Do you prefer ONS over LTRs?

[Bumsniff]

Do you prefer one night stands over relationships? And if so is it because you cannot cut it in a long term relationship and prefer to blame everything on women like you claim women do to men? Are ONS a built in defense mechanisim to prevent you from having to live up to a woman's expectations in an LTR especially if she is of high value and you use ONS as a way to convince yourself that that's all women are good for? Have you been on SS for years and not grown past having just one ONS after another?

 

[crossedup]

Defense mechanism? More like just fast, easy sex. I'd rather make money than worry about little girly problems all day long.

I love ONS, no time for relationships + I'm 22 and DGAF about that sh*t. Bumsniff...girl, if you're looking for a relationship cross me off your checklist.

 

[floydb25]

You're so gonna get white knighted for this thread. We need a white knight icon, actually. And an SMH... few others I can't think of atm. :nono:

 

[Mike32ct]

Do you prefer one night stands over relationships?

I don't know if I necessarily PREFER ONS'. I've never had a LTR. Unless I meet somebody I really "connect" with, ONS' are the ONLY choice other than celibacy or paying for it lol.

I guess the other option is FWB, but that tends to be a social circle thing. I'm not F-ing somebody from work lol.

And if so is it because you cannot cut it in a long term relationship and prefer to blame everything on women like you claim women do to men?

No. A good "connection" is very rare. Finding someone I truly "click" with that "gets" me is extremely difficult. Ironically, the best emotional and intellectual connections I've ever experienced were with ONS with intelligent educated women. They were just short lived flings because they were ONS' and/or vacation hookups. If I met such a woman that lived close to me and wanted to date, would I? Absolutely.


Are ONS a built in defense mechanisim to prevent you from having to live up to a woman's expectations in an LTR especially if she is of high value and you use ONS as a way to convince yourself that that's all women are good for?

No. A woman has HIGHER expectations for a ONS. Most studies have shown that her looks requirements are more strict for a ONS vs a LTR. ONS' really aren't "the easy way out" as you might be suggesting. It's actually much harder to get ONS' unless you're really good looking.

(Although getting a relationship isn't easy either. It's just different. The only "easy way out" is to just avoid women altogether. Of course, maybe that's not so easy either lol.)

I don't think "all women are good for is ONS'." But I do acknowledge that a good genuine connection PLUS high interest level is rare. So with MOST women, you can't hope for more than a sexual connection. You have to go in with low expectatons because you really don't know where it's going to lead. Most likely, it might just be sex. But it could end up being more.

Most so called LTRs start out as ONS' (or at least casual hookups) and then evolve into FWB anyway. Then people get attached after regular sex and start dating. Nobody wants to admit this truth because it isn't so romantic. It's more PC to say, "We were friends for a while, and then we started dating" than the truth, "We had a drunken ONS after the work picnic. Then we became secret FWB out of convenience. Then we started to get attached after all the raw dogging, so now we're boyfriend and girlfriend."

Ok. I'm off on a tangent. Back to your question, until I meet someone and we have the right connection, her expectations of me in an LTR is a moot point.

Have you been on SS for years and not grown past having just one ONS after another?

I don't have a lot of ONS'. I acknowledge the difficulty plus I don't "sarge" as much I did when I was younger.

But back to your point... You seem to be suggesting that a guy should give up ONS' at some point. Ok fair point. But what if he never meets the right woman to date seriously? Become a monk or turn gay?

 

[bigneil]

There are too many factors (including scent) to simplify it to such a "choice" for either party, but sometimes you just don't want anything to do with the other person after, and sometimes you do. Sometimes you don't want it to be a ONS but it is, and sometimes you want it to be, but it turns into a relationship.

 

[Hustlaz Ambition]

Some girls are better off being a ONS. Simply because eventually they will turn into a ****ing headache. So it all depends on the female.

 

[Davezz]

the only thing one night stands give is that you can empty yourself but sometimes thats the right thing. easy relationship with a girl u like then **** a nice girl once.

 

[Boscus]

I actually don't like ONS, I do them though...

My method is, find a women, fvck her, then turn her into a fvckbuddy or Mltr.

So, after I fvck her the first time, I want to fvk her again and again and again....

It's better that way

 

[Who Dares Win]

Most of the women are so damaged mentally and physically that invest emotionally and psychologically on them is asking for trouble.

Ons are not much a "defence mechanism" but more a plan B which works better than plan A after plan A is either unreachable or harder for the majority of guys.

As we shown many times in here women have simply no sensitivity for other people needs or feelings, they can move to irrational beasts when it comes of their basic impulses to cold killing machines when it comes to plan how to gain something out of someone else.

You simply just dont want to be in a position of vulnerability toward such people especially after that law and culture deprived you of most of your god given defences.

Add to this that apart cellphones and parties, women dont have much to offer except their bodies nowadays and you get why most men do the most intelligent thing.

Also personally I have a very low tolerance to resourche waste therefore before giving even the slight investment I have to be sure that there is interest from the other part, sex is the benchmark of such interest and directly influence my availability to commit.