The "It's Cruel When Men Don't Stick Around After Sex" Argument | Page 2 | Girls Chase

The "It's Cruel When Men Don't Stick Around After Sex" Argument

Chase Amante

Hey! Chase Amante here.

You've read all the free articles I can offer you for this month.

If you'd like to read more, I've got to ask for your help keeping the lights on at Girls Chase.

Click a plan below to sign up now and get right back to reading. It's only 99¢ the first month.

Already a GirlsChase.com subscriber? Log in here.

Chase Amante's picture

stick around after sex
Men don’t always stick around for a relationship after sex. Is this wrong and is there anything bad about it – or not?

On my Friday/Saturday night date post, a female commenter took issue with my advice to a male commenter that he take advantage of rebound sex to get over a harsh relationship he just came out of.

To her point, I was perhaps a little indelicate in how I suggested he do this (it was guy-to-guy talk; this is a men’s site, after all). However, she took the occasion to launch into a moral argument that casual sex hurts women, takes advantage of them, and uses and discards them like unwanted objects. Her comment arguing this is a bit long to quote (you can read her full comment here), so I’ll just quote what is the most important part to me:

I have had conversations with girlfriends who have told me that a guy won’t go out with them if they don’t sleep with them. Women have been conditioned to feel they have to have sex, much much sooner than they would feel comfortable. We know from studies that men don’t develop the feeling of love until at least 3-6 months into the relationship, even while sleeping with a woman. What they develop are lust emotions.

Most women have given up on the idea of a man protecting them and *actually* loving them. Valor and honor and real love for another is almost absent in most dating. What you describe in your post is not love at all. It is using people for sex, using people for the thrill of feeling desires, of entertainment, but it is not love. You are incredibly insightful with how to manipulate women to get to your ultimate goal. What I am saying is that this is the opposite of what a man of valor would do. He would protect his woman from physical exploitation, not be the one to exploit her. And he is exploiting her, even if it’s with her permission, when he is trying to extract sex from her when he doesn’t even genuinely love her--- care for her best good.

It doesn’t much matter if rebound sex helps a person feel better. That doesn’t make it right. Maybe we can just numb our conscience to the point that it is dead so that we can pursue feelings of lust and pleasure without caring what is actually loving to others?

First off, her science is wrong. Men are more romantic than women are, heal less completely from breakups than women do, experience love at first sight at nearly double the rate of women... and that immediate in-love love-at-first-sight feeling men get is not infatuation – relationships that spring from immediate in-love feelings are every bit as stable and likely to last as those that develop from slow build-ups.

But that’s beside the point.

Our commenter’s argument is that to sleep with her, then not see her again, or not engage in or want to engage in a long-term committed relationship with her is damaging to her. You hurt her, you injure her, and you just generally make her feel bad.

So is she right? Does sex minus commitment lead to a trail of broken hearts and cynical women?

The answer I’ll give you is “yes, but.” And the ‘but’ is quite important.

But we’re not ready for the ‘but’ yet. Let’s talk about the ‘yes’ first.

Comments

Motiv's picture

…which is why I see this female comment as a shit test.

The sucky part is that from the white knight's point of view (most men in Western society), we are inhumane brutes for thinking this, let alone discussing it openly in a forum such as this.

I would even go so far as to posit that most women are comepletely unaware of what actually turns them on, hence they genuinely believe their own bullshit.

This leaves a frighteningly small minority of "unplugged" men to navigate the chaotic waters of the sexual marketplace (including moralizing men and a feminaized legal system, to name a few of the whirlpools out there).

-M

HereNthere's picture

So it's already been mentioned that (usually) men want sex first, then pick only the best women they have sex with to invest in and start a relationship with. Women (usually) want the investment first, then pick only the best men who invest in them for sex.

A woman who has sex with a man because they thought it would lead to a relationship only for the man to disappears is in the exact same boat as a man who invested a night out (or any date or activity with a large time/money cost) with a woman because they thought it would lead to sex only for the woman to end the date with a peck on the cheek and, "Thanks I had a great time!" before running up her apartment steps and disappearing through the door.

It sucks for both parties because they bought into the opening investment based on an implied possibility only to be denied the end of the road reward (much like busting your ass off at work only to be passed over for the big promotion).

However, you can't have it any other way because nobody owes anything to anyone. A man doesn't owe a relationship to every woman he has sex with any more than a woman owes sex to every man she dates.

LaToya Michelle Shepard's picture

There is nothing wrong with men only wanting sex, just as there is nothing wrong with women wanting only sex.
So,
I have to say the idea that 'powerful women avoid sex to maximize reproduction' is really stupid. What would make more sense is that women get power to sleep with quality, powerful men. Women don't want to avoid sex- if we did, the species would NOT survive, no matter how much men wanted it, and used power to get it, lol. Especially at this day in age, when women can (and do) financially take care of themselves.
I'm bitter, but I don't want serious relationships not because men are scarce, but because I don't believe they are capable of relationships in general. They cheat, lie, and manipulate emotions just to get what they want. Why waste your time on anything but sex with THEM? It's not as if we need them as providers anymore. Some women want love, but men can't do that properly, so why bother? It's FAR more complex than this article seems to state.
Women have committed suicide over loneliness.
Commitment is NOT a better deal for women. If the couple has children, women get stuck with 90% of childcare. When he cheats, women bear the heartache. Women are the emotional support- we have to pick him up if he's ego's feeling bruised. Give me a break.
I also don't buy this "sex is easy for women to get BS". Sex is easy for *anyone* to get if you lower your standards enough, plus prostitutes exist if you want that, so no excuses there. Society caters to men's sexual desires- always has.
If there is anyone who knows less about female psychology, it's men, so I take this article with a pinch of salt anyway. Just a woman's honest perspective.

Leave a Comment

One Date girl next to the number one

Get The Girl In Just One Date

It only takes one date to get the girl you want. Best of all, the date's easy to get… and girls love it.

Inside One Date, You'll Learn

  • How to build instant chemistry
  • Ways to easily create arousal
  • How to get girls to do what you want
  • The secret to a devoted girlfriend

…and more great Girls Chase Tech