Question to butches and how they deal with differences in dating

[imperfect_cupcake]

It's a novella, I apologise. Please have patience. If you want to skip to the point without context, scroll to the bold bit and larger print, you lazy sod

I've broken it into as many small paragraphs as possible for easier reading and put the hypothetical in a different colour to separate it out

I think I probably have only "asked the butches" very, very few times in my 20 year career as a femme...

I know that just because you all share an ID will not mean you see things the same way. I'm not that special kind of idiot lol. However, I do want to hear a plethora of views of how YOU deal with a difference in dating values.

I'm going to give you a scenario - please bear with me, I know I'm long winded but I personally think context and background is really, really important in trying to understand a matter rather than going on "rules."

Someone said that when they see someone they like "bang" they know it and they want it and they want to go after it. That's why when they like someone, they want monogamy for the get go.

I'm very much NOT that kind of person. I do feel chemistry with people, of course. But often just because that chemistry is there, does not mean we will be compatible in the long run. There are too many other things to take into consideration than chemistry (really "getting" each other) for instance there is how we fight, how they communicate, what their values are around certain things, how much they drink or smoke pot, ideas around spirituality or religion, and treatment of others.

I have had amazing and incredibly good chemistry with people who *really* got me, sincerely and absolutely, but who were also active addicts, or binge drinkers, or lied about other women, or were shit at keeping promises, or had mood disorders and bad tempers, or didnt share some values with me about certain things that didn't come up till four or five months in. Or although the sex matched initially, after the first smoke, we found we weren't all that compatible sexually, five or six months in.

This is why I am not someone that trusts instant chemistry and a great click. Yes, I need to feel that deep "understanding" to start to explore possibilities. I do think it's a good sign.

But I'm not that "I know what I want when I see it" girl. I don't put everything on that deep click and "understanding" because I've been with people where even with that, it went horribly wrong. I need to trust someone first before I go there. And that, for me, takes time. I don't trust people off the bat. It takes me a long time.

So I don't do things that way. I don't do monogamy from the get go. I want to know more than the click and the chemistry before I make a commitment. To *me* monogamy is a *BIG* commitment and I don't do getting to know someone when it's required I make a big commitment (to me) off the bat.

I can see that perhaps if we've been good friends for a couple years and suddenly we date (I've done this and had my first long term relationship ship this way, it was great. Totally willing to do that again). But NOT if we met through dating site and I've only met you two or three times over a three or four hour date.

It's been explained to me now why some people do that - because they feel they "know" right away. And I can't, because I don't feel that way. I just don't work that way. I don't even get crushes on people unless I sleep with them first. I don't get and never have gotten "a crush from afar".

If you want to skip to the point, without context, read from here

So here is the question - if you met someone that you had interest in - that you admire, respect, desire and have that fire of "know what you want" for - who dosen't do courting (monogamous only seeing each other) right away, but only does dating with no exclusivity or promises until they know you much better, before they even *think* of courting, even if they agree there is a good click, what would you do?

Would you push her to commit? Give her an ultimatum? Try to do things a new way? Walk away? Try to reach a middle ground?

You've been on two or three dates with them, say, and spend time sending each other emails and call each other for long chats a twice a week. You want monogamy, but she doesn't feel she knows you well enough to make that call and probably won't for three or four months, at least. Your metaphorical balls are turning blue and going to drop off because you are discussing sex, quite openly and I'm great detail, it's an important topic to her. You really want to have sex. She hesitates about it because she knows that you take sex very seriously, right off the bat.

She says she doesn't mind if you go on dates and talk to others because she doesn't expect exclusivity at this point in time. She will not be pushed, she's fiery and has excellent boundaries. Her no means absolutely not. But she is kind, generous, sweet, nurturing, honest, and much more vulnerable than she'll let people on to.

She normally also has sex with people without exclusivity at this point because to her and her history, it's normal and practical to get to know each other sexually as well before making commitments, like monogamy. Yes, even if she thinks you are the bees knees and have a fabulous click.

So? Tell me what you would do if you we starting to date this girl.

addendum:

If this isn't you (courting instead of dating) put yourself in the opposite box... You like someone, they seem different than most people, you are interested in meeting someone different, there is a nice click and you want to get to know them. You do dating (non exclusive getting to know) they only do courting (exclusive and romantic off the bat) What do you do? How do you work that out? Would you?

[MysticOceansFL]

It's really between the two people involved who are dating long distance , using Skype and emailing each other is a form of keeping touch with someone you care about and getting to know the other person. I would rather do online first because you find out things about the other person personality wise plus ( If they have an ex persay they are obsessed over her I would stay clear it's nothing but drama on both their parts) If your single be honest about it from the start if your not single do the same cause I'm like most butches I have morals and I'm not into femmes who are with someone. And as far as knowing about someone as in the ( click ) you can tell that online some but mostly that happens after you meet them in person.

[MrSunshine]

I think you've answered your own question in your post that I read and was not a lazy sod

If we can't agree on how things roll from the beginning I don't see much of a point in continuing.
But, I'm at the age where I'm way past just some chemistry. There has to be a whole lot more than "I like them"
I'm not going to invest my precious time on someone who wants to run the streets and take their time with me. Fuck that!

[imperfect_cupcake]

I'm already not understanding the answers...

Lol

You've met the person a couple of times, three or four hours each time, haven't slept with them, you are just talking. She's holding off sleeping with you because she's trying to be respectful of how you feel about sex till you can come to an agreement.

Let's pretend this hypothetical person is a real person who is nurturing, caring, generous and ME. And doesn't like hurting people. Not a game player. I need much, much more than chemistry, although that has to be there - that deep feeling of being understood. That's why I need to learn about people before I make commitments. I'm 45 and been around too many blocks. I like learning people first, and building trust.

So can we go from there?

Mr sunshine, I also have zero clue what "run the streets and take their time with me" means ... It looks like "if she doesn't subscribe to immediate monogamy, she's a slut" but I'm not sure if that's what you mean...

[MrSunshine]

Originally Posted by imperfect_cupcake

Mr sunshine, I also have zero clue what "run the streets and take their time with me" means ... It looks like "if she doesn't subscribe to immediate monogamy, she's a slut" but I'm not sure if that's what you mean...

Fuck! No, I don't mean that at all. This is why I usually don't bother to try to have a serious conversation in forums. It's just to hard for someone else to figure out what your trying to say.
I hope you find the answers you're looking for.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Lol!!! Well, that's ok. That's why I asked. What does that saying mean, I ve never heard it before? Clarification is always a really good thing when using our talky holes and typing.

I'm not angry. I think you'd have to do a lot worse than that to offend me....

Pardon if my bluntness made it sound as if I was.

[MasterfulButch]

To provide context for my answer, yes, I’m the sort of butch who chooses monogamy for myself as soon as there’s a special femme in my life. This is not done in the mentality of imposing a rule and it isn’t something that feels like any kind of sacrifice to me. On the contrary, it comes with an awareness that someone in my social sphere has achieved a certain level in my affections and this is something to be celebrated. The monogamy choice is like a by-product of this positive realisation.

One thing that I would like to flag straight away is that, from my perspective, sex goes way beyond the physical and I think this is a differentiation that could really impact on the questions you’re asking. For me it’s probably 80% emotional and 20% physical. From what I’ve seen this differs from person to person but I find it translates to a situation where I’m only likely to be intimate with someone with whom I experience a significant depth of emotion and have a belief in at least potential longevity. There have been a couple of instances where I have acted against this approach and frankly, they were far more to do with my own fears at the time than a positive, empowered choice. I am not saying this applies to anyone else, just me. Anyway, now I’m a bit older and I’ve learnt from these experiences, I’m pretty settled that for me, sex equates to an intimacy that I want to indulge in within the confines of a relationship. I guess to follow this thought to its conclusion; this means that being single pretty much equates to being celibate for me.

With that background established, I am now thinking about your question as to how I would deal with the scenario you describe. I think the most important thing to me was that she was open with me. I would want to know that these are her thoughts and feelings on the matter, perhaps some reassurance that it’s a general thing and not me specifically and then honesty that she is seeing other people in a similar way. I would need to know all this early because it would have an effect on how I handled myself. I don’t think it would necessarily pre-empt my interest because I think so much of her in other, more important areas. I would, however, have to hold myself back more and actually have mentally grounding conversations with myself. The other thing is I don’t think I could sleep with her whilst she was sleeping with other people. I could wait, certainly, potentially for many months of getting to know one another. I guess this is the time when you’d find out about substance habits, spiritual beliefs and the value sets you’ve mentioned but once we mutually agreed to cross that intimacy barrier then I’d need her to suspend dating others. If sex was great and it was all going swimmingly then yes, I’d be looking for mutual monogamy at that point. If sex was persistently incompatible then we’d call it a day and she could once again date as she pleased.

Reading this over, I suppose it does rather sound both like an attempt to find a middle ground and an ultimatum. I don’t like the idea of giving someone an ultimatum but then I guess we all have things that are important to us, some we can flex whilst others would feel like a loss if we did. I don’t think I would like the person I would be if I was sitting at home imagining my lover being out and intimate with someone else. It is because of who I am and the peculiarities of my personality, that I would feel that what she and I shared was somehow diminished. My insecurities would flare and I would be such a fretful arse that I wouldn’t even want to be around myself. I wouldn’t want to be that person for me or for her. I totally get it that other people would feel completely different and I whole-heartedly respect that. I guess my ultimate litmus test would be whether or not I felt empowered. I can imagine feeling empowered having my value set and being monogamous. I can also imagine feeling empowered if I were more adventurous, had a more physical approach to sex and we were both out there exploring and enjoying what life had to offer, whether or not it was together. If there isn’t an area of common ground we could find where we both felt empowered then I would say that it wasn’t the right pairing.

I hope this is of some help to you.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Ah ok, that is helpful, actually. Because I don't feel deeper intimacy with someone until I've been talking with them, being with them and having sex for a while. I don't open up that deep till I trust. So to me, if I have dinner and a chat with someone else, it's just dinner and a chat. I don't feel I've exchanged anything intimate. I don't feel I've given over anything intimate. When I *do* start feeling intimate, when I start trusting someone, then I feel ok about talking about monogamy, but to me it would feel like someone im having coffee with tells me "you can't can coffee with other people because of the way I feel about having coffee"
I find it just as baffling. So that does help me to understand that even a single conversation to you is deeply intimate. I take it that you are really deeply intimate with just a very few friends and don't have just happy casual aquainances you talk about things that don't feel intimate with?

Because I'm starting to suspect this is part of the issue. I can have really indepth, open, connective and happy conversation about subjects people feel private about and I just don't. It's very easy for me to do that. My *intimate* conversations are about really deep feelings, and intimacy to me is about when people help me, like drive me to the bank when I'm really sick. I would never, ever let anyone help me with things unless they were my partner or my parent or a very close friend.

For instance I was dating someone and I fell, smacked my head and got knocked out and got a concussion, I called my dad but he didn't pick up. I was at a little clinic and decided to walk to the train, even though they were worried about me walking alone. I did not want to call my date because I had not been seeing her long enough to ask her to help me like that. That is very intimate to me. So I'm assuming that having dinner and a conversation, which is just social lubricant to me, means something equally intimate to them.

That's why I don't go out for ice cream, or do certain activities with people - like weekend holidays or museums or cook dinner for them - unless I feel past the stage of just going out and having meals and drinks in pubs and getting to know them.

I am guessing that for some people, meals and drinks and long talks i pubs and a movie here and there are very intimate. I can understand that.

I guess then there is just finding activities that neither of us find really intimate in order to get to know each other. Bit difficult if someone has already decided they want what they want, but I can at least get a grasp of it now. Thank you masterful butch, that was actually quite helpful.

[WickedFemme]

I'm a little confused...lol... People move at different speeds... I would never push someone into a corner and insist that they choose. Things are either good or they are not. If there are too many differences I just move on.

[MrSunshine]

Originally Posted by imperfect_cupcake

Lol!!! Well, that's ok. That's why I asked. What does that saying mean, I ve never heard it before? Clarification is always a really good thing when using our talky holes and typing.

I'm not angry. I think you'd have to do a lot worse than that to offend me....

Pardon if my bluntness made it sound as if I was.

LoL. I'm just frustrated because it's hard to make a point sometimes.
Plus, that was a long ass post and a lot to sort through.
I like bluntness, you should have started there

Personally, I like things to be easier.

But, I guess if I met someone that wanted to take things slower or faster than me and we had everything that clicked then I would just roll with it and see where it went. I guess try not to get ahead of myself.

I would never call a woman a slut unless she wanted me too

[imperfect_cupcake]

I guess it depends on what one is looking for.

For me, they have to be kinky and dominant, within three hours drive, open minded, wanting a primary partner, same sense of humour, have their shit sorted, sane, not an alcoholic or smoking pot daily, more intelligent than most and really good at communication.

"Easy" is lower on my list. I've dated 10 people in the last 3 years. All of them have been problematic in ways like turning out to be a binge drinker, or winds up having a fairly crippling anxiety disorder that they didn't mention, or wants me to support them, or....

So when I meet someone local, my age range, very intelligent, attractive, funny, dominant, understands a lot of stuff without having to explain myself too much, isnt a binge drinker, has her shit sorted, and is really kind and generous - I'd like to think I can take some of her surface values into consideration without dismissing her or them, off hand. If I'm actually open for something long term to happen. Im not 35 anymore and I'm not in London.
There isn't a dirth of sane and sorted single local butches wanting to play me Mona Lisa on the Ukelele and see how it goes. In fact, I don't know of any.

So I have to be flexible *somewhere* if I want to try and do things differently.

I was just wondering if there are others other there who are flexible to a degree IF they know CONTEXT or if they respond to situations by a set of rules they adhere to.


To be to the point.

I'm suspecting that most people run on a set of rules. Or perhaps flexibility within those rules. But usually people don't deviate off a set of rules unless they have context and reason. Which is why I gave an annoyingly long post.

I'm also used to having longer posts as I'm one of those annoying fuckers that partook in the theory threads. I'm blunt, but I'm totally a context whore. Context can change the colour of a picture completely.

Apologies for my details. I'm not good at fluffy threads. I'm pretty damn cerebral.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Or maybe the answer is "I dunno, I dont think about it"

Which is also a valid response.

[Ginger]

I feel totally confused by this thread and I'm too impatient to read more carefully so that's all on me.

That said, I think I'm hearing that people commit to monogamy at different points in the continuum of getting close, and sometimes that is problematic.

I'm monogamous and usually start having sex before I know someone very well. That hasn't worked well for me, so I'm changing my strategy.

Good luck, everyone!

[Gráinne]

I was wondering why this was addressed to butches-is it because they are more traditionally the "pursuer" in dating/courting?

While I don't feel bound by rigid "rules", it just comes down to: If someone is moving at a far different speed with regards to dating/courting/intimacy than I am, chances are we're not a good pairing anyway and I move on. And yes, the "click" of connection or recognition can happen, maddeningly, even when compatibility isn't there. That's why, for me personally, I don't want to get physically vulnerable until I know that person much better.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Grianne, I actually wanted to hear what butches because they tend to be more conservative (in my expereince only, and this IS NOT a blanket statement, just a general trend I've noticed) around sex - perhaps because of the whole gender thing requiring greater vulnerability during sex? Who knows. It's anecdotal anyway.

And because I just wanted to.

[imperfect_cupcake]

For those who are confused, I apologise. I like context heavy, meaty discussions with lots of things to think about in it. I'm not really a "here's a brief question, Gimmie your drive by answer" kinda thread gal. In 2010 these kinds of threads were common and why I kept going to forums. I'm not a simple question/simple answer kind of gal. I like deconstruction and examination. Apologies. Perhaps this kind of discussion is really out of place, then.

Please ignore if it's confusing and muddled and too long.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Originally Posted by Ginger

That said, I think I'm hearing that people commit to monogamy at different points in the continuum of getting close, and sometimes that is problematic.


Good luck, everyone!

Ding! That's it entirely. Sometimes that isn't about "speed" as some people commit to monogamy easily and casually and they don't mean it to be as serious as *I* see it when the word monogamy gets whipped out.

If I am actually jiving with someone on all others levels, then this problem is something I personally am fine with questioning intent over and coming to a deeper understanding.

But I'm asking others what they think about
"People commit to monogamy at different points in the continuum" and how they approach a bump in it.

[Candelion]

Originally Posted by Ginger

I think I'm hearing that people commit to monogamy at different points in the continuum of getting close, and sometimes that is problematic.

This was so beautifully worded. Sometimes cerebral and erudite thinking comes in a succinct format. Verbosity isn't always the best way to go.

Interesting thread, imperfect_cupcake!

[imperfect_cupcake]

You should see my 16 page emails.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Originally Posted by Candelion

This was so beautifully worded. Sometimes cerebral and erudite thinking comes in a succinct format. Verbosity isn't always the best way to go.

Interesting thread, imperfect_cupcake!

Glad you think it's interesting

So then what would you do if you ran into that problem that ginger stated?