Do women in 2005 define  

rm_Travelin4 57M
7 posts
6/30/2005 2:10 pm

Last Read:
3/5/2006 9:27 pm

Do women in 2005 define


Part of what makes sex so much fun is the difference between the sexes ‒ vive le difference! And the differences aren’t all necessarily physical. Thought processes can differ as well.

Still, I’m a big believer in individualism, versus thinking “all women” or “all men” behave a certain way. Even so, I continue to work through what might be reasonable expectations for a woman who posts her profile on AdultFriendFinder saying she’s looking for a “no strings” liaison.

I know my motivation for posting on AdultFriendFinder falls into two main arenas. As the AdultFriendFinder other topics list it: “my sex life is barren”, and sex IS important to me. The other is that there is an excitement surrounding a new partner ‒ the sense of discovery is arousing; it’s exciting. That second reason might be a broad categorization of why most men post on AdultFriendFinder: sex is fun, and it’s arousing to be with a new partner.

In the “good old days”, from what I’ve read it seemed that women were more likely to take a lover if there was serious trouble in her marriage. The expectation ‒ the hope? ‒ fifty years ago was that her lover would provide a connection beyond sex. But I’m not so sure that’s the case now.

Now I think the reasons for taking a new partner are blurring when looking at men and women. The traditional male affair that was primarily sexual is changing because more men are having more mind AND body affairs. (i.e. a partner who can connect via a conversation as well as her body is more appealing than someone who has a “10” figure but is as dumb as a box of rocks.)

Meanwhile, it sure seems like women are having more sexual affairs: women now feel more entitled to enjoy their sexuality -- at least the ones posting on AdultFriendFinder seem to have that sense of entitlement. So, if sex with their husband isn't satisfying, AdultFriendFinder women have decided to look elsewhere than maybe their grandmothers would have been. And they don’t (necessarily) need to have a deep emotional connection ‒ a friend-with-benefits is OK. Or maybe I’m reading more into the profiles here than I should.

I do think most people have a native curiosity, and for married people posting on AdultFriendFinder ‒ men AND women ‒ these postings might be seen as experimental. Someone finds something missing in their relationship, and checks out what it's like to be with someone else, but they don’t want to end their marriage. The encounter turns out to be not-so-great, and they end it.

I reckon that’s where the “no strings” definition comes in. Someone might look like the perfect bedroom partner, but for whatever reason, things don’t click.

IS that a safe assumption one can take when contacting a woman on AdultFriendFinder ‒ that she is OK with the “no strings” approach ‒ that there’s no obligation to carry on? Do women in 2005 define “no strings” the same as men do?

And geez -- it does put a wet blanket on things to belabor the “no strings” aspect when first communicating with someone. But we all know what can happen when one “assumes” something.

I’m not the brightest bulb in the chandelier, so if anyone has pointers or opinions they are willing to share, I’d be obliged!

And until I reach that next level of enlightenment: Vive la difference!

yknotforme 46F

6/30/2005 2:39 pm

I believe women are more secure in their sexuality and believe they have as much right as men to have a fulfilling and fun sex life. With that said I think before approaching a woman on passion.com you should see what her profile says. If she is not clear on what her feelings are, if she wants a friends with benefits or a no-strings. To me they are different. My definition means that a friend with benefits is someone who I care about to want what is best for them, will lend an ear or a shoulder, but also someone to share in sexual pleasure with. It is something in addition to my life, but shares a small percentage of me, knowing me on some level as a person. A no-strings I think falls more into the one night stand category. It is someone that you see, fuck, and then could care less about. Perhaps the sex is good and perhaps you meet up again for sex, but there is no small talk, there is no cuddling, and it is more of a person you use, not someone you share with. Of course that is my opinion. Just be direct with what you want. I find that the most appealing.


rm_Yesooyes 48F

6/30/2005 2:40 pm

I tend to think of "no strings" as the same as men, but I do know myself, and the more time you spend with someone the more likely you will start having more feelings than the situation calls for. So for me, if I want a no strings fling, it can not occurr as often as I would like it to.


Become a member to create a blog