Guys: some are to lay, some are to date?

Great Debates
1

Or, do women enjoy one-night stands as well?

This was first going to be an IMHO post, but I believe this subject is really a Great Debate, because it is about the single most important fact of life: sex.

We have been having a very interesting debate among friends. It was actually rather refreshing: what started out as a typical exchange of mails about how hot someone was (male bonding :slight_smile: ) gradually evolved into a rather serious discussion. Normally, of course, males can take any serious subject and ensure that it dissolves into skirt talk.

Anyway: the discussion was two-fold a) the ‘chase’ and/or anticipation of the boinking on the part of most males, and getting tired of someone after said boinking, and b) do females categorize men into “guys to lay” and “guys to date”?

Some background: two quote one guy: I don’t really enjoy the chase - I enjoy the ANTICIPATION of the bang. The
games piss me off more times than not. But, I know all about getting tired of someone once I’ve banged her. - Even before the act itself sometimes, if I know I’m going to get it.

Two points I had here: one is that whether or not this is ‘bad male behaviour’ probably depends on the expectations of the female, and level of committment promised and/or suggested by both parties. Why do we always assume that girls never want a one-night stand? Does sex always have to come with strings attached? Why are women not allowed to (unlike males) enjoy a carefree (responsible) boink?

My other point was – well, might as well just quote myself: ‘(I) do find the ‘hunt’ (the innuendos, the courting, the flirting, the heavy overtones, etc etc) more exciting than actually bagging the kill. Getting the acquisition to practically beg for a boinking is a lost art unto itself. I mean, any NFC (normal frustrated chump) can go panting over a skirt; only a man with (ahem) balls of 10lb steel and a bowling pin-sized tool can use understated confidence and patience can take the slow route: it really, really confuses women when you don’t give her the full-court press from day one, and from my experience, the longer you are able to hold off, the more it turns them on’.

Point two: According to one poster, 'guys that tend to be too nice (and look the part) and SLOW get put into the “date” category. Girls will refuse them,
hoping that the “nice” guy doesn’t think they aren’t sluts and will consider dating them.

Note: I can see all sorts of replies to this–but I will reply to them as they come in…

2

webmastr, before I begin, I just want to check. Are you sure you’re old enough to be surfing with your mommy’s aol account?

"Normally, of course, males can take any serious subject and ensure that it dissolves into skirt talk."

Well, I’m glad this conversation took place between normal males.

“Some background: two quote one guy: I don’t really enjoy the chase - I enjoy the ANTICIPATION of the bang.”

Hmmm. When, I wonder, was the last time any of the participants in this discussion actually had sex (note: nocturnal emissions do not qualify as sex for the purpose of this reply).

“Why do we always assume that girls never want a one-night stand?”

Do we?

"I mean, any NFC (normal frustrated chump) can go panting over a skirt; only a man with (ahem) balls of 10lb steel and a bowling pin-sized tool can use understated confidence and patience can take the slow route"

And that would be you, I gather.

*“Note: I can see all sorts of replies to this” *

Ah, I see that prescience is among your numerous other ample endowments.

Well, webmstr, I am overwhelmed. But it’s late and I’ve gotten this far so here are a few well-intentioned replies.

  1. Most women I know have had a one-night stand or two. However, few feel compelled to boast of it.

  2. It strikes me that the question of whether, as you put it, “to lay” or “to date” is usually a cumulative and overlapping process of decision-making, rather than a one-time classifying procedure akin to night and day.

  3. As to the guy who says he knows all about getting tired of someone, “even before the act itself sometimes.” This is possibly one of the most depressing admissions I’ve ever read.

  4. Nowhere does your post bring up the issue of the quality of the sexual experience; although much is said about the quality of the anticipation. Are all “baggings of the kill” equal? Women, I find, when they talk freely about their sexual encounters, will dwell much on the abilities of the partner in question. This is not a simple question of tools.

But, thank you, webmster. I will, to be sure, think of you whenever I go bowling.

3

There are plenty of women who enjoy one-night-stands. There are plenty of women who enjoy sex for the experience of sex–not for the hopes of a relationship. If you are assuming that women don’t feel this way, then you could be missing out on some seriously hot sex. Women just don’t advertise these escapades as widely as men do.

I can’t say whether other women divide guys into (1)date or (2)screw but I do not. Now, women may divide guys into (1)friend and (2)nothing more but that’s different.

4

I’m with evilbeth on this one. Maybe it has something to do with age groups and your own personality as well.

I’m not really now, nor have I been a big fan of one night stands. I like companionship as much or more than sex and I have been that way for a while, but my personality is kinda’ “out there” and for some reason that gives a lot of women a certain impression (I think), also I know that how open women have been to amorous activity and how actively they seek it has a lot to do with the kind of self confidence that usually comes with a little bit of maturity and age. 80% of the women I have been with had to trip me to get the point across because while I talk a good game I’m not much for “closing the deal”. Almost all of those women have been from a specific age group and has somewhat similar personalities.

I would also go on the record as saying that men may think about sex a lot more often than women do on average, but when a woman becomes sexually interested she is likely going to be a lot more intense than a man is. When I have sex I’m pretty much sated and don’t think about it for a while, every woman I have been with (one exception) was more interested AFTER than BEFORE. I have no real insight as to why, but it has been something I have observed and thought about.

5

My thanks to evilbeth and zen101 for actually attempting a serious reply to the OP.

Mandelstam: I can only say that your reply managed to fall short of even my underwhelming expectations. You have managed to completely miss the entire point of my post. Had you been born a few generations earlier, you likely would have been one of those complaining to the editor about the ‘A Modest Proposition’ article.

But I better log off now before my mom finds I hacked her AOL account again.

6

Webmastr,

Women are human, and they have the same desires and thought processes that men have. Just as there are numerous trashy men who live for one-night stands, there are numerous trashy women who want the same.

My wife and her friends, in their dating days, would identify guys as “hotties.” These guys were extremely good-looking, but were obviously looking to have sex with a girl once or twice and then move on. Whether or not my wife and/or her friends would strike up a conversation with these guys depended on their mood that night. Usually they avoided them like the plague. Occasionally, they were “good for what ails ya.” As my wife “matured,” (her word, not mine), she avoided these guys constantly. Sex is fun, but it ain’t the end-all be-all of human existence.

For the record, I have never been a hottie-chaser. I can’t even conceive of having a one-night stand. Color me hopelessly romantic, I guess. I’ve always viewed those males (or females, for that matter) who live for the next conquest as shallow. Sex is just better when it’s with someone you love.

7

I’m still waiting for some empirical evidence.

8

Now, now, webmstr. If you read my post again you’ll see that I was playing with you. Surely an avowed lover of the chase–and an enthusiast of Jonathan Swift no less–can handle a little satire his own expense. If you skip my teasing and look at my numbered replies, you’ll see that I offered you some serious replies to your question. Number 4 is, to my mind, the most important because the question of quality is a bit trickier for us women, perhaps, than it is for you men. You see, when we bag our kill, we are hoping for a bit more than a man with the physical wherewithal to, um, rise to the occasion.

This brings to mind a peculiar moment in Zen101’s post:

“When I have sex I’m pretty much sated and don’t think about it for a while, every woman I have been with (one exception) was more interested AFTER than BEFORE. I have no real insight as to why…”

Could it be Zen, that the women in question hadn’t actually been sated by the act that sated you?

9

webmastr, I don’t know why you are asking this. You said you work for the porn (adult entertainment, you refer to it) industry.

If so, you would know that women in those flicks have almost nothing else but one night stands.

shrug.

10

I have never, as a guy, been into one night stands. But, I did have one at the beckoning of the female, and neither of us had a problem with it. Still talk all the time online and there’s no uncomfortable-ness like I always thought there would be.
Still, though, not a fan. My favorite part of sex is, well, the person I’m having it with. Knowing that its a one-time deal doesn’t make it as fun.
'Course, I won’t turn it down again, either… :wink:

11

handy wrote:

The characters portrayed in pornographic entertainment have nothing but one-night stands.

The models and actresses doing the portraying have private lives just as complicated as those of any other woman – including, but not limited to, sometimes having long-term boyfriends. So, for that matter, do prostitutes. However, because both porn-stars and hookers have professions that involve boinking people who are not their boyfriends, they often have to do other, more subtle things to ensure that their bond with their long-term honey is stronger than the fleeting sexual one they might experience with their screen-partners or customers. (You may recall in the movie Pretty Woman, the main character (played by Julia Roberts) would boink her customers, but she’d only smooch with her real boyfriend.)

12

This is a phenomenon I have encountered as well. Anyone have any insights as to why this may be?

13

Could be. Who ever really knows for certain if they have done all they could and successfuly given the kind of pleasure they have recieved? I’m not that conceited. But I do believe that given even the most pessemistic statistical averages that I have been with a couple of women who have had an orgasm or three. Also I’m not talking about a woman’s ability to “keep going” which is pretty apparent, and if not the rule it is fairly common. What I’m talking about is how many women are more prepared to wait until the relationship matures before engaging in intercourse. And how after that their interest in engaging in sex tends tu surpass my own (and if locker room talk is to be believed I am not alone in this.).

I can only give examples from my own experiences. When I first met my ex fiancee, I was intensely interested in her (had no frigging clue that she dug me as more than a friend). We hung out for a long time and eventually she “tripped” me (meaning she made it very apparent that she was interested in me as more than a friend during what i thought was a “have a nice trip” kiss prior to her going home for the holidays. In the beginning of our relationship my interest in sex was about on par with hers, towards then end there was a great disparity. She wanted sex several times a day and my interest was usually something like twice a week. At the beginning we were both about 4-6 times a week and sympatico. She is the most drastic example but she is/was the longest lasting relationship I have ever had. The trend carries outh, however, to all my past relationships.

Perhaps if you meant to imply that when you have sex with a woman she gives the impression of being completely sated? If that is what you meant, then also perhaps she has no desire to further engage for reasons other that contentment?

14

A thought which is completely off topic but ocurred to me while replying to a post in her that may explain to some degree why we have both observed this:

Men are much easier to physically pleasure for the most part while often it takes some effort and actual knowledge of a woman’s particular likes and dislikes to arouse her and bring her to orgasm. Perhaps as time goes on a woman’s partner (unless he is a complete oaf) fevelopes more ability to stimulate her, thus making the act more desireable itself.

Also if you bring into this a fairly common observation on how women “nest” (be it societal or genetic I have no clue) and become more comfortable once in a secure relationship it may be that women actually have a much higher sex urge than men all the time but because of societal or genetic imperatives they subvert it until they feel secure in a relationship and then feel comfortable enough to unleash this great raging beast of a libido?

Let me know if those sound plausable to you. I have no close female friends of sufficient introspection to bounce this off of so I’m curious if you think this might be near the mark.

15

I was just a one-night stand to my wife, when we were first introduced. She was seeing a guy who wouldn’t commit to a relationship, and had distanced herself from him. She told her friend that she wanted someone to have sex with, and since her friend was my best friend and knew I was having a bit of a dry spell she introduced us. I spent the night, and she asked her friend to ask me what I thought of her. When it got back to her that in my description I said ‘intelligent’ before I got to ‘pretty’ (she was used to men being primarily interested in her looks) she decided that I was a keeper. 8^)

16

Zen: some interesting thoughts; you may be on to something. I personally have always wondered why guys and gals involved in ‘one-night stands’ are perceived as trashy, and this appears to be more the case with women than men. I mean, girls who have one night stands are ‘sluts’; guys who have one night stands are, well, male (grin, grin, nudge, nudge).

But why should this be the case? Are men/women not allowed to be involved in short-term relationships involving sex without being ‘trashy’?

Note that I am not talking about cases where one partner is not up front with the other about their horizon expectations, or their situation (i.e., one (or both) is married, etc.). Nor am I saying that these types of relationships should replace the family as the core social unit in modern society.

Still: the reason I think Zen has a point is that society seems to program women (and perhaps men, to a lesser extent) to only feel comfortable about sex in a ‘proper relationship’ setting, whatever that is. Note that this appears to hold truer for Western (Christian-centric) cultures, and the US in particular.

My personal opinion is that Americans are so damned uptight, confused, sensitive, and paranoid about sex that it creates far, far more problems than we care to admit: US adults are so childish and juvenile when it comes to talking about sex. What is so laughable is that the US both tries to be ‘upright and moral’ (lets protect our kids by putting labels on offensive CDs, etc.), and still can’t get enough of T&A on TV.

I mean, sex (along with food) is one of the base needs/desires of the entire animal kingdom. Man may be the only animal where sex is possible/desired in situations/timing not directly related to passing on our genes, but guess what: what guys find attractive in women is related to their ability to give birth.

Why red lipstick? Symbolizes the female genitals. The butt? Remember that like most other animals, early humans (and maybe in modern times as well <g>) probably had sex with the guy starting the action from behind.

Why did woman develop breasts? Because when man started walking upright, the most obvious part of the women that let the male know she was in heat (her butt – know how dogs and other animals sniff each other up? Same thing) was no longer (literally) staring the guy in the face. So she developed breasts, and started wearing lipstick. When women wear makeup, they tend to add a slight reddish ‘tinge’ to their cheeks–symbolizing the quickness of breath and redness of cheeks during sexual arousal. The whole upper front part of the women’s body is one big tease, a big come on. Not that women do this knowingly–but that’s the point. I recall reading that studies have shown they tend to wear more revealing clothing during the time of the month that they are ‘fertile’, for lack of a better word (will see if I can come up with numbers from the actual study).

Other aspects of females that men find attractive are also psychological, if not so directly related to sex, and are generally also things women find attractive in men: healthy, clear skin complexion, good teeth, relatively trim appearance indicate a healthy male/female specimin capable of producing healthy offspring. Men dig younger chicks because of evolution: younger women are more likely to produce more offspring than older women; maybe not such a big deal now, but a very big deal 20,000 years ago when a good portion of the population died before the age of 30.

Women, incidentally, instintively dig men with flat stomachs, broad shoulders, and tight buttocks (at least from what I have heard; I certainly don’t have any of these <g>). These characteristics suggest (no lie) strong thrusting power, and that the male is a strong, physical speciman able to protect his mate and offspring.

Woman stopped ‘going into heat’ – and thus were able to have sex all the/any time – because the extremely long training process required for the human baby meant the male had to stick around. The 9+ months required to give birth, plus at least a 10-12 year protection period before the child is able to fend for itself in the wild, is unheard of in the animal kingdom (research suggests that this long ‘incubation’ period was a pre-requisite for the development of our brains). As such, it seems that sex was the male’s reward for coming back to the cave each day with food.

Not much has changed, it would appear, in 20,000 years, except our willingness to accept the fact that nothing has really changed…

Badtz Maru posted while I was previewing this: I can only add that I have had two ‘meet and boing within three hours’ experiences in my life. The first women, we never met again. I married the second one.

17

I heard the reason behind lipstick was it made the woman’s lips appear flushed and as if she had been biting on them. Pretty much all makeup is to either simulate arousal or to simulate good health and young age (covering up wrinkles and blemishes). For instance, when you look at someone that arouses you, your pupils dilate. Eyeshadow and eyeliner give the illusion that the eyes are more dilated than they are. Blush makes the cheeks look flushed with arousal.

A nice full round butt shows that the woman (A) has wide hips, which make childbearing easier and (B) is not malnourished. Large breasts show that the female is of childbearing age and can nurse children. A symmetrical face is an indicator of health and lack of genetic defects.

18

I dunno nothin’.

19

Well, arguably, after seeing When Harry Met Sally no man does ;).

On a more serious note, Zen. What you are describing sounds familiar to me as a phenomenon that occurs for men and women both. At the beginning of a new relationship, the sex is very exciting and, if all is going well, both partners can’t get enough. Then, if love and attachment becomes the primary appeal, sex and excitement can decline. I also think different people have different baseline levels of sexual need and (unless your were wildly lusting after other women while you contented yourself with 2x/week with your fiancee) yours may not be as high as your fiancee’s was. This is a very complicated subject that I’m going to boil down to two general comments, one of which bears on webmstr’s thoughts below.

First, I totally agaree that people in the US are hung up on sex and communicate on the subject very poorly. And I think that TV, magazine and movie “T&A” makes things worse (as men are increasingly finding as they find more Calvin Klein-type hunks flexing their bods on the tube). That is, these totally unrealistic images of the god-like make real-live mortals feel like shit about themselves. Hardly a turn on! This is especially devastating for women who, from their birth, are given completely conflicting messages about their sexuality (that they should/shouldn’t want it, etc. etc.). People spend so much time being aroused by unattainable images (the tendency of which is to make them buy things or masturbate–not to have sex); and spend almost no time communicating to real-live partners about what they enjoy. Again, in very simplistic terms, what this means is that many relationships quickly end up with at least one partner having a somewhat depressed sexual appetite that he or she may not even be conscious of as such.

Second, and this is more specifically towards Zen. I don’t know whether your declining interest in sex is what broke up your relationship or not. But, if it was, bear in mind the next time around that there are a lot of things a person can do to make his (or her) partner happy when he (or she) is not himself in the mood. In fact, these kinds of non-procreative-style sexual acts can give a couple a whole new attitude about what to do in the dark ;).

Finally, Zen, I’d stay clear of making too many assumptions about how women “nest” (see below).

Onto webmstr. It sounds to me like you’ve been reading The Naked Ape or some derivative thereof. I’d take all of that evolutionary psychology stuff with a grain of salt–maybe the size of a basketball. It’s all based on speculation and there are heated (and very interesting) arguments about this subject between and within just about every area of social science. Most of these human/animal analogies don’t hold up to any level of scrutiny. Nowadays, when I wear lipstick it’s either very dark chocolatey brown, or a really washed out metallic color like copper. These fashionable shades do not even remotely resemble my genitals. For that matter, genitals tend to be something rather less red than red lipstick–unless something very unsual has been going on. As to going into “heat”: does it really make sense to make extrapolations about female sexuality based on analogies to the reproductive cycle of dogs? If I’m not mistaken, elephants have a 22-month gestation period: yet they neither read The Rules nor wear red lipstick. And if Nature made men attracted to younger women for procreative reasons, wouldn’t Nature have stopped to wonder whether its a good idea for a guy in his late 60s to marry a woman in her early 20s, for the simple reason that he might be dead before their children reached their first baseball practice? Badtz Maru, on a similar theme: my grandmother has huge breasts but she is not of childbearing age. And if you’re looking for a woman to nurse a child, a healthy flat-chested 18-39-year-old will be better than my grandmother any day of the week.

On the subject of one-night stands: webmstr, you’re really asking two questions. 1) Why they’re looked down on for men and women both and 2) Why women in particular are perceived as sluttish for engaging in them.

Again, only simple responses are possible here. I think the assumption is that any man or woman who has reached a certain age and still prefers one-night stands to more enduring relationships has some kind of problem with enduring relationships. Of course,that implies a value judgment: it assumes that enduring relationships are more meaningful and rich in human terms than are mere sexual encounters. As to the sexual double standard: I could go on and on and on here, so I’ll just say one thing that may piss you off. The tone of your OP, although you probably didn’t mean it to, reeks of a double standard. You used the word slut yourself (without quotation marks the first time). And while you may have been miming others’ beliefs in doing so, your overall tone was the kind that puts women on the alert. Who wants to have a one-night stand with a guy that is mocking or contemptuous of the women that he’s “had”? I realize that you were attempting to be funny, young and hip: but what came across was the disrespect you or one of your friends might bring to any woman who allowed herself to be “bagged” by you. You described the sexual encounter in terms of conquest: inherently hostile and competitive. This is rather different from a tone of mutual and equal exchange that you might have brought to the subject of one-night stands (e.g., you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours). Of course, you left the door open to a woman also viewing her sexual experiences in predatory terms; and doubtless some women do. Nevertheless, given the existence of the double standard, and precisely b/c it’s the woman who is much more likely to be called “slut,” or to feel ashamed of having been “used,” when sex is conceived as conquest it’s very often women who decide (consciously or not) that “The only way to win is not to play.”

20

You know, it’s been a loooong time since I’ve seen a woman referred to as a “skirt.” What are you, a member of the rat pack? It kinda made me laugh.

This has never confused me. There are myriad ways of making it clear to woman that you’re interested in her, and it doesn’t need to involve the full-court press. The few times men have attempted a “full court press” on me, the only response I’ve had was to become a little creeped out by it. There is a balance between interested and desperate.

But back to the issues at hand:
I’ve known many women who enjoy the occasional one-night stand, self included, and wouldn’t think to label them sluts any more than I would label myself that. Women, as another poster pointed out, are simply less likely to broadcast the fact that they got laid, except to, possibly, trusted friends. Because really, it’s no one’s business but the two boinkers’ (I will never use that word again, I promise!).

I don’t buy into the idea that a woman’s supposed tendency to “nest” is biological. Speaking from personal experience, no, sex does not always have to have strings attached. My post-sex expectations rarely differ from my pre-sex ones, but then again I try to make intelligent decisions regarding the people I sleep with, so that the expectations on both sides are met. I don’t suddenly expect greater commitment from a man after I’ve slept with him than before, and in one notable instance, I just hoped he’d go away.

All that said, sex can definitely be used as a means to accomplish an end. Sometimes that end is greater intimacy, sometimes it’s to sustain interest (or in some sad cases, to spark it), sometimes it’s to conceive, sometimes it’s just to get off. While I couldn’t begin to know the dynamics of Zen’s relationship with his ex, my thought was that maybe she was aware of the growing distance between them and was hoping sex would close the gap.

By saying that you, webmastr, have gotten tired of a woman after “banging” her, you make it sound as if you made no effort to get to know the person attached to the pussy. I’ve experienced growing interest in a partner after the first sexual encounter, and that’s actually usually case with me. As I grow more comfortable with him, I feel free to dig deeper into my bag of tricks and to learn what new ones he can teach me. If he’s earned my trust, he’s earned himself some pretty hot sex. But then, that requires him to attract me with his mind and spirit, not just his cock (no matter what size). What do you bring to the encounter, aside from your penis? Why should it go beyond a one night stand, if a dick’s all you offer?