Fuck buddies?
- Thread starter Edith
- Start date
joeljjison
Well-known member
I don't, and honestly I'm rather under qualified to have an opinion here. Nonetheless I'll express one anyway.
I've wanted that yes. I'm not especially against the idea, so long as both parties are clear that its sex for sex's sake. Fuck buddy.. i don't know. I have a close friend who has had an on and off one. I hear the sex is fun. It seemed like she was addicted at some point. It was a source for sex, and she wanted it to stick around...
I don't think its uncommon to start wanting more than you yourself had originally intended. If your wary of that, there's no problem.
After all, you said your OK whether its just sex or he wanted more.
Whether there is really any point.. thats another matter. Its just gratification. I'm male, and frankly I keep myself satisfied in 'companionship' whatever that means, through a combination of masturbation (certainly takes the edge of wanting some. your body wont want it anyway), and that i have friends who i can hug, when i want, without sexual interest being a pointless complication.
For me, I've found that if i am sure not to look at my friends with lewd eyes, i can be perfectly content.
Where is the opportunity for that in a fuck buddy... i don't know...
Thats just my two cents. If you want it, go ahead, there's not really any risk if you take the usual precautions and trust the guy, and it'd be pointless to regret it afterwards. Whatever you do, do what you want to with no regrets.
I've wanted that yes. I'm not especially against the idea, so long as both parties are clear that its sex for sex's sake. Fuck buddy.. i don't know. I have a close friend who has had an on and off one. I hear the sex is fun. It seemed like she was addicted at some point. It was a source for sex, and she wanted it to stick around...
I don't think its uncommon to start wanting more than you yourself had originally intended. If your wary of that, there's no problem.
After all, you said your OK whether its just sex or he wanted more.
Whether there is really any point.. thats another matter. Its just gratification. I'm male, and frankly I keep myself satisfied in 'companionship' whatever that means, through a combination of masturbation (certainly takes the edge of wanting some. your body wont want it anyway), and that i have friends who i can hug, when i want, without sexual interest being a pointless complication.
For me, I've found that if i am sure not to look at my friends with lewd eyes, i can be perfectly content.
Where is the opportunity for that in a fuck buddy... i don't know...
Thats just my two cents. If you want it, go ahead, there's not really any risk if you take the usual precautions and trust the guy, and it'd be pointless to regret it afterwards. Whatever you do, do what you want to with no regrets.
Ericisme
Well-known member
Is this seriously even allowed by the site? This is social phobia world, not meet local singles. It seems what most of you guys posting on this commenting in a way where you agree to having sex buddies want is just a sex buddy. I don't know about most of you, but I would rather have a sexless relationship/friend. It may be a bonus for sex in a relationship, but there are other sites for this stuff, go to them.
joeljjison
Well-known member
As I see it, sex ruins relationships!
Prissy
Member
I can sooo relate with you. I have been considering this too and weighing out the consequences on whether it would be cool to have one. If you just want to feel the itimacy and excitement and pleasure of course, then go for it but practice safely. On the other hand if you want companionship and attention along with those things then maybe you need to date this person first. If you don't then I am afraid that you get could get hurt in the end if he wants nothing more than just sex, you know what I mean.
Basically, if you can have nonchalant casual sex, then go for it. But if you want someone to fill and emotional absence along with the sex then you may want to reconsider.
Basically, if you can have nonchalant casual sex, then go for it. But if you want someone to fill and emotional absence along with the sex then you may want to reconsider.
no1
Banned
i fear the day when I have to rely on just sex because I have raging hormones yet I can never find love
I think it's NEVER ok to just look for sex. or even just have a 'fuck buddy'. I mean.. what are the reasons? is it for fun? well if it is then maybe I just don't know anything about that. I guess.. the only reason why'd I'd want to have sex just for sex.. is for health maintenance just so I dont go crazy because the lack of sex can cause a whole bunch of health complications (unless you are a monk or some godlike being)
I think it's NEVER ok to just look for sex. or even just have a 'fuck buddy'. I mean.. what are the reasons? is it for fun? well if it is then maybe I just don't know anything about that. I guess.. the only reason why'd I'd want to have sex just for sex.. is for health maintenance just so I dont go crazy because the lack of sex can cause a whole bunch of health complications (unless you are a monk or some godlike being)
joeljjison
Well-known member
no1 said:
I'm not actually especially interested in sex, as something to have. I don't really understand what the big pull is for it is, because essentially its just a physical pleasure. So therefore i think love, something thats difficult to describe, and sex, a physical pleasure based on 'the mechanics' and how the partner looks as two separate entities.
Masturbation is effective at reducing urges significantly. (I think.)
Anyway, about my theory that sex ruins relationships. Do you have any friends, who you wouldn't mind being with... who's personalities you click with amazingly... but they're just not as hot as someone who you'd like to have a relationship with even though they're not as nice.
Its not uncommon, and people are always in denial, but if you watch others its so obvious. There are some people who don't care how others look,but we always look in relationships for people who are hot... as if that is the defining factor in whether or not you want to be with someone or not. That is rarely stated explicitly, and instead people try to get to know each other...
conversely there are great friendships, where sexual attraction is developed between them (ocassionally on both sides). its fine if they are both attracted equally. but any less than perfect balance ruins things
recluse
Well-known member
I think that sex is something that should be sacred and should be kept in loving relationships. I just don't understand why people go out and have sex with people, some they don't even know, just for pleasure. I admit that i used to occassionaly look at porn but in the end it just gave me a feeling of disgust somewhat. This is why i don't look at porn at all now because it gives the wrong image of what sex should be.
Apart from the emotional side of it you've also got to consider things like unwanted pregnancies and std's.
Apart from the emotional side of it you've also got to consider things like unwanted pregnancies and std's.
Thelema
Well-known member
no1 said:
The only emotions that are actually universal for the human species are the "primitive" ones. You'd probably have a hard time explaining to a caveman the concept of true love or of saving yourself for marriage.
Not knocking those concepts, but they are far from universal
Dave_McFadden
Well-known member
no1 said:
Uh....yeah.....
joeljjison said:
The big pull is, the physical pleasure.
no1 said:
recluse said:
*shakes head* All I can say, is, wait until you've had really good sex with someone you're not particularly in love with, or even in like with, maybe only mildly interested in. Then we'll see how "sacred" you think it is.
recluse said:
Well, that's true. Everything fun has its potential consequences. Which is why, of course, you have to take all necessary precautions.
Good luck.
no1
Banned
just don't make reality out to be too materialistic is all I'm saying. you may take the approach of extreme realism to the point where it kinda just seems mundane. not that I think what you speak of is 'mundane' or whatever. people just have their own individual preference and I so do when it comes to relationships. I just don't like the idea of my woman doing it with others while she is with me and would prefer it if she stayed faithful, as I wish the same for her about me. it just doesn't seem right, and yeah maybe I used to be very stubborn and wish the a woman could just save it for the right one but the right one hardly ever comes along, and in time , but you gotta fulfill your hormones and your every sexual fantasy, (as if one good woman couldn't be enough) right? The whole promiscuity thing might be based on really primitive ideas of survival to keep us mating all the time. This is both spiritual and physical reality, not just one of those alone. you know what I mean?
If, and only if we had space age technology to renewing our bodies from the wear of sex and age and weathering in general, and are immortal.. and leave our bodies hygienically "untouched" (including being cleansed of the fluid and particle left overs from the last partner he/she was with) I might consider having sex just for fun and being promiscuous and sexual with more than one person in a lifetime. I think if otherwise I might find it gross.
Not that I'm judging you it's just my personal preference. Even if we did have these 'technologies' I might still choose to be monogamous if I wanted to. It's individual preference. A lot of others do, a lot don't. Don't judge me as 'not being sexually liberated'. I may be different from others. I'm not just reacting on fear, this is just what I prefer right now. I don't believe in abusive marriages, or abusive relationships just like the others might.
If, and only if we had space age technology to renewing our bodies from the wear of sex and age and weathering in general, and are immortal.. and leave our bodies hygienically "untouched" (including being cleansed of the fluid and particle left overs from the last partner he/she was with) I might consider having sex just for fun and being promiscuous and sexual with more than one person in a lifetime. I think if otherwise I might find it gross.
Not that I'm judging you it's just my personal preference. Even if we did have these 'technologies' I might still choose to be monogamous if I wanted to. It's individual preference. A lot of others do, a lot don't. Don't judge me as 'not being sexually liberated'. I may be different from others. I'm not just reacting on fear, this is just what I prefer right now. I don't believe in abusive marriages, or abusive relationships just like the others might.
joeljjison
Well-known member
Hello no1, I didn't think you were judging me at all. I just didn't agree with you. I didn't reply to your one liner, because i thought it'd seem like i'm just being petulant, but now i can.
In terms of us having evolved.. i think we have just named more things... we have named places, ways of thinking, forms of art. lots of cultural development, and technological development and names.. but we're still humans with the same greed and the same holes in our hearts that can never be filled...
i don't think expecting your woman not to do it with others while she is with you is particularly irrational. It should be a given that once you get to the stage of calling each other boyfriend or girlfriend, that its him/her your interested in. Not someone else, and while some people are more easy going than others, its within everybodies rights to be hurt or annoyed if someone snogs someone else, or indeed does something more.
I'm not particularly interested in sex for sex's sake/ sex for pleasure's sake, and my morals dictate that i will immediately be monogamous if i enter a relationship (unless we agree not to be). The same morals that say there is no problem with sex for sex's sake...
I'm not trying to convince you of anything, its just as you felt disagreement with things, and had to explain why, so do i.
That we can accept others opinions (most people anyway) like that is one way that we HAVE evolved.
I don't think one woman could be enough, unless you love her. (The alternative is that you'd have to be sexually attracted to her ALL THE TIME.) The reality is if you loved her, you still might objectively find other women more attractive, but you wouldn't give a monkeys.
But who's to say anyone will ever fall in love. Its not a given. I doubt there are many people worth falling in love with... i so rarely even get a crush never mind anything further than that.
I used to think about it like you, but i think its an extremely optimistic way of looking at it. You don't need to be 'sexually liberated' whatever that means. You just need to remember, to be with people who think the same way.
I just don't really understand at what point sex transcends being a physical pleasure/ a means for selfishly bringing people into this world. And what does sex have to do with loving people? I love some people who i don't want to have sex with, or pull... and i can't ever see myself loving anyone else more. And I don't love my parents.
The general thing i here is that i will when I'm older. I always would rather have a logical explanation or no answer.
In terms of us having evolved.. i think we have just named more things... we have named places, ways of thinking, forms of art. lots of cultural development, and technological development and names.. but we're still humans with the same greed and the same holes in our hearts that can never be filled...
i don't think expecting your woman not to do it with others while she is with you is particularly irrational. It should be a given that once you get to the stage of calling each other boyfriend or girlfriend, that its him/her your interested in. Not someone else, and while some people are more easy going than others, its within everybodies rights to be hurt or annoyed if someone snogs someone else, or indeed does something more.
I'm not particularly interested in sex for sex's sake/ sex for pleasure's sake, and my morals dictate that i will immediately be monogamous if i enter a relationship (unless we agree not to be). The same morals that say there is no problem with sex for sex's sake...
I'm not trying to convince you of anything, its just as you felt disagreement with things, and had to explain why, so do i.
That we can accept others opinions (most people anyway) like that is one way that we HAVE evolved.
I don't think one woman could be enough, unless you love her. (The alternative is that you'd have to be sexually attracted to her ALL THE TIME.) The reality is if you loved her, you still might objectively find other women more attractive, but you wouldn't give a monkeys.
But who's to say anyone will ever fall in love. Its not a given. I doubt there are many people worth falling in love with... i so rarely even get a crush never mind anything further than that.
I used to think about it like you, but i think its an extremely optimistic way of looking at it. You don't need to be 'sexually liberated' whatever that means. You just need to remember, to be with people who think the same way.
I just don't really understand at what point sex transcends being a physical pleasure/ a means for selfishly bringing people into this world. And what does sex have to do with loving people? I love some people who i don't want to have sex with, or pull... and i can't ever see myself loving anyone else more. And I don't love my parents.
The general thing i here is that i will when I'm older. I always would rather have a logical explanation or no answer.