Questions to the guys of 6gc Options

[BlackCelicaGT94]

I found this article on msn that asked these questions to guys. I just would like to see your guys answers


Thanks in advance


Q: What do you think about women who sleep with you on the first or second date—does it impact whether you see her as a potential long-term girlfriend?

Q: Are there cases where you do sleep with a woman early on, but are still open to a serious relationship with her—say, if the sex is great, or you two really hit it off during brunch the next day, or she's friends of friends?

Q: In your experience, do you think women who make you wait for sex end up being better long-term partners?

Q: What, in your mind, is an appropriate amount of time for two people to be dating before sleeping together?

Q: If a woman does end up falling in bed with you pretty quickly, are there things she can do to pave the way toward a longer relationship?

This post has been edited by BlackCelicaGT94: Jul 18, 2007 - 3:51 PM

[Supersprynt]

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

Wow....that's an absolutely absurd statement. Perhaps your forgetting that monogamy is fairly common among animals, and even some insects. For someone to say this suggests not only lack of any measure of personal morality, but a lifestyle significantly lower in conduct than that of most animals.

...thus said, I think you could guess my stance on the topic question. I'm with playr on this one.

Your right. Monogamy is prevalent in many animals. It is less prevalent than polygamy. Some monogamy is also due to environmental restraints, where several partners are either difficult to obtain or unneeded. The reason for multiple partners is to spread their genes across as many lines of ancestry as possible, for the good of the species. If many animals resorted to only one partner, their species would diminish. Luckily for humans, it feels really good, so this is not an issue.

As for your calling me immoral and lifestyle "significantly lower in conduct." Thats outright absurd, and shows how little you actually know. My moral standards have zero to do with what nature has determined. My lifestyle, has zero to do with what nature has determined. This is one BIG problem among people who have their heads up their asses regarding morality & natures. As if someone can't be moral and atheist. If you believe this, then theres absolutely no talking to you.

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

So what? Are you advocating avoiding marriage and monogamy because they are unnatural? I am sure you will agree that having offspring is "natural". If so, can I assume that you advocate having bastard children? And, when the parents get tired of one another, then it would be "unnatural" to stay together, right? Probably a great move for the "natural" desires of the parents - or at least one of them. I am not so sure about the kids - but screw them, right?

The position is symptomatic of a real problem in our culture. Many people are too quick to do whatever "feels" good at the time regardless of their prior committments, the long term repercusions, or the effect that their decision has on others.

I think your way off base. Your wrongly aligning people who care not of anything but themselves, to people who hold a position about the true natural instinct of human beings. This is common among people who think you can't be moral w/o christianity and a god, and its absurd, purely absurd.

You basically took something I said, and made up your own conclusions about things that have nothing to do with the argument at hand. You made a helluva lot of assumptions based on very little fact.

You first off, assume I'm anti-marriage, anti-monogamy. I'm not, btw. Cute little fact for you to chew on. I said they were unnatural for us, not wrong. I've been in long-term relationships, and will get married someday. I assume you didn't know that.

Secondly, you assume I advocate bastard children? How ridiculous could you possibly get. You go off on saying how you assume I hold a stance on children which says "screw them." I'm so glad you've come to this logical fact based conclusion.

So basically, you traveled this path that started out by my talking about humans in their ID-only, society-less form, to TELLING ME WHAT I BELIEVE about children and my position of marriage, monogamy & choice-making based on how I feel at any given time.

Way to make up nonsense.

[jgreening]

Marriage & monogamy are unnatural.

So what? Are you advocating avoiding marriage and monogamy because they are unnatural? I am sure you will agree that having offspring is "natural". If so, can I assume that you advocate having bastard children? And, when the parents get tired of one another, then it would be "unnatural" to stay together, right? Probably a great move for the "natural" desires of the parents - or at least one of them. I am not so sure about the kids - but screw them, right?

The position is symptomatic of a real problem in our culture. Many people are too quick to do whatever "feels" good at the time regardless of their prior committments, the long term repercusions, or the effect that their decision has on others.

I think your way off base. Your wrongly aligning people who care not of anything but themselves, to people who hold a position about the true natural instinct of human beings. This is common among people who think you can't be moral w/o christianity and a god, and its absurd, purely absurd.

You basically took something I said, and made up your own conclusions about things that have nothing to do with the argument at hand. You made a helluva lot of assumptions based on very little fact.

You first off, assume I'm anti-marriage, anti-monogamy. I'm not, btw. Cute little fact for you to chew on. I said they were unnatural for us, not wrong. I've been in long-term relationships, and will get married someday. I assume you didn't know that.

Secondly, you assume I advocate bastard children? How ridiculous could you possibly get. You go off on saying how you assume I hold a stance on children which says "screw them." I'm so glad you've come to this logical fact based conclusion.

So basically, you traveled this path that started out by my talking about humans in their ID-only, society-less form, to TELLING ME WHAT I BELIEVE about children and my position of marriage, monogamy & choice-making based on how I feel at any given time.

Way to make up nonsense.

Who brought up Christianity and religion? You did.

I never said I assume you advocate bastard children. It was a question. I also, never said that you hold a stance on children which says "screw them". Again, it was a question. Likewise, I never told you what you believe about children, marriage and monogomy. Its difficult to have an intelligent exchange with someone who resorts to personal attacks rather than focus on the issue at hand.

You said marriage and monogamy are unnatural. I asked "so what?" Like, what is your point? The reason I asked this is because it appeared to me (and a number of other readers too, I might add) that you were being critical of marriage and monogamy. I wanted to understand the logical extension of your argument. If you were trying to argue that marriage or monogamy should not be practiced, then the questions regarding child rearing were right on point.

Apparently you weren't trying to make that argument because then, somewhat surprisingly, you took the hypocritical stance that you plan to get married someday (and presumably practice monogamy although you didn't commit to that - no surprise) despite the fact that you think they are unnatural. What?

In any event, you never explained what point you were trying to make by proclaiming that marriage and monogamy were unnatural. If you can keep your commentary to answering this question, I would be interested in your considered response.