Long Term Commitments vs. One Night Stands

For Bock, since he didn't want to discuss it in the Green Room.

Long term commitment. And if one-night stands are permitted within this relationship, all the better.

There's times and places for both, but as always an individual's heart and values will guide them onto the path they choose.

Pretty much had my share of one nighters as few as there were. I'm more of a long term kinda guy.

One nighters will either kill you or get you killed.

Sometimes one night stands turn into long term commitments.

Or it comes back to bite you in the ass later.

Ah, you mean like when they lead to breakfast the next morning?

Long term commitments are soooooo much better, mostly because you don't have to spend all your time trying not to fart in front of them.






And companionship and love and all that. But mostly the farting.

Maybe I am just so good in the bedroom that the chick just wants to keep me to herself forever!

I think I'll stick to whatever I find. Which means very few relationships because most of the guys I know are frat boys who have their opinion of me set within about a day of meeting me.

And even fewer one night stands since I'm still a virgin.

Such is life.

Nope. Prolly should at somepoint.

Toot it and boot it.

Not adverse to one nighters, but never with bar pick ups. (Feck, like I've looked for a bar hook up since 2005) Always with a friend/acquaintance.. someone where there's some history there.

I also have a rule about arranging a "second" date before getting down to business with a first time partner. If we're going this far, we might wanna see if there's chemistry while there's interest. Also practically guarantees a second lay AND women tend to try harder if you're open to at least considering a commitment.

I'm too old for one night stands. Long term friendships that lead to long term relationships are so much better.

Since we don't yet have a definition here, I'm going to go with my own and say you can't have both simultaneously.

edit - If you have a different kind of relationship, then, to me, it means you haven't made the kind of long-term commitment I'm thinking of. You've made a commitment that you're not going to be exclusive. Hence, not committed. If that works for you and all your partners, that's fine, but it's not commitment. It's something else.

You're doing it backwards.

err... no. She doesn't.

Unless you're into arranged marriage.

Did you mail order your wife to be or something?

A lot of my friends are poly amorous, as they put it. To their credit, many have very solid, committed primary relationships. While it's not really my thing, I can understand the practicality of simply removing the guilt factor from extra curricular incidents. For them, it actually reinforces the partnership by adding to the standard of honesty.

You're using sexual exclusivity as the primary definition of commitment? I would think emotional exclusivity would be the better measure.

In a way, emotional exclusivity and sexual exclusivity is like the difference between saying I'm on a diet and not going to the store and loading up on Twinkies. One is a verbal commitment and the other is a practical commitment. For a large part of the population (maybe not all, and each person knows where they are in this) there is (or can be) no distinction.

I wouldn't say it's necessarily the primary definition but it's certainly a prerequisite for that part of the population.

So what you're saying is that for most people their emotional and sexual identities are intertwined. I can agree with that, but don't believe that its impossible for someone to have them be detached while being a mentally healthy individual.

While long-term commitments suck your soul dry until you are nothing left but a worn-out husk.

Fixed.

That's why I'm choosing my words carefully here. I do think most people are like that but I'm sure there are some for whom that's not the case. Most people have these feelings as strong parts of their identities and, if they're not geared toward polyamory, will wind up being deeply hurt by a partner who wants to go in that direction either with or without them. Yet another argument for having a good relationship before choosing to go further, IMO.

Also another reason to try the goods before you buy them.

But then there's also that saying 'why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?'

That always sounded like equal parts bitterness and low self-esteem to me. Some cynical woman who decided no man would marry her if she gave it up beforehand, growing more and more resentful at the "easier" women getting all the attention.