partner, good for you. Your penis, your choice, right? Key word: I.
I'm a fan of consistency. Consistency in logic and arguments. If one is "liberal" about the sexual activity and doings of a specific, minority demographic, it logically follows the same should apply to other demographics. If you don't oppose same-sex couples/marriage (orientation) then why care (enough to declare what is "too many") about the sexual activity, number of partners, of other people? Do you really care about other people's sexuality and what or who they do? Outside moralists and religious fundamentalists, I can't come up with a logical reason as to why what other people do with their body matters to you or those who hold your position. For a moralist or moral absolutist, it is wrong because their version of morality says it's wrong, based on their interpretation of their doctrine/dogma. And then there are those who are not overt moralists who still believe it's wrong due to years and years of living in a society that is steeped in moralistic principles and dogma. We can call that cultural indoctrination. It's wrong or "bad" because that's how they were raised or the sort of thinking and attitudes they were exposed to.
But in the case of skeptical thinking and analysis, I draw a blank as to where the basis of this "moral" dogma originates. It is less a personal code/value and more of a dogma when one believes it should be applied to other people, or that their "too many" assessment applies to others beside himself.
Just saying something is "too many," which is another way of saying you don't approve or give consent to (and your consent is not needed since you are not the involved party), does not a coherent argument make. If you can support it with more than "I think it's too many because I say so" then, by all means, please do so. Otherwise, the argument is no less circular than "Fornication is bad because Jesus said so." And the character "Jesus" said no such thing because "Jesus" didn't write a damn thing, nor did father god Yahweh.
Last edited by Metaphysique; 06-23-2014 at 06:34 PM..
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,920,441 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCUBS1
I know that, which is why going around trying to learn all these specific "techniques" for the endless variables out there would not IMO be as fruitful as focusing on how to be a more overall sensual, attractive, teasing, sexually creative, communicative, pleasure giving person who can successfully feel/listen and adapt action/response...Even for a ONS it starts with the mind....
Of course it starts with the mind. Another strawman. All good foreplay and sex starts with the mind. No one debated that.
But you can do that all right, and if you don't have the toolbox to go with it, it will be less than awesome once you do engage.
My neighbor fits that description. Shes about 45 and I see her leaving with a different man from our corner bar all the time. Probably about one every week or two, so 20 a year would be conservative. I'm not sure if she realizes what the total would be, but I'm sure it's hundreds.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
