how many is too many

[Verres]

Ben, boann, thanx for the concern, but my comments regarding emotional intimacy are made:
a) in a very cynical frame of mind, and
b) referring mainly to past experience. currently, i DO have emotional intimacy, i AM honest with the person concerned, and as yet, i have not been given anyreason to regret this.

i was simply trying to justify why (getting back on topic) it is often the case that people are intimidated more by the fact that someone has had serious relationships in the past than the number they've had sex with.

[boann]

ahhh ok...sorry i misunderstood...
we are a bunch of busybodies round here

[Theben]

Originally posted by Ned
I was watching a commercial for "extend" -- a product for men. One of the women "endorsers" said she had 100,000 men.

Exaggeration?

Saw something in a magazine that compared 4 guys (it was my sister's People rag or something) total partners, and comparative looks. One a virgin, the other two like 10 and 30, and the last about 1500. The last was a porn star- although I couldn't tell by the picture.

I also remember some porn convention (in Texas, go figure) where this lady basically got on a table and had guys come up and do her from behind. Supposedly she had sex with over 600 men/day.

[Whaleboy]

You really think women stop having sex when they reach the menopause???

Nope, but I don't think many continue their porn careers past that point...

*Whaleboy looks innocuously at large poster of Katherine the Great*

[Whaleboy]

we are a bunch of busybodies round here

Clearly

[Drogue]

It’s quite scary (in the best possible way ) how similar our opinions seem:

Originally posted by Drogue
I think there's more to live up to if someone had been in love many times before. I don't really mind whether the person I'm with has to have feelings for that person in order to be intimate. If someone has had a load of one-night stands before, you'd still feel special that it wasn't like that with you. However if someone has had many meaningful relationships before, then it might not feel so special. It would be a bit corny to say there's a difference between having sex and making love, but that is really what I mean. If they have had sex for fun many times, then the chances are it would be completely different for them to make love to someone they care about. If they have already made love to many people, it maybe wouldn't seem so special.

Originally posted by Verres
i would be more intimidated if they had had several serious relationships than just a lot of casual sex, as somehow it would seem more to live up to.

Originally posted by Verres
Simple answer to that Ben, im not a guy!

Something I'm very glad of!

Originally posted by Verres
Its just personally, relationships have always seemed more daunting and intimidating than sex (well, at least that used to be the case )

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Is anyone's lovelife, ideal?

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
If she's doin' it with someone besides you at that moment, that's too many.

I agree completely.

Originally posted by Verres

Once every three hours for 35 years.

Sounds good to me

That settles it, I'm getting my own place!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Sprayber



Yeah I hate those guys that are around 30 or so and go after those 18 year olds

That's why God provided us with the shotgun.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Verres

I would find the physical intimacy far more daunting than the emotional intimacy, of a relationship. Actually, I find the emotional intimacy rather delightful.

Perhaps, yes. exposing yourself to someone emotionally is far more dangerous than physically, as you are opening yourself up to a greater degree of hurt. the emotional intimacy is great, sure, but it also frightening that someone could know you that well and therefore have such power over you if and when the relationship ends.

I have to say, when it comes to actual sex, I couldn't seperate them like that. Sex is an emotional thing to me, and so having sex is exposing myself emotionally. That's partly the reason I like it

However I find it very easy to be open with people both physically and emotionally, to a large extent. It's just when it comes to sex and love, it matters so much more that it is a little daunting.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I guess my approach has always been that it would be worse to lose the sensitivity to such things, than the comfort derived from putting up walls. Of course this approach makes me very vunerable at times.

I cpuldn't have put it better myself. However I wouldn't say I ever feel vulnerable. In a relationship, I trust that other person almost, if not actually, completely. So I don't feel vulnerable, because I don't see pain as a possibility. However even when I've been most hurt, I think of how good it used to make me feel, and the pain seems to pale into insignificance. That said, I've never been truly hurt by a relationship. Whenever it's ended it's been obvious that it was going to end, so I was prepared for it.

I'd like to think, if I ever feel that sort of pain, that I could make myself trust again, and remain open to people, because I know that's what is best. However I'm not sure I could. I might be able to, because I'm absolutely terrified that if, even for a moment, I'm not open with someone, I could lose something far more important than saving myself pain. I'd like to think I'm emotionally tough enough to cope, because of what I've coped with before, and the way I see things. I just hope I never have to test it

Originally posted by Verres
currently, i DO have emotional intimacy, i AM honest with the person concerned, and as yet, i have not been given anyreason to regret this.

We really need a kiss smiley

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Curious. I would think most guys would see things precisely the opposite. I would certainly find the sexual encounters more troubling than serious relationships.

To be brutal about it, by definition, "serious" relationships in the past are failed relationships, unless one partner was accidentally killed. Maybe one person move across the country, but the other still determined that it was better to end the relationship than move. If that was just a realtionship for the time being, I don't count that as "serious," but if it was serious, and one person decided to move and the other not to, bzzzzt, failed relationship.

Nothing is exclusively one person's fault (ok, the bastard was abusive, but what indications of this did you blow off before he started hitting you?), so there's no relief there - at best, you can make bad choices in who you enter relationships with and why.

A large number of sexual partners/encounters may bother you because you've got a moral issue with it, but in reality, a large number of poorly formed, unhealthy, or ultimately failed serious relationships is more of an indicator that you're going to have long term problems.

[Whaleboy]

To be brutal about it, by definition, "serious" relationships in the past are failed relationships

For me, a serious relationship is one that lasts longer than 4 weeks!

[MichaeltheGreat]

You must be about 20.

[Drogue]

MtG: Depends on what you consider a relationship. If in a serious relationship both partners decided they were better being close friends, I don't consider that a failure.

Also, with regards to moving, it depends on the circumstances. If someone has a great job, and the other partner has to move for some reason, and they can't find work their, I wouldn't necessarily consider it a failure.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
You must be about 20.

I think the seriousness depends on the feelings of the people involved. I thought my current relationship was serious after about 3 weeks, when I was bitterly upset that I wasn't going to see her for a while, because she was on holiday, and when we decided to go away for a weekend together.

However I have had relationships that have lasted 2 months that I thought weren't serious.

IMHO, a relationship is serious to me when it would hurt me greatly if it failed.