Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Don't Buy the Cow if You Ain't Tried the Milk

So I was having a chat with a another friend int he same boat as me: over thirty, single and giving up hope of meeting a single over-thirty guy who isn't single for a good reason.* She has found one, and of course he has his issues--wildly insecure etc, etc. They've been dating two months, and she tells me, woefully, that the sex is not...er...stellar. And you know what I thought? I though to myself, hooo boy, there's the best reason ever to not be coy and 'wait for the xth date'.

Seriosuly.
I get a lot of flak for my whole go-with-the-flow approach to sex and dating--if I had a dollar for every time someone has sternly told me 'MinCat, if you want to make this work, you have to NOT SLEEP WITH HIM. TILL THE 5TH DATE!' (Or whateverth date.) I'd have enough money to visit the Light of my Life every year. Apparently, if you sleep with a guy fast, he doesn't respect you. He is no longer interested in getting to know you. You won't have a chance to get him to emotionally bond with you before you give him what is, of course, his ultimate goal, and then he'll leave cos he has it. Or he won't value this precious gift you've given him.

Tosh.
No, really.
All this might hold true for when you're twenty-five, or sleeping with a twenty-five-year-old, but really, I've found they have very little bearing on things at the point I'm at.

For starters, I have, by this time, had enough sex to know I like it, it's important, and it's highly unlikely I'll be happy in a relationship that involves mediocre sex. This might have something to do with having been single so long and in the market, playing that field etc, etc, but whatever the cause, it is a fact. Yes I will dump someone if the sex is bad. So I'd much rather know right off, instead of waiting till *I* am emotionally bonded with the guy and won't be able to walk away.

Second, since sex is so much fun, if you go one one date with someone boring, you can still get away from the experience with some good sex under your belt, as it were. And, believe me, when you get to where I am, you go on a lot of first dates with boring guys. And since you don't have a nice steady partner squirelled away, it's nice to get laid once in a while.

Third, if this guy is a child enough to think that all you're good for is sex, how exactly is withholding it going to do anything more reinforce a really stupid power equation? Because yes, I do think that using sex to manipulate someone, or as a weapon, is a terrible thing. It's one thing to not be able to engage with a partner sexually because you have problems, but to actually say yes I'd like to but I won't until you do what I want is really fucked up. (har har, see what I did there?)

Fourth, sex is not some precious gift that I will only bestow on the knight who deserves it. That's rubbish. Are you telling me that women don't enjoy sex? That we only do it cos men like it and that's how we hold them in thrall? All I gotta say is, honey, if that's your life, go find some other man to sleep with--you've got a lemon. Women can, do and should enjoy sex. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being like that, and there is nothing wrong with having sex with a guy because you enjoy it and you want to, right now, even though it's only the second date.

Fifth, men are not sex-craving automatons! Plenty of men want relationships--okay, maybe not at thirty, but then those guys often want friendship with sex on the side, cuddling, dinner, etc. Men also want women in their lives they can have sex with but can also go have dinner with. It's complete bullshit to stick them in that hole where all they want is sex. Of course, there are guys who do disrespect a woman for putting out, or really do only want one thing, but look at it this way, at least you're not emotionally invested when he walks away! (See #1 above.) Would you want to be with that kind of guy in the first place? Take the sex and leave!

All this aside, I do really think that we seem obsessed with playing this dating game by some severely twisted rules. We spend hours pretending to feel what we don't, and then are upset when people don't get how we really feel. We put tons of effort into going after what we don't want, because it's not kosher to want what we want. There's so much shit going on and it simply complicates life so much that it can so easily ruin one of the best things life has to offer--sex! So, yeah, Don't tie yourself into knots about the number of hours you have spent in socially-dictated acceptable situation with someone. If you want to jump him, jump him. Just use condoms.

*Really, they all are. Some have been screwed over by some girl and can't get past it. Some have mommy issues. Some don't want commitment. Some are just strange. Some are super picky. None of these is good or bad, they just are. 

EDIT
On Dan Savage this morning:
Yes, Dan, thereare still plenty of straight guys out there who are put off by women who go "too fast," and oral sex on the first date is typically perceived as too fast. It's part of a misogynist mind-set, IMHO, that says women who are too sexually assertive are not "relationship material." Or maybe it's some ancient male fear of the insatiable nympho who will drain his male power by overwhelming him sexually. Or, more generously, maybe these men think going too fast just speaks to poor judgment (although straight men rarely apply that logic to themselves). Whatever the cause, I've experienced it myself, and I found the solution to be to date more sex-positive feminist men who take responsibility for their half of the pacing. I've found that feminist men actually appreciate women who are sexually assertive, while many non-feminist men are happy to accept the attentions of sexually assertive women while at the same time harboring contempt for us.

10 comments:

  1. aw. something i wrote made you resurface!

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1. I don’t believe in the he-won’t-respect you, he won’t be interested etc. But I have observed that the stretching-it-out is a mating dance that works mostly. I don’t think there’s a logical explanation for it. I don’t think the guys one would want to be with would be all “what a slut, turn off!” because you slept with them on the first date. I just think that the odds are better by stretching it out. As regressive as it sounds, there is some mystique involved in the slow unveil and I don’t see anything wrong with it.
    2. Sex can be great at the first go. It can also be not stellar because you aren’t emotionally connected enough or familiar enough yet for it to be good. So one could also argue that by writing off someone who failed the sex test on the first date, you’re writing off someone who could potentially have gotten better. The same thing applies to people and conversation actually. I guess it depends if sex is your number one criteria. If it is, then go ahead and make it the gatekeeping test. But for a lot of people conversation trumps sex, so that is the first clincher/turn-off.
    3. So given the above two points, people generally go the conversation route first and let the sex happen later.
    4. “, if this guy is a child enough to think that all you're good for is sex” I don’t think that’s the case. But I do think that many guys do enjoy playing out the mating ritual in the traditional way. One might say “but I don’t - why must I always fall in with guys want”. Fair enough. If you truly and urgently would like a large helping of sex, now, then do it whichever way you like. I think it’s a matter of preference – what kind of seduction method you like – and I think what people are telling you is that many men like the slower way even when they say they like the faster one.
    5. I don’t think of this as withholding sex, since one is presumably also withholding it from oneself. It’s kind of like stopping oneself from saying the first thing that comes to one’s mind. It’s like an extended strip tease and there’s pleasure and pain in it for both parties, to varying degrees. Do you think a strip-tease is a power trip? In a sense it is. But I think it’s okay.
    6. “sex is not some precious gift that I will only bestow on the knight who deserves it.” Agreed. But what was that line about every time you sleep with someone you leave a bit of yourself with that someone. It’s about self preservation more than gifting. You’d like to have sex where there’s affection at least. But how does that happen on the first date?

    All this said, I’m not against sex on first dates or one night stands. I just don’t think they should be standard operating procedure. I tend to err on the side of delayed gratification.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ah, i should have made clear that i am trying to open the field up for women who DO want to have sex, and get them to not be so judged. im with you on all of these counts and for all the people who are comfortable in this context. but i do also know that in my own personal experience, and maybe its an age thing, or a me thing, those rules just don't apply anymore. i haven't met a guy who would really come around to thinking he can date you because he spends time talking to you--at this point, i pretty much know if i want to date someone about ten minutes in, and i don't think guys are different either. practice at evaluating people? i dunno. but it is true.

      i also don't think i'm a victim because a guy wants sex fast--but that IS because i am okay with it. i guess my problem is with people trying to make me feel bad about being okay with that?

      on one level i also think that I, 30 and single, am not really going to meet some guy and then grow closer and bond and slowly and delicately turn it into relationship and love etc. i don't think i have the patience and i don't think i know more than one guy who has the patience. oh wait, he's 28. maybe it's some sort of instant gratification kick i've gotten on--but i honestly, truly do not believe on any level that i'm going to get a better or worse relationship with a guy because i did not or did have sex with him at a point socially considered too early. I really am past that myself, and I don't know if i'd have the patience to BE with someone who IS still there.

      Delete
  3. "i haven't met a guy who would really come around to thinking he can date you because he spends time talking to you--at this point, i pretty much know if i want to date someone about ten minutes in, and i don't think guys are different either." But what do you base that 10-minute assessment on? Conversation and interaction, not sex, right? What I mean is that while there may be less than stellar yet pleasant sex, the same may be true of conversation and that generally leads to date 2. Or is it that people necessarily test out sexual compatibility first before embarking on date 2 as the norm nowadays> I guess not because then we wouldn't have this conversation.

    Agree on not being a victim because both you and the guy want to have sex. I also think that only you can know what it is you want and whether you're having sex for you or somebody else. I don't know who has said what to you but if comments were directed at you specifically and they are from otherwise intelligent people, then maybe they were meant for you alone and what they believe to be the best route in your particular situation.

    "on one level i also think that I, 30 and single, am not really going to meet some guy and then grow closer and bond and slowly and delicately turn it into relationship and love etc. i don't think i have the patience and i don't think i know more than one guy who has the patience. " Really? Don't have the patience to wait a few dates to see if anything develops? Surely you jest. I get not going on with certain duds - personality-wise or sexually - but there must be in-betweens no?

    Thinking back on the people I had sex with quite quickly, I can't say for sure whether the relationships would have been different had I waited. But I do think the tone of the relationship would have been a bit different. I don't think it's one of those 'people should grow out of this BS' kind of things, at least with the kind of men one would be interested in whom we shall assume are non-traditional to start with. It's like telling someone to grow out of their personal aesthetic. Yes, you could say that you only want to be with someone with exactly your aesthetic but then you're limiting yourself.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ooo good point about the ten minutes being conversation.

      no, i really don't have the patience anymore to put up with all this game shame nonsense. i'm not saying this means i must leap into bed with every man i meet once he passes the ten minute test, but i do think it's really not a big deal if i DO leap into bed with him. i think maybe because of my own personal history with sex the longer i wait the worse it is. the more i care the harder it is to actually take my clothes off. fact of the matter is in my experience the ones i've waited for have been far worse, both in terms of sex and relationship potential. so i am making case for those of us who want to do this. also, making a case for hose of us who just want the occasional meaningless one night thing. and are happy to go for it while waiting for worthy man to turn up.

      Delete
  4. > It's complete bullshit to stick them in
    > that hole where all they want is sex.

    MinCat, love your blog. But that double entendre ... was a tad too graphic. And hilarious!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hahaha! good catch! alas completely unintentional.

      Delete