Or he's wanting to get serious and it's freaking him out.

Yeah, I'm with Joe.

He's a closet committer, great analogy Amy!

Or he plays games, and he's used to women who play games (and/or are a little crazy...)

LW this is really simple, since you aren't that into him don't see him any more. Tell him you aren't into whatever games he is playing and that he should find another friend w/benefits. As a woman, you get enough drama from from your female friends, you really don't need it from neurotic male.

I dated a guy who acted just like this. It was totally casual for me, and supposedly so for him too, and when he would disappear for long stretches I wasn't bothered at all. But it was obvious that he wanted me to be bothered.

He had the smallest penis I've ever seen. I mean, when it was at full mast it was the size of a gherkin. I'm not sure why I broke it off - because of the teeny unit or the crazy stuff in his head. And I always figured the teeny unit was probably responsible for the crazy stuff.

I really don't think it's "sex too soon" that repels men. I thinks it's "emotional dependency too soon," and for many women that goes hand in hand with having sex. She's not hooked on him, so he's still intrigued.

I find the idea of repeatedly having sex with someone you don't much care for depressing. If you've just started dating, they really turn you on and you want to take a chance, fine (if that works for you). You probably don't really care about them yet, or vice versa, but at least there is some passion.

But if you've known this person awhile, dated them, slept with them and you basically could care if they go or stay, to me that means that sex with them is just slightly better than staying home and masturbating. Blech.

"It seems the main thing he wants is to be in control."

Yep. Maybe he likes playing games. Or maybe the idea that a woman who see him regularly, and sleeps with him, just isn't all that into him drives him crazy. Maybe he really isn't cut out for casual sex.

Men often devalue women who have sex right away. It's our evolved psychology.

Posted by: Amy Alkon

Not sure what scientific methods led to this statement, but I assure you, you are most likely mistaken.

I think you make these proclamations without any at

any factual basis.

@Laurie - Shortly after I read your comment, I see this picture on Facebook! A coincidence like that is just TOO funny!

Enjoy your dinner,vlc I hope.
Btw, you're wrong, just saying.
Peace

Ron s., any evidence? Our goddess backs her statements with evidence, how about you?

"... it was the size of a gherkin. I'm not sure why I broke it off "

Ouch.

"Men often devalue women who have sex right away. It's our evolved psychology."

What kind of sex? Is PnV sex the only sex that counts in our evolved psychology?

Men devalue women who have sex because men evolved to want women who hold out due to the fact that in caveman days it meant he knew who the paternity of the child was. You know the purpose of sex in natures eyes is for reproduction. Women who give up sex easily are not seen as long term partners due to the fact that in ancient days the paternity of the child would be unknown.

However men evolved to want to have sex with as many possible women as they could because it meant spreading their genes even if it meant not raising the child.

I would like to say we in modern times are over all that but....no we still have the same brains.

Oh and I experienced the same problem as the LW.

I call guy at 1 am for booty call. Guy tells me "I dont want a girlfriend right now" my response "Ok, can I come over?"

We do our thing for several moths and then he breaks up with me because "Oh my god all you would do is come over and have sex with me and it made me feel used. It's like you didnt want a relationship with me"

Huh!

Maybe he thinks that since all women end up wanting commitment even when they want to keep things casual, keeping things casual is his code for "let's take things slowly."

Or, the more likely explanation is he's simply a flake.

Amy's advice was better than mine. I would have said, "Just dump the loser." But Amy has the right idea. Time for her to address his expectations. If she dumped him, he would end up probably keying her car or something. Or, if he's not that unstable, he'd likely go tell his buddies, "I wanted to keep things casual, but she tried to get serious," when in fact, it was the other way around.

At least, if he wants serious commitment, and she doesn't, she can make a clean break and let him move on.

Men devalue women who have sex because men evolved to want women who hold out due to the fact that in caveman days it meant he knew who the paternity of the child was. You know the purpose of sex in natures eyes is for reproduction. Women who give up sex easily are not seen as long term partners due to the fact that in ancient days the paternity of the child would be

not applicable to those who for reproduction is not an issue.
For adults, holding out excessively is a fools game.

Insufficient Poison: I really don't think it's "sex too soon" that repels men.

Amy: Men often devalue women who have sex right away. It's our evolved psychology.

Purplepen: Men devalue women who have sex because men evolved to want women who hold out due to the fact that in caveman days...

Amy says "men often" instead of "men always" because, of course, men don't all think alike. And men who are more evolved, men who are less caveman-like, tend to be the ones who don't devalue women who have sex right away.

*

Croagg: "Doctor, what wrong with me? One day, all I want is hunt mastodon. Next day, all I do is lie on mat in darkness and cry."

Doctor: "The diagnosis is obvious, Croagg. You are cavemanic-depressive."

Men devalue women who have sex because men evolved to want women who hold out due to the fact that in caveman days it meant he knew who the paternity of the child was.

I'm not convinced this is the case, despite the fact that it's popular in evolutionary psychology right now. Prehistoric cultures were interdependent, and it's not clear why knowing which child is yours would be an evolutionary advantage.

There's some evidence that the desire for wives who haven't slept around is an adaptation to agriculture, not a hard-wired part of human nature. This makes more sense when things like inheritance and land ownership matter, and less sense in a nomadic group where everything is shared and people have few personal belongings.

I'm with Monica; paternity only matters to the elites and only for purposes of power and ego. I'd even say paternity matters more to the child than to the parent. In a society where women couldn't own property, paternity became even more important, but it was of matrimonial interest, not that of the man (except for knowing who might possibly kill him for inheritance reasons.)

I posit a much simpler reason; men wanted virgins so they didn't get their heads cut off by jilted husbands.

(I also think evolutionary sociology is way overblown in explaining human behavior. It has way too much confirmation bias and projection.)

I also think evolutionary sociology is way overblown in explaining human behavior. It has way too much confirmation bias and projection.

Agreed. I also think that there's the huge problem that human societies have differed a lot over the ages. So while in a society where men supported women's children who they assumed were theirs, it makes some sense that they want women who have no desire to sleep with anyone other than them.

In a society where the whole tribe takes care of the kids, or where it's mostly just the woman doing it, or where it's the woman's brothers doing most of the work...well, then it doesn't matter all that much.

All four types of society have existed, historically.