🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <DpKtqJ.CHy@world.std.com>, jcooley@world.std.com (John Cooley) writes:
|> -=Weezel=-  <louise@mv.mv.com> wrote:
|> >It *is* confusing. I met the guy I was with for 12 years at my first job
|> >out of college. It's been 2 1/2 years since we split up and it is VERY
|> >startling to me to meet guys who want to have sex "to get to know you
|> >better". How about getting to know me FIRST!!! I'm not a prude, but the
|> >"Hi let's go to your place"  approach is a little fast. 
|> >--L
|> 
|> Over the years the majority of my male peers I've heard mention anything
|> about sex & dating usually say that they'll give a woman anywhere from 3 to
|> 7 dates before either going to bed with her or moving on.  That is, they
|> try to get to know the woman first.  After that they want to know whether
|> she's worth any further investment of time & energy (i.e. is she great
|> or lousy in bed?)

I don't understand this at all. What's wrong in not knowing physically.
I guess if you really care for someone you'll be great in the obvious department.
All it should matter is the proximity and that someone-there-is to talk-to
feeling. In otherwords, how'd you get along and not too different in interest
and more than anything respect and give-in as much as you can. If people would
really forget if they have been physical or not.

If these sounds too outdated, call me the last-living-dinasaur. ;)

|> 
|> Of course, this completely grates against the let's-spend-months-getting-
|> to-know-each-other-before-even-kissing style many women would like to
|> follow if they got their druthers in the dating world.
|> 
|> What results most of the time is something in between these two approaches.
|> 
|>   - John