General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMy dumbest question ever... how do people shtup these days?
No, of course I know a variety of parts and places they can go, I mean the process leading up to the deed.
A friend of ours is getting divorced, a former fraternity brother. Nasty divorce after decades, I guess it happens but a head scratcher. He'll do fine, as will his ex, both lovely high-functioning people.
He's starting to date again which has me thinking back to our fraternity days (Carl Sagan's next-door neighbors, coincidentally). Back then, the process normally consisted of dancing, alcohol (and sometimes other state-enhancers), kissing, yadda yadda yadda... Then
No real discussions beforehand, and yes, no meant no.
(NB: As far as I know we were all nice guys, we had a great reputation with normal women although the high-end sororities were not fans. Our campus had 50 fraternities, half of men lived in frats, so it wasn't one of these situations where all the frat guys are jerks. Also, this was right before AIDS became a big issue so STDs were in a whole different place.)
In any case, my buddy's new situation has me thinking... how do people move from "nice to meet you!" to "um, I'm having trouble with this clip thing"?
I eventually married my college sweetie, so I never really lived the evolution of courtship and mating in modern times. I'd imagine that it's roughly the same as a few decades ago, but it seems like it would be more deliberative. Are there discussions that should/must be had? Papers to sign (I doubt it, but...?). Other? Or does nature still tend to do its thing rather effortlessly?
If this question is offensive I'll be happy to take it down, if it's inappropriate the hosts will save me that trouble.
Rex
(65,616 posts)I'm sure at one time we peed and threw our own feces at each other to express gratitude and general attraction. Those things came from us, so we probably thought they were valuable.
Future dating one day will be done on machines...oh...nm...
Autumn
(44,686 posts)some posters in this thread that want to shtup Manny basted on the amount of feces they throw at Manny to express their gratitude and general attraction.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Autumn
(44,686 posts)And liking it. Makes me happy.
Rex
(65,616 posts)To be THAT patient and understanding. I read that they already have a Windows 8.1.
Autumn
(44,686 posts)But it's not as bad as I thought it would be. I am enjoying all the apps and the tiles are so convenient. But in all truth I have cheated a bit, my 9 year old Grand Daughter has a tablet so she has been a little help there. How crazy is that.
Rex
(65,616 posts)we were all dinosaurs! They probably won't be able to visualize life before the internet.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Yeah, but meta got shut down, remember?
Rex
(65,616 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)frwrfpos
(517 posts)TeeYiYi
(8,028 posts)...but a hat tip.
TYY
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)e.g., Ann Coulter was my classmate, she was in one of the non-normal-woman sororities - most of their members were similar to Coulter other than having better impulse control.
But I get your point, that's a tough thing to call.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Ann Coulter was your classmate? You mean this literally and not symbolically?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)She helped found our idiot Conservative paper and was a ringleader in destroying a shantytown erected in the Arts Quad to protest the school's investments in apartheid South Africa.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)and not really the over-the-top rightwing nutjob she pretends to be.
I guess either she's been performing since college or she really is a despicable as she seems
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Hmmm...that puts you on the plus 50 side, older than I thought.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)As my friend Bill, another frat member (who actually might have known Ann a bit better) says... "Sure you're only young once, but you can be immature your whole life"
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)You try to mess with me then want answers to your questions?
Feh.
Good night.
BainsBane
(52,999 posts)I think you just got dismissed too!
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)sheshe2
(83,137 posts)sheshe2
(83,137 posts)A bigot and a zealot. A truly hateful hateful person. She is not even in my category a human being.
Yet...
So a "normal" woman that has self confidence in herself is hubristic? Self confidence is bad in a woman?
Wow Manny you have a boatload of respect of women, thanks for your powerful manly explanation of what a "normal" woman is. Good that you have classified us.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)sheshe2
(83,137 posts)And no I am not, yet it is an insensitive statement.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)You're just trying to cause a foodfight, and say hurtful things about me.
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)It is hurtful to women.
I did not post the OP Manny, you did and you are the one that said the words. I did not.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Seriously. I suspect you could use one.
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)Lawd, I feel a fainting spell coming on~
You defined "normal women". You brought it into your OP, Manny. I did not. Your words and now you are having trouble taking them back when someone finds them offensive.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)you might want to rephrase what you said, some people find that hurtful."
You, on the other hand, just made #%^* up then followed with this pile of refuse:
Wow Manny you have a boatload of respect of women, thanks for your powerful manly explanation of what a "normal" woman is. Good that you have classified us.
This is the kind of garbage behavior that makes DU less than its former self.
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)Nope.
Aaaah, so now I am a person with no sense.
You are right about one thing...
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)and post
This is the kind of garbage behavior that makes DU less than its former self.. You flood the place with almost 13,000 post. And you can't figure out how DU is less than its former self. Look in the mirror.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)+1000
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)That was a direct quote from Manny. I just copied and pasted that excerpt from his post. That's why I posted it with this
And what does my post count and time at DU have to do with anything?
Autumn
(44,686 posts)are you going to offer your personal information?
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)Autumn
(44,686 posts)BainsBane
(52,999 posts)What a ridiculous comment.
I will request that you quit talking about me period, whether it's to make nonsensical comments about this thread or gossiping in a group from which I am banned. It's petty.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/111413342#post10
I don't know what your problem is, and frankly I don't care. Keep it to yourself.
Why some people think DU exists for them to cultivate personal enmity out of complete strangers, I have no idea. Just leave me out of your junior-high cafeteria gossip.
Violet_Crumble
(35,954 posts)You weren't even mentioned. Also, I remember you saying you'd trashed that group
BainsBane
(52,999 posts)If you had followed the lounge thread, you would see it is gossip about me. Moreover, she doesn't deny it. Ask her.
Is your contention that if I had a group trashed, that makes it acceptable for members there to gossip about me? Or is my crime seeing it and disturbing the God given right to trash feminists? It is fascinating to see how determined you are to excuse others for what you lecture HOF and its members about.
Violet_Crumble
(35,954 posts)I guess you wouldn't be able to see that, seeing as how you said that you have the Men's Group trashed...
And I wouldn't call what I said a contention. I'd describe it as wondering out loud how someone who has a group on ignore can read that group. I thought the whole point of trashing a group was that it vanished totally. If there's a glitch in the system that makes the group visible to you, maybe you should alert the Admins to that? It kind of defeats the purpose of the trash function...
I've read the next few posts and I'm even more curious now. You said: 'Skinner saw what that Lounge thread was and supported the lock.' Where did Skinner say this?
R B Garr
(16,914 posts)In your eagerness to discuss the Men's Group and then discuss whether or not someone has the Men's Group trashed and what significance that has to someone's credibility or possibly to some mysterious glitches in the system, you overlooked that all your dialogue and accusations were unnecessary because the link was from the Lounge to the thread in question. Look up post No. 16 in the Lounge thread. It was just that simple, and I am probably one of the least technical people here.
BTW, have you answered Manny's question he posed in this OP about how his friend can get laid by normal women? Or maybe this thread was really intended for posts such as yours that are basically a continuation of previous snipes. Hmmm.
Violet_Crumble
(35,954 posts)And I don't think wondering how someone who claims they've got a group trashed is still able to read it and comment on posts in the group is an eagerness to discuss a group. I'm just not seeing how if someone does have a group or forum trashed they'd be able to still read it, and I'm not sure why you've popped up with a rather nasty post like that
On edit - I haven't used trash so I just tested it out. I dug back and found the link in the lounge thread and it is viewable even when the group is trashed. Explaining that politely instead of going into nasty, accusatory mode would have been nice, btw. I am still curious to know where skinner said thAt he supported the lock. But will drop it as it's not worth being yelled at for daring to ask a question.
Have a nice day
Autumn
(44,686 posts)I don't care to look them up because I am bored with people who think that only they have a right to an opinion.
BainsBane
(52,999 posts)None of those comments were about you. Aside from MIRT, you never have entered my mind so I can hardly have talked about you.
So what exactly is your complaint? That anyone dare object to racism? That African Americans have a safe haven group? That anyone on this site has the audacity to consider the interests of anyone other than white people?
I don't think I'm the only person who has a right to an opinion. My opinions are about matters of substance. I assumed yours were about nothing but some random distaste for me, but now I see it's that you object to my raising issues of racism. It must be terribly upsetting to have to be confronted with the fact that someone besides white people matter on this earth. This, however, is a site for Democrats, and African Americans are the most loyal voting group. Despite that fact, we have few AA members left on DU. One thing is certain, I am not nearly as important as the issue of racism and that you think there is something comparable about petty gossip about an individual compared to a major social issue that affects America and the world at large speaks volumes.
Skinner saw what that Lounge thread was and supported the lock. He doesn't want this site to become a White Supremacist yuck fest anymore than I do. You object to the fact anyone cares. Too bad.
These past couple of days truly have been enlightening. Between that lounge thread, your carrying the controversy into the Men's Group, and your objection to the post linked above, I've learned a great deal about who you are.
Autumn
(44,686 posts)Very easy. Now I'm finished with what I had to say.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)sheshe2
(83,137 posts)sheshe2
(83,137 posts)it should read you are dense ....or You're dense~
Not and I quote you "man, your dense,,". By the way I am a woman not a man.
BainsBane
(52,999 posts)Last edited Wed Mar 12, 2014, 05:34 AM - Edit history (1)
anything of interest but instead engage in personal sniping.
I've seen many excellent threads by Sheshe2. Also the fact is she was quoting Manny. Perhaps you should pay closer attention to the content of discussions rather than their post count or some random judgment about complete strangers?
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)tkmorris
(11,138 posts)You did so poorly.
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)So, tkmorris, how do YOU define a "normal woman"?
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)For example, suppose I were to say: "Some men act like real jerks when they can get away with it. They're rude to restaurant servers, store cashiers, and other people (of both sexes) who are working in similar capacities that bring them into contact with the general public."
I think my statement is true. Is it "hurtful" to men, to adapt your criticism?
I will concede that some true statements may also be hurtful in the sense of hurting some readers' feelings. Some men reading my example statement may be upset because they're uncomfortable when their behavior is criticized. To my mind, though, that's usually not a good reason to refrain from a truthful criticism.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Performance art.
11 Bravo
(23,921 posts)would mis-characterize your words and proceed directly into full-on, teeth-gnashing, garment-rending fits of outrage over something that you clearly were neither saying nor even implying.
Just another day in the good old Grievously Dysfunctional forum.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)nor did he say or imply or even suggest that self-confidence in a woman is bad. I hope you were joking.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)We know what he was thinking when he wrote it.
If we have to explain it to you, then it proves your hatred.
Regards,
Nobody-in-particular Manny
Vattel
(9,289 posts)I thought I was defending you against a ridiculous attack by sheshe.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I appreciate the defense. This place has gotten nuts.
Regards,
The Real Manny
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Long day.
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)hu·bris [hyoo-bris, hoo-] Show IPA
noun
excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)Manny gives Coulter as an example of what normal is not.
You say Coulter isn't even human, and then go back to berating Manny for his statement.
You call Coulter not human, Manny refers to her as not normal, and HE is doing something so awful?
WTF?
polly7
(20,582 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Puglover
(16,380 posts)Slut shaming upthread. Ann Coulter is disgusting. I don't think who she knew "cacarnally" has squat to do with that. " "Carnally"
Good God.
BainsBane
(52,999 posts)Is they are only 1% of the population, so running into the other 99% isn't difficult.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)sheshe2
(83,137 posts)I said hurtful things to Manny, according to Manny!
dionysus
(26,467 posts)sheshe2
(83,137 posts)Thanks dionysus.
BainsBane
(52,999 posts)and I wasn't even in top form.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)BainsBane
(52,999 posts)He's not been at his best lately.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)from dividing Democrats issues - interesting which side he falls on - he could have been a feminist and that would have been better believable for coming from the left and supporting Elizabeth Warren for President. Choosing the male side may be a bad decision.
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
> > > Mail Message
> > > On Sun Mar 9, 2014, 11:42 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
> > >
> > > He haz a sad
> > > http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4637610
> > >
> > > REASON FOR ALERT
> > >
> > > This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
> > >
> > > ALERTER'S COMMENTS
> > >
> > > This just seems like gratuitous flamebait. Not just this post but the person's entire contribution to this thread. If there were still moderators no doubt the person would be asked to behave themselves or get booted from the thread. It's up to you dear jurors...
> > >
> > > You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 9, 2014, 11:54 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.
> > >
> > > Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> > > Explanation: No explanation given
> > > Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> > > Explanation: Sorry but not hide worthy.
> > > Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> > > Explanation: Nope. Leave it.
> > > Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> > > Explanation: I don't see nearly enough cause here, to hide.
> > > Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> > > Explanation: No explanation given
> > > Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
> > > Explanation: No explanation given
> > >
> > > Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)R B Garr
(16,914 posts)Hilarious that the "alerter" describes the thread as if it has any significance -- i.e., how his friend can get laid. This was just low-hanging fruit. Even the alert is in a mocking format.
treestar
(82,383 posts)just feeds right into right winger stereotypes too. Just gives them something to jump on.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)See posts #81 and #87, with both of which I fully concur.
The chorus attacking Manny is apparently demanding an "explanation" for his statement that self-confidence in a woman is a bad thing. The reason there is no explanation that will satisfy his critics is that, back here in the real world, Manny made no such statement. He said that some women are hubristic while most of them are normal. Equating hubris with self-confidence was added by his critics so that they'd have something to be outraged about.
If you believe that no woman anywhere in the world is hubristic, go ahead and make that case. For my part, I believe that women run the gamut from neurotic levels of insecurity, through appropriate self-confidence, and on all the way to hubris and arrogance. Sort of like men do.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Very subtle way of saying normal women follow react such that men are most comfortable.
sheshe2
(83,137 posts)what is a "normal woman". Yup crickets!
DJ13
(23,671 posts)I've found the $100 bill used as an introduction smooths over the rough spots.
(I'm kidding!)
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)or so I've been told.
It says:
a) I am on the leading edge
b) I value this experience
c) I value your privacy
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)"social skills."
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)"listening" and "thinking before speaking."
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Where might they be purchased, and at what price?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)a set of people with exactly the same reactions for whom there must be a formula for getting them to participate in sexual activities. If we just knew that formula, we could be in control and manipulate the opposite sex with it. There are tons of articles on alter net, etc. and every magazine on how to treat women - because you know they are all alike and will react according to a set formula.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)A HERETIC I AM
(24,307 posts)adirondacker
(2,921 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)MindMover
(5,016 posts)and I suppose that today looking at the tv that I don't have to worry about that later on...
Just don't understand why it is all aimed at an erection when it takes two to tango....
Warpy
(110,744 posts)and a lot of men find themselves doing just that because what was appropriate when they were 20 feels silly as hell when they are over 40. Call girls are a sure thing.
There's an online dating group for seniors if you're 55 plus and not set on finding 18 year old arm candy.
If your body is still hanging together, you can join various organizations from birdwatching to soup kitchens to political campaigns or churches to meet people.
I don't find your question a bit offensive. A lot of people out there are sharing your concern because there doesn't seem to be any graceful way to do what they just did without thinking when they were in their late teens and early 20s.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)There ARE things I find offensive though. But they are so far removed from a Manny post.
Things like bombs dropping on children are extremely offensive to me.
Women being raped by invading armies.
Torture is extemely offensive to me.
Most offensive of all is if my taxes are being spent on these truly evil things.
And of course, war criminals being allowed to walk free, a double insult to the victims.
Manny's post? If that was all the victims of our wars had to worry about it would be a wonderful world.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)7wo7rees
(5,128 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)It seemed like the least I could do..
Cleita
(75,480 posts)They think it's the new singles bar. The women, well as usual, they are looking for relationships. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
JI7
(89,151 posts)without wanting any relationship.
and there are many guys who do want a relationship and not just one nighters.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)I'm a woman, have been one for 74 years, went to all girls schools and worked in all women workplaces and I never met one who just wanted sex. Sometimes they settled for sex, but didn't just want it. Sorry. Fail. Otherwise what I do agree with you about is that I worked with and do know a lot of guys who did want relationships. But they were not the guys who are today cruising the internet. They are no different than the guys who used to cruise single bars. Their main and initial intent is to get laid, not to get married. Oh, yeah, I used to be a bartender in one of the more frequented single bars in LA back in the day. I observed a lot.
JI7
(89,151 posts)at some point in their life.
also even among women who would be interested in a long term relationship they still will go out and find guys just to have sex with.
one doesn't have to be in a relationship to have sex with someone.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,631 posts)A party University in the early 1990's was probably very different when you went to school or your circle of women. Because my Gramfeathers (maternal great grandmother) would be 109 if she was alive and thought my friends and I ad it made. They were doing (she and her friends) the same shit in the 1920's and then as she said in one of her numerous letters to - I"ll never forget this -
The moral majority decade happened and we had to have a sexual revolution all over again.
That decade was the 1950's.
Well, now you've met one. 😄
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)of wanting any type of a relationship but still wanted the sex. It was great being able to be picky. I also had my second son this way completely intentionally. I was ready to have another baby but didn't have any interest in a husband or coparent. His father was completely aware of the situation, it was just a lot cheaper & more fun than a sperm bank.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)There have been many times in my life (when I was single) that I just wanted a lay. I didn't care what their names were and I didn't necessarily want to see them again (unless they were exceptionally good). And there were times that THEY wanted to pursue something else and I simply was not interested. I was young and a lusty little wench if I do say so myself. I just didn't want the ball and chain that are inherent in too many relationships. But then again, my motto back then was, "Play a man's game better than a man. It confounds the hell out of them."
JustAnotherGen
(31,631 posts)dionysus
(26,467 posts)Cleita
(75,480 posts)relationships. They used to go to single bars, now they cruise the internet. I have too many instances from friends to have decided otherwise. The old fashioned way of meeting partners, whether it be through friends, school, church or workplace is where guys go to look for relationships, or frankly the occasional hardware store. Ask me about that if you dare.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)R B Garr
(16,914 posts)This was confirmed by her friends.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and this is why that role is assigned to men. And why the role of wanting more is assigned to women.
edbermac
(15,917 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)they've been told not to...
perhaps they are perplexed.
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)But no, it probably won't get taken down. Just another crap thread that makes a mockery of the rules and DU as a place for political discussion.
ProfessorGAC
(64,184 posts)As i don't agree with your interpretation of the rules, it means your post is an opinion not a fact. My opposite opinion is just that as well.
But, i'm stating mine as opinion. You're making a pronouncement as if you run the joint.
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)Mine stands.
Autumn
(44,686 posts)of groups that are pissed off at you. But before you accept that as too big a compliment just remember, it only takes a sneeze to piss them off. Sneeze is kind of a metaphor for just about anything. .
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Javaman
(62,394 posts)In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)So many people are in recovery from too much social drinking.
Javaman
(62,394 posts)I'm not sure what you are implying.
Cheers.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)I have no problem with having a drink but many of my friends cannot.
Javaman
(62,394 posts)I reread your post, edited my original because I wasn't sure if you were agreeing with a statement or implying something.
Nevermind, I can be very dense at times.
My apologies.
Cheers!
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)are similar to some type of ceremony?
Just get to know other people and don't have the goal of screwing somebody. Wait until it happens naturally. Just having the goal of getting them into bed is dehumanizing.
MissMillie
(38,416 posts)I have yet to meet anyone willing to do that.
All the men I meet go from "nice to meet you" to "so, you like sex, right?"
Nevermind my last name or favorite color....
dehumanizing for sure
redqueen
(115,085 posts)I would tell them yes, I love sex, but only alone, or with people I've known for at least four or five years.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)MineralMan
(146,116 posts)Maybe a change of the situations where you meet people is in order. You seem to be meeting only men who are not likely to develop some sort of relationship before moving to sexual activity. Not all men are like that. Truly.
Skittles
(152,918 posts)and I knew them pretty well first - sorry, I had to KNOW who I was with
Lex
(34,108 posts)Berlum
(7,044 posts)MineralMan
(146,116 posts)There is no real answer to your question.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)LOL
MineralMan
(146,116 posts)Tell your friend that if he just wants to "schtup," as you so ungracefully put it, he should skip all of the stages of relationship building, and just ask women, "Hey, you wanna schtup?" Why waste time? Get to the point right away. That will quickly identify the women who just want to "schtup" and avoid all of the rest of the getting to know someone and all of that boring stuff and move right into removing clothing.
Now, if your friend is actually interested in finding someone to have an actual relationship, he might want to consider some other approach. But he can probably find someone to "schtup" without all of that tedious foreplay. Not often, but once in a while, he'll find someone as bored with life as he is, and someone who just wants to "schtup."
Or, of course, he could just hire someone to "schtup" with him. I understand that such an arrangement is possible in most cities.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)I was going to say, "they don't".
Back to your question though. Since you asked, I have something that may be relevent to it... in later life after being widowed, three of my ex's came back. (Not all at once, one at a time, thank goodness.) So maybe that's a method, or maybe it's just a coincidence, dunno. None of them worked out the second time, but it was kind of interesting while it lasted anyway.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)I feel stupid...looks like I am the only one who has no idea what the question is. what is shtup?
DUH.....now that I write this, he meant shtoop.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Looks like most references have it as "shtup", e.g.:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/shtup
However, the character in Blazing Saddles is Lili von Shtupp.
So I should get half-credit, I think.
undeterred
(34,658 posts)And my answer was going to be "trash this thread"
polly7
(20,582 posts)Once you've experienced and decided what you don't want and won't put up with, you eliminate right off a lot of the chaff, and are free to just choose to enjoy time with people who make you think, laugh and who you just generally want to be around. Don't stress, be you, have fun ..... life is too short to worry so much. If something happens ...... it happens. Of course that's easy to say, being in an area where everyone knows mostly everyone in all the small towns around us. I imagine it's a bit more scary in the city.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)However...
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"My dumbest question ever..."
You underestimate yourself...
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)You ALWAYS have to have the STD conversation.
* Initially, you use a condom or, for cunnilingus, a dental dam.
* At some point, many couples agree to be mutually monogamous. If youve made that decision, and each of you reports having gone at least three months since any unprotected sex with anyone else, and each of you trusts the other, then you both get tested for HIV. If you both come back negative, then you dont need barriers to protect against HIV.
* There are other STDs, though. Annoyingly, there is no way to test men for HPV, so a woman who gets involved with your friend might still have a reasonable concern that hes carrying HPV and might infect her.
* As an alternative to the three-months-of-monogamy route, some people might choose to gamble. What do you do if a partner says I tested negative a year ago and all my sexual encounters since then have included condom use? The partner might be lying or forgetting, or a condom may have failed. Your friend should think now about what hell do in that situation.
Your friend might also want to get tested now, just in case he happens to be carrying something even he doesnt know about.
As to how you get to the point where all this is an issue, I dont think things are very much different from what he experienced before his marriage. Usually, two people get together, there may or may not be a kiss at the end of the first date, and as they continue to see each other the physical intimacy progresses. For some people its not all that uncommon to have sex on the first date. (My guess is that this is more common among the younger set than among the women in your friends age group, but I dont know.) For other people, sex on the third date would be considered much too fast.
There are no papers to sign. The progression toward physical intimacy still depends partly on conversation but mostly on reading nonverbal signals. Furthermore, the trend toward womens equality and toward elimination of confining gender roles has made only limited progress in this area. In most instances (and, again, focusing on the women in your friends age group), women will still incline to expect the man to make the first move. This is often true even if the woman is, not merely willing to consent to, but actively hoping for, something more intense. If your friend waits for an absolutely unambiguous signal from her, he may be in a situation where he wants to do something, she wants him to do it, but it doesnt happen. (Ive been there, as I learned from later debriefings.) Just as in the old days, hell sometimes have to risk rejection.
As others have mentioned, the main difference since his premarital days is the internet. It increases the opportunities to meet someone of compatible personality and interests. It may well seem awkward and artificial to someone (like your friend and like me) whose dating habits were formed in pre-internet days, but he should overcome that feeling and at least give it a try.
One thing hasnt changed: The whole process still presents abundant opportunities for insecurity, self-doubt, frustration, etc. Hell probably have to push himself, especially at first.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Got all sorts of answers to other questions, also sorts of helpful hints on how not to be a horrible person...
Actually, the info's for my own edification, I'm just curious. My friend hasn't asked for my help so I expect he's got it under control.
hack89
(39,171 posts)I have always wondered.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)I got mine at Eve's Garden, a long-established sex shop in midtown Manhattan. If you can't conveniently reach a brick-and-mortar store that carries them, you can order them online. I just searched for "dental dam" on duckduckgo.com. (Screw you, Google, you track me online and cooperate with the NSA, our relationship is over.) The search results included some condom vendors that also sell dental dams, plus Amazon, plus links to articles about how to use them.
hack89
(39,171 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)... I am WAY too literal with my jokes.
hack89
(39,171 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)So there's that.
Ohio Joe
(21,607 posts)oh wait...
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Wheeling a loaf of bread.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Sometimes female superior, but only after agreeing it doesn't mean what you might think.
sendero
(28,552 posts).... will find a way.
JustAnotherGen
(31,631 posts)And no - it's not the least bit complicated. If your friend is putting that much thought into it - he's probably not even leaving the bench!
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Explaining to her dad why he no longer had to pay for campus housing, that was awkward.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)If you want a "connection" go do something you love to do and again be aware and open to the possibilities.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)My fiancee and I undertook our entire mutual seduction via text message and picture trading. By the time we actually managed to meet physically it was smooth sailing -- no awkwardness, because everything had already been discussed and nervousness laid to rest. Five years later we are still happily together.