Wow, Msia beat SG!!!!! Woohoooo... Msia Boleh!!!

Buy me a dinner first and give me a kiss. Singaporean chics probably want to see how big you are first.

shoot first ....talk later lor....always works

Which strategy will work????????

source?

the shooting naturally......hit many....love 3...choose 2....marry one

Hmmmm.... wat about for girls who wanna hv sex and still marry? What strategy is best?

What an unenlightening thread. You cannot just have sex without developing the feeling of love between both parties. Sex is pertinent in case that both parties love and decide to live together. That consequent outcome will be a normal and natural sex between them. Having sex at the first date merely imply selfishness and unappreciative on the part of the male, kind of one night stand attitude which is irrelevant for the relationship to prosper steadily.

I guess no women worth the name will agree on this.

Humanity is but one family.

Hmmm.... basically to get someone in bed on the first date is very difficult but sometimes it happens when both parties wants it. There is a difference between making love and just sex. Sometimes sex happens with no feeling attached. Happens to me several times when sex is just a need and we can go about doing other things later and not think about it nor talk about. And the beauty is this...... when the need arises again, a call will come ....."are you free today......and I will say....everyday and every ready"

Mr Ricochet, sex at first date cant occur naturally. Nonetheless, I am always ready to accept exceptional cases. Sex with no feeling is just a matter of channelling our desire haphazardly without much care towards the other party, am I right? It's really unfair to the woman even if she agreed superficially. Sex is not solely "me" but "us".

Humanity is but one family.

so whatever the case ...the man gets the blame

I think that Sex on the first date is like having a sneeze, u JUSt DO IT, can't help it.

But sex after you know someone for a long time is like YOGA, u take your time to explore and reach the limits of mind, body and soul!

yes yes yes yes yes yes YES YES YES YES YES

Yes you can have sex without feelings, and no sex on the first date isn't selfish if both parties want to.

One question: are you a virgin?

Every times when I go on my first date, it seems as if I'm bound to have sex. GEEZE..

No, I am a normal guy with a lovely wife. Sex without feeling may apparently done with unanimity of both parties but it is as a result of failing to control respective desire. When talking about going for a date, it's the initial steps towards attachment and love, not for hunting girl for sex right? Unless the definition for 'dating' means something else, I will abide by this principle. But of course I will defend your right to disagree with me because human will have differing opinion on every issue.

Furthermore, in the first date, the man and woman do not know each other's character and conduct, sex will rarely occur except in extreme circumstances where both get drunk and their conscious level is not up to the maximum. A person who does sex in his or her first date is considered immature and fail to form a solid thought in their mind. It's true that there are differences between "commitment", "making love" and "sex". The first two is necessary while the thrid one will come naturally.

Humanity is but one family.

peer pressure question detected

answer me this: your wife your first gf and your first person you had relationship? am i correct?

Hate to disappoint, but the answer is no. Are you trying to assess me psychologically?

that, my friend, is the most corny sexthing i have ever seen

No disappointment, I'm trying to shorten the route, why try to assess all those words when you simply can tell people's opinion about sex and love by their own experience.

"Dating" can mean tons of things. Some people shotgun it, some people take it as finding forever. But as for sex and love, their definitely two different things. Lol.

You can buy sex, but you can't buy love. at least not the real one.

Even the one who buy sex knows that deep in his heart, it's unreal. As for first date sex, it's hasty, immature and unintellectual behaviour.

You can only have sex without feelings if you had sex with a total stranger and make sure not to give ayy private information about each other. (ex: one night stands). Its impossible to to that with any one you know! feelings always happen no matter what..

Why? If two people are attracted to each other and simply want to bonk their brains out to fulfill a carnal desire, why is it hasty, immature or unintellectual behaviour?



I disagree that that for sex to occur on a first date it would mean that both parties have to be drunk. If both parties are physically attracted to each other and as long as neither party is decieving each other why can't they enjoy a night of passion and simply leave it at that. Why would they need to control their desires, what purpose does it serve? And women should be able to express their sexuality as freely as men do without being judged.

No No No No No No No

^you just haven't met Zaw Gyi yet...lol.

Mr swingdoctor, apparently you sound like a very open-minded feminist. I am afraid that you are not. Would you put your trust to someone you merely know for a few hours? Even science does not take your side if I may utilize scientific approach in this case. What if one of the party has STD? Will you risk your life and suffer since then for the sake of a few minutes pleasure? We are talking about first date here pal, and having fun uncontrollably on the pretext that both parties attaracted to each other is quite immature. What if the female side get pregnant? Dont tell me that there's no link between sex and pregnancy however secured your protection is.

Your statement: "And women should be able to express their sexuality as freely as men do without being judged", sound extremely impartial, aint it? Every guys who like to hunt girls for a night stand will equipped themselves with this philosophical weapon. It's the gullible and credulous girls that sacrifice themselves in the first date that will get the bad ending. Am I sound too negative and pessimistic? Hell no. Guys know it and girls cant control it. But it is still mutually agreed according to your intepretation. So, that's ok. Is it really OK? What's your perspective about those women who express their sexuality as freely as men? Be careful with your choice of words sir because the meaning is that this woman can have as many sex partners as she wants. Even a man cannot have such liberty or otherwise, he is called a cassanova. If a husband can accept the fact that his wife has multiple sex partnes before, will he not feel pang of conscience?

Humanity is but one family.

And if you waited until the 3rd date or even after you were married how do you know that the person won't have an STD? Are you aware that even a virgin can have an STD? I personally wouldn't sleep with someone on the first date but it doesn't mean that I would judge others who do, that is their concern not mine. Unwanted pregnancies occur both in a marriage and outside a marriage, it can occur in people having sex on a first date or who have been "steady" for many years. Unwanted pregnancies has nothing to do with sex on a first date. It has to do with sex period. Even if you are married but are adamant you don't want a child yet, the only sure way to guarentee that is to not have sex. The failure of contraception has nothing to do with sex on the first date or even premarital sex.



Guys who score regularly are termed studs yet girls who score regularly are termed sluts, why? Can't women enjoy sex as much as a man does, or is the only moral reason for a woman having sex is to satisfy the needs of her husband? There are women who simply enjoy sex, why are they judged for it, when men are not. Besides who are any of us to judge another person in what they do when it doesn't affect us. And what evidence do you have that its only "gullible" and "credulous" girls that have sex on the first date? And why is it sacrificing? As long as the girl is aware of what she's going and is making her own decision, then I'd say good for her and I' would praise her for having the courage to do what she wants in the face of a society that judges her, when it is not their right to.

I would call a husband who cannot accept the fact that his wife has had multiple sex partners before him insecure, what would you call him? I would say the problem is with him rather then her, maybe he's afraid that since she has had other partners, she has a reference to know is he's good in bed or not, I call it the small penis syndrome. I'd say to him go buy a red Ferrari.

If a man has made a concious decision that he wants his wife to be a virgin on moral grounds, fair enough, but then he should also be prepared to remain a virgin until his wedding night. Are most men like this?

ken is the first woman you fu-ked your wife?

Yes, everybody is entitled to keep their opinion which could be: "agreed", "disagreed" or "neutral". Choose your stance. I opt for the second one and provide my own reasons. Did I say anything about sex must be after marriage? No. You already misjudge me on that point. Secondly, you talk about possibility of STD infected the virgin and even the married one. Mr Swingdoctor, you have dragged this a little too far. Please understand the meaning of the words: "Worth it". Is it worth it to have sex in the first date then infected with STD? Answer please. Is it worth to have sex in the first date and indeliberately getting pregnant? Answer please. The problem is in your understanding of the matter Mr swingdoctor. You repeatedly failed to appreciate the "worth". Unintended pregnancy for a married couple is way way too different from unintended pregnancy in a first date. This is logic, a knowledge that derived from ancient Greek philosophers. You cannot lump everything together from a biased and partial outlook sir. The flow of your argument may sound convincing but it completely lack coherence. STD caught in a first date is definitely dissimilar from STD infected by a married couples. By the way, most of the cases will only happen if one party or both parties, husband and wife engaged in sexual activity uncontrollably with others. This is outside the scope of this discussion.



No sane human being that walk on our lovely Mother Earth will allowed his wife to enjoy the sexual freedom that you advocated sir. Similarly, no woman worth the name will happily consented to her husband accumulating sexual partners. I dont know why you bring up this issue but if you feel ok, then I am speechless. Sexual enjoyment has nothing to do with unlimited sex for both gender. Be careful when you use the word "moral" because I may bring in the issues of "ethics" too. The attachment between a man and woman committed towards each other through love is as old as humanity itself. It's the deviation the norms that resulting in uncontrolled sexual freedom for both parties.

If I may bring in psychology, not the Freudian version. Try befriend someone who indulged in "sexual freedom" especially woman. If you have opportunity to assess her psychologically, ask her about her life, whether she is happy with it. Without any hesitation, 90% of them will give you this answer: NO. They are plenty of reasons for them resorting to such kind of "free life". Their deep conscience will resonate unhappiness, moodiness, and despair. Outwardly, they may seem to be a joyful person. Look, I am not a doctor but I have sufficient experience befriending someone like that more than once in my life.

Dont spew some crap opinion trying to act open-minded. It's just too hypocritical and insincere. People, in majority, do succumb in temptation in their life. That's understandable. My conclusion is that sex at the first date is like immature human succumb in temptation.

Humanity is but one family.

i would , but sex isnt everything. theres more to a person than having sex with them

You are entitled to your opinion but the reasonsoning behind your opinions are firstly judgemental and secondly simply wrong. You are still making an argument that sex on a first date leads to high risk or is a direct cause of STDs, this is crap. Show me what evidence you have that demonstrates that sex on a first date equates to a higher risk of STD's then sex at any other time. And sex on a first date does not lead a higher risk of pregnacies, where are you getting all this bull$hit information from? "Common sense"? Well your common sense is wrong. When you have sex with someone for the first time, unless you have asked your partner for a complete STD screen and considering that he or she has not had another partner in the last 3 months, your risk of contracting an STD is the same no matter if you're on your first date, third date or been together for 20 years. And the risk of contraception failing, again has no bearing if you're having sex on the first date, or even the first time. I am a doctor and I can tell you unplanned pregnancies more commonly occur in married couples then they do in unmarried couples. Sure married couples don't often seek an abortion while unmarried couples are more likely to, but this has nothing to do with first date sex and weather you think abortions is ok or not, is not in this discussion.

If you don't think its "worth" the risk of STD's, then don't have sex with a new partner, or at least insist on your new partner showing you the results of a recent STD screen as long as she has not had sex in the last 3 months, and this includes oral sex. And if you're paranoid about STD's if either of you have ever had cold sores, never practice oral sex. If you think its not "worth" the risk of unwanted pregnancies at whatever time in your life, then never have sex. First date, premarital, post marital whatever.

And that the hell logic are you getting at from "Ancient Greek Philosophers", no wonder your knowledge of pregnancies and STDs are based on social paranoias, rather then medical evidence. You get your medical advice from philosepehrs do you? And based on your logic from "Ancient Greek Philosopehers" please explain to me why an STD contracted on a first date is different to one contracted during marriage or any other time? Is Herpes less painful if you contract it during a marriage? Are you less likely to die from HIV if you contract it during a marriage? I would suggest that rather then listening to philosophers, you should speak to your doctor. Or do you think that once you get married, the STD that you had been carrying for years/ months whatever, is suddenly cured at the alter or is it that once you are married you can't transmit STD's any longer. You are using social stigmas as arguments rather then true medical facts.


When I have I advocated "sexual freedom" for wives? Everybody be it man, woman or child has responsibilities to others. However if an unmarried woman(or man) chooses to have sex on every first date, who does she have a responsibility to, her future husband, the one with the small penis syndrome? If your single next door neighbor be they man or woman chooses to have sex on every first date they go on, what business is it of yours or anybody elses? If they were married then yes they have a responsibility to their spouse, but if they were married, I would think that going on a first date would also be a problem regardless of if they had sex or not. Or are you saying that as long as your wife didn't have sex on the first date you would be happy for her to date other men?

And no you may not bring in Psychology into this debate, because from you "explanation" of "psychology" its obvious you don't know anything about it. I talk to people all the time about their sexuality and sexual experiences, its part of my job. Tell me how many people have you spoken to about their sexuality? Tell me what evidence do you have that 90% of women who experience "sexual freedom" are unhappy with their lives? And furthermore how do you know that the reason they are unhappy is because of their sexual freedom, or is this based on the logic of "Ancient Greek Philisophers"? Do some women sleep with men on a first date because of some deep undelying emotional problem, yes there are but to suggest that 90% of women who sleep with men on the first date do so beacuse of emotional issues is an insult to women and their sexuality. Go ahead, quote me one study that shows it, or we'll know who is the real one spouting crap on this forum.

And you can come to any conclusion you want, but I'll tell you this based on the arguments you have given here on on STD's and pregnancies, you conclusions are wrong. If you want to make an argument on morality and sex on the first date, go ahead, that has nothing to do with STD's and pregnancies, but my answer to you would be you are not in a position to place your morals on other people.

NO WAY!!!! That is so wrong and messed up , who do you think I am? A damn slut? Im not a hooker from a 3rd world country??? I'd never have sex n the first day. It takes 2 days until I can "get intimate" with someone.

I'm a Malaysian, and I wouldn't... Malaysia Boleh?

2 whole days huh? Damn you're definitely not a whore. Shoot you can be beatified as a saint.

Mr Swingdoctor, when did I say so? I said, "IF" a person caught STD or getting pregnant due to sex on the first date, that is not worth it. It's not about higher or lower risk, it's about first time mistake. Your medical explanation is not false, that's admissible. However, you lack logic. You fail again and again to differentiate between "first time" and "many times" worth. Should I provide you with another analogy? I think I should. Let's say that a person is a frequent blood donator. From medical point of view, there is always the risk of HIV infection when donating blood. If this person one day discovered that he is caught with the disease due to unhygenic and unsystematic preparation of medical equipment when donating blood, his response will be clearly different from someone who is infected with HIV in their first time donating blood experience. In short, first time accident and first time calamity is dissimilar. An army that is matryed or killed after participating in 10 battles is far too different from a soldier who get killed in his first assignment. I hope you can understand this. Do you know why is that only the male agreed and condone sex on first date but the female will mostly reluctant or disagreed? You know the answer yourself Mr Swingdoctor. Just do a survey and you will get definite unbiased reply. It's in your psychology, your physical buildup and thinking. Psychologically, men prefer the indulgence of women towards sexuality for their own selfish interest. Even if you put forward medical explanation to deny this obvious truth, most women are not vulnerable enough to display themselves in such an easy catch on the first date. It's the men that shout "give sexual freedom to women" bait and they thought that with this magical words, chances are that, more enjoyment for them. I am not damn wrong about this pal.



You dont even know the meaning and application of "Knowledge of Logic" but attempted to furnish strawman argument of medical refutes logic to me. If you dont apply logic in your study area, I doubt you can obtain medical qualification that enable you to practice as a doctor. But I believe that you are a doctor. You merely write so many conjecture about me, masking under medical knowledge. Of course HIV will eventually cause death married or not, first time or many times. This is not the contradiction. The disparity lies in the how easy or how hard you were infected with those diseases. You cant recognise the subtle differences. Ironically, there's always a link between STD or HIV with sexual indulgence. You know why people now talk and discuss about safe sex in Western and developed Asian countries like Japan? It's because only by restricting TOO MUCH sexual freedom of men and women that can curb this problem from its core. Traditionally saying, husband loyal to wife, vice versa. If a guy have sex with so many women, and the women have sex with so many guys, dont you know that this is one of the factor of STD? I mean medically speaking, if you are honest, admit this factual truth.

So far, I have utilized logics, morality and medical knowledge to defend my standpoint that sex at the first date is unsafe, immature and lead to "unworth" possible problem.

Humanity is but one family.

aiya why argue so much over this.....two wants it....let it be lor. Happens many times within the office mates.....dinner together then parties and end up in bed and realise it the next day and both says it was nice and till we meet again.....swingdoc.....at college happens many times right

What stupid logic are you spouting? If you have HIV, you have HIV, it doesn't matter weather you've contracted it through sex on the first date, the 20th date, the 20th time you have sex with that person or through blood transfusion. And the risk of HIV is the same whenever you start have sex with that person, be it the first date or the 20th date. And the risk is that same each time you have sex, assuming that you use condoms each time. And I'll tell you this in my experience people are more likely to use a condom on the first date then the 20th date. When a couple have been "dating", it generally gives them a false sense of security that they know the person and can trust them not to have an STD, when this is NOT TRUE. Tell me in your great logic of "worth", tell me how is the risk of sex on the first date different to sex for the first time on the 20th date? How do you get to "many times" sex without the "first time"?

I agree with you that it is USUALLY men who seek sex on the first date, but it doesn't mean that there are no women who enjoy casual sex. Less does not mean zero. And if you've never met a woman who is either regularly or occasionally happy to have sex on the first date, then I'd say to you you haven't been out enough. And please don't use faulty medical logic, to prove what is clearly a moral argument that you are making.



How stupid is your highlighted statement, you are talking about risk, fair enough but my question to you is this. How is your risk of contracting HIV different if you have sex on the first date or the 20th date. You are making the assumption that people who have sex on the first date have more sexual partners, this may or may not be true, but the number of partners you have is not the argument here is it. By definition an STD is related to sex and therefore sexual indulgence, but again this is not the point we are discussing is it? We are talking about sex on the first date, so please don't change the topic. There is no evidence that sex on a first date leads to higher risk of STD's. We are talking about sex on the first date, not how many partners one has. You are assuming that people who have sex on the first date are promiscious, this is not necessarily true. You further assume that there are no women who enjoy sex simply for the pleasure of it and those women who will have sex on the first date must either be drunk or be suffering from some kind of emotional issues. BULL$hit.

Let me tell you this, you have used morality, to defend your point of view yes, but your arguments with regard to logic and medical knowledge, is full of "holier then thou" attitude with ZERO medical evidence. You use limited medical knowledge to make moral assumptions, and you make statements with such authority never considering for one moment that your assumptions may be wrong. Worse thing is when someone with medical knowledge tells you you're wrong, you refuse to believe it still relying instead on your faulty assumptions based on "traditional" values rather then true medical evidence. Let me tell you this, the world is round and homosexuality is not a choice.


Ah Rico, I've never had sex on the first date, not true a lack of oppertunity mind you but, you can take the boy out of the church but you can't take the church out of the boy. Sometimes I wonder if that was to my detriment ha ha.

Hi Mr or Ms Swingdoctor



Some people get attracted to small children, that's Pedophilia. Some people willing to have sex with corpse, that's Necrophilia. This is sexual perversion, and you cannot dismiss morality in these cases. Of course the percentage is not zero, even in our discussion about this topic. Just because it's not zero does not mean that it's recommendable. Do you get it?



Please dont judge me with your faulty assumption. Your presumptuous attitude is amazing. My advice is, give up, you wont be able to assess my psychology.



So you are against moral argument? Be careful with your words, that may put pedophilia and necrophilia under your permissible list. If you think that my moral argument which is supported by medical knowledge is flawed, then, solve this problem for me: 1. What do you think of a husband who find a girlfriend and have sex with her at the first date? 2. What do you think of a wife who find boyfriend and have sex with him at the first date? 3. What do you think of a single guy or girl who regularly have sex with anyone at the first date?



You dont understand it, do you? A person who regularly have sex at every first date will have higher risk of getting HIV than those who dont do so. Period.

Man oh Man, dont blame me if I doubt about your doctorate. The risk of HIV is higher for those who practice sex at the first date on a frequent basis. You know why HIV never infected a married couple who are loyal to each other? Answer it yourself. This is not "holier than thou" attitude. It's attested by facts and again.... LOGIC. It's sad that you know and apply too little of this ancient Greek knowledge.



It's not stupid if you analyze it from, again.... LOGICAL side. When I say "how easy" or "how hard" to contact with HIV, it means that the practitioner of sex in the first date will bear higher risk vis a vis the non-practitioner of sex in the first date. In order to avoid further confusion, let me elaborate with analogy, a person who keep having sex at every opportunity in the first date with different girls is DISSIMILAR from someone who have sex only with his first date lover. Cant you detect the difference? Then higher risk of HIV is for those who keep changing girls and dates many girls at the same time. Do I make myself clear Mr/Ms Swingdoctor? Again.... this is Logic. Not everybody can bear this ancient Greek science and applied in daily life.



Nope, I am not deviating from the original topic. Again.... Logic tells us that a person indulge in sex at the first date will resume this behavior repetitively and become opportunist. Who the hell in the world that does not want "free lunch"? Renowned Psychiatrists and Psychologists will agree with me, aint it?



You see, again.... Logic, this holy knowledge is absent from each and every statement you spewed. A person who have sex at the first date will highly likely to repeat similar behavior at every date. Earlier in your post, you said that the meaning of the word "date" is not restricted to lover, which means, this leave room for expansion, my friend. A person can have many "dates" with many girls and if he involved with each and every one of them, there's higher risk of STD. Again... the knowledge of ancient Greek saves you. Logic is very powerful indeed.



I was sharing with you my experience, you have every right to disagree with me. But you interpolated my remark a little bit, I didnt say this: "You further assume that there are no women who enjoy sex simply for the pleasure" Your level of assumption is tremendous. Of course sex is for pleasure. The discrepancy lies in whether the pleasure is real one or fake one. Perhaps, your further research will reveal new results. I said that a women who like to have sex with any guy she happened to date with is abnormal. If she dates with 10 or 20 guys, that means 20 times of sex at the first date. Consequently, she will suffer higher risk of HIV or STD. Again.... this is Logic with medical assistance too.

You said:"BULL$hit."

Relax, be calm. Peace to all, hatred to none. It takes time to cultivate LOGIC in one's daily life.

You said:"Let me tell you this, you have used morality, to defend your point of view yes, but your arguments with regard to logic and medical knowledge, is full of "holier then thou" attitude with ZERO medical evidence. You use limited medical knowledge to make moral assumptions, and you make statements with such authority never considering for one moment that your assumptions may be wrong. Worse thing is when someone with medical knowledge tells you you're wrong, you refuse to believe it still relying instead on your faulty assumptions based on "traditional" values rather then true medical evidence."

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" To quote Voltaire and Beatrice Hall. Heard of them? I guess so. How do you categorized as "traditional" vis a vis "modernity"? It's because you assume that I am forwarding moral argument in bias way, but does that make me "traditional"? Do you mean that the advocate of Safe Sex campaign are all traditionalists? You maybe a doctor, or psychologist or whatever expert of rocket science. On the contrary, you are trying to eliminate moral values utilizing your twisted medical knowledge. This is bigotry. Then, you assume things too much, perhaps, you are a psychologist( my apology for assumption, imitating the expert here).

You said:"Let me tell you this, the world is round and homosexuality is not a choice."

Whether homosexuality is genetic or choice, that's debatable nowadays. Each sides has its own strength and weakness argument. That's irrelevant to this topic though.

Humanity is but one family.

Can :P

FYI in some societies, pedophillia is widely accepted and its not against the law. However in Singapore both pedophilia and necrophilia(and you don't have to explain to me what this is) are illegal, while first date sex is not. And you've made the point exactly, to you "first date sex" is a sexual perversion, you equate it to pedophilia and necrophilia, while the rest of us don't. Just because you are narrow minded, does not give you the right to criticise others or expect others to believe in your social conservatism. Again, grow up.

WRT less does not mean zero, what has that got to do with being "recommendable", beside to whom should it be "recommendable" by? You? Someone who equates "first date sex" as a sexual peversion? And in context, you were arguing that because more women are less accepting of first date sex then men, therefore it is not in the makeup of women to enjoy first date sex, unless there was something wrong with them. What utter bull$hit. Even if fewer women then men practice first date sex, so what, why does it mean there is somehting wrong with them?

I don't give a rats arse about your psychology, but I condemn your so called use of "logic" to back up faulty "medical evidence" and try to pass it on as scientific fact, when all you're doing is judging other people with your own conservative views.


I'm not against a moral argument, make it I don't care, but don't pass it on as scientific fact because it is not. And when we talk about first date sex we assume both parties are single. If a husband or wife had "first date sex" the issue would not be first date sex but simply sex. If my wife had sex with another man the issue would for me would not be if it was on the first date but the fact that she had sex with someone else. Based on your argument it seems to me that you wouldn't have a problem with your wife having sex with other men as long as it wasn't on the first date because its morally wrong/"medical logic" whatever.


With point 3 you are assuming that people who have had sex on the first date do so all the time. This is not true. Just because someone has had sex on the first date does not mean that they always want to have sex on the first date. STD's and pregnancies has to do mainly with unprotected sex and secondly with the number of partners you have had, not on what date you had sex with them. You are making an assumption(or based on "Greek philisephers logic") that the people who have had sex on the first date have had more partners and this is NOT TRUE. First and foremost the main cause of STD's is the lack of use of condoms, a very distant second is the number of partners that you have, when you have sex with them is irrelevant.

So if you are concerned about the spread of STDs encourage people to USE CONDOMS. Also before commencing a sexual relationship, get them to do an STD screen. Finally, and this point is very minor compared to the 2 already mentioned, is to limit your sexual partners. Telling people not to have sex on the first date as a means to control STD's is laughable.


Yes but not because they have sex on the first date but becasue they have had multiple partners, when will you ever understand this. If 2 men have had the same number of partners their risk of HIV is the same regardless of if sex was on the first date or later on. So if a man has had 5 sexual partners all with a sexual relationship starting on the the first date, his risk of HIV is the same as a man who has had 5 wives, all of whom he waited untill after marriage to consumate the relationship.


Again, the risk of STDs is not when you had sex, but how many partners you had sex with. If you're in a monogomus relationship, it doesn't matter if you're married or not, your risk of contracting HIV is the same, but then again married couples don't go on first dates do they? So, its a mute point you are making. If you want to make the argument that one way to control HIV is to wait until you are married before having sex, and only have one partner through your life then fair enough, I would say that its a good point to make, however unrealistic it is. But this is very different from a medical point of view then saying, if you don't have sex on the first date you will reduce your risk of contracting HIV, this is bull$hit, so someone will have sex on the second date and think they are safer?



Yes and the difference is in multiple partners NOT with fact that it is on the first date, you are making arguments against yourself LOL. Trust me the Greeks were not this stupid, so don't equate your logic to the Greeks LOL.



Really show me any study which shows this and please quote me which renowned psychologist/psychologist agrees with you, come on just one, or are you just bull$hitting thinking that by saying something so rediculous it gives your argument more credit. Please don't insult me, I'm not stupid. Come on, just one psychologist or psychiatrist, they don't even have to be "remowned" haha.



Show me any study that demonstrates clearly that people who have had sex on a first date have a significanly higher number of sexual partners. Logic is nothing, I want cold hard facts. Ancient Greeks thought it "logical" that the world was flat. Again higher risk of STD's is related to the number of partners, not when you have sex. You ASSUME that people who have had sex on the first date have had more partners. In the medical field we don't assume, we deal with fact.



Firstly just because a woman is happy to have sex with one guy on the first date does not mean she is happy to have sex with every guy on the first date. And how do you know if the pleasure is real or not. Tell me how many women you have spoken to in this detail, unless you are a counsellor, I'd say few to none. And if you are a counsellor, then you are seeing people with emotional issues which is not a representation of the general public is it?


Nobody has a right to do or say anthing they want, if we did there would be anarchy. As a Singaporean you should know this better then most other people, there is no such thing as complete freedom. Having said that you have a right to say what you want, just as I have a right to be critical of your reasoning if I think its flawed, which it is. I never said you were forwarding a moral argument in a biased way, show me where I have. What I have been consistently saying is that you are trying to disguise a moral argument as a scientific one. None of your so called "logic" is based on medical fact. You are good at quoting Philosopy, and this may be your strength but science is definitely not, stick to Philosopy. People like you make my job harder by spreading false information. Again like I've said, make a moral argument if you have to, you won't have me being critical of you, but don't try to make it seem like its a medical/scientific fact, which it is not. And if you do make a moral argument, do not be critical of other nor expect other people to agree with you because it is not your place to make people accept your moral point of view.



See you are a conservative which was the point I was making, you still believe that homosexuality is still a choice. Is this based on "sound Greek logic" or medical facts?

The permission of pedophilia in some societies does not make the practice as ethical or even moral. It may well be accepted within the context of cultural norms of the said societies within a set of boundary or limited at that time period. Singapore outlawing pedophilia and necrophilia while licensing first sex date does not point out that first date sex to be ethically justified forever. People with the likes of you will appear in the future to defend even incest, utilizing your own manipulated prejudiced medical knowledge. When I disagree with first date sex, I disagreed with incest, I disagreed pedophilia or necrophilia, it does not signify that I am conservative. As far as medical knowledge is concern, your stance is rigidly materialistic.

When I said that majority of those (guys the most) who practiced first date sex will be consistently repetitive in their behavior, I am not spreading false information. This is innate natural tendency of human in which your flawed medical knowledge failed to explain or shedding light. Consequently, when the practice become acceptable in the society, there's risk of STD. You ignore the result, focusing on my alleged conservatism. Wise people always try to "think out of the box", limited medical knowledge coated with materialism is not a what a wise doctor will advocate. Since I believe that sex at the first date will induce humanity towards further indulgence, your disbelief is understandable.

Would you like your very own daughter to involve in sex at the first date? Please provide an honest answer. If your answer is positive, I have no further argument with you Mr Swingdoctor.



In what world are you living Mr Swing? Yes, people who are accustomed to do sex at every first date with DIFFERENT GIRLS will normally exercise their "medical given right" sanctioned by you. It's doctor or psychologist like you that will misled the society with your twisted agenda. Even with CONDOMS, changing sex partner as easy as changing clothes will have higher risk of STD. You are denying the obvious phenomenon that occur in the present society. My assumption is not wrong, in fact, it's the very truth. If a person never have sex at the first date, why should he does it on the next date with different girls? Similarly, a person who crave for sex even at the first date will definitely resuming the perverted behavior. Why is it hard for you to comprehend this subtleties?



The laugh is on you. Tell that to your sons or daughter, allowing them to practice sex uncontrollably, but don't forget to use CONDOM. You never failed to surprise me Mr Swing. The advice should be: " My son/daughter, please keep away from sex indiscriminately with anyone you happen to date with, exercise caution, don't just have sex at your first date with someone you are not acquainted with, there's a risk of STD." Anything wrong with this advice?

As for the rest of your post, our point of disagreement is in the multiplicity of partner. I strongly believe those human who like to have sex with any Tom, d!ck and Harry at the first date will continue doing so while you disbelieve so. By the way, I do not differentiate between a person having 20 sexual partners or 20 wives. According to the Guiness World Book record, the King Mongkut of ancient Thai had around 9,000 sexual partners, he died due to syphilis.


By all means marry. If you get a good wife you will become happy, and if you get a bad one you will become a philosopher.
--Socrates (470-399 B.C.)

Never trust the advice of a man in difficulties.
--Aesop

Humanity is but one family.

What a load of bull$hit. FYI I abhor pedophilia, having said that less then 100 years ago in Singapore it was common practice for girls to be married by the age of 15 and having kids. Times change and morality changes. Today, as paedophillia is no longer morally acceptable, first date sex is. Yes, there are people like you who still feel that it is not acceptable, and fair enough, you are entitled to express your moral point of view. However, it is not acceptable that you judge other people that you don't even know. It is also not acceptable that you use faulty medical "facts" to justify what is obviously a MORAL ARGUMENT, which mind you, you have just agreed. You need to accept that not everybody shares your moral point of view and this does not make them wrong. It is my job to deal only with medical facts and not to allow my moral point of view to affect my judgement, I suggest you learn the same thing. How is my stance materialistic BTW? And you are a conservative, there's nothing wrong with that as long as you don't judge other people with your views.


Although there will be the odd person who will bonk anyone they come across, not everyone who has practiced first date sex will sleep with anyone on the first date. Show me any proof of this. Come on you said and I quote "renowned psychologists and psychiatrists" will agree with you, come on tell me which one. The truth is this while is your point of view, there is no study to back you up, nor is there anyone with any form of psychology training who will agree with you.



I would encourage my son or daughter, not to be pressured into sex. I would advise them that to me sex is sacred, and it should be practiced by people who truly care for each other. I would also advice them that in my opinion sexual compatibility is as important as other forms of compatibility in a marriage and to "try before you buy". However, if they did have sex on the first date I would not judge them for it, as long as they were not taken advantage of nor were they taking advantage of someone else. And it wouldn't matter if it was my son or my daughter, would it to you?



Your assumption is wrong and therefore so is the basis of your whole argument. So show me one study or the advice of one "renowned psychologist/psychiatrist" that agrees with you. I have counseled people who have had first date sex, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that it doesn't happen all they time, now if you choose not to believe me even though it comes "from the horses mouth", well that is your perogative but, please stop spoutting bull$hit about something you clearly know very little about.



Show me where I have condoned having sex uncontrollably or indiscriminately? What I would say to my children is everytime you have sex for the first time with someone, make sure you use a condom no matter how well you think you know them. If you are thinking of taking the condom off, make sure the both of you have an STD screen beforehand. However, as my child, it is my absolute responsibility to instill in them what I would consider my moral values. It is not my responsibility to be the moral police of the whole community. I accept that not everyone will agree with my moral point of view. Something I think you need to learn.



So, maybe he didn't practice safe sex. And again, you still haven't proved that people who have had sex on the first date, do it all the time.


Why do you keep posting something as stupid as this, are you trying to show off? Do you actually read something before you actually post it? You do realise that I know you fancy yourself as some sort of a philosopher. Are you trying to tell me something about your relationship with your wife?

Hold on right there, Mr/Ms swing. Don't get carried away, calm yourself. Maybe you should read this book: Unhooked: How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love and Lose At Both. by Laura Sessions Stepps. I draw a thin line between medical and moral argument while you eliminate any moral implication in your profession. There should be common ground in this and if you really open your eyes observing the present world, the Safe Sex Campaign spearheaded by many modern organizations in advanced nations is my benchmark about the potential risk of First Date Sex. Get it?

Read the article in this link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,437244,00.html , Dr Dr. Yvonne Kristín Fulbright, a sex educator, discussed about the first date sex. Her research pointed out the fact that First Date Sex has more negative impact rather than positive one. Do you think that she is applying her personal moral judgment interfering her study? I guess no. Check this link too, http://www.sexualitysource.com/. Since you challenge me to produce a single study to back up my stance, I will comply to your request. Be patient my online friend.

Apparently, we are discussing about First Sex Date, either the act occur accidentally or deliberately is not of prime importance. You may check this link: http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=12523 . Some studies considered that First Date Sex can be categorized as Date Rape if a single party is unaware or not really consensual to have sex except being in sober and drunk mood. Read here:http://www.answerology.com/index.aspx/question/2597804_Sex-on-the-First-Date-with-a-twist.html with regards of the response on this issues. Most of the girls shun from doing it, then, of course, exceptions are there to balance this universe.

Now is the time to debunk your whole twisted agenda. As I said, I will rally support from renowned medical practitioners, here it goes:

Polizzotto MJ. Prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. Clin Fam Pract. 2005; 7(1): 1-12.

Cohn SE. Sexually transmitted diseases, HIV, and AIDS in women. Med Clin North Am. 2003; 87(5): 971-995.

Greydanus DE. Contraception for college students. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2005; 52(1): 135-161, ix.


You check this link for summary of their ideas: http://healthguide.howstuffworks.com/safe-sex-dictionary.htm

Pay attention to this point: "Know your partner. Before having sex, first establish a committed relationship that allows trust and open communication. You should be able to discuss past sexual histories, any previous STDs or IV drug use."

Agreed? Now is the time to slam dunk your so called arguments. You said that there's no evidence for someone who practice First Date Sex to repeat their behavior? Wrong, totally wrong. Read here: http://www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/what-do-you-think-about-sex-on-a-first-date. Please read carefully each and every comment, most of those who agreed will likely resume this behavior as they see no problem with it. There is no flaw in my point, I am retrieving secret human nature. Any opinion my respected doctor?

Read this journal: Kaestle CE et al., Young age at first sexual intercourse and sexually transmitted infections in adolescents and young adults, American Journal of Epidemiology, 2005, 161(8):774-780., it purported:

"Early initiation of sexual intercourse is associated with an increased likelihood of STD infection among teenagers and young adults overall, but the magnitude and strength of the association vary by current age, according to findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (also called Add Health) (1) In analyses of data on respondents who provided urine samples for STD testing in Wave 3 of the survey, teenagers who had first had intercourse at an early age were more likely than their peers who had waited to test positive."



Don't judge me my friend. I slam dunk all your bogus points and my obsession with Greek logic has nothing to do with being a philosopher or relationship with my wife. The quote from Socrates is not stupid, the folly is in your comprehension.

To completely refute your weak argument, read this article here: http://www.helium.com/items/168579-sex-on-the-first-date Do not hold onto an infirm string , it will break and cause you to drown.

Humanity is but one family.

Ken, your responses again are so stupid, how long did you spend on the internet chasing something that you didn't find. Again of all the websites you have made references to, it seems you didn't understand any them and what they were saying. You have tunnel vision and SELECTIVELY take what you want from them, to suit your arguments. You have formed an opinion regardless of the evidence before you and you selectively pick your points to biasly to back up your argument. Lets go through your references one by one shall we.


http://www.sexualitysource.com/ this is Dr. Yvonne Kristín Fulbright website, it introduces her and her credentials and also provides links to her articles.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,437244,00.html this is one of her articles, did you actually read it? I guess not because no where does it say in the article that first date sex leads to higher rates of STD's nor does it say that people who have sex on the first date do so all the time. Infact she infers that people who have had sex on the first date don't do it all the time. The article just covers the issues associated with first date sex. In fact she goes on to say and I quote

"Some people can pull off sex on the first date. I know couples who have gone on to fall madly in love with each other for the long-term." And she is talking about long term relationships as the goal while we are not. We're simply talking about first date sex. So your own quoted article debunks your own arguments. Stupid no? Did you not read the whole article? Did you not understand it? Or did you think I would not read it?

And this is the whole summary of her article and I quote again
"So given all of the headaches sex on the first date can create, how long should you wait?
This is a very personal question — based on your values, age, experiences, and wants, such as the type of relationship you need, and a host of other factors."

Like you she makes many moral arguments but unlike you, she doesn't disguise it with flawed medical evidence, nor does she project her moral values on to other people.

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=12523 This talks about date rape and we are talking about consensual sex, and although the line can sometimes be blurred by "pressure" and "drugs", in all my arguments I have argued repeatedly that both parties are willing participants without pressure being put on them. This article does not mention STD's in relation to first dates.

http://www.answerology.com/index.aspx/ques...th-a-twist.html This is just a chat room discussing sex on a first date with the focus being the opinions of women, some say they will and some say they won't, so? Some go even further by saying that each to their own, and wouldn't judge girls who do, unlike you. No mention of medical facts of STD's related to sex on the first date, or that girls who have sex on the first date do it all the time.

http://www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/w...on-a-first-date Yes there is one girl that has regularly had sex on the first date and this is what she says and I quote "All the guys I had sex with on a first date asked me to be exclusive-committed with them", which shows that even she does not have sex on every first date. Again debunking your arguments. Even so I have said there are people who regularly have sex on the first date, this one example though is far from proving that all people who have had sex on a first date do so all the time or even regularly. Furthermore, in the blog other people give their own views of first date sex, most who admit having had sex on the first date admit they did not do so every time, debunking your own arguments. Are you stupid or what?

These are some of the responses
jafabrit
neither agree nor disagree. It is a personal decision for others to make and depending on the circumstances and the personalties involved can work out or not

RTBjr73
Gonna have to agree with Alex on this one. Back in my dating days, I can not remember ever having sex on the first date. But my wife and I had sex on the first date (and still are going on 7 years).

For us, it was chemistry

alexmcone
I dont mind having sex on the first date. I dont mind not having it either. It all boils down to how well the date goes. If there's irresistible chemistry then you're bound to have sex

Your own posts debunk your own arguments. Do you only read what you want to see?

http://healthguide.howstuffworks.com/safe-sex-dictionary.htm again you selectively post. It says get to know your partner, yes but it also says use condoms as the main preventer of STD's. Let me tell you something, people lie, I have seen many patients where they thought they knew their partner and had sex without a condom after knowing their partner for a while, and their partners lied to them and they ended up with an STD. As I have said, the most important thing in the prevention of STD's is using condoms and getting an STD screen before starting a sexual relationship, EXACTLY WHAT THE ARTICLE ARGUES. So the article you posted confirms I am right.


"Early initiation of sexual intercourse is associated with an increased likelihood of STD infection among teenagers and young adults overall, but the magnitude and strength of the association vary by current age, according to findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (also called Add Health) (1) In analyses of data on respondents who provided urine samples for STD testing in Wave 3 of the survey, teenagers who had first had intercourse at an early age were more likely than their peers who had waited to test positive."

Fair enough, I do agree with this article because young children often have an "it won't happen to me" attitude and secondly, they don't have the knowledge in how to prevent an STD. So this article makes an argument for Sex Ed at an early age. No where does it make a comment that first date sex is related to a higher risk of STD's.

http://www.helium.com/items/168579-sex-on-the-first-date This is an article about not having sex on the first date. It makes a moral argument, fair enough, I don't have a problem with that but unlike you he hasn't tried to hide his moral arguments behind faulty medical facts or stupid Greek logic. Neither does he attempt to project his moral views on to other people. And further more the author of the article, Allen Teal is a Pastor, what other stand is he going to take? Ha ha, you make me laugh, you are so stupid.

In terms of the books you give as references, you haven't actually made any specific references to the points they were making, so I await what you have to say on them.

In summary though, rather then debunking my arguments, the articles you have provided, debunk your own arguments and support mine, which leaves me to assume either

1. You think I'm stupid and wouldn't read the articles you posted
2. You are stupid because you didn't read the articles properly or assuming that I wouldn't read them properly
3. You are biased when you read articles, selecting only what you want to read rather then keeping an open mind and getting the true gist of the articles.

You like quotes don't you well why don't you read up what Sir Arthur Conan Doyle said about evidence and opinions.

Finally if the quote from Socrates was not stupid, please tell me why, what point were you trying to make? Because from where I'm seating, its decidedly stupid and very funny. Unless of course you don't consider yourself a philosopher, which goes against all the evidence from your posts, you know, trying to impress us with all your quotes. BTW I haven't been impressed as yet, I get more impressed by a persons substance rather then his attempts at showing off. Ha ha.

SG girls aren't that innocent it seems:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5o5xJXihRY

So do you. You are being selective too. We are not world's apart, right? Both of us want to strengthen our own arguments and being selective in doing so. What's the difference?



What's your goal then? Pure pleasure? She touched upon First Date Sex and obviously forming an opinion of negativity rather than advocating it, I quoted her to strengthen my point, anything wrong with it?

Here's one more article for you: http://en.allexperts.com/q/First-Date-851/2008/8/Sex-First-Date-2.htm .

This is another article for your consumption: http://datingmingle.com/dating/Having-Sex-On-The-First-Date.html

Earlier, you challenge me to bring forward any scholarly support as to my detestation of First Sex Date, I present to you articles and comments from expert of the sexual matter. Since you already have preconceived notion about First Date Sex, being favorable in your stance, disbelieve that it will induce higher risk of STD, you tried deathly hard to maintain this position even if the evidence I showed proved to the contrary. Your belittling me in every post merely on the ground that you assume I am not as educated as you is very startling. A sad case indeed.



See! You are shooting at your own feet. You conveniently being SELECTIVE in quoting those favorable responses, neglecting those who disagree with your stance. Now you dare to accuse me of bias? What a joke, man. If you read my post, I said that "Exceptions are always there to balance this universe".

Read this: http://www.thirdage.com/dating/he-says-she-says-sex-on-the-first-date, pay attention to this statement: "Remember that sex on the first date has no meaning, will leave you feeling empty, and is too dangerous. Avoid it." Tom Blake said so. He is a moralist according to you and exempted from your trusted lists, right? Another medical joke?

My second phase of debunking your argument commence now.

http://www.onlinedatingmagazine.com/news2007/womenonlinedatersrisky.html

"Paige M. Padgett, Ph.D., and published in the June 2007 issue of the journal. The name of the study is Personal Safety and Sexual Safety for Women Using Online Personal Ads.

While the 30% of women having sex on the first date may surprise people, even more shocking is that out of that number, 77% of them didn't use any protection during the sexual encounters. Some online dating services make it easy for people to meet up for sexual encounters by offering "Intimate" or "Erotic" services to members.

"Risky behaviour like this, from both males and females, is contributing to the dramatic rise of sexually trasmitted diseases," says Joe Tracy, Publisher of Online Dating Magazine. "

I quote to emphasize the fact that First Sex Date still lead to higher risk of STD unless you want to disagree with Paige M. Padgett and Joe Tracy. Perhaps, you are the ultimate medical perfection and your opinion is a standard and superior benchmark.

Here's a study conducted: http://www.examiner.com/x-19354-Boston-Dating-Advice-Examiner~y2009m9d23-First-date-sex-he-saidshe-said, this article is very fair, favorable and opposing views are listed. However, the position of the author is clearly on the negative side as substantiated by this:"Commitment issues. Having sex on the first date leads to suspicion regarding faithfulness and trust. Yes, you’re being judged by hypocritical standards, but many people connect the dots between hot sex and infidelity." But you may quote other sentences that suit your agenda though.

Mr Doctor, by keep insulting me with abusive and vituperative words such as "stupid" will not resolve your own dilemma. What if the First Date Sex turn out to be having sex with other people's husband or wife? Do you think most people out there are saints? In a first date, how well do you know about your partner? 3 or 4 hours of interaction and the outcome is sex? It's not even morality issue, it's common sense that there's risk of indulging in this temporary pleasure. I may not be a rocket scientist but my arguments are researched well by reasonable doctors and most of them admit the risk. Please avoid stubbornness and admit defeat.

Okay, the slam dunk phase 2 commence.

Here's a thought from Amelia McDonell Parry: http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-thoughts-from-guys-on-our-im-first-date-sex/ . After years of experience, she comes to the conclusion that First Date Sex is not good.

Please read this article minutely with sound mind and judgment. It's very good and educative.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1192999/Rowan-Pellings-sex-advice-column-Im-happy-sex-date-Is-relationships-last.html

The author assess the issue psychologically. I enjoyed it and it strengthen my point instead of yours unless you are prejudice.

The problem with you is that you already pass judgment on me and seek to downgrade my whole idea. You thought that I cannot bring forward any doctors or psychologists to defend my position, I hate to disappoint you, pal. Maybe it's because you agree with this guy's opinion about First Date Sex:http://www.yourtango.com/20099328/say-yes-to-first-date-sex-a-guys-opinion Laugh now.

There is no benefit in First Date Sex as proven by this: http://www.thedatingtipsmagazine.com/dating-sex/5-reasons-why-having-sex-on-the-first-date-is-a-bad-idea.html

I have yet to find a single quotation or narration to prove the benefit of First Date Sex from any renowned or famous doctors in the world, either in medical or moral perspective. Show me one study to attest to this. The only one who support First Sex Date are anonymous sex craved males and a few females who are indulgence in sexuality and most probably consume Ecstasy or alcoholic. Sound tough and unfair? That's the truth pal.

So far, I have debunked your points, slam dunked your arguments and somersault your agenda.


Humanity is but one family.


"A dog can be appeased with food, a man can be bribed with money, but nobody can cheat a Wolf from Mibu." (Saito Hajime)

An addendum to the above post:

5 Reasons Why Having Sex On The First Date Is A Bad Idea


ImageIt happens so often. You meet someone, you have great conversation and you connect completely. They know you so well. It's like you were made for each other. They are so beautiful and nice. Before the night is out, you find yourself in an intimate moment with this person. You kiss, you touch and then you have sex. You exchange after-sex pleasantries and then go on your way. The next day you think about what happened the day before, but you aren't filled with feelings of love or joy. You are filled with questions. Did you do the right thing? Will you see this person again? You ask yourself what you were thinking? Did the person have a disease? Having sex on the first date is something many people decide to do and even more people regret. So what are some reasons that having sex on the first date is a bad idea?



* By Allowing Yourself To Be In An Intimate Setting With A Person You Just Met, You Place Yourself At Risk Of Being Hurt Physically
People never think about getting hurt by someone they just met, but when you place yourself in a very intimate setting with someone you don't know, you run the risk of all kinds of things happening to you. One pill in a drink and you can often be coerced into things you might never normally do. You don't know the person you are with so you can't tell what will or won't happen. Men and women have been assaulted all because they have placed themselves in situations with people they just didn't know on a first date.

* By Allowing Yourself To Be In An Intimate Setting With A Person You Just Met, You Place Yourself At Risk Of Being Robbed
Most men and women never think about being robbed this way, yet so many are everyday. You meet someone and go to a hotel. When you wake up, the person is gone and so is your money and credit cards. It happens everyday. People are often so ashamed that they don't report it to the police. In fact, in many cases they knew so little about the person they were with that they couldn't tell the police much anyway. This could happen to anyone, including you.

* Even Though You Have Already Had Sex, Rarely Does A Serious Relationship Develop With The Other Person
You may have been looking at your date with your mate-potential-meter. When you have sex on the first date, that goes right out the window. Rarely does a first night sex-fest end in happily ever after. There is a stigma attached to a people who have sex on the first date. Even the person you had sex with classifies you in a certain way. Women are considered easy and men are considered to be whores. Again, the person you had sex with likely doesn't see themselves this way. They do, however, see YOU this way. If you are trying to create a lasting relationship, skip the first date sex. If the person is a good person, they will be worth the wait.

* You Aren't A Bad Person, Yet Every Part Of You Feels Bad
The problem with doing things that are against our core values is that we feel bad about it deep inside even if we don't want to feel bad. You have to be true to yourself when it comes to doing what you want, however, you need to be honest with yourself about what you feel about what you have done. Know that you aren't a bad person. However, you have made a very questionable choice. It's up to you to not make that choice again.

* You Don't Know If The Person You Are Having Sex With Has An STD
This is a serious issue. A lot of people think that if a condom is used they are protected. Wrong! There are many diseases that a condom won't protect you from. Genital warts, herpes, scabies and crabs are all STDs that you can get even with a condom. Genital warts and herpes cannot be cured. Is this really what you want for yourself? Is it worth it?

Let's be clear about something. If you just want to have sex with someone, then do what you want. If you are looking for a serious relationship or someone to date seriously, know that you will never find it by having sex with someone on the first date. Not only do you devalue yourself in the eyes of the person you are dating, you also expose yourself to things you may not be able to get rid of. It's not safe, but it is your choice. Ladies, it may sound completely sexist, but men will have a great night of sex with you and then never call you again because they think of you as too easy. They think if you are giving it up so easy to them, you probably do that regularly or would do it again. There is also the chase factor. Most men love a challenge deep down on the inside. They want to feel like they earned something. Like they won the prize. When you give it up so easy, you take away the chase factor. They can't hunt you like they wanted to. Instead, they get some easy sex and the opportunity to go find their challenge elsewhere. Men will almost never take you seriously if they get to have sex with you the first time you go out on a date. Men, you aren't exempt from consequence. When you have sex with a woman on the first date, women look at you as a whore. You are someone not to be trusted.
The bottom line is that we have to make sure that we not only do what we want to, we have to make sure that we are willing to accept the consequences associated with our actions. Having sex on the first date isn't the best idea, but it also isn't the end of the world. If you want a serious relationship, take your time and get to know the person you want to be with. That means avoiding sex until you are sure that you and your partner know each other and you are sure that you are ready.

Written By Kila Morton



Mathematicians' guide to first-date etiquette

If only Bridget Jones had listened to the received wisdom that it is best not to sleep with a man on the first date, she might have saved herself a lot of heartache.

Now mathematicians have proved what women have been counselling their friends for years: a woman increases her chances of getting a "good" man by not sleeping with a partner straight away. They used a numerical model to show that better partners were willing to date for a longer time before having sex, but "bad" men were more reluctant to hang around.

Professor Robert Seymour, of University College London, said: "Longer courtship is a way for the female to acquire information about the male. By delaying mating, the female is able to reduce the chance she will mate with a bad male. A male's willingness to court for a long time is a signal that he is likely to be a good male.

"Long courtship is a price paid for increasing the chance that mating, if it occurs, will be a harmonious match which benefits both sexes. This may help to explain the commonly held belief that a woman is best advised not to sleep with a man on a first date."The research is published in this month's Journal of Theoretical Biology. Dr Peter Sozou, of Warwick Medical School and the LSE Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, said: "The strategic problem a female faces is how to screen out bad males, and this is where long courtship comes into play. A male is assumed to always want to mate with a female, but a good male is more willing to pay the cost of a long courtship to claim the prize of mating."

He added: "The female's strategy is a compromise, a trade-off."

There is, apparently, a way to avoid the chances of picking a dud man altogether, but it might not be an answer many women want to hear. Dr Sozou said: "She cannot eliminate this risk completely unless she decides never to mate."

Article derived from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/mathematicians-guide-to-firstdate-etiquette-1418240.html


The website is unstable, thus, I copied before the article is forever lost. Read this Mr/Ms Swing and stop defending the indefensible. Recognize good as good, bad as bad. Call a spade a spade. I am not imposing my idea on everyone.


Humanity is but one family.

"Ak, Sok, Zan, these are my motivations to fight." (Saito Hajime)

Is the matter of When not Would.