Last time I asked a question if women would date a 40-year-old virgin. Now what if he wasn’t a virgin, but only had one sexual partner in his sexual history.
Now how many of you would be willing to date him?
EDIT: Also, if that isn’t the problem for you, but rather that 40 is simply not in your acceptable age range, vote YES anyway!
Kudos to you for doing some research on your target audience. Best of luck.
I’m not a woman but I would suspect the answer might be different depending on if you are talking about one clumsy incident 20 years ago or one long term partner.
Yeah I imagine that would have bearing on it as well.
Putting aside the fact that I’m married and therefore this is a purely academic exercise, I refrained from voting because the answer is, frankly, “it depends”.
Are we talking someone who had one alcohol-infused interlude decades ago and retreated in shame to his parents’ basement only to emerge, pale and blinking, into the sunlight 19 years ago to try his luck again?
Not a chance.
Been in solitary confinement in prison for the past 32 years?
Nope!
Are we talking someone who married their high school sweetheart and remained faithful to her until her death in a car accident a couple of years ago?
Sure, why not?
What I’m getting at is that there is likely to be some sort of reason a dude is a statistical outlier of this variety, and before I decide whether to continue dating him (I assume the topic of his sexual history came up as a consequence of us starting dating in the first place) I’d like to know what it is. The reasons make a fairly big difference. There are certainly any number of perfectly reasonable circumstances (including, for the record, “I want to feel a deep emotional commitment with a lady before I make the beast with two backs”) wherein a person might end up 40 with only one past partner. But there are some really, really worrying reasons too. Context, sir, context!
I’d want to know the story behind any other notable ways in which a potential romantic partner is a statistical outlier as well, for the record.
Not everyone cares about sex, much less your former partners.
I’ll date just about anybody, as long as there aren’t any big red waving flags.
Whether or not I’ll have sex with them or pursue a relationship with them? The point of dating is to figure that out.
Ladies, would you date someone who has deliberately crafted his sexual identity around anonymous reponses to survey questions posted to an online discussion forum?
Don’t bother answering; I can hear the panties melting already.
Well, Angelica came up with the exception. Locked in prison for 30 years? Hell no. But a simple fumbling encounter in his youth wouldn’t stop me.
As always it depends on the reason why. As long as it’s not religion or some weird hangups about women* then we’re good to go.
*I don’t want to hear anything about how women are whores. I don’t ever want to hear a single second about how women shouldn’t like sex. I don’t want to ever be shamed for my liking sex, and wanting it. I won’t wait for marriage for sex, either. Really, all I ask is that he like it, too!
“One sexual partner” covers a ton of ground - like Aangelica pointed out, that could be a person who has major issues, or someone who’s been in prison, or just someone who got married, stayed faithful, and is now divorced or widowed and looking to date again. In my experience, what will turn women off is if the guy defines himself by ‘one sexual partner’, especially in a negative way (pretty much the same as in the ‘virgin’ thread), if he seems to have a lot of hangups about it, or if he doesn’t seem to have dealt with whatever issues led to the situation (if there are issues).
Aw, come on! He was only 8 years old and hungry when he burned down the village and ate the victims…