You Know You Want Him, So Have Him

Is it just a weird coincidence that we both wrote about Ex Sex? Go check out my blog post from yesterday ...
Ex Sex is always complicated and confusing, even when you KNOW where you stand and you have your head and heart (pretty much) on straight.

Haha, is it just a coincidence that I just left a similar comment on your post? Complicated and confusing sounds about right. But that's part of the draw, too. Not boring.

Ex Sex is trouble with a capital T!! Been there, done that, could write many a blog post about it!

Oh, you should! This proves that experience is the best teacher.

Again, choices here & now will come to determine choices in the future, most commonly. Typically this may even be done 'tacitly' & quietly, w/o anyone knowing. The time spent with the Ex rolling around having mindless/meaningless 'fun' means less time (or perhaps No time) spent on future endeavors. Like trying to find a decent, respectable BF who'd better fit the bill. Then there are the complications. Being seen 'out' with the Ex, or being over heard in some intimate dialog or shared intimacy (hey it happens), means that's a signal to other possibly interested guys that 'you're otherwise occupied' or 'still involved' with the Ex. Again, it's an unmistakable signal to others that 'you're taken' and 'not likely interested' to & for many guys. Go figure.


Again actions have their consequences. Even for the mindless fun stuff. So 'keep banging him' might be the recipe for near term fun, but long term greater disappointment. Bottom line? Is it worth the effort to waste your time like this? Is the sex that good & needed? Are there no vibrators to be had? Batteries? The mind boggles. So Just Keep on banging the wrong guys. Yeah, that's the ticket to success! Geez.... Avoid the 'drama', but why & at what lost future opportunity costs? Just wondering where all the brains went here on this one! Cheers, 'VJ'

No one is saying that ex sex is smart, including the blogger who wrote about it. The only way to find out just how dumb it is, though, is to have it. The experience, once had, informs. The point is, a relationship is over when one or both people are done. If they're both still hot for each other, to the point that they can't walk away, they're not done.

Does it make sense to prolong a doomed relationship? No. Will my telling Chelsea that 1,000 times make any difference? No. Chelsea will go home at Thanksgiving, probably choose to have sex with him, and then she will check in with herself afterwards and see how that was for her. Perhaps they will talk. She will only be able to make a reasoned decision if she is allowed to live her life and make her own mistakes.

I'm not suggesting that women run around having sex with a variety of exes indefinitely. Clearly, this post addresses an in-between, or transition period. Chelsea states clearly that she's not in love with this guy. The emotional risk doesn't sound very high. But Jessie Rosen says that no matter what, if you don't know something, you can try it and then you'll know. She mentions the possibility of people getting back together. Who knows?

Casual sex is a reality for young people today. These two are unlikely to go on dates while they're hooking up. They're unlikely to be out with each other or overheard by anyone, because they're probably meeting up at 2 or 3 in the morning after the bars have closed. That's the reality, that's the way kids roll, especially in college. She's not signaling unavailability because no one will ever know. Even the term "hook up" is designed to be vague. The biggest risk for her is an emotional one. She may bond with him during sex, and send out a variety of subtle signals to other potential bf's that she is otherwise emotionally engaged.

I guess she'll find out!

I thought all these strong, independent feminists could have all the sex they wanted with no emotional connections? This "woman" is but a child. A weak, weak, child. For all the blather about strong modern women, why is it that they are always moaning about their love lives?

Advice for this tramp:
Grow up. Show discipline. Quit taking directions from your crotch. You're not in love, you're in heat.

Play this game too long, and the future choice for these women will be a beta with such little self-respect that he will harbor her self-sabotaged soul, or continuing to put out for whatever d-bag comes along. The truly good men with financial security and self-respect will be unavailable to them.

Anyway, I have learned certain key questions and topics to bring up on dates that helps get a look into a woman's soul. If I see evidence of this type of character, they don't get another date.

Famous quote:
"Beauty without virtue is like a rose without perfume."

That, in essence, is my view of the bulk of Modern American Women. Physically attractive, but with a soul that makes me nauseous.

Careful, Rick, your bitterness is showing. Some thoughts:

1. The feminism thing is often blown way out of proportion. By that I mean that if you were to ask college women to use 10 words to describe themselves, 5% would use the word feminist. To me, feminism means an egalitarian meritocracy where women have the opportunity to earn success based on their abilities. Surely you wouldn't object to that? It's a myth that all, or even most contemporary women are strident, political feminists looking to claim victory over men in some way.

2. Chelsea is most definitely in heat. As I point out, she is also at some emotional risk, even though she's not in love. She risks an attachment to a guy she doesn't even like much, just because that's the way women are made. You tell her to get control of her urges, fair enough. I've noticed, though, that everyone expects men to want to have sex with any willing woman, indeed research proves that men are not selective, and no one questions their inability to refrain. They're following their instincts. So is she. Believe it or not, women get horny too. I'm not going to apply the old double standard around sex here.

3. Chelsea is probably 19 or 20. She's got time to make a few mistakes, and to learn from them. Having sex with this dude doesn't taint her for wonderful guys in the future. Yes, she's still a child in some ways. If she's still doing this in ten years, then we can say she never grew up.

4. I agree that a person's character is very important when dating. You're smart to try to get a handle on that as soon as possible in a relationship.

5. Stop knocking beta. I'm working on a post The Alpha Trap, and I'm going to lay it all out for you. My theory is that in modern society, the beta has more of the skills required to be successful and happy in life. You just wait!

Ok I think I just lost 10 IQ points reading & trying to comprehend the answer. I think I understand it, but again I could never actually live it. And it still makes my head hurt!

Still it's my contention that you don't really 'move the ball down the field' until you actually, you know, Change Partners! Ask not 'where are all the good guys?' Or 'why me?' Or 'why do I attract all the losers/retards/hopeless cases/alpha asshat wanna bees'? It's 'cause you're still wrapped up on some losers couch playing tonsil hockey & the ol slap & tickle routine with your ex 'on the down low'. Yeah, that's attractive. Reality it may be, but it still bites. And of course it's still probably preventing you from 'moving on' & coming to grips with the reality of another failed relationship. Or another inadequate BF/FWB.

So let's take this from the top again, shall we?

Susan says "No one is saying that ex sex is smart, including the blogger who wrote about it. The only way to find out just how dumb it is, though, is to have it. The experience, once had, informs. The point is, a relationship is over when one or both people are done. If they're both still hot for each other, to the point that they can't walk away, they're not done".

No perhaps no one can tell them just how dumb it is or dangerous it might be too. Imagine the same with a small round of the infamous 'Russian roulette'. Just one spin of the cylinder, right? It's just so damn exciting and all your friends agree! OK that's hyperbole right? Well maybe not that much. Just about half of the sexually active population under the age of 26 has some sort of STD, STI nowadays. About 1/3 of them, something that will eventually require treatment and definitely do have implications for your future health & fertility status. (Yeah, you've heard all this before from the Church Ladies, right?)

But still you're 'hooked' on cuddling & snogging with your ex, but like you never ask who they might be seeing presently, right? It's not your place to, and you might not care to anyway. And he's likely banging anything that moves in his direction (the 'standard MO'), be it human, animal vegetable or mineral. As long as the hole is slightly fleece lined, no one's looking and he can 'get away with it'. Anyone in public health will identify him thusly as something they like to call a 'known disease vector'. And yes, he is. And you'll soon be a helpful 'carrier' too. Keep it up long enough with the right sorts of 'wrong guys' and you can get to be a 'known reservoir' for whatever zoonotic disease he may be carrying back to you. I know that sounds unduly harsh. But the point should be well taken. If he means Nothing to you, and you to him? He's using you, and you likewise, without any sense of responsibility for each other’s welfare. Yeah, I know, that's the point. Still it's Stupid, no matter how it comes across.

So bottom line? Tell me, how is this not playing into the hands of every damn alpha wanna be asshat out there? How in the world is this 'hooking up smart'? When does banging your Ex cease to be an interesting proposition? Is that before the honeymoon? Before the 1st child? Before the 5th anniversary? Same time next year? When exactly? Is this ever a really good idea for any woman worth her salt & knowing her own mind? Is this not just a recipe for disaster and playing for time when we all know, (or ought to know) that we really don't have too much of that precious commodity to waste?

Hooking up smart? Fail! Yes indeedy... Sorry, but Cheers, 'VJ'

VJ, I'm not going to be able to explain this effectively to you. Everything you say makes total sense. It's just that your considerable IQ is never going to enable you to understand. You speak with the wisdom of maturity and age. I generally try to do the same.

But go back to the conversation laid out by Jessie Rosen. Can you fault her logic? The friend she is counseling says, "Oh, I caaaaaaaan't stop seeing him." She caaaaaaaan't. She won't. Not just yet. Will they be having sex next summer? Hope not. We're talking Thanksgiving break here, not a commitment of any kind. Four days. You're saying the worst that could happen is that she spends her life screwing Alpha asshats. I'm saying that she's much more likely to spend a weekend screwing an asshat, who may actually be a beta, who knows? In the hookup culture, beta males are getting plenty of sex. I see it myself just walking around the city (not the actual sex act, thank God). On any given weekend on college campuses, 5-10% of the guys have sex. They're probably mostly strong alpha types. But once the betas develop themselves and acquire social skills, they do fine. At least that's my belief, based on personal observation. More research needs to be done!

Ugh.

I guess no one sees the world the way I do. A long time ago, you had a fairly good chance of finding a woman who had not bonded so thoroughly with losers that she had a good chance of bonding with her beta husband. The reason I feel forced to rule out these women is a strong suspicion that even after they "settle" for me, they will always have part of them permanently remembering the devastatingly attractive alpha that hurt them.

I can never compete with that. Women who guard themselves out of a sense of honor and duty to their future husband bring something real to the table.

The rest bring the pain of failed alpha-chasing, and the bitterness that comes with it.

Re: Your comment on feminist as an identity.

Even if the number of women labeling themselves as 'feminist' may be lower, they are all still probably big believers in the girl-power, Sex and the City, you-go-girl ideology. So the concept remains the same. So if i read this correctly, modern women are strong, intelligent, and powerful, and every bit as tough as men, except when it comes to being attracted to high-status men.

Fair enough.

First off, what makes you think this guy is high status? From some of the details in Chelsea's original email, I don't think so. She said he was not very sexually experienced, for example. She knew him in high school, they struck up some chemistry. He should feel fortunate to have a young woman interested in him, because he's obviously attracted to her, but he has refused to commit. He would not even commit to being exclusive sexually. He got a taste of power, and now he wants her on her knees. Chelsea is probably strong and intelligent, but in this relationship at least, the male is still dominant.

Second, I think you should adjust your attitude about women and their past experiences. Both men and women are not thinking in terms of long-term mating until they're in their mid-20s, at least. Obviously, both men and women will be having sex before that time. Let's assume that many women have been attracted to high-testosterone alpha types, and that those men have hurt them. Instead of "settling" for a different kind of man, I think many women run for the hills, vowing never to get sucked into a relationship with such a self-absorbed, unfeeling person again. They are not settling, they're improving their lives, and many of us know it. Finally, the number of devastatingly attractive alpha males is very small. Most of the d-bags that I have laid eyes on do not meet that description. In fact, it's amazing how physically unappealing some of them are - they get a pretty girl with a confident attitude (see Game).

If a woman falls for you, you can feel confident that there is no other man lingering in her mind. Handsome men who have nothing else to offer become unattractive very quickly.

Wow,

Friend:: "I want to drive off a cliff. Should I wear a seatbelt?"
Me: "Don't drive off a cliff."
Friend: "But I'll be wearing a seatbelt. I really want to drive off a cliff."
Me: "Don't drive off the cliff."
Friend: "Should I wear a seatbelt? I really want to drive off a cliff. Really, should I wear a seatbelt?"
Me: "I suppose a seatbelt might help, but don't drive off the cliff."
Friend: "Great! I'm off to the cliff...and I'll be wearing a seatbelt!"

Now, there's some chance there was a guardrail at the cliff, or that it was just a small embankment, so no permanent damage. But if you're driving in the Rockies, you ain't coming back from that cliff...

The sad fact is the person in question has already made up her mind. She really just wants validation for a pre-decided course. Now, if it turns out badly, yes, she may more quickly learn from it. Learning from ones' mistakes is a fact of life. But sometimes you don't need to personally experience driving off a cliff to understand that it is generally a bad idea, if you can avoid it.

One other thing...the guy in question may or may not be an alpha, but he does has some douche-like qualities:

"I guess the bottom line is that he wasn’t all that into me, but really wanted me to be into him. "

So, basically, he enjoyed her attention, without necessarily wanting to reciprocate. Boy, I've seen that story first hand...and it didn't end well.

Haha, I love your dialog! So, so true. Thank you for pointing out clearly what I have failed to do -- She has already made up her mind. In her case, she's gone over that cliff a few times and has lived to tell the tale. In fact, she kind of got off on the excitement of it. If she's 19, and we tell her that developing a cliff-diving habit is ultimately going to do her in, she'll say, "No, no! You're wrong, I know exactly what I'm doing and how to stay safe." If she goes over the cliff and finds it unpleasant for some reason, she'll have the negative reinforcement/reality check that she needs to make a different choice next time. And then she'll say, I'm done with cliff jumping!

What I try to do is get people to think rationally and pragmatically about their relationships. When I'm talking with young people, I'm not very effective if I sound like their aunts or mothers (even tho you pointed out that that's exactly how I sound, haha!). Many young women tell me things they don't feel comfortable telling their moms. They know I won't say "I told you so."

Chelsea is going to have sex with this guy, and may have a bad experience. She'll find out. I think it's very possible she'll find him boring, or she'll feel tired of his reticence, or whatever. Maybe he's thought about her during the time they've been apart. She calls him a douchebag, but that may mean "stubborn guy who won't be in a relationship". Their friends saw them as romantically linked. This was less than dating, but definitely more than sex.

One more thing: in the homosocial world of late adolescence, guys care much more about what other guys think than what any girl thinks. A generation or two ago, men were looked up to for having a hot, steady girlfriend. Now a guy has to have social status to pull that off. There is peer pressure to "hit it and quit it." Unfortunately, that results in even "nice guys" acting like dbags in their efforts to mimic alphas. It's lose lose every which way!

For what it's worth. I'm on your side, Susan.

It's worth a great deal, Hamby! Nice to "see" you!

I agree with Rick.
Chelsea = booty call loser
At 19, many intelligent girls are working days and studying nights. Growing and maturing.
Chelsea needs to close her legs. Get discipline for later in life. Focus. Maybe go to church.

Stop being nasty smartduck. There's no doubt in my mind that Chelsea will read these comments, and I don't want HUS to be a place where anyone is being called names. I don't object to casual sex, I'm a veteran of quite a bit of it in my own youth. Will it get you a husband, children, and a white picket fence? Maybe not. But maybe that's not what Chelsea wants, especially at the age of 19!

P.S. Don't tell Chelsea to go to church, this is not a religious blog. And by the way, do you think churchgoing girls aren't having sex? Even in the 70s we were confessing our gropings the day before Mass.

Susan,

I see where you are coming from, in terms of advice, and being someone people can confide in. However, some of us can be the more the "I told you so" crowd :-) The sad thing in today's world is between friends, peer pressure, and the general scene, the overwhelming push is to "drive off the cliff". It's like the "I told you so" is seen as old-fashioned and out of date, when all it's been is a willingness to learn from other people's mistakes (not just your own).

The description of the guy in question has some elements of a typical "player", so it shouldn't be too surprising that she's trying to re-hook up. He can afford to wait and string things along...the players always do. It's just sad that the woman in question doesn't use her time to do other things than retread an apparently failed "relationship". But, that's her choice, even if I don't agree with it.

The problem with "driving off the cliff" repeatedly is that it can become a pattern and part of a person's personality. Past is prologue, often times, and 5 years henceforth, a smart confident man isn't going to see a repeated history of "driving off the cliff" events as a recipe for a solid long term commitment. It may be unfair, but when one is looking for a life partner, it's a smart thing to look at the person's past actions.

There are "nice guys" who mimic alpha behavior. I can't deny that because I was one of them (and it ultimately worked). However, I was not looking for simple hookups, so I never practiced the harder core alpha stuff or made it a way of life. From seeing an alpha up close (my brother), he himself readily admitted that the constant hookups did, in some sense, make him lose respect for women in the main. This is the alpha version of the "driving off the cliff" where the constant hookups can harden you, and one can lose the simple pleasure of being with someone else.

"constant hookups can harden you, and one can lose the simple pleasure of being with someone else"

This is so very true. That is perhaps the best bit of advice to come out of this post or any of the comments.

Susana
Sorry if I was rude, but you are indeed telling her to go down the path of a disposable loser. She doesnt like the guy, the guy doesnt like her. Why should they get together? Meaninless sex. I'm not a prude, but at least have sex with someone you like.
There must be a time when a person should think about temporary abstinence for lack of abetter option. Read a book, think about life, develop friendships, and yes, even think about spirituality, or philosophy, why not ?? Even 19 yolds are not only animals in heat. There is more to life than sex.
If this girl keeps fixated on sex, she willnever grow as a person.
I think you are underestimating her.
My humble 2 cents.

Thanks, smartduck. You're a great reader and commenter. We're probably not going to see eye to eye on this, but just let me say that I really don't believe I am helping her make a decision. She has made a decision. As for abstinence, I'm a big believer that it's a valid choice. See my post Why Do Feminists Find Abstinence Intolerable? I also agree 100% that her time would be much better spent reading a good book or developing herself in some other way. I hope she will come to realize that, too.

I really like it that you say I am underestimating her. Perhaps I am. I like that you give her the credit for being complex enough to seek real meaning instead of meaningless sex. I agree that she is capable of making a better and different choice, or she wouldn't have written to me. I believe she will make that choice, but she may not make it before Thanksgiving.

For what it's worth, meaningless sex can occasionally (perhaps not often) grow into something else. I wrote my own story in the post I Married a One Night Stand. You never know!

I see Smartduck's point, but I also see Susan's. I think it's important, crucial, to be able to listen to the advice of people who have more life experience and can point you in the right direction. That said, I think most of the time people have a really hard time ACCEPTING good advice because they're too close to the situation to have any perspective. The light of harsh retrospect tells me that I should have broken up with my ex about 7 months earlier than I did. That wasn't the same situation -- it wasn't all about sex and there was obviously a significant emotional attachment -- but when it came down to it, he was a bad boyfriend, and I'd need to figure that out firsthand, repeatedly, for months until it would really sink in.

I guess my point is that you often do learn your lesson. Getting your heart broken at 19 is bad, but it isn't the worst thing in the world. Staying in that relationship for too long sure as hell taught me never to do it again, and now I'm in a happy, functional relationship with someone else. So while I did spend those last 7 months mostly unhappy, I don't consider it wasted time, because I'll be accruing future benefits, in terms of the lesson learned, for the rest of my life. I'm willing to have paid that price.

Of course, I was lucky to have been raised with enough confidence and self-respect that eventually I had to admit to myself that I deserved better, so I actually learned the lesson. But it's certainly possible for women to fall into the trap of thinking "oh no, I can only get losers/douchebags/alpha asshats," in which case they lose all self-respect, fall prey to Game players, and start a long downward spiral. But I don't think it's any easier for those women to accept outside advice, so I'm not sure what the solution is for them.

Hey, angharad, nice to hear from you. I like what you have to say here - you acknowledge the mistakes you've perhaps made and actually value them! I love the idea of accruing benefits forever - I think that's true if you are introspective enough to recognize them.

I also rebel against the idea of saying to a 19 year-old, "Be careful, at some point you will be a used up Alpha discard with no fertility and no appeal." I think that's unbelievably harsh. Are there women like that? Yes, many. A woman with confidence and self-respect will learn those lessons early, after one experience, not keep setting herself up for poor treatment for many years with many men.

As you say, the women who slip into becoming prey? I'm not sure what the solution is for them either. A house full of cats, perhaps.

OK one more time into the fray. How about suggesting to these folks that this is largely a waste of their time, and will prove nothing, and advance the cause of nothing more than their immediate gratification? (Yeah, I know that this apparently has come to describe much of modern culture...)

So let's do the numbers here. Let's posit just 3 Ex's you're going to have significant relations with despite (and perhaps Because) 'it's going nowhere, but I'm still comfortable and I need it bad!. This is a pretty low expectation. But say it's just that, for each of those 3 (serially) studly dudes you just could not 'wash out of your hair', you'll spend at Most 2 months Extra with. (Yes, even a few weeks is about 2 months with all the lead in time and the allowance for the final 'trailing' & no doubt lingering break.)

So we've got up to 6 months here. Of wholly, largely fruitless wasted time. That'll you'll likely never regain to your advantage. In a relationship that will likely go nowhere, unless you count the number of stars in their passed around 'little black books' of 'steady’s' to proudly share with their crew.

In 6 months? You might have found someone more respectable & respectful of your wishes & desires. Someone more suitable for a budding LTR. You might have been able to find that brilliant itinerant Scientist who was in your city for just one week, and who was at that gallery your friends own for a few days on end. Or the interesting budding entrepreneur who was also visiting and had frequented that doughnut/coffee shop near the museum you always just to stop at before work. That was before you took to regularly boffing your long term unemployed (natch!) ex 'wonder boy' most mornings instead of heading out early to work. Yeah, they've noticed that new shit eating grin of yours as you clock into work late, and that you seem to be mightily distracted too. Ergo you missed your production quota for the quarter, (but not by much), but being that you've been traipsing in so late recently? No, you did not get that small raise they were offering this year. Nor the new position that had just opened up that was almost tailor made for someone with your skills. They gave it to the new 'fresh' go-getter in the office. The one who's unattached and actually, yes, strangely dedicated to their work. You? You've got that fine afterglow of a thorough banging to keep you warm. But not for long perhaps. Years from now when you try and pin precisely when your once budding career went off track? You'll no doubt think somewhat less fondly of this last 'summer of love' with this ex, who's now a tennis instructor at some posh resort. And he's still unmarried, but now he's just boffing a wider selection of the more grateful 'older ladies'. (Grateful meaning 'many gifts' & vacations rendered).

You? Despite being an honors grad & working very hard? Your future salary will always be determined by your past. And you lost a year’s worth of possible income on that one 'bone-headed' summer loving move alone. But hey, you're going to do it 2 More times yet still! And disrupt your life further. All for naught. And get further removed in mind, body, spirit & soul from that potential future hubby. But all this won't bother you much until, hey perhaps your 50's. So don't worry about it now. Enjoy it while it lasts!

Again what's the purpose of 'hooking up smart'? What's the definition of 'smart choices'? How about merely 'better choices'? Leaving well enough alone. You cannot hope to do much right, by doing things that are seemingly 'only' slightly/sometimes' wrong. You cannot advance the cause of finding someone worthy to love who'll also love you in return by merely wasting time with ever more wastrels, no accounts, shirkers and those already well disposed & dismissed of as 'wanting' somehow. Not now. Not ever. Your momma knew this. Her momma did too, as did hers. How come with all that fine extra education at the cost of a fortune of piled up debt, you have not? Just wondering. Again, Cheers, 'VJ'

VJ, you are very right about wasting time. Time is so precious. Yet it's very difficult to get the young to absorb the import of this. There's a personal trainer at my gym, a guy in his 20s, unbelievably buff and virile. He seems the picture of clean living and good health. A colleague of mine is his client. She told me this week that he is finishing up his chemo. CHEMO?! What? He has lung cancer, is having chemo and radiation. He understands the value of time.

What's the purpose of hooking up smart? It's about crafting strategies to help you get what you want. I never said casual sex was off the table. If you want to have sex with Guy, you have sex with Guy. It doesn't necessarily (though it can) delay your realizing a more meaningful relationship. And VJ? You have painted a picture here of a veritable relationship apocalypse!

I thought Chelsea might weigh in on some of these comments, but the poor girl is probably traumatized! Truce! I call truce.

Hey, I'm a long term lurker of this blog and I feel the need to finally speak up because I'm surprised at all the harsh, biased and judgmental assumptions and remarks being made in the comments section.

First of all, I think it's already been established that no matter what anybody says to Chelsea (no matter how much you call her a whore or slut or whatever), she will continue her current arrangement with the fellow until she learns otherwise. Don't tell me you haven't made unwise choices in your youth regarding relationships and the opposite sex (or same sex, depending on which way you lean). I think older adults tend to roll their eyes at youth and sneer at the things they choose to do (I know my parents like to oppose my every decision, even if it's something minor, like buying groceries, never mind choices regarding boys), but you have to give them the benefit of the doubt and let them learn from their experiences.

Second of all, I think it's lame to measure whether a man is relationship material or not from his employment status, especially of people in their twenties. Many of my peers don't know what they're going to do with their lives and are stuck working in minimum wage jobs or are unemployed after graduation. I don't think we all are necessarily slackers. We are just trying to navigate through the adult world and not everybody can be a brilliant scientist or hotshot lawyer or CEO of a multinational corporation when we are struggling just to make ends meet. Should girls only go for guys with incomes higher than $60,000 a year?

I will say that I do think that girls should go for guys who treat them well (and who will not bail lest girl becomes pregnant/ gets an STD). I'm not disputing that. Douchebags are definitely not worth the time/money.

Reserve the outrage for when people really screw up, like get a felony on their record.


Okay, that's my two cents.

- Violet

Hey Violet, I am so glad you came out of the shadows! Thanks for speaking up and reminding all of us to maintain a productive and positive tone. Because interacting online is so anonymous, people say things they really wouldn't say face to face. Sometimes that's great, and other times it makes others feel terrible. In the last week I've been called an ugly old feminist and a disgrace to women. I've been letting those comments through, but I may have to start blocking them. As long as comments are civil in tone, I'll let them through for discussion, even if I don't agree with them.

It is so true that older adults roll their eyes at the shenanigans of youth, and it can be hard for us to remember what we felt like at your age. But if we can't remember, then we can't understand, and I believe young women and men need to be understood, not judged. I try not to make any moral judgments on HUS, except that I admit to throwing the word douchebag around a lot, haha.

I've also found that the topic of casual sex tends to get people riled up. People having it get their knickers in a twist when it doesn't go well. Guys not having it feel frustrated. Guys having it feel defensive. Girls having it feel like they're being accused of sluttiness. Girls not having it feel bored and frustrated that no guy pays attention to them. It's very, very difficult out there in the real world.

I want people to speak honestly, but I'm with you. I feel like I really set Chelsea up here - she doesn't deserve anyone's scorn or outrage. She hasn't done anything wrong, in my opinion.

Anyway, I hope you'll jump in again when you see a post that hits home for you. Commenting on blogs doesn't feel natural at first, but you get used to it pretty quickly. I'd love to hear more from you!

Violet,

I agree and disagree with you. I agree that any insults and ad hominem attacks are really not acceptable. I disagree, however, about being judgmental. Making judgments is a fact of life. They may be wrong, but an individual has a right to make their own judgments about a person's behavior. That person can ignore it, but that's their right too. Being judgmental is what we all do, when we decide who our friends are, who we date, who we marry. It's only when we don't think before making judgments that it can be a bad thing.

Here is the issue. Chelsea knows, in her own mind, that her actions are not the best. She says so herself: "I don’t want to be the kind of girl who has sex with a douchebag, but I can’t help it, I’m attracted to him. Help!". So it's not us who are selling her short, but herself. She knows the right action, but she wants validation of her wrong action. She'll have plenty of people, like yourself, who won't "judge" her, or who'll tell her to do "what feels right" or to just go for it. But I'm on the side of not validating her action (there's few of us old-fashioned young people these days). Now, any observant person will realize that she's just going to ignore any real advice, she's already made up her mind (I mentioned that before). So, any comments or advice we, in the peanut gallery, make are really for other Chelseas out there. They may, if they're thoughtful people, think about things and decide to do what is best for them (and this applies to both genders) and maybe take into account what other people have been through. That is what an adult does, and yes, 19 is an adult. Ask our parents and grandparents what they were doing at 19, or look around in your college at people who are working for their financial aid to see that being 19 isn't an excuse for lacking adult skills.

And of course, we've all made mistakes. But here's the difference...is she learning from them? Again, her own words: "Actually, I’m worried I’ll make the same wrong choice several times over in the four days that I’m home." The guys is her ex for a reason! So if she knows it's wrong, why should we doubt her?

And on your other comment, I think you've misunderstood what some of us are saying. We're not saying "girls only go for guys with incomes higher than $60,000 a year". We're saying, if your want a long term relationship (a big if, apparently these days), look for a solid, trustworthy man. When we were in college, none of use were guaranteed a rich future, but only what we were willing to do and learn. Someone on some website mentioned: "you want a man who would be willing to sleep at your bedside when you're in the hospital".

Of course, you are free to ignore all our rambling. It's no skin off our nose, but as a wise old philosopher said: "Not everyone can accept this word ... The one who can accept this should accept it." :-)

I hope the best for Chelsea; maybe the "drive off the cliff" will be just a small puddle or embankment , which can be a learning experience, but it could also be the Grand Canyon...

This was a response to Violet, sorry to butt in here, but I just want to quickly say that I love what you say about your comments being for the other Chelseas out there. It's such a simple and obvious notion, but I never thought of it! I keep thinking of Chelsea reading this, but there are well over 1,000 people a day coming here. We have no idea how many will be affected by the comments, and in what way, but it is well worth considering.

The whole disagreement lies on whether she will learn from experience (Susana's point) so let her go ahead, or if she will develop a pattern and sink into a bad habit (mine).
Of course, in this particular case, nobody knows for sure, but it seems to me that most people who developed a series of harmful relationships started at a point when they thought they could handle it.
Susana, thanks for your patience with me...and BTW, my last comment disappeared.

Seriously, your last comment disappeared? I've checked everywhere, I can't find a missing comment from you. I'll keep looking. Is this a Halloween prank? I apologize. (Not that you haven't had your say, haha.)

Your warning Chelsea is fair. I'm sure her friends are warning her too. She has a lot to learn, and I think she is going to learn some of it over Thanksgiving. It may be a hard lesson, but we need to be thankful even for those.

I'm with the previous poster. I'm not in the business of validating bad decisions just to be polite.

I also reject the idea that someone "just can't help themself".

B.S.

As to his status, obviously he get her hot, so she is making a choice on "hotness", regardless of whether other women think he is high status.

Men like me watch these women, and reject them permanently for their bad judgment and damaged hearts.

Rick, fair enough. But if you plan to reject every woman who got treated poorly and used poor judgment when she was 19, you're eliminating a lot of women. Chelsea will not be spoiled goods, no matter how this pans out. If her relationships look like this for years? That's a worry, I agree.

BTW, you beta types are all worked up about women thinking the alphas are hot. You clearly have surmised that this guy is an alpha douchebag player and she is falling for his crap. You might be right. But who do you think was knocking up women while the alphas were off slaying dragons in the prehistoric era? Those betas who stayed back and cared for the women, protected the community. They had their own appeal. And they still do.

My main issue here is not with the casual sex per se. It's the continued casual sex with someone she considered a 'douche bag'. Again that's just a pretty miserable judgment (going forward), no matter how 'hot' he makes her. And probably at almost any age too, but especially for an adult.

Now if there was any inkling that she had a future with this DB? Or that he had some 'redeeming qualities' that have been expressed to her but remained somehow 'hidden' to the wider world? My opinion would be vastly different. If there was any hope expressed for a decent future relationship, perhaps even just a 'comfortable' FWB situation? It would be a different case. But that's not what was expressed in the scenario given to us.

It's even acceptable to my mind to go out and hunt down Other New potential DB's as long as you're previously unawares of this delimiting condition of 'poor potential mate quality'. Or you're just looking for a 'shag' every now & again. But the scenario described here is a bit different. It's deliberately going and bedding down with someone you know is not only unsuitable for you, but someone you've already rejected for all intents & purposes, Besides the sex. Now folks, that's the very definition of unwise & severely unfavorable choices here! And 'hooking up stupid'!

Again this has nothing or little to do with the employment status or income, or even most higher education of the described DB. I was just using these examples to heighten the sense of urgency & possible relative irony & humor here. Most of the examples I cited above in my comments are things & scenarios that I know have happened in real life to someone I've known or met too BTW.

So Please. Pretty please. We've got to be learning from our past mistakes, or else there really is no progress. Or any hope for much improvement in the human condition. Everywhere. Again I knew this at 20, and so did the wife. We met then (actually @18), and yes it was her smarts, good character & judgment that was attractive to me from the start. It'll save you a lot of grief down through the years. Believe it or not! Cheers & Good Luck, 'VJ'

"We met then (actually @18), and yes it was her smarts, good character & judgment that was attractive to me from the start."

That is one of the nicest things I have ever heard a man say about his wife. She sounds wonderful. I love it that you are invested in the progress of mankind, and that you bring that concern to one young woman who emailed me with a problem. I am moved that you care enough to write so thoughtfully and with great insight. Thank you, VJ, you have become a dear "regular", even if you were not my original target market ;-)

SUSAN;

I'll try to stop beating the drum on this topic after this post.

"Rick, fair enough. But if you plan to reject every woman who got treated poorly and used poor judgment when she was 19, you're eliminating a lot of women. Chelsea will not be spoiled goods, no matter how this pans out. If her relationships look like this for years? That's a worry, I agree."

Not my intention. I'm talking about very bad judgment, which this appears to be. We all make mistakes. But if you know it is disastrous, I'm not sure it qualifies as a "mistake" anymore.
Defense attorneys will often refer to their client's robbery of a convenience store as a mistake.
I think that is a perversion of the word, but that is just me. :-)


"BTW, you beta types are all worked up about women thinking the alphas are hot. You clearly have surmised that this guy is an alpha douchebag player and she is falling for his crap. You might be right. But who do you think was knocking up women while the alphas were off slaying dragons in the prehistoric era? Those betas who stayed back and cared for the women, protected the community. They had their own appeal. And they still do."

Okay, but if the only reason the betas were getting any was the fact that the alphas were out on the hunt, then it still feels like 'settling' to me. I'm skeptical, can you blame me?

I guess I'm just alone in my views, which I am very used to at this point in our cultural journey. I really wanted a gal who had not made the good decisions all along, or made a few honest mistakes (instead of deliberate "mistakes").

I am just very, very skeptical that I can meet someone who has some heart left, that hasn't had the life beat out of it by their determination to snag a guy who is OUT OF THEIR PRICE RANGE.

This is what I've been getting at all along. It does NOT BOTHER ME one little tiny bit that hot girls don't have attraction to me. This is natural, normal, and right. I am not a hot guy, that is the way life works, some people get the looks, some get the wealth, some get it all.

I am NOT BITTER that I am not high-value, as the PUA guys call it.

I am vehemently, ferociously bitter about average-looking plane-jane girls who are completely in my 'price range" who pine and WHINE about wanting a hot guy.

Hell, even the FAT ones get dreamy-eyed for alphas and then act snotty to average guys like me.

When the plane janes are really washed up and start going for guys like me (which they have started to do, and in surprising numbers), I plan to date them, then dump them, but the dumping will come in the following form:

"I really like you a lot. You're an amazing person. So much that I'm not willing to destroy our friendship by becoming romantically involved. We are such good friends. Let's learn to appreciate that, and have that be enough. Now give me a hug".

The bitter, cruel filling comes in a sweet flaky crust!!

;-p

While the alphas were out on the hunt, the women had sex that was meaningful and emotionally rewarding with the men who were there. I imagine more than a few dreaded the return of the high-testosterone alphas. Do women like to be dominated and controlled by a strong man? Yes, on occasion. But more than that we want a partner we can talk to and relate to. Betas are much better at that.

Rick, stop focusing on looks so much. You're smart, you have a lot to give. You need to be careful that your skepticism doesn't poison a new potential relationship. I don't know where you are looking to meet new women, but if you pursue your own interests and present yourself with confidence, you will "read" as someone who has his act together. Hell, there are many average looking men who are Hollywood stars. Women will go for a confident guy who knows his own worth every time.

Instead of focusing on getting your revenge by dumping undeserving women, I'd like to see you open yourself up to a positive experience with a worthy woman.

Oh come on here Rick, Even the sweet flaky crust of tart lemony revenge will get old after awhile. And besides, that's not really the object of the game. But yeah, we've all heard the lines before, and I appreciate your thoughts & predicament here. I think the media have a lot to answer for here too, presenting wildly unrealistic expectations on the TV, 24/7. But yeah, the 're-tread' cycle here is telling. Frequently only after all alternatives are exhausted do many of our fine female friends come to the seemingly rueful conclusion that they need different 'search patters& parameters'. And again it's my contention that this now comes all too late for many of them.

So you're right. You want to be looking for the smart ones. The very smart ones who do not 'suffer fools gladly' or easily. Just once is enough for these true dames. They learn their lessons quickly & solidly. And it then goes into influencing their behavior immediately and who they find acceptable to spend time with. (Again this seems to be all too rare today).

For the wife, she thought that there were very few guys even worth the bother of conversing/flirting with. They did not understand her, and did not understand where she was coming from either. If they were just trying to get into her pants? Well they got nowhere. And if they tried this surreptitiously on a Greyhound coming back from school (she had no car until her mid 20's), or on a plane when she was trying to sleep? More than once they'd be greeted by a fist in the face. It's surprisingly effective.

So watch out for the quick left hook there too. But you want someone firmly grounded in reality, with a good sense of self worth, but still able to look in the mirror and come up with an accurate self appraisal. That alone is pretty damn rare right there. Someone who looks beyond themselves & their own self gratification for both their self worth but their sense of belonging, industry & commitment to larger projects & a real life. Someone who knows beauty comes from the inside out, and cannot be 'fixed' by any tolerable amount of elective cosmetic plastic surgery say. Someone who was never much attracted to most of the alphas (unless they're wicked smart & relatively humble), and who never imagined themselves as any great beauty. Someone who'd laugh at the tactics of a PUA, or splash a drink in the face of those more eager types. Not the show horse but the ever reliable & loyal dray horse. The 'regular' ones you can set your clock by perhaps.

They still make a select few of these rare creatures, and they can be found in select venues. Your job is not to be bitter about the poor choices made by others. We can & do all wonder about it. But that will eventually resolve itself, and most likely without your help or input. No, your task, should you chose to accept it, is to find the ones who were immune to the wiles of the PUA's, & the alpha asshat wanna be's, and who've not played into the media miasma stereotypes, and who are smart enough to realize that the value of relationships lie not in the immediate carnal gratification but in the potential union of souls and the future possibilities of a life shared together. That takes some maturity. And yes, some folks do possess this @ 20 & 20 something. All pretty rare, and possibly getting more so by the day. Me? I'd perhaps start with farm country personally, but there are a few to be found all over. (After all the sub & exurbs are eating up former farmlands at a ferocious rate). But again, look for the ones not wedded to pop culture & not too keen on taking their style points from TV or the Glam mags either. Someone who deliberately perhaps quietly removed themselves from the more detrimental toxic flows of the cultural flotsam in order to 'get done what needed to be gotten done'.

They still make 'em, and they ain't all Mormons, Amish or Mennonite either! Just some more thoughts here. I hope that helps some. Cheers & Good Luck, 'VJ'

Susan-

I'm a little intellectually wounded by your insistence that I am hung up on looks. My whole point is that I am NOT trying for the hotties. I wanted a regular gal. How is that being hung up on looks?

I meant your own looks! Obviously I have only your own self-deprecating descriptions to go on. What I'm saying is that you can be sexy no matter what. I think you found me when I started writing about PUA stuff, so you know what I'm talking about. There is no reason you can't attract a classy woman who you find very attractive. See VJ above - he's giving excellent advice here. There are some good ones out there, more likely to be found in a library than a bar.

Damn, Susan. This is the hottest topic for a while, eh? Quite a hornet's nest you've stirred up.

I just want to say a couple of general things that will probably apply to a lot of the posts so far.

1. Everyone should be very careful about the term "meaningless sex." All sex has meaning. What most people mean when they say a certain sex act is meaningless is that it doesn't have any long term possibilities, or that it is just gratifying a physical urge without any attached emotion. That does *not* make it meaningless. Humans are not designed to just have long term emotional sex. We have it built into our genes to be horny and just want a hot fuck sometimes. To me, there's a certain stench of patriarchy in the notion that a girl ought not indulge her sexual desires even when the only "meaning" is an orgasm and some psychological relief.

2. Human females have both short and long term mating strategies, and it's simply not true that one is superior to another. They both serve different evolutionary purposes, and particularly in today's diverse social climate, they both have their place.

3. As for this being a "bad decision" or something Chelsea needs to "learn from," I say horse-shit. We don't know if it's a bad decision or not. If it weren't for the hordes of busybodies telling her she *ought* to feel bad about a four day sex hookup, it might be that this is a good thing for her. Then again, it might not. The point is, we simply don't know. Neither does she. I've had at least three or four of this kind of hookup in my life, and pretty much across the board, I regard them as good decisions, and so do the women I had them with. Sex, love, intimacy, and romance are separate. Sometimes, they go together. Sometimes, they do not. Again, it's just wrong to say that sex is ill-advised just because it's necessarily a short term thing.

4. Finally, take it from someone who knows. Mad sexual chemistry is harder to find than a lot of people think. When two people have it, make no mistake -- the sex really is a lot better. If Chelsea is having crazy chandelier sex for four days, and has lots of hot memories to take back home with her, who is anyone else to tell her that she's damaged goods, or wounded, or whatever.

Like Susan has said, Chelsea already knows what she's going to do (or has already done... whatever). She was simply looking for someone to tell her it was ok to get what she wanted. Again, my patriarchy bullshit detector goes off when someone insinuates that a girl is just "too weak mentally" to handle a casual sexual fling without falling madly in love and getting her poor little girlie heart broken and spending a week on the couch with a crate of Haagen Das. Part of becoming a well adjusted adult is learning how to do things both because of and in spite of emotions. If Chelsea manages to go into this with a proper attitude, and treats it as a fun vacation, and puts her emotions in check when she starts doing the "what ifs," then damn right, it's a learning experience... and a good one at that. She'll realize that in the future, she can give herself permission to indulge in her youth and sexuality from time to time, and emerge with a healthy sense of self worth and a few days of endorphin highs.

Hamby, reading your comment was like drinking a glass of wine or getting a massage. By that I mean that the tension just kind of rolled away as I realized you had understood my point. I published this particular question for a reason - this is a very common dilemma for young women today. It is not my job to tell them not to have casual sex. A lot of what I offer is support for women who are very definitely having casual sex, and may have some questions about navigating those relationships, which can be tricky.

I get very upset by the idea that a 19 year-old is tainted by an experience of this kind or "ruined" for worthy men. While the old patriarchal double standard does still exist, many men do not lose respect for women who choose to be sexual with them.

I think it's entirely possible that Chelsea's experience could be a positive one. Who knows, they may come away from it looking forward to the next break. Life is full of surprises, and people are complicated. If Chelsea feels compelled to explore this further, who am I to tell her no? Maybe it isn't "hooking up smart," but maybe it is.

My post "I Married a One-Night Stand" renders me ineligible to pass judgment.

I've been avoiding this argument ahem, I mean discussion for a couple of days...because I think a lot of times when we ask for advice we really just want validation that it'll be ok. And Chelsea will be ok - maybe a rough patch - but it's like if someone tells you a plate is really hot, you want to touch it right, then you know not to do it again.

I can't help but wonder what this discussion would be like if we were talking about a 19 year old guy named Chad. And Chad wanted to know if he should go home and hook up with some girl that he's not that into and she's not that into him...If it were teenage guys wouldn't they be slapping him on the back and saying "nail her, dude, that's awesome"?

Absolutely! You KNOW Chad is getting total props for the whole scenario. Not only that, his friends will all be convinced that Chelsea is totally into him and wants nothing more than to trap him into a relationship. The old stereotypes prevail.

Well Hamby, If some of that was directed at me, I'd say you've not read my comments (particularly the last 2-3) carefully enough perhaps. I'll raise your questioned 'patriarchy bullshit' and call with an inside straight of simple stupid. But, with the following provisos (as I've tried to make clear above):

1.) I've got not much to say about just FWB or even the mindless f*ck. Really depends on the context. Typically employable for many, at different times in their 'life course'. It's deliberately going after a previously Disposed of , self assessed 'Douche-bag' that's a bit troubling & stupid.

2.) Again, probably little to do with any conscious 'mating strategies' here, and more like 'tricks of the trade' that DB's use to get laid. (Which IS a viable strategy, just probably Not Hers!) Which is fine BTW, as long as this is what you truly desire. But Chelsea seemed pretty conflicted on that point. (Which again is not all that uncommon, sadly enough).

3.) Hamby says: "As for this being a "bad decision" or something Chelsea needs to "learn from," I say horse-shit. We don't know if it's a bad decision or not."

Well perhaps not yet. But we Do know by her own self assessment & ambivalence expressed that She thinks it's not the best or 'better' decision to make. But she's still going ahead & doing it. Which again is not all that uncommon. So how likely is it to remain a 'good decision' in her mind? Well we already know that. She does not already!

Nowhere do I claim that she 'ought to feel bad about it'. I do not care much for such assessments, and mostly they're useless, morally perverse & often besides the point. Stupid things & decisions often feel just Great most of the time. They often only appear stupid in retrospect, when we take the time to reflect & learn more about the circumstances behind, or the context of our poor decision making. Hence 'hooking up smart'. Yes, there Are smarter choices to be made. Yes we learn from All our choices, hopefully. Some more slowly than others. Evidently.

And again, nowhere did I ever claim this: "Again, it's just wrong to say that sex is ill-advised just because it's necessarily a short term thing".

4.) Hamby: "Finally, take it from someone who knows. Mad sexual chemistry is harder to find than a lot of people think. When two people have it, make no mistake -- the sex really is a lot better. If Chelsea is having crazy chandelier sex for four days, and has lots of hot memories to take back home with her, who is anyone else to tell her that she's damaged goods, or wounded, or whatever".

Nowhere do I say or imply that anyone is 'damaged goods' here. Still, you can get seriously 'played' by an awful lot of perfectly wretched but studly DB's down through the years. And yes, that does take a toll on anyone's soul or consciousness. It can and does make it harder to connect & trust others. That's it. We should not discount someone's worthiness as a human, or hopeful potential for a relationship due to their 'number' of hookups. But if you're carrying a bunch of 'bitter baggage' by the time you're 30 something? Probably some of these situational scenarios have repeatedly 'gone wrong or poorly' for you. Time & time again. And besides, it has wasted plenty of time on DB's. Which, BTW? Is reason enough to try & avoid the situation.

This is not to insinuate "that a girl is just "too weak mentally" to handle a casual sexual fling without falling madly in love and getting her poor little girlie heart broken". Women are and have always been the 'stronger' sex at the skill of sheer survival here, especially in emotional contexts. They'll do fine, as long as they learn the ropes & have the time & inclination to acquire some active social skills/cultural rules quickly.

And again nowhere did I claim that this should be denied to her or anyone: "She'll realize that in the future, she can give herself permission to indulge in her youth and sexuality from time to time, and emerge with a healthy sense of self worth and a few days of endorphin highs."

So yes, again, 'The Stoopid, it Burns!' Sometimes a simple shot of penicillin can take care of some of the more immediate detrimental issues here. (Going here with the Burning, especially for the guys). Sometimes not.

I'll use another context here for an example. Take 2006-7. I was already tremendously fearful that the market was going to crash soon back then. I slowly started removing cash from the markets. Many people thought I was simply foolish & 'short sighted'. Too frightened by what I imagined I saw. But the numbers all lined up & economist Dean Baker, Nouriel Roubini & a few others were not wrong to be screaming the same warnings. Come 2008? I was mostly out of the market. Which of course saved my ass & our business. People were massively stupid in thinking, 'This time it'll be different'! (See the masterful book "This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly" by Carmen M. Reinhart & Ken Rogoff on that score too).

So to review, Lots of similarly supposedly Very smart, well educated people doing massively stupid things with yes, eventually trillions of dollars, thinking they were basically immune from any consequences of their bad acts and/or severely poor judgments. But they were all thought of as Very popular & even Yummy decisions at the time, and made plenty of folks, mad crazy money for quite awhile. Even though a few people called this BS at the time, (which was wildly unpopular too, BTW) not many were listening. But I was.

Again, there is a certain wisdom in crowds. There is less wisdom in doing things you strongly suspect are 'less better choices' and that you already are deeply suspicious about. Or that you know will come to threaten your position if the 'larger truth' were 'better known'. Your gut tells you things here too. But again, you cannot gain much good by continuing to make 'more foolish' choices. About anything. Anywhere. No matter how 'good' it feels doing it.

That's about it. Cheers & Good Luck! 'VJ'

"...you can get seriously 'played' by an awful lot of perfectly wretched but studly DB's down through the years. And yes, that does take a toll on anyone's soul or consciousness. It can and does make it harder to connect & trust others."

This is the biggest risk for women. They get emotionally invested with men who do not value them, and every one of those relationships leaves a scar. Women can have casual sex without getting emotionally involved, but it's more difficult for us, especially if it becomes a regular thing. So women need to be smart about who they hook up with. We definitely need to wean ourselves away from the bad boys (good luck with that).

This is a great blog,this website provides very useful tips.we are going to add it to out free dating website and college information blog college singles. http://www.universityloveconnection.com/blog so our visitors can read your
news,as you are a reputable source