Do men really feel absolutely zero emotional attachment after sex?

[Day_Walker]

I wouldnt say NO emotional attachment but I would say he has a limited emotional attachment to you. My guess would be that he has rationalized that the relationship is about sex and that is it. That doesnt mean he cannot like you as a person or get along well with you.

[LDRohnos]

Personally, the physical act of sex does not leave me emotional at all nor does it fill my "emotional needs".

 

That said...in a relationship if I'm not getting regular sex it generally makes me emotionally unfulfilled or I just withdraw from the relationship. In one sense I guess you can say sex (the act of sex) is just fun and a release. The fact my women does/does not want sex with me has emotional ramifications.

[alwaysmoving]

UPDATE:

 

This guy ended up calling me just a little while after I posted this thread. We had this long flirty conversation for an hour and then he said he actually called for a reason. The reason was that he went on a date with someone and he likes her a lot so he wanted to make sure I knew. A few weeks later they became official.

 

A week or so after that I had to go on a really long drive and called him (we would often talk on the phone if either of us had a long drive) and that turned into a 3 hour conversation. He tried to be flirty and talked about the sex we used to have and I just kept saying "you have a girlfriend. we aren't talking about this anymore." He would talk about hanging out "as friends" and I told him that we were never platonic friends and will never be platonic friends, so since he got into a relationship we won't be hanging out.

 

That was just in case anyone was interested. Men can be so strange.

[partydelights]

Sorry to hear that.

 

As a man, I like to say something:

1) At least one man on earth is not like him.

 

2) But it is in men to want sex.

There is a saying here: "When a man says 'I do', he also says 'I done' later".

So be cautious about entering an "unprotected" relationship.

You can give your love and kindness, but not engage in sexual intercourse.

Make sure you future man says "I done" AFTER saying "I do" and you will not be disappointed again.

 

Cheer up. You'll still find someone who will love you because you're much wiser now.

[Glowguy]

How is that any different or stranger than what you were doing? You both wanted sex and seemed happy to continue down that path. He eventually met someone that changed his mind. You said yourself you would entertain the idea of dating another person. How is that any different at all? Personally I think you should avoid that type of arrangement if you are looking for a relationship otherwise it will probably limit your opportunity. If you want something more then why settle for just sex? You can have both but it's up to you.

[alwaysmoving]

How is that any different or stranger than what you were doing?

 

Well I always took him to be a very honest, up front guy. I was happy that he made the effort to let me know he was going to get into a relationship (despite the fact that he bashed relationships and would always say how he didn't want one). What I found strange is that he flirted with me on the phone call we had after he became official with the girl he "really liked" and talked about hanging out and having sex with me, as if nothing were different. If he likes her so much, he shouldn't be saying that stuff to me. That's what I found strange.

[thehardestpart]

cut him out and be done with it. really. this dude will never learn to appreciate you or any other girl(like his gf HA).

[doyathink]

Sorry to hear that.

 

As a man, I like to say something:

1) At least one man on earth is not like him.

 

2) But it is in men to want sex.

There is a saying here: "When a man says 'I do', he also says 'I done' later".

So be cautious about entering an "unprotected" relationship.

You can give your love and kindness, but not engage in sexual intercourse.

Make sure you future man says "I done" AFTER saying "I do" and you will not be disappointed again.

 

Cheer up. You'll still find someone who will love you because you're much wiser now.

 

Maybe its just me, but what does any of this mean? Im not understanding it at all

[vivia12]

" "he is very slow to answer his calls from me or text" and he just, possible is "losing interest." I think the worse part about it is, I continue to stay with him thin,king he will wake up.Don't let it get to this place...its not a good feeling, believe me.

 

wow, story of my life there..thats deep.

 

To the OP,you have your answer there if you keep giving it,he will take it. Its like going to a bar for free beer,he wont say no to that.

[oren]

disregard this

[oren]

I always do. But I've only had sex with a three girls, and most of the time it lead to a romance. Six months, * * * * , he would have to be the most unromantic, boring guy in the world if he didn't have feelings for you.

 

 

 

Orrrrr, he's been with more than three women lol

 

He told you about his girlfriend right? That means you're his real girl, she's just his love interest

 

YESSS, hes has feelings for you, but they're warped and suppressed!

[partydelights]

Maybe its just me, but what does any of this mean? Im not understanding it at all

 

What I mean is, generally speaking, sex to men is different from sex to women.

 

Men is easily satisfied. The physical act of penis-in-vagina intercourse (PIV) is usually sufficient and satisfying.

After a PIV, men will not need this release until the next build up of semen in him.

This building up takes around two days to a week depending on individuals.

Most men after a PIV can do without another for about a week without feeling "blue".

 

For women, much more is involved. Usually, PIV alone cannot bring most women to orgasm.

That's why much has been written about "foreplay" that involves not just the physique, but the mind.

 

So what I'm trying to drive at is, as a woman, "alwaysmoving" should be more cautious the next time she enters a relationship. There are many ways to show love other than offering PIV sex.

 

Outside marriage man who has "tasted" her has days or weeks to reflect on the Episode.

Most of the time, PIV is not as satisfying as masturbation.

Perhaps I can put in this way also: Masturbation gives most men higher expectation about sex.

Hence, many relationships ended after the girl agrees to PIV, because the expectation was not met in PIV.

 

So the loser is always the woman. Thus I caution "alwaysmoving" to have PIV only in marriage rather than have another "free sex" that very likely will result in another disappointment.

 

partydelights is some religious person who thinks EVERYONE should NEVER engage in premarital sex whatsoever because it's baaaad and that somehow you're tarnishing yourself by doing so. *laughs*

 

I'd just ignore him/her.

 

You're right I am religious. I see nothing wrong with being religious, as long as I respect others who have differing views. So far, I did not tell anyone to do or stop doing anything, nor voice anything condemning anyone. So please do not put words into my writings.

 

The reason I posted is because I 'm happy with my life which is related to the choice I made some 15 years ago. So I just like to share with those who wish to give a listening ear. I hope this act of mine can likewise be respected.

 

BTW, I'm a male with 5 kids. Hence I believe I know enough about sex to share with many teens and twenties in this forum.

[bob333]

My thoughts, I am not so black and white.

 

I think my sex can be linked to a state of mind, but that state of mind, as they put it in the 'Passion Paradox', is heightened by a state of fear.

 

Twice my ex run off with another man, and my sex drive and emotional cravings for that person went through the roof.

 

Love is linked to a state of fear, fear of losing the one you love, it works for men and women - and its why women like a challenge - its gets their emotional juices flowing.

 

If a man is not in this state he will not commit, marry or wish to be in a relationship, if he is having sex than that act is no more than 'blowing his nose', a release of built up semen. He may have a little attachment (the degree depends on how much he views you as a potential mate), but if you are available on tap then their can be no fear or sense of loss in him - or wanting what you cant have, and he can do as you say and have no feelings of commitment of any form.

 

BUT how the tables can be turned if you know how to start that spark.

 

If the cirumstances are right, you could heighten his emotions (and his sex drive) - and have him on a string.

 

Of course he may view you as not being a good long term partner, and have no vested interests in you at all in which case you could knock away all day at this and get no where.

 

He does need to see 'value' in you if you want him to feel anything, but we place value on things we cannot always have.

 

Do be carefull though, as has been said, you may up with this guy for a long period if you get pregnant, please be carefull - but have fun !!!

[partydelights]

BTW, I'm sorry, but you clearly do not know much about sex if you think:

 

-men have VAGINAL (not PIV...I've never heard anyone use that) intercourse and then don't want it anymore because..

 

Howdy Fudgie,

It seem my posts had pushed your wrong buttons.... No ill intentions though.

 

Perhaps my English is weak. It seem what I type was somehow interpreted wrongly by you.

So let me explain myself.

 

1) PIV is just an abbreviation in that post alone. Instead of typing "penis in vagina" intercourse over and over again, I choose to use this as an abbreviation instead. That's all and I'm not surprise you not heard of it before. It's not a sex term. Just a term I use to save me some typing. ;-)

 

2) I'm not saying once men tried PIV once, he has no need for it anymore.

What I'm saying is, most men after a PIV will not need another until few days or weeks later.

 

Masturbation is more SATISFYING than vaginal intercourse.

 

That really has to be one of the silliest things I've read here in a long time. I've NEVER met a male who preferred his hand to intercourse with a girl. If he did, it's probably because he detested the girl or he was actually gay and didn't want to have sex with her in the first place.

 

I'm sorry but this is just nonsense.

 

Ha...Ha...Ha... Silly indeed. If masturbation can satisfy man, then I'll probably still be single today.

No, I don't mean that. My apologies if I expressed myself to the extreme to drive home an argument in my post.

 

What I'm trying to say is, masturbation gave men expectations for PIV that can be very different from the act itself.

 

For example, the feeling of tightness, the thrusting frequencies, the slipperiness during masturbation can be manipulated by the person. But in actual PIV, tightness cannot be changed beyond certain factor, neither can the thrusting frequencies (hands can go much faster than the hips, I think).

 

As a result, the expectation most of the time exceeds the actual deed, especially in short-term relationships.

 

But of course, it does not mean the actual PIV is not satisfying. Rather I'm trying to say mentally, expectation is higher. So it's more difficult for it to be met, unless by chance, the lady is extremely tight and agile and hot and exceeds the expectations of the man.

 

Sorry party, but most people here have had premarital sex. Sex is talked about a lot here. I think you'd do better on a religious forum, but that's me. I don't know very many people who like to hear the whole "VIRGINITY IS PRECIOUS YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE WASTED IT." If they want a guilt trip, they can go to church.

 

Again, religious forum would be much more supportive of your views.

 

O... "Do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side".... (Darth Vader, Star Wars 1 "A New Hope")

 

Why sooooo serious? Is this how you live life? Relax. I'm not a priest nor am I a pastor.

I'm just a Christian who loves sex.

I'm here to read what you guys and gals did and perhaps share what I think I know about sex. That's all.

 

And I assure you. I get to like you already. I'll stay on to read your rebukes to my posts.

Wish you good day and Merry Christmas!

[Fudgie]

"Most men have sex will not need to have it again until a few days or weeks later?"

LOL. You're kidding, right?

Look around you. So many men complain about not being able to have sex with their girlfriends more than a couple times a week.

 

You really don't know very much about sex if you think these things, just saying. Please stop spreading misconceptions about it. We have enough of those here.

 

Again, religious forum would probably be a lot better for you. Hope to see you go there.

 

Happy Holidays.

[partydelights]

"Most men have sex will not need to have it again until a few days or weeks later?"

LOL. You're kidding, right?

Look around you. So many men complain about not being able to have sex with their girlfriends more than a couple times a week.

 

O, of course I wants sex everyday. But really. Circumstances doesn't permit. If I'm lucky, I get about 3x a week. Otherwise, if I have to go outstation, I might have it only once a fortnight.

 

But I'm still alive and not really blue (except for once a fortnight, sometimes).

 

You really don't know very much about sex if you think these things, just saying. Please stop spreading misconceptions about it. We have enough of those here.

 

I don't spread misconceptions. My religion don't permit it. Perhaps we're just different. That's why I enjoy replying you.

 

Again, religious forum would probably be a lot better for you. Hope to see you go there.

Happy Holidays.

 

Sometime I visit those sites. But they don't talk much about sex. I see it quite pointless debating there whether God is a Trinity or not, should you study with Jehovah's Witnesses or not, was Jesus born on 25th December, .... etc

 

You get bored seeing the same topic repeated over and over again

 

But anyway, maybe we can meet each other there also, if you can post a site you visit

 

Hey, BTW, are you a male or female? (I think you're male. My wife will call you an "alpha-male". [compliment])

[Fudgie]

But I'm confused....if you want sex everyday, then why do you say the MOST male have sex and then not *need* to do it for a long while? That makes no sense to me.

 

Many guys want sex everyday/almost evertday and WOULD have sex everyday (or almost everyday) with their mates if they could.

 

I'm a female. Alpha male is most definitely not a compliment...it means boorish, stupid, egotistical, and a s___. I've only had 3 partners and all have been within monogamous LTRs. So thanks for the insult, I really appreciate it.

[partydelights]

But I'm confused....if you want sex everyday, then why do you say the MOST male have sex and then not *need* to do it for a long while? That makes no sense to me.

 

Many guys want sex everyday/almost evertday and WOULD have sex everyday (or almost everyday) with their mates if they could.

 

This is precisely the point I try to drive at in the original posting.

Men want sex. But sometime, for practical reason, he withheld it. (e.g. workload is heavy, stress over the next day's chores, out of town, ...)

 

Then there is a difference between wanting sex and getting "blue". No sex for about a week or two will not make a man blue. But he will think about it daily. Simply putting, it is humanly possible (in fact easy) to withheld sex for this period of time.

 

I can illustrate with food. If a person has eaten, he won't need to eat every other hour. But sometime, due to circumstance, a person might skip a meal. He will be hungered, but not starved. It's different if that person not eat for three days. He'll be starved, not just hungered.

 

So my original post was to drive home this point. And I use it to elaborate on the danger a female will face when engage in premarital sex. The man has a sufficiently long time to evaluate the experience before his sex drive is high again. This "evaluation period" is where a man decides to break the relationship or not.

 

 

I'm a female. Alpha male is most definitely not a compliment...it means boorish, stupid, egotistical, and a s___. I've only had 3 partners and all have been within monogamous LTRs. So thanks for the insult, I really appreciate it.

 

Oops... I pressed the wrong button again.... My apologies.

Our definition of "alpha male" is leader, authoritative, strong, derived from the "alpha male lion" that leads among other male lions.

 

I definitely has no intent to insult.

But since you're female, my apologies I made an "ass" of "u" and "me" (ass.u.me too much) ;-)

[tiredofvampires]

So love to you will have a very short shelf life. If it's based on fear of losing, of never really having, of things beyond reach, then the love that sustains a marriage for 50 years will never happen. And there is no point of ever committing, becoming exclusive in an LTR either. Because by your reasoning, once the thrill of the chase is over, the man is no longer interested and the woman's emotional juices dry up. Trust and security would be the death knell of any relationship.

 

What a sad, sad state of affairs. And I do mean AFFAIRS.

 

By some people's beliefs, love and fear are nearly opposites. "The Passion Paradox", while I haven't read it (and really should), has been read and quoted as a personal bible by everyone I've ever disagreed with about love on this board. Their relationships were/are defined by a series of well-orchestrated, convoluted games which might better be classified as subtle power plays, all revolving around themselves. All chasing is good for is a feeling of frustration (and possibly a short-lived thrill if it "works"), and while the longing hurts so good, in the end it leads to a dead end, whether you get what you wanted or not.

 

Love is only linked to a state of fear in the sense that when the person you love is hurting, you're worried about them. If something bad happens to them, you're afraid for them. If they're dying, you don't want them to leave this earth because your life was enriched by them. So you can be afraid of losing them then, yes.

 

All other fear is just a state of egoistic need for validation, and fear of abandonment and/or attachment issues.

 

Love is primarily a sense of overwhelming acceptance and appreciation for another person that is so strong, all you want is their happiness and fulfillment. When you love, you are prepared in fact for them to leave and to let them go. It's the absence of fear in the face of just celebrating whatever the beloved's life is, with you in it or not.

 

The clinging, the attachment, the hoping, the fearing, the worrying can all be part of the ups and downs of a relationship at times, but if you are relying on that to cement things, or using it as a primary courtship device, or are calling it "love" -- if it's the glue -- you're doomed.

[Fudgie]

I'm still not sure what you mean by "evaluation" period.

 

My thought is, you need to be with someone who has (roughly) the same sex drive as you. A marriage/relationship is not going to work if one person wants sex 1-2x a week and the other wants it everyday. It's just not. Maybe you'll stay together but resentment will build. I do not think a marriage "surviving" but not very happy is any sort of "success".

 

So basically (and you need to clarify this for me, because I'm unclear) a man will want sex everyday, and then once he gets into marriage (no sex beforehand) he'll get all the sex he wants during a honeymoon period but then he may watch it fizzle out because it comes to light that he and his wife are different in terms of drive...how is this good, again? Really, I'm not understanding this. You say "well the man may not get his expectations met so he'll leave a relationship. So that's why you should only have sex after marriage." I consider that entrapment. What guy wants to wait until marriage only to THEN find out that he and his wife don't match? What happens then? Resentment, possible infidelity, and maybe even divorce. And I've heard of this happening to MANY, many couples. It's a real issue. Does it happen in relationships? Absolutely, and that's when a partner leaves. But I'll tell you, I'd rather have a LTR fail on me than a marriage or be stuck in a really unhappy one...that's for sure.

 

I really consider it a form of entrapment for both men and women alike if they have a LTR (with sex) but then as soon as marriage occurs, one of them just REALLY cuts down on the amount of sex, for good. I'm not taking a period of sickness or stress (that happens!) I mean for good. I think of that as rather selfish because it's unfair to the other person who went into marriage thinking that they would continue to get their needs bet and then BAM.

But if someone followed your advice, someone would be going into a marriage blind of all that, only to realize afterward that "wow...this really sucks. I like sex a lot more than my wife/husband." or they have a lot and then it slows down over time and one of them is bothered by that. The only difference is that you've managed to "trap" them before so they can't leave without a divorce. I find that pretty deplorable.

 

I don't think of "alpha male" as a good leader. Any sex can be a good leader with the right traits. "Alpha male" around here in terms of relationships generally means someone who is "manly" in the stereotypical sense.

[tiredofvampires]

Don't really want to get too in the middle of the Fudgie-partydelights match, haha, but I just wanted to put in that the "alpha male" of any species is the dominant male figure. He usually has the most testosterone, is the most aggressive, and the most competitive. In the human species, this translates into leadership, authoritativeness, competitiveness and gregariousness (which are not necessarily bad). It may or may not accompany physical strength, but it often does. While some of these things can put him "at the head of the pack" in good ways, due to his aggression, the alpha male will be predisposed to the unpleasant stereotypes that people talk about as it pertains to relationships: egotistical behavior, domineering demeanor, temper issues, cockiness, being a jerk, etc. Being a crude/"stupid" boor can certainly be an extension of alpha male behavior, but partydelights is correct that this is not necessarily THE defining feature of being an alpha male. There are a lot of intelligent, commanding, strong, type A, ladies' man, socially extroverted men who got there by alpha qualities but aren't necessarily crude boors. A lot depends on how they were raised and what was modeled around them.

 

It's also true that a lot of females gravitate towards the alpha male (in any species) because of his strength and heartiness. So that would be perceived by many as an asset.

[partydelights]

Before I answer your questions, I like to mention that I was warned by a super modulator I'm not allowed to air religious views here. So what I said here will be based on principles commonly known by the general public, but not necessarily practiced. So if you disagree, there is not other means I can answer you, unless through private emailing.

 

I'm still not sure what you mean by "evaluation" period.

 

This is the time period immediately after an intercourse until the time his sexual needs builds up to an intolerable level. This time period is about 2 weeks for most men.

 

I believe everyone with sexual experience will reflect on their recent sexual episode, particularly with a new person. This is what I called "evaluation". If the man is satisfied, then the relationship will likely continue. But if satisfaction is not there (or pre-conceived expectation is not met), then the relationship will likely break, and the losing side is usually the woman, especially virgins.

 

My thought is, you need to be with someone who has (roughly) the same sex drive as you. A marriage/relationship is not going to work if one person wants sex 1-2x a week and the other wants it everyday. It's just not. Maybe you'll stay together but resentment will build. I do not think a marriage "surviving" but not very happy is any sort of "success".

 

You hit the point as if you're talking about my marriage. I wanted sex daily, but my wife 1-2x a week. Well, there are challenges for me, but I would not use the word "resentment".

 

Much like my illustration using food in my previous post, it's like I want to eat every hour, but I'm given food 6 hourly. So I think about food every hour, but I eat only every 6 hourly.

 

Well, I might feel hungered sexually speaking, but I definitely not starved. In fact, the positive effect is, I can use those time doing some secular activities and visiting my good friends in the neighborhood.

 

So basically a man will want sex everyday, and then once he gets into marriage (no sex beforehand) he'll get all the sex he wants during a honeymoon period but then he may watch it fizzle out because it comes to light that he and his wife are different in terms of drive...how is this good, again?

 

(Note: many men did not get all the sex he wants during his honeymoon also.)

No. It's not good. The rest are religious viewpoints. Ask your pastor.

 

 

Really, I'm not understanding this. You say "well the man may not get his expectations met so he'll leave a relationship. So that's why you should only have sex after marriage." I consider that entrapment. What guy wants to wait until marriage only to THEN find out that he and his wife don't match? What happens then? Resentment, possible infidelity, and maybe even divorce. And I've heard of this happening to MANY, many couples. It's a real issue. Does it happen in relationships? Absolutely, and that's when a partner leaves. But I'll tell you, I'd rather have a LTR fail on me than a marriage or be stuck in a really unhappy one...that's for sure.

 

I fully agree. In fact, marriage is a risk. Heard of the term "Love is blind, marriage is an eye-opener?"

Also "Marriage is not a just word but a sentence.... A life sentence...."

 

Again, if sex is all a person seeks, then all you said is true.

But if you believe there is such thing as "love making", then more is involved. One of them is the joy of childbearing and parenting.

 

I cannot speak more. The rest are religious.

 

I really consider it a form of entrapment for both men and women alike if they have a LTR (with sex) but then as soon as marriage occurs, one of them just REALLY cuts down on the amount of sex, for good. I'm not taking a period of sickness or stress (that happens!) I mean for good. I think of that as rather selfish because it's unfair to the other person who went into marriage thinking that they would continue to get their needs bet and then BAM.

 

Agree.

Again my answer is as above. Is sex alone enough for you? Do you seek love?

(Love is unselfish. But sex alone usually is selfish.)

 

LTR with sex guarantees sexual satisfaction. But for certainty, there is no legal security.

Since there is no commitment, only limited "love" can be expressed, for one party at least.

 

The rest are religious.

 

But if someone followed your advice, someone would be going into a marriage blind of all that, only to realize afterward that "wow...this really sucks. I like sex a lot more than my wife/husband." or they have a lot and then it slows down over time and one of them is bothered by that. The only difference is that you've managed to "trap" them before so they can't leave without a divorce. I find that pretty deplorable.

 

Very true. That's why there are so many divorces worldwide. I find situations like that deplorable also.

 

Please do not take what I say as "advice". I'm not a marriage counselor. I'm merely sharing my life stories and experiences, in bits and pieces. Also, what I said cannot be combined with what most people in this forum believes. Combining what I wrote with those beliefs will lead to failure in life, and fail it certainly will, very miserably.

 

Again, why my marriage stays despite differing sex drives is because of religion.

Nevertheless, I'm not complaining about my sex life. I deem it as wonderful based on personal standard, and above world average based on hundreds of real/fictional stories I read in many sites and forums.

 

I don't think of "alpha male" as a good leader. Any sex can be a good leader with the right traits. "Alpha male" around here in terms of relationships generally means someone who is "manly" in the stereotypical sense.

 

Get it. Thanks for clarifying. My wife and I coined this term after watching "Lion King" with our children.

So our bedroom usage of this term is much more innocent.

[bob333]

I really think Partydelights should hit a religeous forum, just my thoughts.

 

TiredofVampires, I agree you certainly cannot rely on the glue of fear to make a long term bond, although it is found couples with some jealousy between them lasdt together longer than those without, those simply drift apart.

 

I am infact talking about the 'glue' on another thread funnily, if you want to read that:

 

 

I was simply though trying to apply the theory of love and fear to this situation on this thread, I think the lady in question has feelings for this man, but he's not engaged or commited or feels any value in the relationship beyond simply 'blowing his nose' - he has no fear of losing, she's always available, and she wanted to know why he wasn't engaged.

[doyathink]

partydelights is some religious person who thinks EVERYONE should NEVER engage in premarital sex whatsoever because it's baaaad and that somehow you're tarnishing yourself by doing so. *laughs*

 

I'd just ignore him/her.

 

well, if thats what he's meaning here, then I agree with him. But Im no perfect angel who can always resist what I know I should lol.

[doyathink]

OOOOh...ok, I got what youre saying. Good post. A lot of truth in what you've said