The honing of the twat radars - dating chat thread number 9

[lubeybooby]

Thread got too big so here's a new one :o

All dating, online or otherwise in here please

Chit chat to serious stuff - off we go!

PMSL at "two fat people desperate to be laid".

When I first internet dated back in 2005 (bloody hell that was a long time ago), I was all horrible & raw from the break up of my marriage, which had happened two years earlier. I badly wanted reassurance that I was attractive, sexy & beddable. I wanted to pull basically. And I did. I had sex with blokes I barely knew, I gave blow jobs in bizarre locations & put myself around a bit. It was what I needed to do & I did it. Don't have any regrets, it was all part of the healing process.

However, I can honestly say the quality of the sex was rarely great. Apart from exceptional cases, I think you need to know someone a bit to have really, really great sex. You need to know what turns them on, what heats them up, what cools them down. You don't need to be in a relationship for ages, but at least have sex a few times before you get to great sex.

Hence, in my humble opinion, why no strings sex never works that well.

'There are no privileged frames of reference. '
so give us the view from nowhere

loves, all I mean by that is no one has the only or best perspective on anything. Everyone has a different perspective. By taking part in these threads Iafter 9, 678 messages I now have a slightly better perspective, but it doesn't actually help!

post
'I think you need to know someone a bit to have really, really great sex. You need to know what turns them on, what heats them up, what cools them down. You don't need to be in a relationship for ages, but at least have sex a few times before you get to great sex.'

that seems like a rational position to take, I'd agree but, I have had some really really good first time sex with people.

There has been some rubbish first time sex and I never went back because they just seemed inept and I couldnt see any chance of improvement.

I think sex in a long term relationship waxes and wanes over the years

yeah, james bond theory all the way.

postbell - i totalyl agree, which is why its so baffling, when you stumble across someone and have amazing first time sex, and its not followed up.

I guess the lack of follow up after amazing sex can be accounted for by the james bond mechanism combined with a fear that great sex will trigger psycho small pet cooking behaviour (a la glen close fatal attraction) in women.

(Pah..dont flatter yourself sunshine)

Perhaps not contacting him and seeming completely unmoved by the sex would work, but jeeze it's all a bit hard work isnt it

Playing devil's advocate here... So if a woman doesn't go back because their partner seemed inept and she couldn't see any chance of improvement that's ok, but if a guy doesn't go back he's playing James Bond.

Which leads me to my new Rule 007: Don't bother having sex.

poppa - no, we are talking about two different types - crap sex and good sex.
both parties can tell if its been less than memorable - and yes, i wouldnt bother if its been like that.

Just saying that good dates/ good sex leads to the james bond theory.

of course the guy may have not gone back because he thought she was sexually inept.
but we are talking about instances where the woman experienced the sex as prolonged, intense and very enthusiastic..can the bloke have thought she was inept?

From my perspective it does seem a lot of women like the mysterious guys... the bad boys... so maybe you're right. I was never able to do the mysterious thing.

maybe women have a more nuanced and sophisticated view of sex, about 10 different grades ranging from rubbish to religious experience.
men have just 2 categories, ok and quite good

Hmmm. We're a tiny bit deeper than that. I'd say crap - ok - quite good - good - act of god.

poppa, i cant see how you are getting this mtsterious bad boy thing?

And there is no way a 12 hr marathon where neither of us could walk would in any way mean i was inept. at all. impossible.

given recent experience. The sex was great, I do think it takes time for one to hit ones stride and have that mutual trust thing that makes sex particularly firey, but as first time bouts go, it was great. Not over in a fingersnap, everyone came. no one shat on anyones chest.

Therefore I am led to the following thought process...

(a) he might think he's James Bond, in which case I refuse to stroke his cock ego further.

(b) This might be the slightly-awkward-post-sex thing where it's a bit & no one quite knows what to do. that is fine.

(c) He might just be a twat.

(d) I might not be quite as good in the sack as I originally thought.

(e) He might not have experienced someones post-pregancy and childbirth body before and that might matter to him, in which case, I am the aforementioned moose and I refer you back to point (c)

(f) oh who cares. what is done is done, there are no explanations other than inviting him to participate in a survey monkey reactionnaire, so chalk it up to experience. it's day four. I shall endeavor to move on.

im going with an a/c combo. Of course you might not find out, OR he might be in contact????

yes he may yet be in touch Snape?
perhaps there are differing expectations of what frequency of contact is appropriate?

also, in regards to the whole ' not being as good in the sack as i thought i was issue' - im always in two minds about this. For example - people dated and had sex in far more prudish times, and they were able to form relationships- and th man went back - yes?

but move forward 60 or so years and you can be the all singing, all dancing version, and you are inept? nope, does not wash with me.

its just the james bond thing.

re 'good in bed' it varies I know that I have felt awkward with some people and more relaxed & uninhibited with others.
I think some people are good together, and sometimes sex doesnt work so well.

erm, that does seem to contradict my earlier comment about some men being inept

and if he is in contact (snort! now very unlikely!) there is the whole 'now what?' aspect. I'm truly not needy, but daily, alt-daily contact prior to sex, then 4 days silence post 'it' strikes me as a little fatalistic.

After a 4 day silence, do I actually agree to drop eveything so I can get some?! That makes it acceptable that there was little post coital interaction, but still an expectation of shagging... I set myself up for this to be the way of things...no thanks.

christ, this is fwb and it's already complicated - what fresh kind of hell awaits me if I ever decide I actually want a relationship...?

Leaving the options open is wise snape. It's sure to be at least one of your points. As that curly haired kid in the old movie sang... "Que sera, sera."

Watch, you're cool, switched on, sexy and sexual and just a bit scary... you and he of the broken sink are probably the exception that proves the rule. He may well be 007 and you may well be Ros Myers from Spooks... and it took a great deal of restraint not to say Pussy Galore.

Hi everyone

Nothing to add on the sex debate because I'm not having sex and haven't had sex for quite some time now BUT, I have this morning passed my spreadsheet exam with 94% which almost gave me an orgasm!

loves, no i know what you mean, which is why im not going to bother with mr crossing things off his list. Also, he cant write filth, he uses the word ' buttocks' now, if hes not comftable saying rude words, he sure as hell isnt going to inspire me. it would be worse than inept.
So yes- some people work, some dont, but again, makes it more puzzling when you find one that does.

Congrats *time". Would some quips about concatenation or merged cells be appropriate? :)

watchout, this is why I think it has to be clear in our own heads exactly what we want. If it is just a bit of no strings fun - then it doesn't matter if they never call back. It was fun & you move on. If anything more is wanted, then I think that has to be clear from the outset & if there is any kind of vibe that the guy at the end of the email / text or even having a few dates with is a player, then you walk away - safe in the knowledge that the only one who'll get hurt is the one looking for more than no strings fun.

I could be way off base here, but I don't think a man is ever going to spell out with crystal clarity that he is only looking for one night stands, if he thinks he has a chance of getting laid. To be honest, when I was going through my shag'em & move on phase, I would never have actually said up front, look I'm going to enjoy the thrill of the chase, the flirtation & the build up & then after I've bonked you I'm going to run so fast you won't see me for dust - because that appears heartless & callous & yet that is exactly what I did!

Why do I keep putting a hash or quotation mark instead of an apostrophe around people's nics? time" instead of time* :(