Active Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

138 Excellent

About BadWolf

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,469 profile views
  1. I confess, I'm not a big fan of this article. I definitely agree with certain points (there isn't just one "The One" magic person right for you in particular). But I don't think that you can generalize about when is most appropriate to get married, etc. It's rather a sore subject for me, actually. Because although there's a bit of a cultural shift toward waiting longer to get married, it's far from a 180-degree turn. It's more societally acceptable to get married later, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything. I'm in my mid-advancing 20s at this point, and most people I know are married or engaged. Very few lack a significant other altogether, as do I. I...never found the [or should I say "a"] right person. When I was younger, I hadn't fully come into my own (and by that I mean not that I wasn't ready or mature enough, but rather that I was less attractive because owing to circumstances I had less control over healthy lifestyle choices)—but additionally, I never met anyone that I really fell for. Now that I am older and have far more of a shot (from some perspectives anyway), the only people I've ever met who ::are:: right for me ::are not single::. There are enough people out there who are counterexamples to this guy's argument that by the time I ever even had a fighting chance, it was already too late. I now have no choice but to either get married later/older [most likely in my 30s at this point] than all my peers (provided I ever find someone) or never at all. There are also plenty of people who get married—who shouldn't in the first place, for various and sundry reasons. (Either they're not yet emotionally mature enough to handle it but do so anyway because that's the thing to do, or many just marry the wrong people because they haven't yet worked out what's right for them.) That's largely responsible for today's high divorce rates. I once had to turn down a marriage proposal because I was still asking myself if we were right for each other...and I realized that if I still had to ask myself if I was even in love with him/if it was right, that I already had my answer. It just didn't feel right. I could have said yes for fear of being alone forever—and frankly that would have been the easy thing to do—...but it would have been wrong. I had to trust my instincts, for both our sakes. Even for people who have been together for long periods of time without getting married: ultimately, it's their choice. Everyone knows the potential pros/cons/risks of waiting till you're older. If both people aren't on board, they shouldn't be getting married. If the timespan not to marry is inappropriately long for one of the partners (ie if someone believes they "should" get married and it isn't happening despite conversation), then that also tells you something. Regardless, the point is there's no one right or wrong answer, and it's different for everyone. It's not appropriate to categorically pass judgment on those who choose not to get married, for whatever reason. Everyone has different priorities, and those priorities change throughout one's life. Once you tie the knot, that's [meant to be] a permanent and non-renegable decision. Not everyone's ready for that at the same time; and if you're not, you shouldn't enter into it just because it's "better to do it while you're young." That may be ideally true for some, but I say "better to do it when the time is right." But for a culture ostensibly higher in singles than ever before, we're still ignored, forgotten, disrespected, of swept under the rug remarkably often.
  2. Is it fair?

    Of course you can still wait, and of course a woman would still accept you. Anyone who would blame the victim of a sexual assault probably isn't an ideal life partner anyway. But being abused as a young child does not mean you made an active choice not to wait--any reasonable person would see that. Even if you had, I think you'd find that lots of people even on this site find it more important that it's the choice you make now and that those are your values.
  3. Is "Submissiveness" a Turn-on?

    I think the idea is more to take care of ::each other::. I wouldn't want a man fully responsible for taking care of me any more than I'd wish to be entirely responsible for taking care of him. [same for dominance or submission.] That said, I'm reading a theory about "matched opposites" among the most successful of relationships—the idea that your ideal mate isn't someone who's 100% like you (although s/he should be like you in many core, crucial capacities and some more trivial interests); nor is s/he your opposite (although opposites do attract, and it's important to be different to one another in many capacities as well so you continue to have someone to bounce ideas off of or make you laugh, etc). Rather, the "matched opposite" characteristic of the most successful long-term relationships is a perfect balance/blend between these two--both the same and quite different, so that you have strong and lasting chemistry, and complement each other's strengths and weaknesses. In this context (which is the sort of relationship I desire), each partner will be better at some things than the other, and worse at others. I'd submit to my husband in the matters at which he was stronger, and would expect the same in return. Meanwhile, in this way, each of us would be helping the other get better...and we're better as a unit than either is apart. I want to take care of him, and to the same degree I want him to take care of me. The bottom line is, each of us would take care of the other as circumstances required, and [for me] the balance would even out in the center/overall equality. But you trade off those roles as needed/necessary...
  4. This is a very interesting topic. It's funny how there are such strong opinions for opposing answers, but citing the exact same reasons. :-) it really does show how strong the influence of geographical [and thus demographical] location and one's own upbringing/personal experiences are for something like this. Very cool. I guess the bottom line is, whatever the answer is, it needs to be well considered.
  5. I wouldn't sign one and would never ask for one. I understand that divorce happens, but if either of us is marrying while thinking about what happens when there's a divorce, I feel like I have no business getting married in the first place. A prenup, to me, would speak to a deeper lack of trust. I would not wish to enter into a marriage if I didn't trust the other person to not try to take advantage of me if things went south—and vice versa. I think it's fine to do if that's what's right for you...but definitely wouldn't be right for the type of relationship I'm looking for. If my potential husband insisted on a prenup, I would actually call off the wedding (because we're not both in the place I would need us to be in before entering into a marriage).
  6. Controversial Topics

    I really like the idea in concept; but I worry that in practice it might have unintended side effects. Heated arguments are bound to happen no matter what on a site like this; but encouraging them like that could lead to things getting inappropriate and out of hand really fast, even with lots of moderation. I'm not saying this would be in the spirit of this category's intention, but I just think human nature will see a place specifically designated for 'no-holds-barred battle royale' as an invitation to attack or take things to an inappropriate level. I think the difference between a flamefest with good points being made and a flamefest that's just a flamefest is an important distinction—but a challenging line for a moderator to draw. It's a bit subjective, and people might look at the same post differently by both tone and content. [Having diverse moderators would be important, but probably also tricky to coordinate.] And people will always feel personally attacked, whether it's true or not, if others rebut their arguments even respectfully. When someone chooses to participate in a discussion, s/he opens him/herself up to receiving responses, which may or may not be what s/he wants to hear. Such a zone would still require the same individual responsibility of respect and civility that is demanded in the general forum regardless. So while I'm not exactly opposed to the idea (quite the contrary—I love it in theory), I admit I have a few practical concerns. *shrug* For whatever it's worth.
  7. Viewer's Undiscretion

    I agree with CrystalFaerie. There is a real difference between expressing another opinion and attack or derision. A forum, by definition, is a place for open discussion or expression of ideas. I find the perspectives of this diverse group of people quite enriching. :-)
  8. Hi, all! I’ve had an unintentional hiatus (things have gotten really crazy lately and I have not had a lot of time to visit this site unfortunately) for the past month and a half or so, but I’ve missed you guys. :-) Thought I’d weigh in here… A couple of you have mentioned sticking almost entirely to the virginity/WTM questions on OKCupid and largely avoiding the others. While I understand the rationale for doing that and it may be necessary to sort of “hijack†the less-than-ideal functions of the site to get the kind of results you seek, I can’t help but feel the need to mention how leery I’d be of adopting that strategy. If I saw someone else’s profile and he had answered questions but stuck almost exclusively to questions about sex (or sex and drugs), that would be an automatic red flag—because what it tells me is that he defines himself as a virgin. Virginity may be one admirable aspect of someone’s personality; but if that is the only focus of the questions answered, what that would say to me (as a stranger/observer/potential interest) is that he didn’t respect himself as a whole, rounded person. I am not a walking vagina, and I do not wish to marry a walking penis. Sexuality is very important, but if it’s the only thing that is important to someone (which, whether true or not, is the message it sends if someone only answers those types of questions)—that’s selling both individuals short. I would never judge someone’s worth as a person by his “status†as a virgin/nonvirgin. If I thought someone was judging me by that sole criterion (the implication—intended or otherwise—of just answering those questions), I would be insulted. Yes, that’s one aspect of who I am—but I’m compassionate, funny and intelligent and interested in X, Y, Z, P, Q, R, and S. I want someone to see me—not the virgin label. Some of those other questions may seem trivial (and actually are); but a lot of them also actually speak to deeper compatibility issues… if the only answers we had that coincided were the virginity ones, that would tell me this person is not a good match: 1) If we had both answered other questions but the only similar answers were the sex ones, as far as I’m concerned we have virtually nothing in common. 2) If it came out that way because those were the only questions the other person answered, again, it would tell me that’s how he defined himself and I’m looking for a man, not a sex object whose value is determined by a number…and I expect said individual to hold me in similar esteem. Although it can be a good litmus test of one aspect of personal values, if a virgin is all someone is (or even the main characteristic he sees in himself), frankly I’m not impressed. It takes a lot more than that to spark my interest. I’m not saying you’re wrong to do it that way if that is what you believe in/most important to you; sincerely, good on you for sticking so strongly to your principles. I definitely think everyone should do what is right for him/herself. Just thought I’d share that other perspective for what it’s worth…sometimes what online profiles say to others isn’t the intended message. Sheesh, sorry that was so long! Making up for lost time I guess...
  9. Is Virginity Really Attractive?

    Conceivably. It's certainly true that experienced men are more likely to be comfortable and easygoing around the topic. And "I need to get laid" is a real thing—here's to oxytocin! The rest of us (celibate folk) need to resort to roundabout ways to achieve those extended feelings/highs of joy/happiness/rightness with the world that make people more personable as they walk through their lives. And self-confidence is no doubt affected by past experiences too. But while there might be some association for some individuals, it's not universally true. I've seen plenty of counterexamples.
  10. Is Virginity Really Attractive?

    Not particularly. It's not very relevant to their lives either way, and most of them are currently happily involved in "typical" (non-celibate) relationships. But of course decent men would at least respect my stance. (I say "would" because I am, of course, not currently seeing anyone for whom it would be an issue in the first place )
  11. Is Virginity Really Attractive?

    Grr--just as I finished typing it erased my answer. >:-( Let's try this again... Hmm...that's a very personal question. There are just certain traits (personal, mental, and physical) that tend to lead me to find a person attractive, and I've happened to notice that no one I've ever met personally who possessed more than one or two of them was a virgin. Some examples, since you ask—with the caveat that of course I do NOT have some checklist of requirements...these are all just individual characteristics in no particular order that happen to attract me to varying degrees [and more relevant to life and living in the present rather than to the past, per someone's prior sexual history]—would include a certain meshing sense of humour (ability to make me smile/laugh easily); my age or older; self-confident in a crowd; equally comfortable with [and capable of!] deep, in-depth personal conversations; similar values; musicianship; expressive and communicative; willing and happy to dance with me (or just in general--and dare I say even instigates such behaviour on occasion); nerdiness; generosity/heroism/altruism (this can be in really small things too); fellow scientist/doctor (especially in a field similar/related to mine for several reasons beyond the obvious); similar recreational interests; physically attractive (completely subjective of course [and intentionally vague on my part]); sufficiently in-shape that he could go adventuring with me, and the spirit to want to do so... In the last few years, I've known myriad men who possessed many or even most of these characteristics, as well as a whole bunch I didn't name. Not one of them was a virgin; nor is it in their collective culture, generally speaking. I recognise that wasn't a direct answer. Feel free to PM me iyw, but I've no intention of being less nebulous on a public forum. Put simply, it's pretty unheard of among the kind of man I tend to make real connections with/fall for. But if such a man existed and he did happen to be a virgin, that would be nigh irresistible to the romantic in me...
  12. Is Virginity Really Attractive?

    I find by-choice virginity in men quite attractive, because it shows a strength of character that is rarely encountered...and it would show me that the chance of being with the right person (hypothetically myself) was worth waiting for. The idea that someone would decide before he met me that I was worth it...yeah, that's a real turn-on, because that's the decision I made myself. Unfortunately, virginity tends not to coincide with many/most of the other things I find attractive—so I'm willing to concede it for the right person. A gift is a can my choice and sacrifice be meaningful if I don't give it freely, not expecting something in return? I'd definitely rather be someone else's only, and learn together, and never wonder whether I'm being compared to his history—but at this point in my life it's not reasonable for it to be a dealbreaker rather than a mere preference.
  13. Serious discussion : rape culture

    Exactly. Drug-facilitated sexual assault is very relevant to my field--I've attended workshops on it, been more directly involved (no, I do not intend to elaborate for privacy reasons), and as it happens even have another upcoming two-day workshop on the topic next week. Vince is right. Passive assent means nothing if the person was not able/in a position to give active, capable, informed consent. Part of the reason many of these cases don't get prosecuted, however--apart from the fact that going through the necessary motions often puts the victim through yet more physical and emotional pain, shame and humiliation--is the grey area wherein the victim isn't actually sure whether s/he was "raped"/"sexually assaulted" or not. That's part of the danger with throwing drugs into the mix. People think of DFSA as someone slipping roofies into cocktails. One of the most common DFSA drugs, though, is mere alcohol. Often what transpires is that a couple of people get drunk at a party and engage in activities that they otherwise would not. Sometimes the line blurs, and neither victim nor (in some circumstances) perpetrator can actually tell or [sometimes] even remember whether it was rape or consensual. Obviously the case described in this thread sounds pretty clear-cut. And the subsequent victim shaming described above is equally abhorrent and despicable. But it isn't always so simple, from a prosecutorial standpoint, for various reasons. It's a rather disconcerting reality. For the record, it is NEVER ok to take advantage of someone with diminished capacity to give consent.
  14. Seconded. I think I've said this before, but I would not be ok with a proposal involving any sort of audience, be it people we know or people we don't. I personally find it not romantic as much as disrespectful, because it doesn't give the other person a fair chance to say "no". Even if you're sure of the answer and it's just a formality, from my perspective that's just not fair.There will be no parental permission involved in my case. As I am an adult, they don't have the authority to grant us permission. I really hope they like each other, but for me personally the choice doesn't lie with my parents. If they do find out he's proposing before I do, it should be because he's seeking help/advice re: making it special. Ideally though, we would announce our engagement together.
  15. Virgin Territory

    I agree. I've thought that for a long time