Number of previous partners...what do you say?

[longrodten]

How does partner count have anything to do with quality of sex? If you had 100 partners and boinked them only 1-3 times each, vs 10 partners that you boinked 200 times each the one with less partners is going to have more experience.

The ones with a high partner count never spend enough time with one to get good at anything other than getting them into bed.

 

[islander]

Agreed long!

 

[TTBB]

I also agree with Longrodten.

 

[Praetorian]

How does partner count have anything to do with quality of sex? If you had 100 partners and boinked them only 1-3 times each, vs 10 partners that you boinked 200 times each the one with less partners is going to have more experience.

The ones with a high partner count never spend enough time with one to get good at anything other than getting them into bed.

I do agree with you longrodten that partner count and quality of sex share no causal link. However, I think that it's a hard claim to prove that exposure to a high number of partners definitively leads to the person not getting good at anything other than getting them into bed.

I think that it comes down to the individual. A person exposed to potentially 100 different sets of sexual behaviours and preferences could well learn quite a few things. However, if they aren't interested in learning anything and are only engaging 100 partners for self gratification, maybe they learn nothing. I think that it's highly variable.

The other scenario with 10 partners and 2000 sexual encounters in total could be in a great position to learn a good many things. However, this is again variable as they may largely be engaged in sexual relations, again, for self gratification.

Not in disagreement with you but just trying to demonstrate that the great range of motive and personality involved is a highly relevant factor in sexual learning beyond the mathematics of what is being discussed.

 

[Nachos87]

How does partner count have anything to do with quality of sex? If you had 100 partners and boinked them only 1-3 times each, vs 10 partners that you boinked 200 times each the one with less partners is going to have more experience.

The ones with a high partner count never spend enough time with one to get good at anything other than getting them into bed.

This is completely wrong.

Each women react on different stimuli. Different strokes, rubs, motions, verbal stimuli, licks, pulls, bites etc etc.
With many different partners you get that instinct wether you're on the right track or not, by gouging their involontery reactions and reflexes.
Promiscuous guy will learn every quirk and trick there is, and quickly. And his one night stand or whatever will know that he'll be amazing in bed because every other non-promiscuous guy couldn't even get her to cum in the first several sexings (what was the word? lol).

Also, I presume, non-promiscuous guy will rub a new girl, the same way he rubbed his last gf who he fucked 200 times, it won't work and he will be stupified why it isn't working. Frustration for both parts, especially her, but she isn't used to getting an orgasm so it's perfectly fine.

So a guy with 100 partners (1-3 times each) is surely a god, at the first several sexual experiences with a girl, compared to a guy with 10 partners. And after that... he is still a better lay.

 

[Pegasus]

This is completely wrong.

Each women react on different stimuli. Different strokes, rubs, motions, verbal stimuli, licks, pulls, bites etc etc.
With many different partners you get that instinct wether you're on the right track or not, by gouging their involontery reactions and reflexes.
Promiscuous guy will learn every quirk and trick there is, and quickly. And his one night stand or whatever will know that he'll be amazing in bed because every other non-promiscuous guy couldn't even get her to cum in the first several sexings (what was the word? lol).

Also, I presume, non-promiscuous guy will rub a new girl, the same way he rubbed his last gf who he fucked 200 times, it won't work and he will be stupified why it isn't working. Frustration for both parts, especially her, but she isn't used to getting an orgasm so it's perfectly fine.

So a guy with 100 partners (1-3 times each) is surely a god, at the first several sexual experiences with a girl, compared to a guy with 10 partners. And after that... he is still a better lay.

I am told promiscous guys are so self obsesed and arrogent they learn little.

 

[Nachos87]

I am told promiscous guys are so self obsesed and arrogent they learn little.

I think that's rather harsh generalization. I'd call it a prejudice.
I'm personaly very generous when it comes to that.
Wouldn't know about the others, but I prefer keeping the babes that I fuck. And what's the better way to do that, other then being great in bed?
It depends on the person I guess, wether he wants or doesn't want to learn.

However, if you are not promiscuous, you learn little either way.

 

[Pegasus]

I think that's rather harsh generalization. I'd call it a prejudice.
I'm personaly very generous when it comes to that.
Wouldn't know about the others, but I prefer keeping the babes that I fuck. And what's the better way to do that, other then being great in bed?
It depends on the person I guess, wether he wants or doesn't want to learn.

However, if you are not promiscuous, you learn little either way.

Uh huh, do you do pua that would explain a lot?

 

[Nachos87]

Uh huh, do you do pua that would explain a lot?

I wouldn't really call myself a PUA. I was into Pick-Up, but it's not really my thing. I'm more of a natural, a seducer... I gravitate towards as less talk and as much physical connection and escalation.

 

[Pegasus]

I wouldn't really call myself a PUA. I was into Pick-Up, but it's not really my thing. I'm more of a natural, a seducer... I gravitate towards as less talk and as much physical connection and escalation.

Uhhuh I see, Do you feel this allows you to avoid the pitfalls of self absorbed etc etc ,common in pua?

 

[Samurai]

I think that's rather harsh generalization. I'd call it a prejudice.
I'm personaly very generous when it comes to that.
Wouldn't know about the others, but I prefer keeping the babes that I fuck. And what's the better way to do that, other then being great in bed?
It depends on the person I guess, wether he wants or doesn't want to learn.

However, if you are not promiscuous, you learn little either way.

Are you saying that a guy who was with only one girl for twenty years and learned to rock her world, learned little? Are you saying that if he was to sleep with a different girl (his second) that he would not be able to satisfy her? Of course women can be different but at the end of the day a guy who is good at sex is a guy that is good at sex. You could be far more experimental in a monogamous relationship than you could be in promiscuous relationships and visa versa. As you said it is down to the individual. We cannot judge how good a person is in bed by the amount of partners he or she has had. Same as saying that a girl who has slept with a 100 guys is better in bed than for example our very own 'Someone like You' who has only been with one guy her husband. We just can't say.

 

[Samurai]

I wouldn't really call myself a PUA. I was into Pick-Up, but it's not really my thing. I'm more of a natural, a seducer... I gravitate towards as less talk and as much physical connection and escalation.

Haha Nachos, once a PUA always a PUA Your description of your style sounds very PUA to me. I remember the word 'escalate' so much from my readings in the community

 

[Nachos87]

I'm not quite sure about the definition of PUA, but in my mind that's someone who is calculated, thinking of tactics, is in his head pulling out phrases... sort of a person. Being Natural is completely different. I usually don't even talk and get them to bed... with dancing, touch, eye contact, electrified connection... I wouldn't call that PUA.

The good that Pick-up did to me, is make me realize where lies the problem. But didn't help me much in resolving it (there's one fantastic program that I found out recently though, but kind of too late because I fixed it already). And it was then that I switched from PUA to seducer/natural.
So, first the inner switch happened, and by that I mean removing fears, pride, neediness, being in the moment, having unconditioned happiness, learning what true love is etc etc and becoming decent human being... and after that women simply got drawn to me and all fell into place.

They can feel if the guy got some inner issues so it's really hard to fake it. Self absorption is an issue and I doubt it's considered sexy.

So PUA = fake.
Natural = real.

Of course women can be different but at the end of the day a guy who is good at sex is a guy that is good at sex.

Let's say that you played a guitar for a year. You can play lute, but it wont sound nearly as good... you would need some time to hit that sweet note. While someone who got experiences with many string instruments...

 

[Padawan787]

I'm not quite sure about the definition of PUA, but in my mind that's someone who is calculated, thinking of tactics, is in his head pulling out phrases... sort of a person. Being Natural is completely different. I usually don't even talk and get them to bed... with dancing, touch, eye contact, electrified connection... I wouldn't call that PUA.

The good that Pick-up did to me, is make me realize where lies the problem. But didn't help me much in resolving it (there's one fantastic program that I found out recently though, but kind of too late because I fixed it already). And it was then that I switched from PUA to seducer/natural.
So, first the inner switch happened, and by that I mean removing fears, pride, neediness, being in the moment, having unconditioned happiness, learning what true love is etc etc and becoming decent human being... and after that women simply got drawn to me and all fell into place.

They can feel if the guy got some inner issues so it's really hard to fake it. Self absorption is an issue and I doubt it's considered sexy.

So PUA = fake.
Natural = real.



Let's say that you played a guitar for a year. You can play lute, but it wont sound nearly as good... you would need some time to hit that sweet note. While someone who got experiences with many string instruments...

Once a PUA, always a PUA.

You might feel as if you're acting naturally, but you've probably incorporated what you've learned into your character. It becomes a part of you due to repetition.

We are what we repeatedly do - Aristotle

 

[Mikes Mrs]

Looks like a popular thread, let me watch from the side.
We all have our own opinions. It depends on our knowledge coupled to our experiance.

 

[islander]

Oh this is fun. I just did the math. My ex and I had a great sex life we were together for 25 years. Lets use the LOW LOW number of having sex only once twice a week. Uh, thats over 2600 times! WOOHOO hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[SpicyPeanuts]

I believe in if they have the courage to ask, I give them the answer. If it's a relationship and she's asking I will give her the honest answer. I think a big deal is how you tell them. If you try to wave it away it makes them more concerned. I just make it sound like it's nothing and tell it to them while I look deep in their eyes. A passionate kiss a few moments later usually makes them forget I ever told them.

 

[Praetorian]

Whilst I did learn some 'things' from multiple encounters, I didn't really do it with a view to promoting myself as a Don Juan. I will just be honest and say that I estimate that between the ages of 18-29 I slept with somewhere between 300-400 partners. About 80% of those were in a single year; it was the result of me actually being in a bad place mentally and abusing alcohol.

I am so very happy after 10 years with my wife. Our sexual relationship is very satisfying for both of us...just not enough time due to our crazy work schedules.

I don't look back on the years prior to marriage (in terms of all the partners) with any particular pride but I don't condemn it either. It was just part of my development through good and bad times. However, I do recognise that I was predatory to some degree in actively searching for sexual partners but I at least tried to be honest with the short term arrangement I was committed to; not well received by many but for some it was seen as a 'challenge' to try and be the one who could settle me down. It didn't work and after all the promiscuity, after hurting the feelings of one particularly lovely young woman, I decided to stop this behaviour. I didn't go out looking for women and had no sexual relations for 8 months which was more liberating than all of the sex prior. It also put me in a good place mentally to meet my future wife

 

[longrodten]

I do agree with you longrodten that partner count and quality of sex share no causal link. However, I think that it's a hard claim to prove that exposure to a high number of partners definitively leads to the person not getting good at anything other than getting them into bed.

I think that it comes down to the individual. A person exposed to potentially 100 different sets of sexual behaviours and preferences could well learn quite a few things. However, if they aren't interested in learning anything and are only engaging 100 partners for self gratification, maybe they learn nothing. I think that it's highly variable.

The other scenario with 10 partners and 2000 sexual encounters in total could be in a great position to learn a good many things. However, this is again variable as they may largely be engaged in sexual relations, again, for self gratification.

Not in disagreement with you but just trying to demonstrate that the great range of motive and personality involved is a highly relevant factor in sexual learning beyond the mathematics of what is being discussed.

Most guys with a high partner count where just trying to get a nut. Once this was accomplished they kicked them our, left or started getting dressed.

Most guys with the high partner counts aren't trying to be Don Juans. And on almost anyone, you are still learning things on them over many many sessions, no way your going to max it all out in the first 1 to 3 sessions.

 

[Praetorian]

I agree with you longrodten; whilst I didn't kick anyone out per se, I acknowledge that I probably exerted some subtle pressure for them to leave. I would cite meetings or a busy day etc. This was disrespectful behaviour but it takes time to understand and learn what is respectful behaviour in life.

I think that you have a strong claim with your second paragraph, particularly the last sentence.