Why does every one think that after a date or 2 or after they have done something for you that your relationship is more than it is and somehow special ? Is it impossible to just hang loose and enjoy the company of another without all the expectations ?
I seem to have that problem, too. Seems “expectations” get set early (and individually). Perhaps it’s because the other party has a renewed “hope”... and they project it...
Personally - I like to keep it casual, non-assumptive. It takes unforced TIME to get to know someone... and it should be natural.
I always date casually at first - hikes, ballroom dancing, going to the zoo, movies, etc, and I never allow men to get physical or serious the first month or so.
I'm evaluating him to see if it's more fun to do things with him, or by myself.
The book "The Rules" wisely advises women to not have sex with new romantic prospects, but to continue dating other men until they are exclusive.
I don't have sex with anyone at this point not even kissing and hugs are rare so that's not it.
@EvaCoe Well, then it's the guy's and your friend's hopes getting out of hand. I don't usually accept a second date with a guy unless he's a strong possibility, but I never tell anyone about him until we are exclusive.
Your second question: Totally possible, represents my norm.
Oh bloody hell! Where do I start? I can put out a few hundred thousand words on this, but in nutshell, we are socialised into what we expect from a date. We are the products of all our extended experiences throughout our primary and secondary agents of socialisation.
If anyone wants to know more from a scientific perspective, please just ask.
Can you imagine,the couple have been dating for awhile,things are going good,they go out to eat at a nice location,he drops down to tie his shoelaces,she miss interprets a proposal,is embarrassed it does not take place, and the drive back is full of hurt feelings, and a certain "Frostiness" in the air?
that`s an assumption. I am speaking of when it is clearly stated more is expected. I was recently told by a friend that what we have is like a marriage so we need to define it. No sex or intimacy ,not even a kiss just several months of casual friendship
We did it in the 50's and even cross dated for dances etc. it was a lot of fun then.
Cross dated? I think I know, but can you explain please? All Google comes up with is cross-dressing in the 1950s.
I believe both Men and Women read more into a few dates,I'd love to be a spider on the wall of the house of the Woman, who came home and gushed to her friends, about the new Man she's dating,before he knows it,engagement parties are being planned, and wedding locations.[agnostic.com]
I doubt "everyone" thinks that.
If you are looking for a casual relationship -- particularly if it involves any form of physical intimacy, which science tells us generates oxycontin and other feelgoods and bonding agents -- then you should make that bleeding obvious up front. Even then some men can't take "no" for an answer. But "some" do.
Was reading how after intercourse,a Woman's vagina absorbs some of the seminal fluid from her partner,affecting her moods, and increases the bond between them
@Byrdsfan Oxytocin.
@Byrdsfan I wished now,I'd kept that article,I use Firefox ,and it was a news article on Google,probably can be found by searching,a long list of items the vagina absorbs by chemical listings.
@Byrdsfan Lol. Clearly I couldn't either. Had to look it up. Oxycodone, Oxycontin, Ocytocin, Oxy-Clean, something like that!
@Mike1947 That's the theory. All things being equal I think it is mostly true. However ... there are inconvenient edge cases. What if there is physical illness in the way -- either directly (eg, painful or mechanically difficult sex, as with Peyronie's Disease) or indirectly (e.g., chemotherapy). What if there are unresolved relational issues or emotional problems in one or both partners? Does that just automatically mean the marriage disintegrates? It shouldn't in my view.
Sex, particularly consistently mutually enjoyable sex, is really nice if you can get it but it's too hit-or-miss in my view to be a condition of staying married. Or even a condition of being happy or content. Particularly as we age. Conventional wisdom is that we shouldn't assume old age is sexless, but we shouldn't assume it's not sexless, either.
Can you imagine how much more sex would be occurring, if oxycontin was the result !!