FabSwingers.com > Forums > Swinging Support and Advice > Hotwife advice for the lady
Hotwife advice for the lady
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another." Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. " In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. " Quite in depth psychological analysis here. As you said, what works for you might not work the same way for others. I will never feel entitled whatsoever because of my "investment". No one is entitled on a meet other than respect of their boundaries. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. " If you've ever watched any of these my lover my killer documentaries, you always see that it's because they have become obsessed. A massive concern I have with the whole getting to know someone and then social etc etc is that if you meet someone in between and get a verification, that the other person feels like you've cheated. I've seen this mentioned on these forums before. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. " So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. If you've ever watched any of these my lover my killer documentaries, you always see that it's because they have become obsessed. A massive concern I have with the whole getting to know someone and then social etc etc is that if you meet someone in between and get a verification, that the other person feels like you've cheated. I've seen this mentioned on these forums before. " Are you saying that if you’ve told one person that you want to take your time getting to know each other properly before having sex and then he sees that you’ve met up with someone else for sex after talking to them for 5 minutes then i think it’s understandable that the first man will be a bit annoyed. Nothing to do with him thinking you’ve cheated but because you’ve been dishonest with him, you’ve told him you like to get to know someone before meeting for sex and you’ve met someone else you don’t know for sex. Maybe he is only interested in women who only have sex with men they have taken the time to get to know. And the ‘my lover, my killer’ reference is irrelevant because he’s not your lover as you haven’t had sex with him yet, there are also a lot of people who get killed by people they meet off the internet after only talking to them for 5 minutes, in fact meeting someone off the internet after only talking for 5 minutes is more likely to get you killed than anything else. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. " The issue is you're approaching this from your perspective, which is that of a presumably sane, decent human. Our experience of meeting a lot of very last minute meets vs meeting a few longer term build ups is that the latter are not as positive experiences. Of course people will wank over future and past experiences, but everybody knows that expectation is rarely matched by reality. I can't say if it's safer or better for everyone to meet last minute, but I can say 2 things. 1. We've never had an issue meeting last minute and that includes her meeting alone, a lot. 2. This thread clearly demonstrates that having a social really serves no purpose in the context of safety. We also don't verify people we've not played with, for this exact reason. I hope fab will introduce a social and play verification category. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. If you've ever watched any of these my lover my killer documentaries, you always see that it's because they have become obsessed. A massive concern I have with the whole getting to know someone and then social etc etc is that if you meet someone in between and get a verification, that the other person feels like you've cheated. I've seen this mentioned on these forums before. Are you saying that if you’ve told one person that you want to take your time getting to know each other properly before having sex and then he sees that you’ve met up with someone else for sex after talking to them for 5 minutes then i think it’s understandable that the first man will be a bit annoyed. Nothing to do with him thinking you’ve cheated but because you’ve been dishonest with him, you’ve told him you like to get to know someone before meeting for sex and you’ve met someone else you don’t know for sex. Maybe he is only interested in women who only have sex with men they have taken the time to get to know. And the ‘my lover, my killer’ reference is irrelevant because he’s not your lover as you haven’t had sex with him yet, there are also a lot of people who get killed by people they meet off the internet after only talking to them for 5 minutes, in fact meeting someone off the internet after only talking for 5 minutes is more likely to get you killed than anything else. " No, I meant that maybe you've been talking to two people long term, one 3 weeks one 5 weeks. You meet Mr 5 weeks and he verifies you, Mr 3 weeks throws his toys out. I've seen this mentioned on this forum as being an issue. Infact I believe it was a woman complaining about a man doing it though. The my lover my killer, my point is that a lot of people here are seeking emotional connection, forming that makes certain people irrational | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. The issue is you're approaching this from your perspective, which is that of a presumably sane, decent human. Our experience of meeting a lot of very last minute meets vs meeting a few longer term build ups is that the latter are not as positive experiences. Of course people will wank over future and past experiences, but everybody knows that expectation is rarely matched by reality. I can't say if it's safer or better for everyone to meet last minute, but I can say 2 things. 1. We've never had an issue meeting last minute and that includes her meeting alone, a lot. 2. This thread clearly demonstrates that having a social really serves no purpose in the context of safety. We also don't verify people we've not played with, for this exact reason. I hope fab will introduce a social and play verification category. " You can’t spend weeks discussing sexual desires and what you will do with someone when you meet them and then criticise them for being disappointed when you meet and refuse to do the things you’ve been discussing though. I’m not saying that discussing something with someone beforehand is a reason for them to force you to do something you don’t want to but it is a reason for them to be disappointed and annoyed and would mean that you’ve been lying to him and deceiving him. You say that you have had issues with men you’ve built a relationship with but never with quick meets but the reasons and examples you’ve given are absolute nonsense. How does this thread display that meeting socially first has no bearing on your safety? You’re the only person who’s said that….how can taking your time to get to know someone properly and being able to make a accurate judgement of what kind of a person they are and whether you can trust them be less safe, or no more safe, than meeting a complete stranger that you know nothing about? So, you’re at a bar at 1am and you want to go home but you don’t feel safe walking home alone, your best friend offers to walk you home and a complete stranger offers to walk you home…would you feel as safe being walked home by the stranger as you would by your best friend? Saying that you’re as safe with a complete stranger as you are with someone you know is complete nonsense…..unless you get to know someone, see a load of red flags and sense you’re not safe with him but meet him anyway. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. If you've ever watched any of these my lover my killer documentaries, you always see that it's because they have become obsessed. A massive concern I have with the whole getting to know someone and then social etc etc is that if you meet someone in between and get a verification, that the other person feels like you've cheated. I've seen this mentioned on these forums before. Are you saying that if you’ve told one person that you want to take your time getting to know each other properly before having sex and then he sees that you’ve met up with someone else for sex after talking to them for 5 minutes then i think it’s understandable that the first man will be a bit annoyed. Nothing to do with him thinking you’ve cheated but because you’ve been dishonest with him, you’ve told him you like to get to know someone before meeting for sex and you’ve met someone else you don’t know for sex. Maybe he is only interested in women who only have sex with men they have taken the time to get to know. And the ‘my lover, my killer’ reference is irrelevant because he’s not your lover as you haven’t had sex with him yet, there are also a lot of people who get killed by people they meet off the internet after only talking to them for 5 minutes, in fact meeting someone off the internet after only talking for 5 minutes is more likely to get you killed than anything else. No, I meant that maybe you've been talking to two people long term, one 3 weeks one 5 weeks. You meet Mr 5 weeks and he verifies you, Mr 3 weeks throws his toys out. I've seen this mentioned on this forum as being an issue. Infact I believe it was a woman complaining about a man doing it though. The my lover my killer, my point is that a lot of people here are seeking emotional connection, forming that makes certain people irrational" But you’re taking your time getting to know mr 5 weeks, so your issue with getting to know someone is that if you’re getting to know someone and you meet with someone else you’re getting to know then the person you’re getting to know will be jealous of the other person you’ve been getting to know, so getting to know the person you met wasn’t a problem, it was only a problem that you were getting to know the person you haven’t met yet….so why don’t you just get to know one person at a time, or be honest with the people you’re getting to know and tell them that you’re getting to know and will soon meet someone else. The issue here is more that you’re not being completely open with people i think. | |||
| |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. The issue is you're approaching this from your perspective, which is that of a presumably sane, decent human. Our experience of meeting a lot of very last minute meets vs meeting a few longer term build ups is that the latter are not as positive experiences. Of course people will wank over future and past experiences, but everybody knows that expectation is rarely matched by reality. I can't say if it's safer or better for everyone to meet last minute, but I can say 2 things. 1. We've never had an issue meeting last minute and that includes her meeting alone, a lot. 2. This thread clearly demonstrates that having a social really serves no purpose in the context of safety. We also don't verify people we've not played with, for this exact reason. I hope fab will introduce a social and play verification category. You can’t spend weeks discussing sexual desires and what you will do with someone when you meet them and then criticise them for being disappointed when you meet and refuse to do the things you’ve been discussing though. I’m not saying that discussing something with someone beforehand is a reason for them to force you to do something you don’t want to but it is a reason for them to be disappointed and annoyed and would mean that you’ve been lying to him and deceiving him. You say that you have had issues with men you’ve built a relationship with but never with quick meets but the reasons and examples you’ve given are absolute nonsense. How does this thread display that meeting socially first has no bearing on your safety? You’re the only person who’s said that….how can taking your time to get to know someone properly and being able to make a accurate judgement of what kind of a person they are and whether you can trust them be less safe, or no more safe, than meeting a complete stranger that you know nothing about? So, you’re at a bar at 1am and you want to go home but you don’t feel safe walking home alone, your best friend offers to walk you home and a complete stranger offers to walk you home…would you feel as safe being walked home by the stranger as you would by your best friend? Saying that you’re as safe with a complete stranger as you are with someone you know is complete nonsense…..unless you get to know someone, see a load of red flags and sense you’re not safe with him but meet him anyway. " Literally the OP confirmed that having a social means nothing! That's exactly my point, that if you've built up an expectation of what will happen, you've set expectations and people will be disappointed if it doesn't. Doesn't mean you've lied, but maybe you changed your mind or you're in a different kind of mood. You seem to have taken this extremely personally. My post is in no way to suggest that everyone who has a social first is bad. You are using a bad analogy with the lift home because you're friend is obviously safer. But meeting a guy for a few drinks vs trusting them with sex is not remotely similar. The whole point of this has been lost, but ultimately, in regards to the OPs point, in our experience, quick meets are much more successful than meets planned in advance. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. If you've ever watched any of these my lover my killer documentaries, you always see that it's because they have become obsessed. A massive concern I have with the whole getting to know someone and then social etc etc is that if you meet someone in between and get a verification, that the other person feels like you've cheated. I've seen this mentioned on these forums before. Are you saying that if you’ve told one person that you want to take your time getting to know each other properly before having sex and then he sees that you’ve met up with someone else for sex after talking to them for 5 minutes then i think it’s understandable that the first man will be a bit annoyed. Nothing to do with him thinking you’ve cheated but because you’ve been dishonest with him, you’ve told him you like to get to know someone before meeting for sex and you’ve met someone else you don’t know for sex. Maybe he is only interested in women who only have sex with men they have taken the time to get to know. And the ‘my lover, my killer’ reference is irrelevant because he’s not your lover as you haven’t had sex with him yet, there are also a lot of people who get killed by people they meet off the internet after only talking to them for 5 minutes, in fact meeting someone off the internet after only talking for 5 minutes is more likely to get you killed than anything else. No, I meant that maybe you've been talking to two people long term, one 3 weeks one 5 weeks. You meet Mr 5 weeks and he verifies you, Mr 3 weeks throws his toys out. I've seen this mentioned on this forum as being an issue. Infact I believe it was a woman complaining about a man doing it though. The my lover my killer, my point is that a lot of people here are seeking emotional connection, forming that makes certain people irrational But you’re taking your time getting to know mr 5 weeks, so your issue with getting to know someone is that if you’re getting to know someone and you meet with someone else you’re getting to know then the person you’re getting to know will be jealous of the other person you’ve been getting to know, so getting to know the person you met wasn’t a problem, it was only a problem that you were getting to know the person you haven’t met yet….so why don’t you just get to know one person at a time, or be honest with the people you’re getting to know and tell them that you’re getting to know and will soon meet someone else. The issue here is more that you’re not being completely open with people i think. " Where does it say in fab rules you should be open? And this is proving my point 100%. You expect trust, honesty and openness. You deserve none of that. I deserve none of that. We make our decisions based on the information available. I am not going to share with you who I'm talking to or meeting, and I don't expect you to either. If there was ever a clearer reason why building a relationship can be dangerous, this is it. | |||
| |||
| |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. The issue is you're approaching this from your perspective, which is that of a presumably sane, decent human. Our experience of meeting a lot of very last minute meets vs meeting a few longer term build ups is that the latter are not as positive experiences. Of course people will wank over future and past experiences, but everybody knows that expectation is rarely matched by reality. I can't say if it's safer or better for everyone to meet last minute, but I can say 2 things. 1. We've never had an issue meeting last minute and that includes her meeting alone, a lot. 2. This thread clearly demonstrates that having a social really serves no purpose in the context of safety. We also don't verify people we've not played with, for this exact reason. I hope fab will introduce a social and play verification category. You can’t spend weeks discussing sexual desires and what you will do with someone when you meet them and then criticise them for being disappointed when you meet and refuse to do the things you’ve been discussing though. I’m not saying that discussing something with someone beforehand is a reason for them to force you to do something you don’t want to but it is a reason for them to be disappointed and annoyed and would mean that you’ve been lying to him and deceiving him. You say that you have had issues with men you’ve built a relationship with but never with quick meets but the reasons and examples you’ve given are absolute nonsense. How does this thread display that meeting socially first has no bearing on your safety? You’re the only person who’s said that….how can taking your time to get to know someone properly and being able to make a accurate judgement of what kind of a person they are and whether you can trust them be less safe, or no more safe, than meeting a complete stranger that you know nothing about? So, you’re at a bar at 1am and you want to go home but you don’t feel safe walking home alone, your best friend offers to walk you home and a complete stranger offers to walk you home…would you feel as safe being walked home by the stranger as you would by your best friend? Saying that you’re as safe with a complete stranger as you are with someone you know is complete nonsense…..unless you get to know someone, see a load of red flags and sense you’re not safe with him but meet him anyway. Literally the OP confirmed that having a social means nothing! That's exactly my point, that if you've built up an expectation of what will happen, you've set expectations and people will be disappointed if it doesn't. Doesn't mean you've lied, but maybe you changed your mind or you're in a different kind of mood. You seem to have taken this extremely personally. My post is in no way to suggest that everyone who has a social first is bad. You are using a bad analogy with the lift home because you're friend is obviously safer. But meeting a guy for a few drinks vs trusting them with sex is not remotely similar. The whole point of this has been lost, but ultimately, in regards to the OPs point, in our experience, quick meets are much more successful than meets planned in advance. " I agree that meeting someone once beforehand, as OP did, is pointless and I stated that in my first post, but you’re saying that spending weeks getting to know someone is pointless and has no bearing on safety which absolutely isn’t true. My point was that if a man is into something then he will think about it and wank over it whether he’s been discussing it with someone or not. If you don’t want to do that thing when you meet then the fact that you’ve been talking about it won’t make someone more likely to force you to do it, I would think that someone who you have built a relationship with and has spent a lot of time with you will be more considerate towards your feelings and respect you more than a complete stranger will. So you feel safer with a friend that you know properly when it comes to walking you home but when it comes to having sex with someone you feel safer with a complete stranger? I’m not taking it personally, i just don’t like to see someone giving out bad advice that will put people in danger and making completely false claims to try to back it up. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. The issue is you're approaching this from your perspective, which is that of a presumably sane, decent human. Our experience of meeting a lot of very last minute meets vs meeting a few longer term build ups is that the latter are not as positive experiences. Of course people will wank over future and past experiences, but everybody knows that expectation is rarely matched by reality. I can't say if it's safer or better for everyone to meet last minute, but I can say 2 things. 1. We've never had an issue meeting last minute and that includes her meeting alone, a lot. 2. This thread clearly demonstrates that having a social really serves no purpose in the context of safety. We also don't verify people we've not played with, for this exact reason. I hope fab will introduce a social and play verification category. You can’t spend weeks discussing sexual desires and what you will do with someone when you meet them and then criticise them for being disappointed when you meet and refuse to do the things you’ve been discussing though. I’m not saying that discussing something with someone beforehand is a reason for them to force you to do something you don’t want to but it is a reason for them to be disappointed and annoyed and would mean that you’ve been lying to him and deceiving him. You say that you have had issues with men you’ve built a relationship with but never with quick meets but the reasons and examples you’ve given are absolute nonsense. How does this thread display that meeting socially first has no bearing on your safety? You’re the only person who’s said that….how can taking your time to get to know someone properly and being able to make a accurate judgement of what kind of a person they are and whether you can trust them be less safe, or no more safe, than meeting a complete stranger that you know nothing about? So, you’re at a bar at 1am and you want to go home but you don’t feel safe walking home alone, your best friend offers to walk you home and a complete stranger offers to walk you home…would you feel as safe being walked home by the stranger as you would by your best friend? Saying that you’re as safe with a complete stranger as you are with someone you know is complete nonsense…..unless you get to know someone, see a load of red flags and sense you’re not safe with him but meet him anyway. Literally the OP confirmed that having a social means nothing! That's exactly my point, that if you've built up an expectation of what will happen, you've set expectations and people will be disappointed if it doesn't. Doesn't mean you've lied, but maybe you changed your mind or you're in a different kind of mood. You seem to have taken this extremely personally. My post is in no way to suggest that everyone who has a social first is bad. You are using a bad analogy with the lift home because you're friend is obviously safer. But meeting a guy for a few drinks vs trusting them with sex is not remotely similar. The whole point of this has been lost, but ultimately, in regards to the OPs point, in our experience, quick meets are much more successful than meets planned in advance. I agree that meeting someone once beforehand, as OP did, is pointless and I stated that in my first post, but you’re saying that spending weeks getting to know someone is pointless and has no bearing on safety which absolutely isn’t true. My point was that if a man is into something then he will think about it and wank over it whether he’s been discussing it with someone or not. If you don’t want to do that thing when you meet then the fact that you’ve been talking about it won’t make someone more likely to force you to do it, I would think that someone who you have built a relationship with and has spent a lot of time with you will be more considerate towards your feelings and respect you more than a complete stranger will. So you feel safer with a friend that you know properly when it comes to walking you home but when it comes to having sex with someone you feel safer with a complete stranger? I’m not taking it personally, i just don’t like to see someone giving out bad advice that will put people in danger and making completely false claims to try to back it up. " But I've probably walked home with that person loads of times. And I'd feel safer with someone I had had sex with loads of times. The two aren't equivalent. | |||
"The issue is that you saying chatting to someone from a hookup site (which this is) for a few days or weeks and meeting them for a coffee equates to "knowing and trusting" someone. Online predators and abusers do that. They build trust and then exploit it. I'm not saying that meeting people after 5 mins of chatting is safe or sensible, I'm saying in our experience of meeting literally hundreds of guys, it results in a better experience and the guys we meet are much less intense and more clam than the very few we've met who haven't been quick meets. You talk about "opposite of reality" but how many men have you met off fab? What's your experience? I'm talking first hand experience of meeting men off here for many many years. " You’re changing what you’re claiming now. Earlier you said that a stranger is happier to walk away if there isn’t a click, that’s nonsense because a man meeting for a quickie doesn’t care if there’s a click or not and you wouldn’t spend weeks chatting and meeting socially with someone if there wasn’t a click. You claimed that a stranger wanting to meet straight away for a quickie is more likely to be single than someone who’s spending time chatting with you and meeting you for socials and that’s just not true. You said that you’re more likely to be killed by someone you build a relationship with because they’re more likely to become obsessed. In essence you’re saying that meeting with strangers leads to better experiences and is safer than meeting with someone you’ve taken time to get to know and that just isn’t true. Sex with strangers is cold, lacking in emotion or feeling, awkward, unsatisfying and dangerous…. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. The issue is you're approaching this from your perspective, which is that of a presumably sane, decent human. Our experience of meeting a lot of very last minute meets vs meeting a few longer term build ups is that the latter are not as positive experiences. Of course people will wank over future and past experiences, but everybody knows that expectation is rarely matched by reality. I can't say if it's safer or better for everyone to meet last minute, but I can say 2 things. 1. We've never had an issue meeting last minute and that includes her meeting alone, a lot. 2. This thread clearly demonstrates that having a social really serves no purpose in the context of safety. We also don't verify people we've not played with, for this exact reason. I hope fab will introduce a social and play verification category. You can’t spend weeks discussing sexual desires and what you will do with someone when you meet them and then criticise them for being disappointed when you meet and refuse to do the things you’ve been discussing though. I’m not saying that discussing something with someone beforehand is a reason for them to force you to do something you don’t want to but it is a reason for them to be disappointed and annoyed and would mean that you’ve been lying to him and deceiving him. You say that you have had issues with men you’ve built a relationship with but never with quick meets but the reasons and examples you’ve given are absolute nonsense. How does this thread display that meeting socially first has no bearing on your safety? You’re the only person who’s said that….how can taking your time to get to know someone properly and being able to make a accurate judgement of what kind of a person they are and whether you can trust them be less safe, or no more safe, than meeting a complete stranger that you know nothing about? So, you’re at a bar at 1am and you want to go home but you don’t feel safe walking home alone, your best friend offers to walk you home and a complete stranger offers to walk you home…would you feel as safe being walked home by the stranger as you would by your best friend? Saying that you’re as safe with a complete stranger as you are with someone you know is complete nonsense…..unless you get to know someone, see a load of red flags and sense you’re not safe with him but meet him anyway. Literally the OP confirmed that having a social means nothing! That's exactly my point, that if you've built up an expectation of what will happen, you've set expectations and people will be disappointed if it doesn't. Doesn't mean you've lied, but maybe you changed your mind or you're in a different kind of mood. You seem to have taken this extremely personally. My post is in no way to suggest that everyone who has a social first is bad. You are using a bad analogy with the lift home because you're friend is obviously safer. But meeting a guy for a few drinks vs trusting them with sex is not remotely similar. The whole point of this has been lost, but ultimately, in regards to the OPs point, in our experience, quick meets are much more successful than meets planned in advance. I agree that meeting someone once beforehand, as OP did, is pointless and I stated that in my first post, but you’re saying that spending weeks getting to know someone is pointless and has no bearing on safety which absolutely isn’t true. My point was that if a man is into something then he will think about it and wank over it whether he’s been discussing it with someone or not. If you don’t want to do that thing when you meet then the fact that you’ve been talking about it won’t make someone more likely to force you to do it, I would think that someone who you have built a relationship with and has spent a lot of time with you will be more considerate towards your feelings and respect you more than a complete stranger will. So you feel safer with a friend that you know properly when it comes to walking you home but when it comes to having sex with someone you feel safer with a complete stranger? I’m not taking it personally, i just don’t like to see someone giving out bad advice that will put people in danger and making completely false claims to try to back it up. But I've probably walked home with that person loads of times. And I'd feel safer with someone I had had sex with loads of times. The two aren't equivalent. " You don’t feel safer with your friend because you’ve walked home with them loads of times before, if you’d never walked home with them before you’d still feel safer walking home with a friend than with a stranger wouldn’t you? Why do you feel safer walking home with a friend rather than a stranger but less safe having sex for the first time with someone you know rather than a stranger? | |||
| |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. The issue is you're approaching this from your perspective, which is that of a presumably sane, decent human. Our experience of meeting a lot of very last minute meets vs meeting a few longer term build ups is that the latter are not as positive experiences. Of course people will wank over future and past experiences, but everybody knows that expectation is rarely matched by reality. I can't say if it's safer or better for everyone to meet last minute, but I can say 2 things. 1. We've never had an issue meeting last minute and that includes her meeting alone, a lot. 2. This thread clearly demonstrates that having a social really serves no purpose in the context of safety. We also don't verify people we've not played with, for this exact reason. I hope fab will introduce a social and play verification category. You can’t spend weeks discussing sexual desires and what you will do with someone when you meet them and then criticise them for being disappointed when you meet and refuse to do the things you’ve been discussing though. I’m not saying that discussing something with someone beforehand is a reason for them to force you to do something you don’t want to but it is a reason for them to be disappointed and annoyed and would mean that you’ve been lying to him and deceiving him. You say that you have had issues with men you’ve built a relationship with but never with quick meets but the reasons and examples you’ve given are absolute nonsense. How does this thread display that meeting socially first has no bearing on your safety? You’re the only person who’s said that….how can taking your time to get to know someone properly and being able to make a accurate judgement of what kind of a person they are and whether you can trust them be less safe, or no more safe, than meeting a complete stranger that you know nothing about? So, you’re at a bar at 1am and you want to go home but you don’t feel safe walking home alone, your best friend offers to walk you home and a complete stranger offers to walk you home…would you feel as safe being walked home by the stranger as you would by your best friend? Saying that you’re as safe with a complete stranger as you are with someone you know is complete nonsense…..unless you get to know someone, see a load of red flags and sense you’re not safe with him but meet him anyway. Literally the OP confirmed that having a social means nothing! That's exactly my point, that if you've built up an expectation of what will happen, you've set expectations and people will be disappointed if it doesn't. Doesn't mean you've lied, but maybe you changed your mind or you're in a different kind of mood. You seem to have taken this extremely personally. My post is in no way to suggest that everyone who has a social first is bad. You are using a bad analogy with the lift home because you're friend is obviously safer. But meeting a guy for a few drinks vs trusting them with sex is not remotely similar. The whole point of this has been lost, but ultimately, in regards to the OPs point, in our experience, quick meets are much more successful than meets planned in advance. I agree that meeting someone once beforehand, as OP did, is pointless and I stated that in my first post, but you’re saying that spending weeks getting to know someone is pointless and has no bearing on safety which absolutely isn’t true. My point was that if a man is into something then he will think about it and wank over it whether he’s been discussing it with someone or not. If you don’t want to do that thing when you meet then the fact that you’ve been talking about it won’t make someone more likely to force you to do it, I would think that someone who you have built a relationship with and has spent a lot of time with you will be more considerate towards your feelings and respect you more than a complete stranger will. So you feel safer with a friend that you know properly when it comes to walking you home but when it comes to having sex with someone you feel safer with a complete stranger? I’m not taking it personally, i just don’t like to see someone giving out bad advice that will put people in danger and making completely false claims to try to back it up. But I've probably walked home with that person loads of times. And I'd feel safer with someone I had had sex with loads of times. The two aren't equivalent. You don’t feel safer with your friend because you’ve walked home with them loads of times before, if you’d never walked home with them before you’d still feel safer walking home with a friend than with a stranger wouldn’t you? Why do you feel safer walking home with a friend rather than a stranger but less safe having sex for the first time with someone you know rather than a stranger? " You're totally missing the point. You never actually "know" someone who you meet on here. You need to meet them 20 times in different environments with different groups or people with different social dynamics to even claim you "knew them". This is exactly how dangerous people operate, they work on the basis that people mistake familiarity with trust. Just because you see the same guy in the corner shop every morning doesn't mean you know him, just because you see that same guy in the pub on a evening does not mean you know him, but then he'll exploit you. Or the school girl or boy who sees the same guy at the bus stop every morning who says hi. Then they bump into each other in town and then in the park. You need to realise whar you're saying is dangerous. | |||
"I am basing all this on real life experience. Experience of people turning up on our door step and saying sorry not for me and waking away. Or people turning up and half way through saying "thanks, I am done" vs people we've met for a social and have harassed us for months with constant messages etc. The whole fact you say that you should be open and honest and tell other people who you're talking to, is a huge red flag. As my initial message said, this is our experience and it doesn't apply to everyone. " A man who you’ve never met before is obviously more likely to say no thanks when you meet than someone you’ve already met socially and been chatting with, if he’s been chatting with you and met you socially then he wants to have sex with you so why would he decide that he doesn’t want to have sex with you and walk away when you eventually meet for sex? The whole point of getting to know someone is to check that you click and you want to have sex. Wanting openness and honesty is a red flag to you? So you prefer to be with someone you have to lie to and hide things from and who will lie to you and hide things from you? You said that one of the positives with meeting someone you have only spoken to for 5 minutes is that they’re more likely to be single, so being open and honest mattered then….it you aren’t looking to build a relationship and you don’t care about being open and honest with each other then why does it matter to you whether or not the man you meet is single? | |||
"I am basing all this on real life experience. Experience of people turning up on our door step and saying sorry not for me and waking away. Or people turning up and half way through saying "thanks, I am done" vs people we've met for a social and have harassed us for months with constant messages etc. The whole fact you say that you should be open and honest and tell other people who you're talking to, is a huge red flag. As my initial message said, this is our experience and it doesn't apply to everyone. A man who you’ve never met before is obviously more likely to say no thanks when you meet than someone you’ve already met socially and been chatting with, if he’s been chatting with you and met you socially then he wants to have sex with you so why would he decide that he doesn’t want to have sex with you and walk away when you eventually meet for sex? The whole point of getting to know someone is to check that you click and you want to have sex. Wanting openness and honesty is a red flag to you? So you prefer to be with someone you have to lie to and hide things from and who will lie to you and hide things from you? You said that one of the positives with meeting someone you have only spoken to for 5 minutes is that they’re more likely to be single, so being open and honest mattered then….it you aren’t looking to build a relationship and you don’t care about being open and honest with each other then why does it matter to you whether or not the man you meet is single?" I never said it mattered if they were single or not. I just stared that it seems that way. Expecting openness and honestly and what you implied, exclusivity is an absolute red flag on a site like this. I have no obligation or expectation to only be chatting and planning to meet one person. If I want to meet 3 people the days before I meet you I have no reason or need to tell you that, but you implied you would want to know and I should tell you. You're point about chatting and meeting because you want sex is exactly he crux of this. They want sex with that person. They have liked that person they have invested in that person. The guy you chatted to for 5 minutes doesn't have any desire for you, just sex so they don't feel emotionally hurt or let down if it doesn't happen. | |||
"The worst, most disrespectful, challenging meets we've had have been where we've had a social and/or prolonged chat before meeting. It sets an expectation and some men will feel they are "owed" for their continued effort. We all have different tastes and desires, but last minute meets tend to be much much more sane and calm than where any form of relationship has been built up. But what works for one doesn't work for another. Really? That’s the complete opposite to what I’d expect. So an alternative way of saying what you said is to say that a man who is willing to disregard the limits of the person he’s with and just do whatever he wants is less likely to do that with someone he’s never met before and will respect the limits of a complete stranger but ignore the limits of someone he’s built a relationship with? I’d have thought that a man who is vile enough and lacking in empathy that he ignores the limits of the person he’s with doesn’t really care whether or not he’s invested time and effort into getting the meet. In essence, yes. Of course you just get dicks, but our extensive experience of meeting guys would indicate that a guy who has nothing invested is much more likely to be content with what's on offer rather than what they've been thinking of, wanking over and discussing for days or weeks. The issue is that a guy you've been talking to enough to do a social, and then like enough to plan a sexual meet has invested a lot of time and possibly money already and that creates an imbalance. If you have a guy you have chatted to for 5 minutes turn a up and you don't click and you're not what he wants, he's much happier to walk away. There's also a bit of a paradox that the guys who can "meet now" are quite a lot more likely to be single or if not, have not invested in you and are much happier to accept you win some/lose some. It's a reason why we don't meet anymore than about a 15 minute drive away etc. So do you think that men only think about and wank over things when they’re interacting with someone regularly? Do you think that after a man has been chatting with you he will think about you when he’s having a wank rather than watch porn? Do you think that if a man is into something that is outside your limits then he will only think about it and wank over it if he’s been interacting with you and a man who is into things that are outside your limits won’t have been thinking about it and wanking over it if you only speak to them 5 minutes before meeting? And you say that a last minute meet will be content with whats on offer rather than what they’ve been thinking about, wanking over and discussing for the last few days or weeks, I assume you mean what they’ve been discussing with you for the last few days or weeks? So does that mean you’re discussing doing things with men before you meet them and then don’t do it when you actually meet them? Sorry, where’s the imbalance? If a man has invested time prior to meeting then surely you’ve invested an equal amount of time? If a guy turns up to meet you after talking for just 5 minutes he’s not going to care about clicking with you or whether you’re exactly what he wants, he will just want sex and it would take something pretty extreme to make him walk away. If a man is chatting with you over a period of days or weeks and you’re having several social meets before sex then he will care that you don’t click and if you’re not what he wants. Why would someone turn down no strings, hassle free sex with you because there’s no click but will continue chatting and having social meets with you when you don’t click? So someone who wants to meet straight away for a quick shag and then leave is more likely to be single than someone you have been talking to extensively and had social meets with? The man with limited time looking for a quickie is more likely to be single than a man who spends time in the evening chatting with you and meeting you? The guy who isn’t interested in building any kind of relationship with you is more likely to be single than the man who is actively building a relationship with you? Literally every point you’ve made there is the absolute opposite of reality. The issue is you're approaching this from your perspective, which is that of a presumably sane, decent human. Our experience of meeting a lot of very last minute meets vs meeting a few longer term build ups is that the latter are not as positive experiences. Of course people will wank over future and past experiences, but everybody knows that expectation is rarely matched by reality. I can't say if it's safer or better for everyone to meet last minute, but I can say 2 things. 1. We've never had an issue meeting last minute and that includes her meeting alone, a lot. 2. This thread clearly demonstrates that having a social really serves no purpose in the context of safety. We also don't verify people we've not played with, for this exact reason. I hope fab will introduce a social and play verification category. You can’t spend weeks discussing sexual desires and what you will do with someone when you meet them and then criticise them for being disappointed when you meet and refuse to do the things you’ve been discussing though. I’m not saying that discussing something with someone beforehand is a reason for them to force you to do something you don’t want to but it is a reason for them to be disappointed and annoyed and would mean that you’ve been lying to him and deceiving him. You say that you have had issues with men you’ve built a relationship with but never with quick meets but the reasons and examples you’ve given are absolute nonsense. How does this thread display that meeting socially first has no bearing on your safety? You’re the only person who’s said that….how can taking your time to get to know someone properly and being able to make a accurate judgement of what kind of a person they are and whether you can trust them be less safe, or no more safe, than meeting a complete stranger that you know nothing about? So, you’re at a bar at 1am and you want to go home but you don’t feel safe walking home alone, your best friend offers to walk you home and a complete stranger offers to walk you home…would you feel as safe being walked home by the stranger as you would by your best friend? Saying that you’re as safe with a complete stranger as you are with someone you know is complete nonsense…..unless you get to know someone, see a load of red flags and sense you’re not safe with him but meet him anyway. Literally the OP confirmed that having a social means nothing! That's exactly my point, that if you've built up an expectation of what will happen, you've set expectations and people will be disappointed if it doesn't. Doesn't mean you've lied, but maybe you changed your mind or you're in a different kind of mood. You seem to have taken this extremely personally. My post is in no way to suggest that everyone who has a social first is bad. You are using a bad analogy with the lift home because you're friend is obviously safer. But meeting a guy for a few drinks vs trusting them with sex is not remotely similar. The whole point of this has been lost, but ultimately, in regards to the OPs point, in our experience, quick meets are much more successful than meets planned in advance. I agree that meeting someone once beforehand, as OP did, is pointless and I stated that in my first post, but you’re saying that spending weeks getting to know someone is pointless and has no bearing on safety which absolutely isn’t true. My point was that if a man is into something then he will think about it and wank over it whether he’s been discussing it with someone or not. If you don’t want to do that thing when you meet then the fact that you’ve been talking about it won’t make someone more likely to force you to do it, I would think that someone who you have built a relationship with and has spent a lot of time with you will be more considerate towards your feelings and respect you more than a complete stranger will. So you feel safer with a friend that you know properly when it comes to walking you home but when it comes to having sex with someone you feel safer with a complete stranger? I’m not taking it personally, i just don’t like to see someone giving out bad advice that will put people in danger and making completely false claims to try to back it up. But I've probably walked home with that person loads of times. And I'd feel safer with someone I had had sex with loads of times. The two aren't equivalent. You don’t feel safer with your friend because you’ve walked home with them loads of times before, if you’d never walked home with them before you’d still feel safer walking home with a friend than with a stranger wouldn’t you? Why do you feel safer walking home with a friend rather than a stranger but less safe having sex for the first time with someone you know rather than a stranger? You're totally missing the point. You never actually "know" someone who you meet on here. You need to meet them 20 times in different environments with different groups or people with different social dynamics to even claim you "knew them". This is exactly how dangerous people operate, they work on the basis that people mistake familiarity with trust. Just because you see the same guy in the corner shop every morning doesn't mean you know him, just because you see that same guy in the pub on a evening does not mean you know him, but then he'll exploit you. Or the school girl or boy who sees the same guy at the bus stop every morning who says hi. Then they bump into each other in town and then in the park. You need to realise whar you're saying is dangerous. " If you chat with someone for 5 weeks and meet them a few times socially you will get a feel for what sort of a person they are and you’ll have a gut feeling about whether you feel safe with them. I’m not saying you’re 100% safe doing that but you’re a lot safer than if you meet a complete stranger. Like i said earlier, there’s always a risk meeting someone but you can reduce that risk by taking time to suss them out beforehand. I find it incredibly that you’re actually trying to argue that getting to know someone before meeting for sex is no safer than meeting a stranger. I mean, the main advice people give regarding staying safe when chatting with people online is don’t meet anyone until you know them well enough to feel safe meeting and always meet in a public place first, every dating site says that, the police say that, parents tell their kids that….no one ever says the safest and best thing to do when meeting people off the internet is to meet with a complete stranger in a private place. Do you really believe that it’s better and safer meeting a complete stranger than it is meeting someone you chatted with and met socially over a few weeks? Do you really believe that it’s dangerous to advise people to take some time getting to know someone and meeting them socially before meeting in private for sex? If that’s what you believe then I’ll accept that’s what you believe and we can end this conversation. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I only played by a couple of main rules when I was a hotwife.... hubby always had contact separately with the guy as well as joint. And I never met anyone claiming to be a bull. I never had any trouble and found all that I met were extremely respectful. Maybe hubby laid down the Law. *shrugs* I don't know. " This absolutely works. Everyone knowing where they stand and what is expected. Nice to see. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Sorry to hear about the bad experience. We think it's best to know the other guy really well not just from a social. " But a social is a good start getting to know someone | |||
"My advice to Hotwives (going back to the original post intent) is that you need to be confident to say No. Stop. I don’t want that, please leave (or that’s enough, I am leaving if that’s the arrangement). Based on the initial post story this is the key takeaway. Allowing a male to continue doing things that cross boundaries, breach agreed meet rules or doing anything you or your partner are not comfortable with, beyond of course the mans unacceptable behaviour foremost, is down to failing to withdraw consent. I’ve heard disturbing stories from female friends of meets turning bad, where they regret what went on but they didn’t say “stop”. One of the key parts of a social beforehand is ascertaining if this man will respect ground rules and will accept ‘don’t do that it’s making me uncomfortable’ and or ‘Stop and Leave now please’ without fear of repercussions." Worth bearing in mind that the freeze trauma response is very much a thing in this kind of situation, so not saying ‘stop’ could happen - and that’s not the woman’s fault or a ‘failure’ on her part. Appreciate it’s probably only the case in extreme circumstances, but something to be aware of. | |||
"My advice to Hotwives (going back to the original post intent) is that you need to be confident to say No. Stop. I don’t want that, please leave (or that’s enough, I am leaving if that’s the arrangement). Based on the initial post story this is the key takeaway. Allowing a male to continue doing things that cross boundaries, breach agreed meet rules or doing anything you or your partner are not comfortable with, beyond of course the mans unacceptable behaviour foremost, is down to failing to withdraw consent. I’ve heard disturbing stories from female friends of meets turning bad, where they regret what went on but they didn’t say “stop”. One of the key parts of a social beforehand is ascertaining if this man will respect ground rules and will accept ‘don’t do that it’s making me uncomfortable’ and or ‘Stop and Leave now please’ without fear of repercussions. Worth bearing in mind that the freeze trauma response is very much a thing in this kind of situation, so not saying ‘stop’ could happen - and that’s not the woman’s fault or a ‘failure’ on her part. Appreciate it’s probably only the case in extreme circumstances, but something to be aware of. " 100%, it can take a great deal of confidence to be able to call a halt and men don’t appreciate the trauma | |||
| |||
"You met the wrong guy for your liking. Moving on to solo meets should only happen after a prolonged period of knowing each other. Meeting once and then solo is crazy. And if solo, best be in reputable hotels rather than at his house. " There is absolutely nothing wrong with meeting once then solo please stop shaming the women! It’s the man in the wrong here! He was the one not sticking to what was agreed and generally being a prick pushing boundaries! The the op my advice would be carry on as you are some meets are shite others are fantastic just out the bad ones leave if your not happy during the meet remember it needs to be consensual , not all guys are bad don’t give up them I love a solo meet and yes usually do it after one social  | |||
"You met the wrong guy for your liking. Moving on to solo meets should only happen after a prolonged period of knowing each other. Meeting once and then solo is crazy. And if solo, best be in reputable hotels rather than at his house. " There is absolutely nothing wrong with meeting once then solo please stop shaming the women! It’s the man in the wrong here! He was the one not sticking to what was agreed and generally being a prick pushing boundaries! The the op my advice would be carry on as you are some meets are shite others are fantastic just out the bad ones leave if your not happy during the meet remember it needs to be consensual , not all guys are bad don’t give up them I love a solo meet and yes usually do it after one social | |||
| |||
"You met the wrong guy for your liking. Moving on to solo meets should only happen after a prolonged period of knowing each other. Meeting once and then solo is crazy. And if solo, best be in reputable hotels rather than at his house. There is absolutely nothing wrong with meeting once then solo please stop shaming the women! It’s the man in the wrong here! He was the one not sticking to what was agreed and generally being a prick pushing boundaries! The the op my advice would be carry on as you are some meets are shite others are fantastic just out the bad ones leave if your not happy during the meet remember it needs to be consensual , not all guys are bad don’t give up them I love a solo meet and yes usually do it after one social "Shaming women??? Are you for real? There's always a snowflake somewhere who reads what's not been said nor implied , nor intended. Just so one can get "offended"... | |||
" Worth bearing in mind that the freeze trauma response is very much a thing in this kind of situation, so not saying ‘stop’ could happen - and that’s not the woman’s fault or a ‘failure’ on her part. Appreciate it’s probably only the case in extreme circumstances, but something to be aware of. " Although true, the issue is that if the guy tries something in the heat of the moment and the woman doesn't say anything to suggest stopping, he isn't doing anything wrong, obviously if it's crossing a pre arranged boundary it's bad behaviour. Everyone meeting alone, men or women, must be confident enough to handle themselves and a variety of situations, that doesn't absolve the other party off responsible behaviour, however removing consent is a fundamental part of staying safe. | |||
