Prostitute or Decent Girl

yup - that's what the anecdotal evidence in my world suggests (and I spend a lot of time with other women because of my dance classes/dance troupes/dance performances). A good attitude can get a guy a long way to some casual sex.

The younger women (25 - 40) complain that guys want to get serious way too fast - they still want to date a few people at the same time, stay casual, and the men are asking for commitments - or at least exclusivity - way too soon.

OH, and they tend to have OK cars, not fancy or super new but not beaters either. THese guys have a least a little money.

I think this rolls around to another subject we have talked about at A2K, that so many guys seem to be so clueless about women and about relationships. These 35-50 YO's have lived long enough that they should have been able to at least partly figure women out by now, but by the fact that they are paying for a happy ending and by watching how timid they are while doing their walk of shame I get the distinct impression that they have not.


http://www.wikisexguide.com/wiki/Tacoma

Seriously??!!, Buying a girl dinner and smooth talking her into sex seems like a better deal to me. By the time you pay for the foot massage and one low end added service you are already almost to $100.

Yeah, but see, next thing you know, you're in a relationship. Like someone once said, "I don't pay a prostitute for sex. I pay her to leave afterwards." (Or to let him leave, I forget)

But--wouldn't it also be true that when a man likes a woman for himself, they keep the other "wolves" away from the territory? There's also a lot of that. Maybe to secure the passing of his DNA..I dunno. So men don't want for the female they have selected to be promiscuous...go figure. The "relationship" is a secure design then.

It's the whole securing the passage of DNA thing...both for men and women. Women now have options ( in the last 100 years) to create richer lives for themselves. No need to rush to the altar and start having babies ( a friend of mine had her first child at 45).

Insofar as the desire for ownership and control goes, yes. But that goes for both genders, in my experience. At a more primitive level, and a no less legitimate one, I think, most people just need/want to have sex. Sex is good, sex is fun. It's not always about relationships and ownership/control. Sometimes you just need an orgasm that you don't give yourself. I don't pretend to understand it, mind you. I'm just reporting on my own experience.

I find that biological factors are powerful drivers. It's interesting that after having children ( and not desiring anymore), women tend to no longer pursue marriage as a "final destination". Women are less likely to want to remarry. I think with "strings" attached come responsibilities. And--after assuming the primary responsibility to care for kids(a lot of work 24/7)home, jobs, etc...women just want time for themselves(which has usually been an unaffordable luxury in the past). ...so, many women who divorce simply say, "no thanks, " I'll pass", to the strings.

I can understand that. I tried marriage once. It lasted about 2 years, but with no kids. I have exactly zero compulsion to give it a second go. I have neither the desire to own or be owned, to control or to be controlled. On the other hand, I fully respect people who are in a committed relationship. That much I can understand. I just don't see the life-long aspect of it. The future is a mystery, and I won't pretend to know what it holds.

I don't consider sharing my life being "owned "....I know I can leave anytime, if I so desire. But--it's not just about me...

Well...biologically, "cougars" are essentially looking for the same thing as you are. Ever give them a try?

Yep. Or maybe they gave me a try. Not sure.

This thread is very odd to me. I didn't meet the guy I married until my early thirties and in all that time before, I was "promiscuous" for about a year and a half, long story, none of anyone's business. Even then, I was looking for someone, so I don't get the thread's seeming insistence on casual, or the more perjorative promiscuous, being without interest in more. Of course it often presents so, but sometimes someone is looking.

I did meet with a guy at an irish bar that we clicked, and went back to friends for religion reasons. He was later an attorney for me on an internecine irish matter, and my ex still consults him.

I bet a lot of women would disagree with that as a definition, that casual means not looking.

Then I did the classic get involve in your own interests thing, and met him by chance.

This thread is full of certitudes and distrusts, based on personal experience. Women looking for height or wealth.

Now we have cougars being taken as not actually looking.

Last time I saw my cardiologist, he was re-interviewing me to figure if I had some backup system of family and friends and told him about my now far away but still somewhat caring people, he got it that I married a way younger guy, by eleven years. COUGAR, he said. We both laughed and laughed (he knew the length of the marriage.) He's from India, and I was surprised he knew the word in that context.

Anyway, I think of this as the Assumptions Flying thread.

Yeah, I'm not much on making sweeping generalizations, either. I hope I haven't encouraged it with my posts. And I agree that even during a casual hookup, there's always the question in the back of my mind about the possibility of something more long-term. But it has to click with both people, and that's not usually the case in my experiences. I've had a few times when I was the only one interested in a relationship. It's not always the way the stereotypes suggest.

I seemed to blame you re a generalization, sorry, when it was gremlat who posted re cougar, I meant it more re the whole thread stuff re women, getting to annoy me.

Gremlat may be right re some plethora of cougars. I like Gremlat, as it happens. But as a cougar, I get testy.

My first lover was three years younger (I was 21). He was brilliant, I was right.
On the other hand, data doesn't substantiate that tendency all the time.

Oh, I didn't take it as blame. As for me, I don't see anything wrong with being a cougar or any sort of person who's looking for consensual sex. We've got these body parts and the hormones that tell us to do something with them, after all.

My stepdad was about 10 years younger than my mom. He was the greatest love in my mom's life. She never remarried after he passed away. I agree it was a generalization ....meant playfully. My point was....not all women want a relationship...not all women are interested in falling in love. Sometimes,they see a guy with regularity because, it's easier than being consistently on the prowl. Some women want sex but not necessarily strings attached.

Wow. Simply amazing. He will figure it out or get an STD. Tell him they are gross, dirty and have been places you don't even want to think about! If a prostitute is cheaper than a date it must be a real cheap one! Gross! Tell him to find a girl, treat her right and maybe he'll get what he wants. Geez. Too simple.

First we are talking about someone that only wish for casual sex at this moment in his life not a long term partner.

Second for that kind of sex, health precautions should be taken in any case as a matter of course.

Next if the nice girl he find and treated right had some regards and or gotten mad at him he might be looking at tens of thousands of dollars of legal bills and or being thrown out of college by some Kangaroo university court.

The woman is no more "gross", than the men that seek her company. It is the practice that I find disgusting....BTW...same with promiscuity. Ok..not the same less money.

I don't know what this even means... but yes we do want to think about these places (or else we wouldn't be on this thread now, would we.)