# So how many partners is too many partners? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [September 21, 2009, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017 "2009-09-21T23:21:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![KellyCriterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@KellyCriterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyCriterion)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/121 "2009-09-25T02:42:03Z")
> [@Green\_Bean](#): > > Baloney. Good luck arguing your case on that one. ---
**Author:** ![KellyCriterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@KellyCriterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyCriterion)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/122 "2009-09-25T02:43:40Z")
> [@Antinor01](#): > > No, I don’t agree with that. That may be the case for you, but I don’t see any reason for sex to be something you ‘save’ for you spouse. As I said, if you’re the sort of person that believes the most intimate, sacred way that you can express your love for someone should be reserved only for the person(s) you feel the most intimately and sacredly about, then being with someone that has had 30 sexual partners is a clear mismatch of values. It’s not right or wrong, but a mismatch of values. In regards to whether something becomes more valued and cherished the more exclusive it is, that is just an undeniable reality, and one that you appear to have admitted anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/123 "2009-09-25T03:34:40Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > As I said, if you’re the sort of person that believes the most intimate, sacred way that you can express your love for someone should be reserved only for the person(s) you feel the most intimately and sacredly about, then being with someone that has had 30 sexual partners is a clear mismatch of values. It’s not right or wrong, but a mismatch of values. If that’s how you feel, then awesome. I truly hope you find someone that agrees and that you’re truly happy. (unless I missed something and you already have, then make that present tense 😉 ) > [@](#): > > In regards to whether something becomes more valued and cherished the more exclusive it is, that is just an undeniable reality, and one that you appear to have admitted anyway. I would modify my agreement slightly to say that in my view, sex isn’t something that needs to be more valued. It’s already an amazing thing as it is. I’m very glad to be with someone that shares my view. ---
**Author:** ![Soapbox\_Monkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ed655f/32.png) [@Soapbox\_Monkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Soapbox_Monkey)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/124 "2009-09-25T04:24:35Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Have you done it at all yet? I vaguely remember a thread of yours where I think you were a virgin at 25. Going on 25 in a matter of days. It’s…unbearable. That and I’ve recently fallen for my best friend, and she does not feel the same way. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/125 "2009-09-25T05:22:53Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > In regards to whether something becomes more valued and cherished the more exclusive it is, that is just an undeniable reality, and one that you appear to have admitted anyway. I guess that depends on whether your idea of “value and cherish” leans more toward “want, seek, and enjoy” or “hoard, guard, and defend”. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/126 "2009-09-25T06:08:27Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > I’m sure you value and cherish the sex you have with your partner. If you and your partner had saved yourselves just for each other, wouldn’t that make the sex even more valued and cherished? You might not think so, but life tells us that we place extra value on things the more exclusive and sacred they are. There aren’t enough :rolleyes:s for my response. In my case, if my partner and I had “saved ourselves” we never would have met. We met in the course of having casual, anonymous, sleazy group sex, and we never would have met otherwise. But we did meet that way, and have been together . . . and monogamous . . . for almost 22 years. If we hadn’t been having that casual sex, we’d still be “saving ourselves” and very much alone. ---
**Author:** ![Cyberhwk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7993a0/32.png) [@Cyberhwk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyberhwk)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 7:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/127 "2009-09-25T07:34:34Z")
> [@Soapbox\_Monkey](#): > > That and I’ve recently fallen for my best friend, and she does not feel the same way. Ughhhh…Danger Will Robinson. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![El\_DeLuxo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_deluxo/32/9043_2.png) [@El\_DeLuxo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_DeLuxo)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/128 "2009-09-25T12:43:20Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > A lot of casual promiscuity in a female is a red flag for an abuse survivor with emotional issues. Oh, bullshit. It could also be because she enjoys fucking, and variety, and has an up-front and relaxed attitude about it. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/129 "2009-09-25T16:47:48Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > In regards to whether something becomes more valued and cherished the more exclusive it is, that is just an undeniable reality, and one that you appear to have admitted anyway. This statement is undeniably true when applied to objects. A diamond or an Oscar or a rare baseball card have value precisely because of their rarity. But I don’t think it works as well with experiences. Having eaten a hundred different delicious meals does not dampen the pleasure of a truly exquisite dinner prepared by a master chef, in fact quite the opposite. Having traveled all over the world doesn’t diminish the excitement of one’s first trip to Paris. And the opposite view, that one should spend their life eating plain oatmeal so as not to ruin that one exquisite meal, sounds kind of crazy when applied to something we haven’t created so many taboos around. There’s nothing wrong with the values you express if that’s how you choose to live your life, I’d only argue with the logic you use to defend them. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Bean](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_bean/32/1760_2.png) [@Green\_Bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Bean)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/130 "2009-09-25T18:06:08Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > This statement is undeniably true when applied to objects. A diamond or an Oscar or a rare baseball card have value precisely because of their rarity. But I don’t think it works as well with experiences. Having eaten a hundred different delicious meals does not dampen the pleasure of a truly exquisite dinner prepared by a master chef, in fact quite the opposite. Having traveled all over the world doesn’t diminish the excitement of one’s first trip to Paris. > > And the opposite view, that one should spend their life eating plain oatmeal so as not to ruin that one exquisite meal, sounds kind of crazy when applied to something we haven’t created so many taboos around. > > There’s nothing wrong with the values you express if that’s how you choose to live your life, I’d only argue with the logic you use to defend them. Very well said. With certain things, there’s only so much to go around. Only one Best Actress Oscar is given per year. But sex isn’t like that. The only limits are self-imposed. So if you want to make it more “special” by imposing those limits, knock yourself out. But that doesn’t change the fact that for many of us, having more sexual experience doesn’t devalue each encounter. If anything, I’d say it makes it better. Anyone can enjoy a good meal, but a connoisseur knows that what he or she is eating is truly exceptional. ---
**Author:** ![KellyCriterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@KellyCriterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyCriterion)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/131 "2009-09-26T01:21:57Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > I guess that depends on whether your idea of “value and cherish” leans more toward “want, seek, and enjoy” or “hoard, guard, and defend”. I often hoard, guard and defend the things that I want, seek and enjoy. As does every other person I know. The two are not mutually exclusive concepts, leaning towards one doesn’t mean you lean away from the other. ---
**Author:** ![KellyCriterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@KellyCriterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyCriterion)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/132 "2009-09-26T01:24:18Z")
> [@panache45](#): > > There aren’t enough :rolleyes:s for my response. > > In my case, if my partner and I had “saved ourselves” we never would have met. We met in the course of having casual, anonymous, sleazy group sex, and we never would have met otherwise. But we did meet that way, and have been together . . . and monogamous . . . for almost 22 years. If we hadn’t been having that casual sex, we’d still be “saving ourselves” and very much alone. How on earth did this post contradict anything I said? ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/133 "2009-09-26T01:26:00Z")
All this talk about saving oneself makes me think of this old friend of mine I’d not thought of in years. As a teenager, he honestly believed, for whatever reason, that you only got 100 orgasms in your lifetime, so he tried hard not to waste them. When he finally figured out otherwise, he went a little crazy making up for lost time. ---
**Author:** ![KellyCriterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@KellyCriterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyCriterion)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/134 "2009-09-26T01:33:07Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > This statement is undeniably true when applied to objects. A diamond or an Oscar or a rare baseball card have value precisely because of their rarity. Being an Oscar winner is more cherished than being in possession of an Oscar statue. Winning an Oscar _is_ about the experience. Somebody remains an Oscar winner even if they incinerate their statue. > [@](#): > > But I don’t think it works as well with experiences. Having eaten a hundred different delicious meals does not dampen the pleasure of a truly exquisite dinner prepared by a master chef I disagree. If you were only permitted to eat 4 exquisite meals per year, you would enjoy each one more. > [@](#): > > In fact quite the opposite. Having traveled all over the world doesn’t diminish the excitement of one’s first trip to Paris. Correct, all subsequent trips to Paris just wouldn’t be the same, would they? > [@](#): > > And the opposite view, that one should spend their life eating plain oatmeal so as not to ruin that one exquisite meal, sounds kind of crazy when applied to something we haven’t created so many taboos around. Ever noticed how people tend to eat at fancy restaurants only when celebrating some sort of occasion? A birthday, an engagement, annual family catch-up, etc. A few people certainly eat at such places just for the heck of it, but usually people reserve meals at fancy restaurants for special occasions - if everyone ate at “fancy restaurants” 5 nights a week, it would be less special to take your father there for his 60th birthday. Wouldn’t it? It is just undeniable reality that the greater the exclusivity of some sort of experience, the more cherished and sacred it becomes. Look around you. ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/135 "2009-09-26T02:08:24Z")
Ok, after a ton of thought about this: Men are like dogs. A dog that licks 20 different people at the park is considered friendly, cute, etc. The assumption here is that each person the dog licked doesn’t make the dog dirtier when it licks the next person, which is incorrect. Women are like hydrants. Would you put your food on top of a hydrant 20 dogs peed on? The assumption here is that the hydrant was not washed between pee’s, which is also incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 10:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/136 "2009-09-26T10:07:33Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > I disagree. If you were only permitted to eat 4 exquisite meals per year, you would enjoy each one more. Or maybe, with the knowledge of what I’m missing, I’d enjoy the rest of my meals _less_. > [@KellyCriterion](#): > > Correct, all subsequent trips to Paris just wouldn’t be the same, would they? No, they’d be better, because on each subsequent trip, you know more about Paris, and what you enjoy doing there. > [@KellyCriterion](#): > > Ever noticed how people tend to eat at fancy restaurants only when celebrating some sort of occasion? A birthday, an engagement, annual family catch-up, etc. A few people certainly eat at such places just for the heck of it, but usually people reserve meals at fancy restaurants for special occasions - if everyone ate at “fancy restaurants” 5 nights a week, it would be less special to take your father there for his 60th birthday. > > Wouldn’t it? Actually, most people who only go to “fancy” restaurants for special occasions do so because they either can’t afford to go more often, or else that kind of experience just isn’t a big deal to them. Lots of people go to them all the time, enjoy it immensely, and consider their life richer for it. > [@KellyCriterion](#): > > It is just **undeniable reality** that the greater the exclusivity of some sort of experience, the more cherished and sacred it becomes. Look around you. I don’t think those words mean what you think they mean. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/137 "2009-09-26T16:43:59Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > It is just undeniable reality that the greater the exclusivity of some sort of experience, the more cherished and sacred it becomes. Look around you. The more sought after it becomes. Not “sacred”. A bottle of 1973 Latour is not sacred, even though people will pay thousands of dollars for it. ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/138 "2009-09-26T17:14:09Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > Actually, most people who only go to “fancy” restaurants for special occasions do so because they either can’t afford to go more often, or else that kind of experience just isn’t a big deal to them. Lots of people go to them all the time, enjoy it immensely, and consider their life richer for it. > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > The more sought after it becomes. Not “sacred”. A bottle of 1973 Latour is not sacred, even though people will pay thousands of dollars for it. Well, there’s always the Big Mac of Pussy or Dick (Billions served)… I suppose it’s good if you like the secret sauce and a chance at food poisoning. And really isn’t it just automated food after that point? Homogenized, boring, and mundane, fixed menu items served up rote… like a fry with that? Although, I hear Ronald McDonald is quite the freak. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/139 "2009-09-26T18:22:00Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > I disagree. If you were only permitted to eat 4 exquisite meals per year, you would enjoy each one more. Perhaps, but to what degree would you go to wring the maximum amount of enjoyment out of those four meals? Would you deliberately eschew any flavors at all and eat just plain rice the rest of the year? Would you eat regular food, but specifically avoid making anything too flavorful so as not to compete with the upcoming meals? There’s obviously a continuum here, and everyone draws their lines differently, but it’s not any more logical to fast in preparation for those meals than it is to enjoy every meal as it comes. > [@](#): > > Correct, all subsequent trips to Paris just wouldn’t be the same, would they? Sure, you can’t recreate that first trip to Paris once you’ve been any more than you can have a first kiss with someone more than once. But some people might enjoy Paris more if they’ve traveled to a few other countries first. Their trip to Paris won’t be diminished by the fact that it’s not the first time they’ve stepped foot out of their home town. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017/140 "2009-09-26T20:39:01Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > If you were only permitted to eat 4 exquisite meals per year, you would enjoy each one more. If you starved yourself the rest of the year, you’d grab the food and wolf it down so fast, you wouldn’t care what you were eating. You’d be incapable of really enjoying it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-how-many-partners-is-too-many-partners/511017.md?page=8)