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.
So basically your reason is "because I want to know."
I don't need to know someone's number to know who he is as a person. He will show me that by how he interacts with me and the world around him. I don't need to know what shaped who he is as a lover. Only thing that matters is I enjoy sex with him and he's not giving me the clap or something. If I like him, we get along, we like the same things, we agree on politics and religion, and he's good in bed, that's what matters. I don't live in the past--mine or anyone else's. Life is too short for anything else.
Yes, people generally want to know what situations and people they are becoming invovled with and placing their trust in.
You do, I do, everyone does this.
This "entitlement" you speak of is looking out your best interests and avoiding the things you know not to be good choices for you or where you are trying to go in life. This is a sum of all parts, not just how someone may treat you in the moments they desire you or something that can only involve you.
If a where to have serious relationships with every person who walked through the door that I could have great sex with, fell in line politically and generally had some form of mutual attraction to in any regard the list of people would be a very long one.
That is the bar to entry, not a high water mark.
It's not living in the past to examine it with purpose. it's coming to an understanding of who someone is based on what has influenced their lives and helped shape them as a whole person, not just they layers they present to you.
For myself, Anyone who claims their past has no mark on their present isn't worth placing much trust in. That's not insecurity speaking, that's better judgment kicking.
I do not desire someone who only lives for the moment, I desire those who is able to enjoy the moment for what it is while remembering what came before it.
Last edited by rego00123; 07-09-2015 at 01:00 AM..
Has your spouse ever told you how many people they slept with before getting married?
Do you want to know or is the number such that you don't your spouse to know.
If they confronted you about it, would you tell the truth or is a white lie acceptable if the truth won't do anyone any good?
Why would anyone ask this question?
You can not expect a truthful answer.
So, their reply means absolutely nothing.
Like I would tell my gf / wife I have slept with over 100 women.
I have a feeling nald's social experiment is failing.
You can be sexually a free spirit, and absolutely faithful in relationships. Anyone who cannot grasp that concept is destined for a limited experience in this life.
I'm not the one doing any social experiments. That'd mean that I'm trying to induce some behavior in other people through my actions. That's not true at all - I'm rather observing the social experiment that claims "free love is the way" (sexual casualness) yet the same society is still conditioned to expect a Medieval ideal of a family. I'm completely okay with people doing whatever they want when it doesn't involve me and my private life. If they're to be part of my private life, I'm not tolerating that attitude.
As @lilac said once, she'd say it's none of my business. I'd be satisfied if I recognized this attitude because I'd not want to go on with a relationship when someone reasons like that. I'd be really glad if it worked this way and if women like her could disqualify me immediately, it'd save me the stress to actually dump such people myself or to waste my time myself. Everybody wins - we're just not compatible and that's all OK in my book. I don't get the point of trying to shame me or bash me because you know I'm strongly inclined to profile of people who are completely different than you.
Once again I have the need to clarify that I don't think things to be exclusively true for everyone. I don't argue that swingers cannot be absolutely faithful, even if it means mere sincerity. I'm arguing that the likelihood of such relationships to follow the Medieval ideal and Medieval ideal outcome are significantly endangered through their actions, past actions and current actions do affect the future outcomes in that department.
I don't get why is it so hard to think of general notions WITHOUT putting things into my mouth that these general things are exclusively true for everyone. I don't say so and I don't pretend to say so - you are putting such claims and try to attach such claim to me.
Like I said earlier - you can also have sexually non-exclusive relationship and still do quite well. Pay notice that long-term success rates over a lifetime happen to be even lower. Ask yourself why... and then just recall of this - relationship makes two. Even if ONE person (the one "with the past") WISHES to live that "Medieval ideal" once they find someone to commit to, this other person will also be more likely to either have an affair when good opportunities and sexual attraction is big enough (thus, "it's not cheating/doesn't matter when my SO doesn't know/isn't around to see it"). And even the affairs themselves are NOT such an issue - it's the part where one or both parties happened to indulge in such affairs and there literally isn't much of a difference with their new relationship, even if it's marriage, to make them think of it as something very special. Thus when things get to be stagnant or when some serious stress occurs - at least one of them will be far more inclined to desire further escalation - which leads to break-up.
I've also mentioned it on numerous posts in here and in other topics... the most common way Americans "fall out of love" or "get bored" (out of which only a portion will have an affair) and the way relationship progresses is this - they literally start picking on each other over small things and subconsciously desire to cause a situation of irretrievable breakup. This is especially the case when some serious stress arises, such as job loss.
Relationship takes two, but one side is enough to cause it to collapse, despite the fact that it's usually a chain of mutual actions that lead to irretrievable breakdown or even a hostility even after couple parts their way. This picture is way more common among those "with sexual history", because participants are generally less likely to see each other as "special" and as worthy to actually have any (and especially both) parties willing to recognize how these fights over trivial things are arising and where such attitudes will lead.
I don't have time to read the previous 20 pages so what I write may be repetitive. If so, please ignore.
In any case, I have no idea how many people my DW slept with, not do I care to know. And I have never asked and never will. I just don't understand why this is important. What is important is that I am reasonably sure that she has not slept with anyone since we got married. When we dated and met, it was important for me to know that she was generally healthy, had no STDs and was interested in guys. I guess if she had any unusual sexual interest I would need to know as well. I did ask these. I also asked me about her last boyfriend just out of curiosity. She also shared some details about other man she dated in the past without me asking. That was enough for me, I really was never interested in how many people she slept with. I don't understand why you would want to know this? Doesn't this knowledge make you jealous and unhappy?
Once again I have the need to clarify that I don't think things to be exclusively true for everyone. I don't argue that swingers cannot be absolutely faithful, even if it means mere sincerity. I'm arguing that the likelihood of such relationships to follow the Medieval ideal and Medieval ideal outcome are significantly endangered through their actions, past actions and current actions do affect the future outcomes in that department.
You keep using the term "medieval ideal". What in the heck does that mean? Selling your daughter for dowry or political alliance? Return to a time when women were not allowed to own assets, no inheritance, no schooling and being the literal property of their spouse?
Lack of regular baths?
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
And then there is another issue. I was up front and honest with my new DH when we were dating. and how many partners I had currently..then..at that time. He goes on to blab that information to some female friend of his....whom I have never even met. Talk about invasion of privacy!!
He told me he had told her about us, and my sexual information. Say what?? Excuse me???
I have had to work with him on the fact that my sexual information I choose to share with him is still private and SHOULD be respected.
Like I would tell my gf / wife I have slept with over 100 women.
Get real lol
I also do not see why the question would be asked. However, if asked, I would tend to think a lot of couples would be truthful with the person they are trying to build a lasting relationship with. If the two individuals are secure in themselves and their choice in partner, the answer is not going to do damage to the relationship... which brings me back to your first point... since that level of being secure likely would mean the question would never get asked or the topic even come up.
You keep using the term "medieval ideal". What in the heck does that mean? Selling your daughter for dowry or political alliance? Return to a time when women were not allowed to own assets, no inheritance, no schooling and being the literal property of their spouse?
Lack of regular baths? <--FREAKING LOL!!
^ Thanks for the laugh. I was getting a little like what is up with this medieval stuff, are we at the Renn Fair? Is he gonna go medieval on our um...you know, nevermind...
I do agree with one point that is kind of, sort of being nudged at with nald's posts. The whole expectation of lifelong relationships might not be the end-all, be-all that many think it is.
Truly, I had a high number by most standards. Especially for a woman, awful as it is to say it, but more significantly for the age at which I accrued most of those partners. I admit it with no shame. And while I was faithful, the marriage did fail. And in a sense, my casual approach to sex was to blame, because I let this man into my life and my bed and I didn't understand that he would take over and not go away, and I'd be stuck with him so long. I got knocked up and wound up married to a crazy person. That would not have happened if I hadn't slept with him in the first place. And I wouldn't have gotten into that mess if I hadn't been so casual about sex, and had understood that some people (him) were going to get really seriously serious, whether I liked it or not.
The weakness in my moral character was not one of being low or dirty because of my sexuality, or of less value even. It was one of letting my guard down too easily and being taken advantage of, and it is a pattern that repeats itself if I allow it to, in various ways.
I am a bit more careful now, trying to be self and situationally aware. It can still be hard to force logic to take precedent over emotion, but I am trying. One thing though...the whole "sex is just sex" thing...I find that I am more choosy now as an adult because the concept of sex with someone I don't feel anything for doesn't appeal to me much. I want to adore a partner's mind and body, and get really into them, hear their stories. I feel that these relationships expand my world. So I am not as casual about it as I was as a teenager. I don't think that there is anything wrong with that, so long as I guard my boundaries as much as I respect those of my partner.
Guess what? Sometimes sex IS casual. And sometimes it's not. Sometimes it's gentle and communicative. Sometimes it's raunchy and filthy-dirty hot. I am not so one-dimensional that it's the same with everyone in every relationship or encounter--and that is a good thing.
My ex-hub was one of those guys who had to have everything be deep and meaningful and "making love" and cuddling and snuggling and speaking in glowing terms of the experience immediately afterward and all of that sentimental stuff and good gawd, it was tedious. Sometimes a woman just wants to get gotten mercilessly until her eyes cross, without symphonies, roses, and ethereal fairy dust summoning choirs of angels.
Indeed, what will prompt me to leave is if it's always one way, whichever way that is. I do want a man who can bang a million different ways, and that includes casually. That's the guy I get monogamous with, because that's the guy who will keep me interested and work with me after the honeymoon phase is over to keep it going.
YESSSSSSS! Very well said. All of it.
If the connection is there with the person I am with, I do not care what their sexual # is before I entered the picture. Everyone has a past and some pasts are more colorful than others. Big deal. I'm going to be focused on the NOW.
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.
If the two individuals are secure in themselves and their choice in partner, the answer is not going to do damage to the relationship... which brings me back to your first point... since that level of being secure likely would mean the question would never get asked or the topic even come up.