When Should You Have Sex? Depends If You’re Him or Her


when should you have sexOne of our female readers commented the other day on the article "I Don’t Chase 'Em, I Replace 'Em," about not waiting around for women who aren't interested / are pushing things off indefinitely, saying:

Matt's letter suggested that you cut a woman off if she won't sleep with you on the first date... that cuts out a lot of good women, including me! If all guys thought like this, I'd never get a boyfriend (or laid) again!
(also, it should be noted, many men claim they 'won't date' a girl who will have sex on the first date, so you can't blame us for taking it slow)

The topic is one that's been brought up a number of times by male and female commenters here, and done so in a variety of ways. Because the general advice for men on Girls Chase is contrary to conventional advice (i.e., take women to bed as lovers fast, not slow), it tends to provoke excitement in some, but confusion, questioning, or ire in others.

So - when should you have sex?

We've discussed the process of women's attraction expiring for men who fail to move things forward fast enough, but are there other reasons a man ought to take things fast with women he likes, and not slow, as the advice from the mainstream instructs?

And what about for women - is it better for women to make men wait, and if so, how long?

Today, I'm exploring both sides - so buckle up.


when should you have sex

What if I told you there was one thing that set the pace for a relationship, and stayed with that relationship forever, whether it lasted for 4 months or 40 years?

If there was something that reverberated on down the halls of that relationship, echoing, amplifying, and affecting the future courses that relationship took, and was as close to "predetermination" of a relationship's path to come that you could get?

Well there is - and it is how soon or how late into courtship sex first occurs.

Sex, you see, is a bit of an arms race. It's one of the key points a relationship can pass where the balance of power shifts from one partner to the other. As discussed in "Women and Drama," there are exactly two (2) real, substantial balance-of-power shifts any longer relationship can often expect to pass:

  1. Commencement of sexual intimacy (where a man and woman become physically intimate for the first time)

  2. Passing of the commitment point (where the man and woman pledge to remain together with one another exclusively forever, and mean it)

Each of these denotes a shift in balance of power of the relationship -

  • Before first sex, the woman is in complete control of course of the relationship - she determines if sex ever happens, or if the man is permanently relegated to friend / orbiter / "candidate" status. Many men get upset at women here for "leading them on" - i.e., "wasting their time" in a courtship that never turned into anything sexual.

  • After sex, a reversal occurs, and the man is now in complete control of the course of the relationship - he determines if the relationship progresses or remains static, or if the woman is permanently relegated to "friends with benefits" status. Many women get upset at men here for "leading them on" - i.e., "wasting their time" in a sexual relationship that never turned into anything committed.

  • After the two pledge their undying devotion to one another, the woman once again shifts into complete control of the course of the relationship - as she is the only one with options (men still hit on her and are easy for her to get, but her partner stops hitting on women and his abilities to get them begin to rust over and decay), she can make continually escalating demands on the man while knowing she has a safety net, but he cannot similarly resist these demands because losing her is a much more substantial loss for him than losing him is for her. Many men get upset at women for divorces - 70% of which are initiated by women - here.

The thing that's important for us to note here is that when you have sex for the first time, you've passed the first of these key points.

And at that moment the balance of power shifts from woman to man.

Obviously, passing this point has some rather different implications for how things progress, depending on whether you are the woman or you are the man.


Why Women Want to Wait

I like to tell a couple of stories about waiting for sex that very nicely, I think, illustrate the effects of waiting on men's emotions and investment levels.

I was in South Korea in 2008 with a couple of friends of mine. One of my friends, while there, reconnected with a stewardess for Singapore Airlines he'd met briefly about a year ago. "She's pretty cute," he said, showing our other friend and I her picture. "I figure I'll just take her out today, bring her back to the hotel, and take her to bed." He left for the date and I didn't see him again until the next morning, when we had some touristy stuff planned.

"How'd it go last night?" I asked him.

"Man, I got her all the way back to the hotel room, and I managed to get her shirt off, but every time I went to take her pants off she shut me down!" he said. "I'm going to try one more time tonight, but if it doesn't go anywhere then that's it, and I'm done."

That night, he went on a date with the girl again. Again, he came back home empty-handed.

"Dudes," he told us, "she wouldn't even come back to the hotel with me this time! I'm totally over this chick."

But, the next day, she sent him a really sweet text message. "Actually, she's not a bad girl," he told us. "I think I'll see her again and try one more time."

For the third night in a row, he left on a date with this girl. And for the third night in a row, he came back empty-handed.

"Okay," he told us, "that's it. I'm definitely done seeing this girl."

Once again, she sent him a really nice message, and once again, he changed his mind.

"I'm going to see her again tonight," he told us the next day. "I probably won't be able to sleep with her on this trip, but she's going to be flying to the city I'm staying in, and I'm starting to realize she's actually a really great girl, and I might make her a girl I see regularly."

He ended up seeing her either five or six times during our eight-day trip - my other friend and I spent most of the time going out without him - and by the end of it he was talking about making her his girlfriend. And they hadn't slept together yet. And this was a guy who was regularly sleeping with lots of different women.

I'd already started piecing a theory together by this point that there was some kind of unconscious, deeply-rooted biological switch in men's minds that the longer they chased a woman for sex before getting it, the higher quality she must be, but this incident served as proof for me at the time that I was on the right track.

My friend had only wanted to sleep with this girl once, and almost got there.

But then he didn't. And she just kept stringing him along... and he went from seeing her as mere hookup material, to a girl he'd like to have as a girlfriend.

When I got back to California, I asked my friends: "Hey, think about every girlfriend you've had that you really cared about - it probably took you a long time to get her, right?"

And they'd think, and rub their chins, and say, "Yeah, you know what - it did."

It turned out that almost every guy I talked to slept with girls quickly here and there, but only ended up dating the ones he wasn't able to easily get. Why? So far as I could tell, all the chasing created a sense of higher value - if it's this hard to get her, she must really be worth it, reasoned the guys' minds.

I've since realized this isn't some kind of sex-specific trigger in men's minds, so much as it is an investment trigger - we value most highly the things we work hardest to get.

Like the childhood toys I mentioned obsessing over in my youth in "Can't Stop Thinking About Her?," the things we pour the most sweat, blood, and effort into acquiring we also come to value the highest:

  • The school you work hardest to get into is the one you value most highly
  • The job you work hardest to get is the one you value most highly
  • The achievement you work hardest to achieve is the one you value most highly
  • The woman you work hardest to get sex with is the one you value most highly

There's another factor, too, and it's the factor of the man's experience levels and belief about how women select partners to go to bed with.

For the average, ordinary man, he lacks the ability to present himself as a very attractive man and give women the kind of experience they need to become sexually excited soon into meeting him, so the only women he ends up sleeping with quickly are the ones who sleep quickly with everyone.

The average, ordinary man thus sleeps with a woman fast and thinks, "Wow... she must do this with ALL the guys if she did it with ME!"

But when he encounters a woman who is difficult to get... suddenly, she becomes some cherished treasure, invaluable and difficult to attain.

There is a flipside to this: the ordinary man finding out that his treasured princess is not as hard to get as his experiences instruct. This is the man who chases a woman for six months and finally gets her; only to find out she has a past of one-night stands with men she met at parties or bars or while on vacation. It feels like a bait-and-switch; here he thought he was getting this hard-to-get woman, but the reality is she's easy to get... just, not for him.

This even happened to me with my first girlfriend, back when I didn't know my way around women all that well. It took me a Herculean effort to get her, and when we broke up later I felt like I was passing up on one girl in a million. Finding out she had a couple of one-night stands to get over me, though, erased any perception of her being especially difficult to get.

For a woman, then, it's better to make a man wait - so long as he's not going to find out that other men have had her far sooner than he has (which is kind of like finding out that you paid $500 for what you thought were designer jeans, only to discover a friend of yours paid $25 for the same exact jeans at an outlet store nearby).


Why Men Want to Move Fast

Aside from attraction expiring, there is another reason that a man wants to move fast with women.

We just talked about the investment switch that's triggered in men when they chase - a man comes to see a woman as more and more valuable as he pursues her and doesn't get her.

So what's the other side of things - what happens to women's view of men when those men move fast?

Most women have four modes on sex. Those modes are:

  • "I will have sex with him quickly, because he's sexy and we have no future together."

  • "I'm not sure what to do, because he's sexy but I'd also like to see if we can be boyfriend-girlfriend."

  • "I will not have sex with him quickly, because he's not sexy enough and I'd like to see if we can be boyfriend-girlfriend."

  • "I will not have sex with him at all, because he's not sexy enough and we have no future together."

So it comes down to:

  1. Do you make her want sex with you?

  2. Do you make her want a relationship with you?

To maximize your odds of taking a girl to bed (and once you're lovers, you can normally very easily transition that into a relationship if you so choose), you ideally want #1 to be "yes" and #2 to be "no."

when should you have sex

Most men try to make #2 "yes" and don't realize there's anything they can even do about #1.

Now, depending on which mode she's in, getting to sex fast with her and then continuing on in a relationship with her does a number of good things for you:

  • If she wanted to have sex with you quickly, and she does, and then you continue to date her, you will always be a very sexy man in her mind, because that's how she originally saw you. Even years later, when most women have long since lost interest in their men, your woman still looks at you and thinks, "Wow. Here was this guy I thought was tremendously sexy, and I had no future with, and then we got together and it was great AND we had a future together. Amazing!"

  • If she wasn't sure what she wanted to do, and you have sex quickly and then continue to date her, she later thinks, "Wow. He just knew exactly what he wanted, and got me, and I did something I usually don't do with him because he was so sexy, and now we're still together. I'm a lucky girl!"

  • If she didn't want to have sex with you quickly and wanted you as a boyfriend, but she still sleeps with you fast anyway, she thinks, "Wow. I completely misread him. I thought he was just good as a boyfriend... but it turns out he's a dominant, sexual man who takes what he wants. Impressive."

  • And if she didn't want to have sex with you at ALL and wanted you as just friends, her thoughts are, "Holy crap, I thought I didn't want anything with this guy at ALL and he just completely overrode what I thought I wanted and got me into bed and we had sex anyway, and now we're together. He knows what I want so much better than I do... this man blows my mind."

How about if you just wait and take things slow? Well, then you're just another average, ordinary guy. Not remarkable, not amazing, not anything all that special.

And if she's had another man who took her fast like this before, you'll never quite occupy the same place in her heart as that man.

A big part of the reason why I tell men to get women into bed fast is to avoid wasting time and avoid attraction expiring or life intervening (as we discussed in the article on how to get girls), that's true.

But the other part of the reason I tell men to get women into bed fast is so that they can establish themselves as one of the most powerful, dominant, sexual men of those women's lives.

And the only time a man can do that is at the outset of the relationship.

However, just like with a man finding out a woman he took a long time to bed went to bed fast with other men feels like he got a bait-and-switch, women can feel the same way if they find out you wined and dined other women in the past. When girlfriends of mine I've had first-date sex with have later found out that I've had girlfriends it took me weeks or months to bed, it's made them feel cheap ("Oh, those other girls were able to make him wait, but I wasn't? This guy isn't as sexy as I thought if he couldn't make them give it up faster... I must just be easy.") I've had to spend a fair amount of time explaining that in the days that happened, I knew a lot less about women and was far less talented with them.

So, just as women ought to be careful about telling men who chased them for a long time before sex about men they slept with quickly before, so must men be careful about telling women they bedded fast about women they bedded slow.


when should you have sex

Men want sex to happen fast, to reduce the odds of losing women to time, the fading of attraction, and faster-moving competition, and to increase the perception of them as being powerful, attractive, dominant, sexy men.

Meanwhile, women want sex to happen slow, to reduce the odds of losing men to too-quick gratification, a failure to become properly intrigued, and slower-moving competition, and to increase the perception of them as being aloof, attractive, hard-to-get, conservative women.

Whatever to do, then? When should you have sex, and how can you properly balance the interests of both parties?

The long-and-short of it is: you can't. You can't have sex fast AND slow. And if you have it at some kind of moderate, middle-of-the-road speed, you'll simply end up with moderate impressions of one another - the man thinking the woman was reasonably difficult to get, but not that difficult to get, and the woman thinking the man was reasonably sexually dominant, but not that sexually dominant.

In other words, compromising here only leads to unexceptional romances.

Which means, if you want an exceptional romance, you must do away with the compromise.


One Partner to Rule Them All

In every two-partner relationship, there is always one dominant partner, and one subordinate one. The distance between their roles may be great, or it may be small. But there is never a "perfect balance" between the two - with the two being equally dominant or subordinate. Yes, a relationship is a partnership, but it is not an equal partnership.

What normally predicts this dominance? You guessed it - speed to bed.

The sooner a man beds a woman, the more dominant he tends to be. The longer a woman delays sex, the more dominant she tends to be.

Are there rare situations where men are religious, say, and are dating without sex by choice and don't want sex, and it's the women who end up chasing sex? Sure; you bet. And are there situations where men desperately want a relationship, and their female sexual partners do not, and it's the men who end up chasing relationships? Yes; absolutely. But these are not the norm.

Usually, prior to sexual intimacy, men are chasing, women are resisting.

And by the time sex occurs, the tone for the relationship has been decided:

  • Either sex happened fast, and in this relationship, things are done on the man's terms (the male is dominant, the female subordinate), OR

  • Sex happened slowly, and in this relationship, things are done on the woman's terms (the female is dominant, the male subordinate)

This is partly due to the effect of fast or slow sex on the psyches of those involved, but also due to the fact that a guy who gets sex fast is plainly and simply a dominant guy (compared to the women he sleeps with quickly and prompts a rapid decision to go to bed with him in), and a girl who delays sex for a good while is plainly and simply a dominant gal (compared to the men she has chasing her while she decides whether to yield to their advances or not).

(there's also the moderate-speed-to-bed scenario in which both individuals have roughly the same base levels of dominance and neither has a big impact made on him or her from the speed-to-bed - in this case, the relationship tends to be rather lukewarm much of the time, without much passion on either side)

Now, here's an interesting point: as Ricardus mentioned in the article on relationship control, relationships where the woman is in the dominant role last longer.

We had a lengthy discussion about this on the boards here - Is it worth it to become good with women? Basically though, based on everything I've seen, women prefer dominant men and are happier on average with them, but in the relationships where partners are unhappy, it's always the subordinate partner who suffers most, and subordinate women are a lot more likely to leave unhappy relationships than subordinate men.

That last is because subordinate women, despite being in the subordinate position in the relationship, still have options - men hitting on them, courting them, flirting with them, despite their relationship status - so leaving the dominant partner doesn't feel so bad; conversely, subordinate men do not have women hitting on them, courting them, or flirting with them, since it is normally men who do this, not women, and subordinate men cease doing this with other women once they're in a relationship, thus cutting off their options and making it far harder for them to leave in the event of an unhappy relationship.

So, relationships where the woman is in control are more stable (because unhappy subordinate men don't leave), but less fulfilling for the woman overall; meanwhile, relationships where the man is in control are less stable (because unhappy subordinate women do leave), but more fulfilling for the woman overall.

This has made it very easy for me to recommend to men that they make sure they're in charge of their relationships, but very difficult for me to make recommendations for women. When I have women ask me if it's better for them to be dominant or subordinate, I can never really answer that well. The truth is, a woman will be happier in a subordinate role where the man controls the relationship, but more likely to have a stable, long-lasting relationship in a dominant role where she controls the relationship.

So what's better for a woman? Well, I suppose that depends on the woman, and it depends on what's most important to her.


Unstoppable Forces and Immovable Objects

Back to sex.

What happens when an unstoppable force (a charming, attractive, seductive, sexually experienced man who knows how to push all the right buttons and rev a girl's engine like crazy and move things smoothly and rapidly forward to sex) meets an immovable object (a charming, attractive, seductive, sexually experienced woman who knows how to dodge all the best advances and avoid falling prey to even the best seducer's efforts and calmly and gracefully slips away from his silk-lined "traps" every time)?

Well, most often, you end up having two people who simply part ways without either of them getting what they want... that's what.

The man who knows his way around women wants sex to happen fast; the woman who knows her way around men wants sex to happen slow. And very often, the man will not accept it happening slowly, and the woman will not accept it happening quickly.

For this reason, men and women of comparable sexual expertise often do not end up together.

In "The 4 Kinds of Girls and Which Ones YOU Should Go For," we examined the four major dating personality types and how they interact. And we talked about the fact that you will usually not end up with someone who's the same type as you.

Why not? Because you cancel each other's efforts to steer things one way or another out.

Take two soft experienced individuals. The man will calmly but steadily attempt to escalate things, and the woman will calmly but steadily attempt to deescalate them. If their experience levels are roughly the same, they'll usually be stalemated, and at best end up in a "middle of the road" coupling where neither person is particularly enthused, or at worst simply don't get together (or maybe that's the "at best" scenario; depends on your perspective).

Or take two strong inexperienced individuals. The man will tenaciously pursue sex, while the woman assertively shuts him down and tenaciously tries to induce him to chase. Stalemate: both lose interest, or they eventually begin a mediocre relationship together, both giving some ground but neither taking as much as he or she would like.

But now, take a strong experienced man and a strong inexperienced woman, and the TR/IN woman tries to make the man chase her, but the TR/EX man shrugs this off and beds her swiftly anyway.

Or, take a soft experienced woman and soft inexperienced man. The FT/IN man doesn't even try to make sex happen quickly, and the FT/EX woman knows how to draw things out long enough that the FT/IN man is fully committed and head over heels in love with her before he ever takes her to bed.

This inherent tension between pursuer and pursued usually means that partners of similar sexual experience levels and similar personality profiles simply don't end up together. They may have similar personalities but differing experience levels, or similar experience levels but differing personalities. When it's the same though, they end up deadlocked, and little usually happens.


What the Woman Must Do

when should you have sexWhen I talk to women about dating and sex, I usually at some point end up saying, "It's a lot harder to be a woman than it is to be a man who knows his stuff."

Even when a woman knows exactly what she's doing with men, she still struggles somewhat to pull things off just right. For a man who knows his way around women, this is rarely the case.

True, the man who doesn't know what he's doing with women has it worst of all - he's liable to be alone completely, which is almost never the case even for the most clueless of women. However, men have the opportunity to get educated and learn how to make things happen with women.

The main reason I say it's harder for a woman who knows men to excel than it is for a man who knows women to excel is simple: for a man, all he has to do is make things happen fast and he gets the best outcome for himself. Get a girl in bed with you quickly as a man, and you're assured she'll view you as a powerful, desirable, valuable man.

However, for a woman, things must be done slowly, if the best outcome is desired, and the more slowly you do something, the more opportunity there is for things to go awry.

A woman's strategy for sufficiently alluring a man needs to be:

  • Intrigue him and capture his interest

  • Give him enough hope that he begins to chase

  • Don't let him get what he wants to get at first

  • Yet, continue keeping his hope afloat so that he doesn't give up and go into auto-rejection

  • Keep alluring and enchanting him further and further, while hoping that you don't lose interest or he does

  • Finally go to bed with him, but only after he's done something to merit giving it to him in a way that paints the sex as a reward, so that it's even more highly valued

It's little wonder that most women very sharply divide "lovers" and "providers." Taking men through the "becoming a boyfriend" process is long, draining, and failure-prone, and sometimes women simply need a sexual release while they're doing it (enter the lover, a man she has no interest in dating, but who satisfies a specific need).

Even the women who are the most talented with men have no guarantee that this process of intrigue-building and investment-gathering works; sometimes it does, and the girl gets the guy and he is head-over-heels, but many times he simply gives up and goes away.

This can also lead to uncertainty and doubt in all but the most experienced women; should I have moved faster? Did I lose a good guy by moving too slow?

(this, by the way, is akin to the doubt of men new to moving fast with women - did I lose her by moving too fast? Would I have gotten her if I took things a little slower?)

You can see this process in action with my friend I discussed earlier with that flight attendant for Singapore Airlines; she gradually roped him in further and further, from him viewing her as a mere hookup, to then deciding he liked her, to finally wanting her as a girlfriend.

For me, when I met that first girlfriend of mine I mentioned earlier, I'd known from the start I wanted her as a girlfriend (as I have with all my girlfriends), but I went through a similar process with her - trying to get her out on a date, but having her flake on the date; deciding I was done with her, but then getting a delightful phone call from her and deciding she was even more amazing than I thought.


So When Should You Have Sex?

The simple answer is:

  • If you're a man, as soon as you reasonably can, if you want the best outcome for you (a very attracted, impressed woman who views you as a very powerful man), though you must also avoid escalating things with her at the wrong moment or in an unsmooth way or when you haven't yet properly warmed her to you

  • If you're a woman, as late as you reasonably can, if you want the best outcome for you (a very in-love, committed man who views you as a very hard-to-get woman), though you must also avoid letting interest fade or him feel like he's simply can't get you

And while a man sometimes can have a great relationship with a woman he chases for a long time (as I did with that first girlfriend of mine), and while a woman sometimes can have a great relationship with a man who seduces her to bed very quickly (as my subsequent girlfriends have had with me), generally speaking, you want to avoid those you are not skilled or compelling or attractive enough to impel to do things the way you want to do them.

When a man meets a woman who won't sleep with him quickly, most of the time he's met a woman who's going to dominate him in the relationship, because she is more experienced and more adept at getting her way than he is. It might be that she simply is that way with all men - but, especially in the modern West, it's very rare to meet women who are conservative with all men, and the odds are that even when you think you've found one, you've really just found a woman who's conservative with you.

And when a woman meets a man who takes her to bed quickly, most of the time she's met a man who's done this many times with many women, and while he won't judge her for sleeping with him quickly (he knows it's his skill level, not her "quality," that determines this), the odds are she probably isn't a girl he picked out to keep on as a girlfriend after (she might be, but she can't know that in advance, as he is equally charming with all the women he beds, so she can only go by the odds - and, the odds are against it).

So... when should you have sex?

Sooner if you're him; later if you're her.

And it really is as simple as that.

Always,
Chase Amante

Related Articles from GirlsChase.com

Comments

Wallflower I Am Not's picture

Passion vs. Stability


After reading this article I am further convinced that a woman has to pick a passionate love life or a stable life for herself and that there is really no middle ground. It's a "no win" situation and one must accept it as such. It seems that it is impossible to have both, despite what is generally believed and preached by those who see marriage as the pinnacle of happiness. It seems that it might be the case for men as well.

This issue has been really bothering me for quite some time and it seems that you are reaffirming my prior observations and assumptions about it. I wonder what men think about this.. Do you guys feel like it is possible to have a passionate long-term relationship? I am talking decades of time together? Do you really believe this? Has anyone experienced this? I am not talking about affection here, I am talking about raw passion - wanting to rip each other's clothes off, yearning to have sex all night long, that type of a thing. Is such high sexual drive towards one another sustainable? Thanks for your answer.

Knight's picture

Passion


I think it is Wallflower,
I'm not at that age and can't speak from experience but through Chase's observations and techniques im certain this is achievable. However, obviously this would be quite rare as both individuals would have to understand and employ a lot.

- Knight

Chase Amante's picture

Re: Passion vs. Stability

Author

Wallflower-

More or less, that is the choice, yes. The dominant partner gets to ensure stability for him/her self, at the price of passion; meanwhile, the subordinate partner gets passion, at the price of stability.

The main reason for that is that emotions are a product of being not in control; the more in control you are, the calmer you feel, and the more your emotions recede. Stability is a natural byproduct of being in control. The dominant partner is in control, which means he or she can ensure stability if he or she chooses, but doesn't get to feel the highs and lows of emotion that come from feeling passionately out of control; the subordinate partner is not in control, which means he or she has little say over how stable the relationship is, no matter how sweet or wonderful or awesome he or she is to the dominant partner, but he/she also gets the full range of emotional ups and downs from not being in control and not knowing how things will turn out and hoping they'll go a certain way but never fully knowing.

Long-term passion comes as a result of long-term instability - for you to feel it, you actually need a partner who creates constant instability in the relationship. The more stable things become, the more passion wanes.

There are some ways you can structure in higher passion in long-term relationships - e.g., go on Google and search for "living apart together" and you'll come across a number of articles on people in long-term relationships who report continuing to have passionate, sexual relationships by not living together, including a number of happily married couples with children.

Anything that gets the blood running can reinvigorate passion - travel, new experiences, amusement park rides, horror movies, adventuring like mountain-climbing or scuba diving, etc. These don't give you the kinds of wild crazy month-long passion sprees you get at the start of a new relationship, but the only way to get that IS to start a new relationship with a totally new person and still have all the thrill of discovering someone unknown to you and filled with potential. More on reinvigorating passion to a certain degree in this article: Self-Expansion and Growth in Relationships.

A high, rip-each-others'-clothes-off sex drive doesn't last though, because that comes as a bit of a response to the newness - there's a certain feeling of, "This person is AMAZING, so we need to mate NOW in case we come apart and never end up seeing each other again!" - and the more time you spend together, the more your brains begin to realize that this other person isn't going anywhere, so things are a lot less urgent. Living apart, joint self-expansion, and drama seem to be the best ways of giving an older relationship a jolt in the arm - probably because they all suggest the partner might leave (living apart, how do you know if he or she isn't seeing someone else? Self-expansion, how do you know if your partner is improving him or herself so much, he/she isn't going to catch the eye of some attractive member of the opposite sex and vanish? And with drama, how do you know this fight isn't the one that ends the relationship?). Introduce chaos, anarchy, newness, or thrill, and suddenly passion rouses from its slumber to go a round or two, until the emotions and uncertainty subside and stability returns to the fore once more.

Chase

Wallflower I Am Not's picture

Growth and Self-Expansion to gain Passion?


Chase,

Thank you for your generous response and a link to another very interesting article.

So, after reading all this information, I gathered that it is not possible to sustain a wild attraction for anyone in a long-term relationship, but that it is possible to sort of get it out of a rut every once in a while with some "tricks," such as learning to do new activities together and growing. But then, what if you are very different people? And you like very different things, yet you get a long well and have years of history together?

I don't know.. I guess I am more confused now, granted it's not your responsibility or fault, of course. I just don't really know how I am supposed to live my life. Most guys that I had wild passionate feelings towards would end up messing with my head somehow and I would feel very unsure of what this relationship would amount to in the end, not that I cared so much about the outcome, but it still made me feel a little uneasy about it and I would opt out or they would do it for me. Or, sometimes the dynamic would change, they would fall in love with me, so then I would be in control and lose the passion and break up with them. The guys who were really into me from the get-go, who were attractive but not to a point where I was losing my mind thinking about having sex with them would go on to become supportive, reliable boyfriends who would want nothing more but to marry me. But, somehow we were always very different in our interests and I was the "exciting one" in the relationship I felt.

Basically, I guess I just don't know what to do with myself at this point in my life. I don't want to make compromises, but it seems that I would be unfulfilled no matter which path I take in this life. I don't want to experience the lows of the lows that you get with someone who gives you the ultimate highs, but at the same time don't want to be bored and feel like I have to take some medication to keep my sex drive in check.

I know you suggested trading countries, cities, engage in new adventurous activities etc. and yes, thes do work to an extent, but they occupy your mind, not your body, your body still wants something new and exciting.

Anyway, I feel like some serious whore writing all this. I am not! :))) believe it or not. Just very dazed and confused! :)

Chase Amante's picture

Long Term Passion

Author

Wallflower–

Well, we’re kind of in a weird place as far as historical precedent is concerned right now, because traditionally there’s either been society or biology that sets us on some kind of a normal path, but we don’t have either of those right now. e.g., Western society is very against telling anyone that she HAS to do anything, and because of contraception pregnancy isn’t going to come along and force people to become parents and move into the usual “next stage” of life as it has in generations past (e.g., 40% of American brides in the mid-1700s were already pregnant on their wedding days). It’s a bigger problem in general in the West – a whole lot of people who don’t know what they want to do and don’t have a clear sense of purpose or direction.

There are a lot of ways you can have fulfillment, but it might be the kind of fulfillment you thought you’d have when you were younger. I have a friend in her early 30s who’s a very pretty, intelligent, vivacious gal with a great career who’s something of a serial monogamist, with one-night stands scattered between her relationships (and occasionally during them). She’s told me a few times that she prefers being single to being in a relationship, because she feels like she has to work too hard to be careful not to make any “mistakes.” For her, fulfillment might not ever be settling down, or it might be settling down with a guy she has an understanding with that they can both see other people, or that they take separate vacations and don’t talk about what happens, or whatnot. Or it might be staying single (relatively) until she gets a bit older and her sex drive goes down and the desire for a more steady companion goes up.

The “open relationship” or “open marriage” option (more on that in Wikipedia here) might be a good option, if you’re comfortable with it, but you’d want to make sure you went into with a guy with a similarly high sex drive to you – a guy who wants to continue seeking passion and novelty, but maintain a steady companion too. A guy with a sex drive too much lower than yours will eventually stop getting new girls, and then start getting jealous that you’re still getting new guys. There’s also stuff like swinging, which, depending on where you live, can actually be a pretty big scene. Certain parts of Europe and California have large swinger communities, but they exist more or less everywhere. There are lots of committed couples who get bored of the same partners all the time and want to mix things up without breaking up.

These may not be exactly what you’re looking for, but if you want to have your cake and eat it too, they’re some of the more practical options. And maybe they’ll start some mental wheels turning about what you’d really like, long term.

Chase

Wallflower I Am Not's picture

Hey Chase, You are awesome!


Hey Chase,

You are awesome! I know you try hard to help us all here. I hope you get rewarded for it somehow in some way. Your blog has been helping me understand myself and overcome depression, among many other things, and for this I want to thank you.

Well, yes, you are right, everything you are suggesting should work and has been turning my mental wheels for quite some time now, but the thing is... I am in a situation that pretty much cannot change. Maybe you can guess what I mean here. It's a bit too late in the game for me to do that. I should have thought about all this 10 years ago or so, but I was a different person then and I don't think I can have my cake and eat it too at this point. I have to figure out a way to maybe keep my sex drive in check. Maybe I can use your theory of actively blocking those thoughts and after a while maybe I will stop having them.. Do think this can work? If it worked for me to overcome my depressive thoughts, maybe it can also work to help me deal with my physiological urges as well?? Do you think it's doable? Or am I just tricking myself into thinking that this is an option? I have to say that by actively blocking my negative thoughts and by adopting your "existing for the sake of existence" theory I have become a little calmer already, something about it appeals to me. I just need help with this passion thing. And I cannot have, as I said, an open relationship/marriage, etc. It is not an option at this point :(

Thanks

Chase Amante's picture

Channeling Sexual Urges

Author

Wallflower-

Got it. You need something else to do with those urges then.

The thing with depression, you're not actually blocking the thoughts so much as you redirecting them. So, where your brain would ordinarily take a pathway of rumination and obsessive thinking and negative fantasizing, you throw a switch on the railroad and send your train of thoughts down a different path.

If you try to block your sexual urges, you'll end up going crazy (and doing things you'd rather not do)... but what you CAN do is redirect them. What you want to do instead is tap into sexual transmutation. If you look around you notice that both among men and women, the most successful individuals are almost always those with very high sex drives. There is a bit of a feedback loop between victory and sex drive, but the bigger thing at play is rather the channeling of sex energy into productive energy.

In the "How to Be Edgy" article I talked about Mozart, Picasso, and Tesla as a few examples of successful, edgy guys; they were also guys with very high sex drives. Mozart had six children, something you'd be hard-pressed to do without a fair bit of sex; Picasso had four, plus a number of wives and mistresses - both of these men also channeled a lot of their sexual energy into their crafts. Tesla claimed to have a strong desire for women but abstained from them completely because he considered his work very important and thought that sex would drain his energy and distract him from it; he died celibate. Isaac Newton supposedly had a high sex drive, but died celibate as well... rumors are he was homosexual, but could not accept that about himself (he was deeply religious), and so channeled all his sexual energy into other areas instead. Benjamin Franklin talks about how he wasted a lot of his sexual energy in flings with girls before he tapped the power of transmutation to make himself a more productive man. And as far as women, it's always been my experience that women with advanced educations and/or high-powered careers almost universally across the board have elevated testosterone levels and much higher sex drives than the norm (part of why I like them so much... low drive girls are boring!).

Napoleon Hill has a whole chapter on the subject in his book Think and Grow Rich - you can actually read that chapter online, here.

If you can train yourself to do this, all you need then is an outlet - something you want to build, or create, or design, or conquer, that you can pour that sexual energy into and transmute into productive energy. It could be an art; it could be a business you're building; it could be a sport; it could be a hobby like mountaineering or scuba diving or body-sculpting for modeling competitions - they have these for women; female body models - not the super-bulky bodybuilder chicks, but the ones who look like this:

female-body-building.jpg

... are always impressive. Writing, acting, surfing, shooting, playing billiards, painting, public speaking... anything, really. Pick something you've always wished you could do, and channel your energy into mastering it, so long as you really DO really want it.

A high sex drive is like a massive power generator. Potentially dangerous if left wide open and chaotic, but an extremely potent weapon and engine for change and progress when properly harnessed and directed.

All you really need to figure out is what you're passionate enough about that you can use it for, and you're in business.

Chase

Wallflower I Am Not's picture

Hey! You are really cool,


Hey! You are really cool, posting all this information for me. I appreciate it a lot.

I read both your article on edginess and the Napoleon Hill's article and I was happy to learn that it is possible to not lose your mind and redirect your thoughts into something more productive. Thanks for giving me that hope.

I am, however, mildly confused as to how I would go about accomplishing such a thing... I couldn't quite understand how it is supposed to be done. I guess maybe I should just try and see if I can do it somehow? I am going to try this today :)

What I do for a living is something I absolutely love and am extremely passionate about, so I think that if I can figure out a way to actually redirect my sexual thoughts into being more productive that would be the bomb!! Sometimes I play out a scenario in my mind such as what if I could have a fantastic sex life all my life, but give up what I do? Or vice versa. And I battle with that one. Sometimes sex wins, other times it doesn't. Sounds childish perhaps, but they are very closely ranked in my mind as the things I love to do most in life and so you saying that individuals who are most accomplished have high sex drives interested me.

As for exercising, I do a fair amount of that already, but I find that the more I exercise and the better I look the more sex I want :) Then I read up on this and found out that exercise boosts testosterone? and makes your hornier.

Anyway, so if I can learn to redirect my thoughts the right way, maybe I can just do exceptionally well with my daytime passion and to hell with all the wild sex drama :)))) You are giving me hope!

So, going back to Napoleon's artice, the only one thing that I was kind of weary about is his mentioning of love and God. Both the concept of love and spirituality is something I have been having real problems quite grasping for myself and I don't quite understand them. There are so many variations of love.... and spirituality is just as complex too I feel. So, as I was nearing the end of the article I began to lose hope once again but maybe with time I will be able to understand what Napoleon meant there too.

All in all, Chase, you are one of my favorite people right now, even though I never met you!

Pandy's picture

Different Dominance Qualities into Play...


What are your thoughts on transition between soft and strong qualities based on your post "4 Kinds of Girls and which..." As I have felt that I am soft and exhibit more and more strong qualities as I progress.

This being said I have noticed that as a soft/experienced man I assume can take a soft/inexperienced women to bed quickly (though being a softy may mean not pushing for what you want) but a strong woman can wrangle in a wine and dine before leading a soft man to bed being more dominant than the man. As a strong and experienced man I am not compatible with the strong experienced woman and am able to take any woman I AM compatible with to bed quickly.

Chase Amante's picture

Moving from Soft to Strong

Author

Pandy-

It's uncommon to go from soft to strong - it essentially means completely altering how you do things - but if you transition effectively to strong in thought and action, preferences appear to naturally follow suit. It's much more common to move from inexperienced to experienced than to change from soft to strong.

I'm not sure if it's a permanent move, though, or if it's more of a forcing-yourself-into-a-role deal where at some point in the future when you let your guard down you'll begin reverting to old you. I've seen guys who went from FT/EX to TR/EX revert back eventually (once in long-term relationships); this seems to be the usual pattern. It might be though that these friends simply hadn't completed the transition before settling down, and that had they done so, they'd permanently be strong. I haven't seen enough examples play out over the long term though to get that good of a read - so on transitioning soft-to-strong over the course of years, I'd say your guess is as good as mine.

I would caution against holding strong up as an absolute ideal, though; there are strengths and weaknesses to both the strong and the soft personality types - two sides to the coin in either category.

Chase

Hitch's picture

Wow, thanks...


Great level of detail with these articles Chase. Thanks for taking the time to break it down in such a way...

Anonymous's picture

A theory?


So I came to the conclusion based on your article that the longer a woman makes a man waits, the more power she has and he becomes subservient to her desires.

This means that the majority of marriages happened because the woman was dominate enough to get the man to propose to her.

At the same time, women initiate the majority of divorces whereas men are more likely to cheat in a long term relationship, yet many men continues to stayed with the wife.

Therefore my theory is this:

A dominate woman that was able to make a man wait for sex is more willing to divorce her husband when he cheats on her (because he got tired of being subservient, but is unwilling to leave) than a woman that sleeps with a man fast.

Do you disagree?

Chase Amante's picture

Dominance and Marriage

Author

Anon-

Well, keep in mind that relationships where the male is subservient last longer and have lower divorce rates (Ricardus talks about this here). There was a discussion about this on the boards here - basically, from everything I've seen, it looks as though the higher divorce rate is because submissive women have options, and when they're unhappy they leave, but submissive men do NOT have options, and when they're unhappy they just suck it up and stay.

It doesn't seem to be the submissive/unhappy men who cheat - women cheat because they're unhappy, but men seem to be much more likely to cheat when they're dominant and happy and feeling powerful (that's when they're more attractive to other women, and when they are more confident they can "get away" with it or that if they lost their current girl, it wouldn't be such a big deal and they could take it). A submissive man has lower testosterone levels as a result of his being dominated, and thus a lower sex drive, a lower propensity for risk-taking, and a lower level of attractiveness to other women.

Women who sleep with men quickly or end up in the submissive role in the relationship do spend more time deliberating if they're going to leave, but they're still a lot more likely to leave a relationship than a submissive man is.

On marriage, it's an interesting topic, but historically it's been men who pursued marriage and women who recoiled from it. That's changed somewhat today, with many women pushing for it harder and men recoiling, but there are still a lot of men who very much want to get married, and a lot of women who remain ambivalent about the institution. So while there may be cases of women dominating men into marriage, there are lots of other cases of men dominating women into marriage, or the two making a joint decision that it's what they both want. Among my friends, I have men who've been dominated into marriage by controlling girlfriends and other men for whom marriage is what they've always wanted (and now have, or will have soon). Men who don't reproduce are usually easier to bully into marriage because their biological imperatives start wresting control of them, figuring that their logical minds have failed them (e.g., they've logically decided they don't want kids, so their bodies make them weak-willed against women until they get steam-rolled into marriage and, eventually, children, usually somewhere between 30 and 35, though I do have friends who are only now falling prey to this in their 40s).

So, I'd say, when the woman is dominant, you'll see more cheating by her, and less need to divorce her husband, who is sitting patiently by waiting for her to come back from her liaisons with various men. Meanwhile, when the man is dominant, you'll see more cheating by him, but here the submissive partner (the woman) has options - men in her life who hit on her, flirt with her, ask her out - so, unlike a submissive male, she has an exit path, and if she becomes unhappy enough with the dominant partner's treatment of her she'll take it. (and of course, there are relationships where no one cheats - we're just discussing the different likely scenarios precipitating divorce. And there are other reasons why the submissive partner will be unhappy with a marriage and likely to leave it aside from cheating, too)

Chase

Anonymous's picture

Oh no.


Hi Chase,
Thank you so much for writing this article. Hopefully you could take the time to give me a bit of advice. I wish I had found this article before I went to bed with the guy I'm currently seeing. I've only been with my two previous boyfriends, and I'm 22 (the last one was for five years; I've always been faithful).
But this new guy, he's so sexy. Our first date, in the movie theatre, he grabbed me and pressed himself into me and gave me a kiss like I'd never had before. It was amazing. I was breathless. I had to go to the bathroom and try to gain composure. The very next day was Valentine's Day, and he brought me roses to work. He would text me saying how "absolutely beautiful" I was. It all happened so fast for me. He swept me up.
Sex with him was all I thought about. He even snuck into my workplace to press me up against the wall in the back room. How could I not think about it? We went out to the movies again the week after, and the movie was so dull that we decided to leave. As we were walking out of the theatre, he pushed me up against the wall and put his hands all over me. And, I think at this point, I hadn't had sex that I actually really wanted to have in about two years (That's my own fault, obviously.).
Long story...still pretty long...we did have sex. Afterwards, I felt a tremendous rush of guilt and shame. I'd never done that before. He said, "Don't pull away from me.". But the next day, we talked, and we both said we didn't want that to happen so quickly. He said he wanted to start over and go slow. That he didn't want to rush into things. And we still talk. We still go out. He came into my work yesterday, just to see me and give me a hug. He always texts me to say "Sweet dreams" before bed. But I know it's going slower than before. And I know the ball is in his court, but...what should I be doing? He's definitely a busy guy. He works and he's a musician. I know I can't really fix it or go back in time, but what CAN I do? I really don't want to be seen as cheap or easy when I know that I'm a really good, devoted girlfriend who just made a mistake. If you can help me, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.