Photo credit: mensatic from morguefile.com
No point in getting into a shit storm of a fight over on Moxie's blog about her constant lampooning of folks who want to slow things down, and also her endless suspicion of anyone who doesn't fuck after a handful of dates.
I'll just say here that I think she's wrong. And her advice suffers terribly for it.
In her current post she cites this article, which I think is pretty level headed, if also lacking in details and supportive research.
I particularly like this section:
One might think if American culture has continued to become more open, then the three-date rule might now be the first-date rule. It is, but only with a small minority of daters.
Instead, by becoming even more sexually liberal, our culture is more accepting of a wider range of sexual attitudes and behaviors.
This is a positive, don't you think? Folks who so fiercely advocate against delaying sex seem to me to be, in part, battling against the opposite kind of culture. A socially conservative one where sex is shameful, to be controlled, and littered with oppressive gender scripts. Something that's still present in the U.S., but doesn't dominate our overall discourse, despite the religious right's continued attempts. Of course, regionally there are major differences. Some places are much more open and accepting than others. But overall, we're a nation with a wide mix of views about sex and sexuality, many of which contradict each other.
There are tons of Dating Books on this subject and much more.
What I find so fascinating - and disappointing - about the commonplace heterosexual arguments in favor of sex right away, or nearly right away, is that they're usually built on really old stereotypes about male sexuality. In particular, the idea that men can't wait, won't wait, and those who do must have some issue (sexual dysfunction, they're closeted, etc.) These folks think they're being so progressive in voicing all this, but they're actually peddling the same old patriarchal nonsense that has dominated the sex lives of generations of women and men before them. Yes, they're free to have sex whenever they want now. But their thinking isn't that much better than their grandmothers and grandfather's was on the subject.
If a man runs his dating life on the premise that he's got to have sex early on, or else he's going to move on, he's not "liberated."
If a woman runs her sex life on the premise that men are going to bail if she doesn't have sex with them early on, and/or that guys who don't want sex right away are "damaged" somehow, then she's not liberated either.
True sexual liberation, in my opinion, is being able to engage the current dating situation as it is. To be able to let go of the stories and propaganda you've swallowed over the years to face, and embrace, the person before you as they are. To learn each others' actual needs and desires and go from there.
The number 1 reason why waiting a bit is a good idea is that it takes time to wade through each others' conditioning and fears/hangups from the past in order to actually engage sex in a more liberated way. Hell, the first month or so of most relationships, you're operating almost completely on a fantasy sketch of who someone is, and how they are in the world. Add on that all the mixed messages you've swallowed over a lifetime, plus your past dating/relationship history, and it's gets complicated really fast.
Which doesn't mean you can't have casual sex, or that sex on the first or second date dooms a relationship. I'm just saying you're fooling yourself if you think that just being able to have sex whenever is a liberated position. That you're somehow have so much more freedom just because you can fuck whomever whenever.
Because You don't. It's not that special anymore. Take a look at the underlying motivations and rationales. Consider whether your ideas about men and women are actually your own, and also whether they help you be the best person that you can be in a relationship. Having a liberated sex life is much more than just being able to do it.