On being called a "pricktease"

[BimbledAgain]

The background is we've been dating a couple of weeks. We've not dtd yet but are indulging in some heavy petting on the sofa. I'm not ready to have sex and call a halt to it when he begins to push for way beyond what I want. Later he calls me a prick tease for not following through to sex and tells me it's wrong that he had to go home and masturbate. We later discuss his 'pricktease' comment and he apologises.

Fast forward a few weeks and our relationship is fully sexual (and it's great - amazing in fact), but another discussion ensues where he tells me I shouldn't start any physically intimate activity if I'm not prepared to follow through to full intercourse or if I don't tell him upfront that it's not going to end in full sex, so at least he's prepared to not expect that outcome. Once again I'm called a prick tease for what happened in that original evening.

I find the comments highly disturbing. Is this really how people conduct themselves sexually. I can't imagine ever imposing such obligations on another person for something that to me should happen organically and without expectation.

In a very simple way, I see it like being told "Let's go out in the car. We might get ice cream". But after a 30-minute drive, you're just dropped off outside your house. Yeah, you were never promised ice cream, but it's still disappointing.
Whereas, if you know there won't be any ice cream, you can just enjoy the drive for what it is, or choose not to go if you don't fancy it

That's not actually the most accurate analogy though.

In reality its like getting in a car to go on a journey that you know goes past an ice cream shop, where you sometimes stop to get ice cream, and instead of asking "do you think there might be time for an ice cream" just presuming that there will be ice cream. Then when there isn't using a mysoginistic slur to describe the driver when you moan that you had to go back and get ice cream by yourself.

Then demanding that you be told every time you go in that direction in advance whether there will be ice cream or not, despite it sometimes being an in the moment decision based on mood and time etc made with the consent of both people in the car that they are in the mood for ice cream. And repeating the mysoginistic slur at them.

It puts the entire burden of communication on the driver, and means they feel like it's harder for them to change their mind if they are tireder than they realise or they just aren't particularly hungry.

Honestly regardless of whether its a signifier for rape or not, it is a clear sign of immaturity, poor communication division, an expectation that the woman is responsible for managing men's expectations and a signifier for a poor partner and potential future parent.

Actually in the aim for entire accuracy that first paragraph should actually read:

In reality its like getting in a car to go on a journey that you know goes past an ice cream shop, where you have sometimes stopped with other people to get ice cream, and instead of asking "do you think there might be time for an ice cream" just presuming that there will be ice cream. Then when there isn't using a mysoginistic slur to describe the driver when you moan that you had to go back and get ice cream by yourself.

That is horrific advice to young people, truly disgusting and sexist. You haven’t signed a contract to provide sexual services FFS. He, not she, is responsible for his ‘impressions’. Was this a moderated forum? Is this just students giving their own views, or was someone professional providing advice?

It was a student forum and other students commenting. It was hard to get access to the post again just now as a log in screen kept coming up but here's the link. Appreciate this is not the best place to be getting advice from, but the responses dismayed me to think that this might be what a younger generation are being brought up to believe. I thought we left all this behind in the 70/80's...

https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=874643

That thread you linked is from 14 years ago. 2010.

14 years is a long time, so I'm not sure how informative it is regarding what the current generation of students would say about this issue.

Also, the majority of respondents aren't telling the OP of that thread that she was wrong not to have sex with him.

But you didn't dump him though. You took the abuse and showed him that he can treat you badly and you'll stick around for more.

Honestly, if this is real, I recommend you do a shed-load of work on your self esteem and boundaries. And dump him, obviously.

As I wrote in an earlier post I'm not discussing things outside of the initial post and what the initial post concerned.

Whether I have since dumped him or not is outside of that, I hope that clarifies things.

Well unfortunately, the only sensible response to the question: "What do you think about my new boyfriend calling me a pricktease and demanding advance notice if I don't want sex?" is "Dump the fucker now". So that's why people have responded as they have.

A tiny number of MRA / Andrew Tate supporters posters have said otherwise, but the consensus is clear.

Been in this situation before. It's not pleasant. I called it a day.

Ahh... "the student room forum", I just found some of their thread titles and almost piss-ed on my pants):

• -Would you date a girl who wears trainers without socks?
• Girls, Would a guy wearing pink shoes put you off?
• My friend is making fun of my arm hair
• 20 years old with a 2 inch penis

20 year olds... bless em! 😂Sorry just read the thread OP mentions and these kids sound a bit confused and all over the place.

So I now understand the context ....the first night when he called me a pricktease when I wasn't ready to have sex....his expectation was that I should have put my feelings aside and had sex with him anyway, because that would have been the caring thing to do. It's what he would have done if the situation were reversed.

The fact the truly caring thing to do would be not to have sex with someone who was not ready and fully willing and only someone completely focused on their own selfish satisfacton would think it was okay is completely lost.

I'm reeling.

Thank you again for everyone who took the time to respond...I'm not saying I didn't think the comments were right or course I knew they were but quite the extent they were right is shocking. And just to note we are not in a relationship anymore and were not when I first posted.

Glad to hear it! Well done ☺️💐

God he's an arsehole

I'm glad you aren't with him any more

It's up to him to manage his expectations, not to expect to always be forewarned.

If he's not able to manage his expectations without being told firmly in advance that this might not lead to full sex then he shouldn't be having sex at all, because it suggests a lack of self control or the ability to self regulate, which is something that all people, especially men NEED if they are being intimate with someone.

He is also putting his lovers in a position where if they do start off thinking they're going to have full sex but then change their mind during, that they then will be nervous or afraid to change their mind......because they didn't warn him in advance, so they will think they have to go through with it or else deal with the consequences of him moaning or complaining or being angry.

What a disgusting individual he is. I can almost guarantee that his past lovers wouldn't describe him as 'caring' at all and that all of them have felt coerced into sex with him at some point or another or many times.

For him to say that to you only a few weeks in and actually think it's ok is exceptionally worrying, that level of entitlement shows someone with a deeply fucked up view of consent, enthusiastic consent and how sex is supposed to be mutually wanted.

Vile.

You both need to view the NSPCC cup of tea consent material. Then you need to dump him. Don’t put up with this, at best he’ll get angry at you if you don’t want full sex at worst he will rape you.

His whole outlook is strange. At what point does an interaction with a woman become an implied contract to have intercourse? Is it necking? Kissing? Hugging? Holding hands? Her wearing pretty clothes? Talking? Being alone together in the same room? To me it seems that none of these actions imply a contract to proceed to intercourse. If you are holding hands, then you are holding hands, there is no implied statement that you will move to hugging. If you are hugging, then you are hugging, there is no implied statement that you will move to kissing. If you are kissing, then you are kissing, there is no implied statement that you will move to necking. And so on.

The whole idea that kissing is some sort of promise to have intercourse, seems to me to be an indication that the person sees a woman's company as having no intrinsic value. The only reason to kiss her is to get a promise to have intercourse. Is that attitude attractive to me as a woman? That kissing me is not rewarding in itself? That would make me feel that he does not care about me as a person at all.

Also, as others said, the whole thing, of acting like kissing someone is an implied contract to have intercourse, seems designed to discourage women from saying 'no,' by creating a dynamic whereby saying "no" means she would be failing to follow through on some sort of nonverbal contract. Maybe, as things move along, she decides, you know what? This guy is not very good at this, I'm not enjoying myself, I want out. Maybe, as things move along, he is very rough. And so on. There are some really strange ramifications to the idea that she is, in any way, morally/ethically/socially obliged to continue.

Massive red flag I'm afraid.

flags .. Red ones. The sex may be "amazing" now but it will end badly with a man who thinks like that.

Good to hear you’re not in a relationship with this manipulative coercive creep who thinks he has an entitlement to sex regardless of whether the woman wants to or not.

And yes the line between coercion and rape is a fine one.

Yeah I would dump him he sounds like an arse with those comments. Equally now you’ve dtd and decided presumably to do it again, I think it would be annoying if you just start something you don’t finish. I’m not saying he’s right, he’s not, but why bother? I’d get frustrated if my partner did that on a regular basis

Do some of you really never kiss your partner without it leading to sex? Never have a proper smooch and fondle unless you’re going to bed? That seems really sad to me. Can’t beat a good kitchen make out session when you’re not expecting it, and if it doesn’t lead to sex then it will help keep the fire stoked until you do it later. I love it when my BF leans over while we’re cooking and gives me a really passionate kiss, gets us both feeling frisky and then we carry on cooking. If that was banned because one of us might feel disappointed that we didn’t switch off the oven and go upstairs that would be a sorry state of affairs.

This. ⬆

IME, the more I feel pressured to commit to sex by initiating a cuddle or kiss, the more I pull back from all physical contact. The amount of sex gets less, not more, under that circumstance, and it kills the relationship.

I've never met a man who's been pushy/coercive like this early on and hasn't turned out to be an unreconstructed arsehole once I got to know him better.

Absolutely agree. I’ve never been in a relationship where every kissing and cuddling session automatically meant sex.

It’s great to just make out then stop, calm down and carry on with whatever you were doing.

I can’t imagine anything less romantic than agreeing in advance where the kissing was going to lead. Is there supposed to be a pre agreed conversation very time?

Basically he just wants to coerce her into agreeing to have sex regardless of whether wants to or not as it’s the caring thing to do apparently - what a complete twat he sounds.