Women - What are you feelings about "giving away the milk for free".

[OldFatGuy]

At our age, all the good ones are taken.

For every available beautiful woman out there, you can find a man who got tired of her. And vice versa.

 

[OldFatGuy]

I was lucky, I figured them out long ago.

They want someone who projects financial power and status.

It's pretty straight forward.

Like shoots ducks in a barrel.

You're a better man than I, Gunga Din.

 

[Omega Man]

Ok, pal. You said a lot of stuff here, most of it wrong. I sincerely hope you feel better after saying it though.

Everything I've said is based directly upon the information you have freely given.


OM

 

[SDET]

The title "Vai Malandra" does not translate as "You go slut." "Malandra" is not "slut." In Brazilian Portuguese, the jargon for "slut" would be "galinha" or "piranha." "Malandra" is rather "trickster" as a jargon, originally negative but lately acquiring a positive connotation of a street-wise person. The original meaning of "malandra" is a lazy person who doesn't like to work, in literal translation (the traditional, dictionary meaning of the word, minus the jargon aspect). The "trickster" connotation is not a sexual one, and doesn't involve promiscuity.

Here, some dictionary definitions:

Significado de Malandra

1.Aquela que gosta de viver de modo boêmio, sem trabalhar, na malandragem.
2.Pessoa que age com esperteza, astúcia, malícia; esperta.

Interesting. That one is easy to get mixed up. Many of the Brazilians chicks I have known let you get away with call them anything you want. I have been speaking Portuguese for 30 years and that's an interesting subtlety. I have yet to understand their shamelessness (in a good way). I am very careful, have ALWAYS been able to use Brazil as a sexual funhouse and have never been attacked by a criminal other than getting $26 of my small bill money finessed out of my pocket on a bus. There's no need to engage in explicit prostitution. If you know where to go, a nice meal is enough to get full access.

 

[SDET]

She's either using you for a free ride and compliments, or was into you at one point but changed her mind. Sorry man

You could try quitting your job, going on welfare, and then acting abusive on your next date. Women seem to love that nowadays.

Funny how that works in North America. While some people consider being "transactional" as abusive, others call it being fair. I give consideration in proportion to satisfaction received.

 

[SDET]

That's only for when sex isn't about fear and shame. You're not considering their perspective.

Sex being about fear and shame doesn't sound like much fun. Why would anyone want to involved with someone like that?

 

[Pippi Longstock]

That's very interesting. Are you saying the women can better finesse wealth out of men without marriage?

Not sure how you got that out of my post. On another note I think the problem for the person in the OP is that he needs an arranged marriage.

 

[SDET]

Not sure how you got that out of my post. On another note I think the problem for the person in the OP is that he needs an arranged marriage.

That's certainly an option, but he had better be damned careful, get a good solid checklist of who presents a high divorce risk. He had also had better be ready, preferably in writing, to be able to communicate what he brings to the table. Getting a low risk woman is comparable to a job interview with her family. Requirement number one: Be able to provide good enough financially to where she won't live in squalor.

I pulled it off, but I was REALLY lucky.

 

[apdst]

For every available beautiful woman out there, you can find a man who got tired of her. And vice versa.

That's right. If you see a single woman past the age of 40, there's something wrong with her.

 

[Superfly]

I swear to you that a female friend of mine who is in her fifties actually believed that her "area" could not take the physical stresses of the activity due to several years of not getting any. Far as I know, unless there are other legitimate medical issues happening, the "area" does not become unable to be sustain sexual activity just because it's been a long time.

But I bounced that off several other friends, both male and female and got varying responses. Most of them laughed and mentioned K-Y, but at least one other female said this wasn't the first time she'd heard the "paper thin va-jay-jay theory". My wife laughed, but not at my friend, just at the theory. She said that the grandmother of a friend of hers had cautioned her daughter with a similar warning once.

Just understand, there are some strange and weird theories about in the world.

I don't think it's a paper-thin vajayjay. The hymen regrows together after about 7 years.

 

[Superfly]

Okay I won't jump all over you because everyone else has. So as a lady myself, I'll try to answer your question.

I do think the comment about her kids being gone could be taken as an invitation. I get that. But I also get her comment that she wasn't ready. There could be lots of reasons for that. You and I are from the exact same generation. In the 80s when we were young adults, before AIDS and palimony became a thing, there was lots more "free love" going around than I think there is now.

Maybe she just wants cuddling and companionship. Maybe she didn't feel "fresh" that night. Maybe she has intimacy issues. Maybe she had a bad experience with her last partner. Maybe she was tired. Maybe her stomach hurt her. Maybe she doesn't find you attractive enough to be intimate with, and just wants to be friends. Who knows? Without knowing her it's impossible to know.

My husband was the first person I had sex with, and we dated for a long time before we had sex, at a time when all of our college friends were hooking up nightly, with real partners or just the good looking person from the bar. It varied. If we broke up, it would probably be a long time before I could be intimate with someone else. It wouldn't be a slap to potential partners, just my way of easing back into the scene.

Yeah, I mean honestly, she could have just been on her period. :shrug: Women at that age can still get them, and that's a deal breaker for sure, for many women. That's something that could have happened overnight, even after she asked her kids to stay with someone else. All of a sudden, it's, "Whoops - never mind." And maybe she had that scared look because she didn't know how Lurch would react. Maybe she thought he would react exactly like he did.

 

[SDET]

Not sure how you got that out of my post. On another note I think the problem for the person in the OP is that he needs an arranged marriage.

Also, if his marriage resume is good enough, he may as well shoot for an 18-20 year old. Go for the best if you can.

 

[OldFatGuy]

That's right. If you see a single woman past the age of 40, there's something wrong with her.

And not the men?

Other than widowhood, it may not be that something is wrong, just boredom with the same person for too long. We tend to marry for reasons other than love, falling in lust, it's the right thing to do, loneliness, desire to escape parents, whatever. Those reasons fade. Relationships are hard work to maintain and for fostering growth or even maintaining stability. It is never a simple proposition or one person's failures when things don't last. The old adage, "familiarity brings contempt," doesn't help.

My wife and I were both widowed, an experience that helped us find commonalities. Both of us had married young, both had long term lasting relationships with all their ups and downs. Both of us were lost without our respective spouses. Yet we couldn't be more different. However, we are good together for all sorts of reasons, and we work hard to keep it good. It isn't always easy, sometimes, extremely frustrating. Yet, we persevere and ultimately enjoy what we have.

Then again, some people are bat s**t crazy, or become so.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Your assumption may have been initially true but something you did changed her mind and completely turned off any sexual desire she may have had.

Just how long did you talk on the couch before you moved in for the kiss?

Her pulling back should have given you a clue you were moving to fast.

Not very good at reading clues are you?

You then proceeded to ask her how long since she had been (sexually) with someone! Any sexual arousal she may have had simply flew out the window at that point in time.

Your next move of gently taking her hand to move her towards the bedroom was the last straw. She pulls back and tells you she is not ready.

She was not ready because you were treating her like a sex object. And there was nothing you could do at that point to sexually arouse her.

There was absolutely nothing romantic or sensual in your approach. You turned off any sexual arousal she may have had when she invited you into her home.

She knew you were there just to bed her because you were horny and that you would be a lousy lover based on your inability to accelerate her arousal and only managed to turn it off.

Then you get on a forum and state "I don't understand why this chick is even on a dating site if she has such a puritanical and unhealthy outlook on sex."

If, she hadn't had sex in quite awhile and desired a memorable sexual experience she made the right choice by turning you down.

Your sexual method may be the reason for what you call her puritanical and an unhealthy out look on sex.

Hopefully, you will stop blaming her and look to yourself for the mistakes you made.

imho Roseann

You noticed a few things in the OP that I read right over/past. :doh I think you unpacked the scenario pretty well.

Never ask someone "how long has it been".

A no is NO, not an invitation.

The "stop digging" signal came with the kiss. At that point, just back off and regroup.

 

[SDET]

That's right. If you see a single woman past the age of 40, there's something wrong with her.

That's very likely. The stereotype that comes to mind is the feminist that partied through her 20s and 30s, riding the **** carousel the whole time and still thinks she's entitled to a top-shelf man because she is so special.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

It's funny because that might be me too, clam up the first time and get shy but once I break the ice, well you know what happens next. :mrgreen:

Well, in reference to "that girl" (who became a very serious relationship) I was nervous, too. So I was a bit quiet and reserved on our concert date, too. I think it became something of a vicious circle, me being quiet and her noticing my quietness, and each thinking the other wasn't having a good time. But she was pretty annoyed that I didn't contact her for a couple of weeks afterward, so I had to chase her around the employee lunchroom with flowers. No, not Harvey Weinstein chasing and stalking, I was doing my best to be romantic about it. She played at being mad for a bit.

I am not above humiliating myself to get a laugh, so that's what finally melted her I guess, and I got a second chance.
Then the first-aid kit, heh heh.
She just passed away about three years ago at the tender age of fifty-one, cerebral hemorrhage, unbelievable.
And although I'm happily married, it was a sad and shocking piece of news.
She made quite an impression on me as a young man, and truth be told, there's been a little bit of "her" in everyone I've been with since.

It's not so much a longing for her, more of a guideline on how to pick someone I can make happy, and who will make me happy.

 

[CharisRose]

You noticed a few things in the OP that I read right over/past. :doh I think you unpacked the scenario pretty well.

Never ask someone "how long has it been".

A no is NO, not an invitation.

The "stop digging" signal came with the kiss. At that point, just back off and regroup.

I tend to focus on all of the details and analyze them and then write long and detailed posts.

Thank you, for this short break down of my long post using the main important points you mentioned.

Roseann

 

[Amelia]

No need to generalize. One would hope that the vast majority of men (like many here in this thread who gave good opinions), especially those as experienced as we'd expect from someone who is 58, would not be as creepy, clueless, and demeaning to women as the original poster. Like I said, I'm glad for the woman who turned him down and got rid of him.

Even his title is offensive - giving up milk for free. As opposed to what? For money as a prostitute?

One can get everything one needs to know about this guy from the wording in his original post.

It is interesting that he thinks that her "I don't know you" is an excuse for her sexual inhibitions, when it's an excuse for what she was probably really thinking: "now that I know you, I don't want you; I want you out of my home and my life."

Sure, her telling him that she shipped the children away, was suggestive... but not necessarily. In any case, even if she was more open to sex when she invited him in, she obviously changed her mind, and that's precisely because she got to know this aspect of his personality that made of him a sexist and entitled jerk.

Not sure what I said which got a "no need to generalize" as your first line of reply ... but oh well.

 

[SDET]

No need to generalize. One would hope that the vast majority of men (like many here in this thread who gave good opinions), especially those as experienced as we'd expect from someone who is 58, would not be as creepy, clueless, and demeaning to women as the original poster. Like I said, I'm glad for the woman who turned him down and got rid of him.

Even his title is offensive - giving up milk for free. As opposed to what? For money as a prostitute?

One can get everything one needs to know about this guy from the wording in his original post.

It is interesting that he thinks that her "I don't know you" is an excuse for her sexual inhibitions, when it's an excuse for what she was probably really thinking: "now that I know you, I don't want you; I want you out of my home and my life."

Sure, her telling him that she shipped the children away, was suggestive... but not necessarily. In any case, even if she was more open to sex when she invited him in, she obviously changed her mind, and that's precisely because she got to know this aspect of his personality that made of him a sexist and entitled jerk.

That's mighty judgmental. Why do you see the need to put someone down when they are struggling? What you are doing is exploiting his misfortune as an opportunity for you to virtue signal. That's sad. He might not like my solutions, but at least I offer a solution instead of put-downs.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I don't think it's a paper-thin vajayjay. The hymen regrows together after about 7 years.

Whaa-a-a-a-a-attt??????
Sorry but I am having a tough time visualizing that. Are you sure that isn't another old wive's tale or an urban legend?
Perhaps it is a reference to a sort of "psychological" hymen, because I am fairly certain that the hymen is a bit of quasi-vestigial tissue which shrinks away into the background and does not "regrow".
I'll have to look this up, but please know that you gave me a good laugh this morning.

If it turns out you're right, I'll freely admit that I learned something from you!

 

[nota bene]

Yeah, I mean honestly, she could have just been on her period. :shrug: Women at that age can still get them, and that's a deal breaker for sure, for many women. That's something that could have happened overnight, even after she asked her kids to stay with someone else. All of a sudden, it's, "Whoops - never mind." And maybe she had that scared look because she didn't know how Lurch would react. Maybe she thought he would react exactly like he did.

Having the kids out of the house means that she was receptive to the possibilities. Something went on betwixted sofa and bedroom, what I don't know except that something went wrong for her. I mean, was it a couple of kisses? Did he take her hands or grab them and pull and try to lead her to the bedroom or she perceived it this way? Did he move too fast and throw her guard up? Or the kissing turned her off?

Who knows...but something happened with her. Maybe it's as Lurch as said, and she's just dysfunctional and needs therapy. (Is therapy the new "frigid"--what guys tell themselves when the woman just isn't that into them?)

I think it's more likely that something happened or didn't happen that we don't know about, especially not having heard Sherri's side of the story.

 

[joko104]

The OP is bizarre: "A woman wouldn't have sex with me. What's wrong with HER?" :roll:

 

[SDET]

The OP is bizarre: "A woman wouldn't have sex with me. What's wrong with HER?" :roll:

Does there have to be a "wrong"? He has BILLIONS of other choices. That oyster has no pearl; time to open a different one.

 

[Superfly]

Having the kids out of the house means that she was receptive to the possibilities. Something went on betwixted sofa and bedroom, what I don't know except that something went wrong for her. I mean, was it a couple of kisses? Did he take her hands or grab them and pull and try to lead her to the bedroom or she perceived it this way? Did he move too fast and throw her guard up? Or the kissing turned her off?

Who knows...but something happened with her. Maybe it's as Lurch as said, and she's just dysfunctional and needs therapy. (Is therapy the new "frigid"--what guys tell themselves when the woman just isn't that into them?)

I think it's more likely that something happened or didn't happen that we don't know about, especially not having heard Sherri's side of the story.

Based on Lurch's behavior in this and the other thread, it's entirely possibly that he just acted like an entitled asshole, and she backed out. Many of us have done that.

 

[nota bene]

Based on Lurch's behavior in this and the other thread, it's entirely possibly that he just acted like an entitled asshole, and she backed out. Many of us have done that.

That's what I mean. At some point "go" turned into "no-go," and I've been there.