The solution to players

[vashti]

am i manly enough to fit this description??

raverboy

I don't know. Are you manly enough to man-handle?

[IndiReloaded]

The OP forgot about the players who marry women for steady pussy, lulz.

Not necessarily from their wives, either...

There is some truth to the OP's post, I think. Getting to know each other before sleeping together isn't a bad thing.

[vashti]

But what if you always like them better before you get to know them?

[firefly_86]

Please Note: As a very happily married person, I did not post this as MY method to overcome player abuses, but as words of wisdom for younger women out there who keep getting hurt over and over again. I see so many girls in my own community rush too fast into intimate relationships, only to be lied to, cheated on, have their self-esteem crushed. I am only offering a possible solution to a growing problem, be friends first, see if someone respects you before you sleep with them. I really didn't think this was such a radical idea? Its only common sense really...

[Chupacabras]

Good luck with those rules; hope you like cats.

[Prefix]

First off, I'm a guy, just felt like commenting.
Isn't the point of dating (other then for fun) to scope out a potential life-long mate? Not necessarily saying that every person you date should be a consideration for marriage, but I've always pictured dating in the same way that a prior poster mentioned - to give the car a full "test drive" before getting to keep the keys. Why would I want to marry someone whom I've never been physically intimate with? Hell, why would a girl want to marry a guy she's never been close to either?

I can appreciate and respect your message for girls to get to know a fellow before dropping their pants, but in all honesty that is there call to make and not yours. It's not the woman's fault for trusting the player, it is the player's fault for abusing that trust.

I like to think that 90% of women who aren't bimbos are intelligent enough to identify when a guy is just trying to get into their pants, and when he's serious. I've seen it happen with some of my player-esque friends. Women have built in radar for these situations, they don't need old-school rules.

[firefly_86]

Re: Prefix

I never said that if you were in a loving relationship that sex was out of the question... not at all. I agree with you that dating is a great way to get to know someone... However I still think the friends first period is important too to weed out players. I wish you were right, I really wish that players were easy to spot.... However, my long experience as a cousellor tells me that the problem is at an all time high, players are better than ever at deceiving people, and the resulting and depression and suicde rates are not to be taken lightly.

[Chupacabras]

My response wasn't very helpful, so I'll break it down for you:

1) Consider waiting until marriage for sex (it worked for many healthy relationships in the last 2000 years, why are we so desperate and impatient today?)

The invention of the birth control pill completely changed the nature of pre-marital relationships from the end of the baby boomer generation 'til today. Expecting someone that isn't very religious to follow these tenants is just unrealistic (I'd go so far as wrongheaded, too, as a sexual incompatibility is not something you want to live the rest of your life with).

2) If rule 1 is too strict, then please be platonic friends for least six months before dating. (hang out in social groups, never 1 on 1)... (Note 2: For those of you who say six months is too long to wait.... I say what is wrong with people being friends for a while? If people go out in groups, and enjoy fun activities, then this is a perfect way to see if you are compatible with someone or not. In the old days people showed each other respect by talking, getting to know each other etc. If people are in a rush to hook-up it usually means they don't respect you and just want to use you... )

Men recognize this as the friend zone. If there's a spark with a friend and you make him wait six months before a single date, he's either going to have written you off as a romantic interest or he's a milquetoast. Apart from that, this is a wholly impractical proposition as it suggests you date exclusively from within your social circle.

3) If you start seeing someone, whose past you are not sure about, then check them out with a little research. (See if they are listed on player websites or are frequently using dating websites behind your back. This info is easy to find with google searches or on their computer internet history)... (Note 1: For those of you who may say this is an invasion of privacy, I reply that those who lie and cheat do not deserve to get away with it. So, if you check on someone once or twice and find nothing then there will be no need to keep looking. No problem.)

This is a violation of trust, not privacy. Yes, do a Google search on someone you've just met. Search his personal property and you deserve to be dumped most harshly. You're using the "If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't be worried" argument, which is BS.

Your rules throw the baby out with the bathwater and are a great way for a young lady to spend her best years (in this case, when her perceived value is the highest it will ever be to the opposite sex) alone. People learn from experience, not sheltering themselves from all that's bad and scary in the world.

[MVPlaya]

Your rules are absolutely hilarious, and horribly thought out. If you make a man wait 6 months, being only friends first, he might have had the best of intentions for you and lose interest along the way, feeling that you are simply stringing him along and/or don't care about him. You "friend zone" a guy, no matter how nice, he'll assume there's no point wasting his time with you and go for another girl.

[MVPlaya]

People today seem to think they are entitled to instant sex, no they are not! In the old days men showed a woman respect by talking to her, getting to know her, and not man-handling her until he got excited.

If you really think "players" are a new development, then you really understand nothing about men or history. Its pretty deluded to think that modern society created players. Players, sluts, cheaters, hoes, all have been around for millenia. I mean, just ask this: what is the world's oldest profession?

You should seriously read "The History of Sexuality," it'll dispel these myths you have about what sex was like in the old days. Hint: it has nothing to do with a Jane Austin novel. The majority of people's delusions about sexuality in the old days comes from 1950's media, which was so heavily censored that they could never discuss sex (showing people kissing or married couples going to sleep in the same bed was banned on TV). As a result, all the sex and debauchery that happened in the 50's never got shown on TV, and the only media left from that day is squeaky clean nonsense, so people think that because that is all they see, that must have been what the 50's and 60's were like. Same with older literature, either the vulgar literature / commentary has been suppressed, ignored, destroyed, censored, or overlooked (see how Shakespeare is taught in classrooms, most sexual innuendos are completely brushed aside). Consequently, its not that human sexuality was different in the past, its that our discussions of sexuality were less open, giving people a warped perception.

Human sexuality certainly adapts to societal changes, but there is a huge gap between what you think happened 'in the old days' and what actually happened.

Usually, 'the old days' means 'what I wish life were like, so I will pretend that there once was an idyllic setting where this was commonplace, but modern social norms that I disagree with must have destroyed it so you should follow my interpretation of what is correct ethical behavior.'

[Prefix]

Re: Prefix

I never said that if you were in a loving relationship that sex was out of the question... not at all. I agree with you that dating is a great way to get to know someone... However I still think the friends first period is important too to weed out players. I wish you were right, I really wish that players were easy to spot.... However, my long experience as a cousellor tells me that the problem is at an all time high, players are better than ever at deceiving people, and the resulting and depression and suicde rates are not to be taken lightly.

Hi Firefly,
like I said before, I respect your notion of getting to know someone before hopping in bed with them; I'm a guy, and I think it's silly to have sex with someone you barely know - but I'm more concerned about things like STD's and unplanned pregnancies than emotional damage.

It's funny that you mention it's important to be friends for at least six months with a girl; I have done EXACTLY that with every single girl I've been romantically interested in. I've tried to be as nice and friendly to them as possible. And know where that has gotten me? In the "Lets just be friends" zone, or (even worse), the "You're a big brother to me" one. It's not a fun place to be.

Meanwhile, my friends (some of whom have been in serious long-term relationships for 2+ years) started going out after knowing each other for just a few weeks.

I wish the "just being friends first" worked like you think it does - I really wish that. But I know from experience that it more often than not has a negative effect.

[firefly_86]

OK I think we are all getting stuck on the details of the 6 month rule. Maybe for some people its 3 months for some 2 but the point is don't instantly hand out your trust to a total stranger or you will be used and abused... 6 months is only a suggestion because it takes time to really get to know someone. If people could always rely on their intuition then there would not be so many broken hearts and stds in the world. If anyone out there can come up with a better strategy of protecting themselves I'd like to hear it...

[Prefix]

I think you're misinterpreting the point some of us (or at least me) are trying to make. It's not an issue of waiting six months to go out with someone - I still think it's silly (if you like someone, why not date them when you like them?) but a relationship could still work after waiting six months to date - assuming both parties know and show that they like eachother.

What we're getting at is that being "friends" in the platonic-friendship sense of the word for X amount of time before becoming a couple is silly. It sticks one or the other person into the "friend" zone while waiting some allotted time. From my experience, girls who see me as a friend see me as more of "just" a friend the longer time goes buy. And it is nigh impossible to shift out of the "friend" zone once you're in it.

How about this: You directly tell the man/woman that you are interested in them and would enjoy taking them out on a date, and see how they feel and what their response is? No point in bringing any more mindgames into the dating scene; there are enough of them as is.

[firefly_86]

Good idea Prefix. I like the idea of people being upfront and honest. Maybe they could say "Look I like you and I could see us dating, but I want you to know that I'm looking for a serious relationship and I need to take things things slow, that means no sleeping together until I feel 100% ready..."

Its not so much that dating that causes the issue, its the fact that as soon as a person starts dating someone (with kissing etc.) there is often great pressure to get in bed right away. Howvever, when things becomes sexual people tend to get emotional and lose their rational objectivity. Early on, in getting to know someone, everyone needs to be rational and see them for who they really are, a good person or a deceiver. If the person you are dating is truly worthwhile then there is not real danger, BUT if its actually a player, its very wise to hold back a bit. Keep the good ideas coming...

[SirWagginston]

So your solution is to completely ignore the natural human desire to have intercourse? True, you will avoid the emotional attachments that many people develop during sex, but also you will smother a human need that needs an outlet. I would have trouble exclusively dating a girl as per your rules, simply because my hormones push me strongly to seek sex. When other girls approach me, if my girlfriend is not giving me sex, I will find it more difficult to ignore them.

You could argue that if we were really meant for each other, that I would be able to suffer this, because my girlfriend is so great in my mind. But still, I wonder: why should we have to suffer? Because of some fear of being played? I'm not willing to suffer because some other guy that I have no control over is full of shit.