BPDFamily.com

Excuse me, but why is a woman (disordered or not) with a high notch count is bad news by default when I see that a male on this forum states how many hundreds of women he has slept with and interprets that as a sign of his self-confidence? Why isn't it a red flag then? There seem to be at least two double standards there.

Again, a male here can talk about how "disordered ones are the best" (which I find both stereotyping objectifying) but when disordered women choose to practice the very same thing with their own iniative, that becomes a sign of unhealthy impulsivity?

|iiii

I believe the number is the important part. It creates the "why"? I mean think about it... 20/30/50 partners and not 1 of those relationships lasted? Something isn't right... And if it's sex with ppl outside a relationship what does that say about her morals, values, beliefs, decisions etc? A promiscuous past should serve as a warning... you really think there's long term potential there?

I won't tell any man how to live his life, they can ignore it at their own peril.

I don't think it matters what sex the person is. If they have slept wit that many people then something is going on. Whether it is BPD, sex addiction, NPD, low self esteem or whatever.

I know men that have slept with a similar number of woman and in all honesty they are shallow and selfish and I ended up not wanting to spend any time in their company.

What matter is the context and back story, nothing else, male or female it doesn't matter.

Agree entirely Thisworld.  |iiii

So... .

Sometimes we just have to have an acceptance that there is a double standard. We can get into a big equality issue, but men and women aren't the same. In so many aspects. I mean I can give birth to a child but can't pee standing up. For me it's chipping away it, discussing the inequality where it counts (like equal pay, right to vote, etc.) not necessarily throwing your hands in the air talking about how it's not fair.

I think that's where we need to step away from all the generalizations.  

There's an exception to every rule. There's a reason for every thing.

My husband was promiscuous in his twenties because it was the 80's, he was having fun, his roommate was in a hair band, and they objectified women. His number is cringe worthy but AIDS wasn't an issue yet back then.

Sex abuse survivors can have coping skills on either end of the spectrum ---- some embracing the shame having multiple partners in order to normalize it while others can be (otherwise) virgins into their 30's. For women, high notch counts can be a tell tale sign.

I think this has to come to each of our own set of values. I don't necessarily judge someone based on their sexual past, because you just don't know why. As far as relationship partners, that wouldn't matter to me (obviously with my husband's past), but I might take issue when someone who is overly sexual on a first date though, simply because it's not in line with my own boundaries/limits/expectations. It wouldn't be a judgment, just a sign perhaps that there were some poor boundaries going on.

I liked my girl's freedom. I encouraged  her. I hate the double standard.

But in her case it was part of a pathology. Of a lack of ability to connect with others otherwise. Of a twisted power game in seducing only married men, and as part of cheating on her behalf. Then she'd dump them disgustingly (instead of just fading away). So it's all context. Why it's done and how. I did it after a 9 year relationship, compensating ... .And never hurt anyone. But of course there was an obsession too, me wanting to be "the best".

What's important here is that sex is probably a coping mechanism for a bigger problem, and a high number can be seen as a testament to that. A red flag in my book. I've never seen a emotionally healthy woman with a high count, it was always the troubled ones. This was MY experience. Obviously ppl learn, so to me, "by default" I would stay away in order to avoid pain.

I can only speak from my experience as a man, I cannot comment from a woman's perspective. If you find the same to be true for men then you are welcome to share it. Equality or double standards or whatever was never the point here.

You need to remember there are a lot of guys here that are angry at a specific woman. I've read worse things. Lots of ppl vent here, comes with the territory. Why take it personally? But either way, no one needs to respond to me if that's what you want.

I personally am not referring to you. I haven't read any of your posts outside of this thread.

lol, must have misinterpreted your post bc the original statement was partially directed at me. Never mind then. Apologies

Because there is a double standard.  There have been quite a few studies dating back to the '50's where surveys were conducted asking heterosexual adults how many sex partners they've had in their lifetimes.  Invariably on average men have reported they've had 7 and women have reported they've had 4.  Think about that: if heterosexual sex requires both a man and a woman, how is that possible?  It isn't.  So researchers have concluded that there is a tendency for men to over report the number and women to under report, due in part to cultural programming that assigns promiscuity as a virtue in men and chastity as a virtue in women.  It shows up in language as well, with promiscuous men being labelled 'stud' and promiscuous women being labelled 'slut'.

The truth is libido strength varies among humans of both sexes, as do moral standards, so the most empowering course per usual is to follow your own bliss wherever it takes you, and what you're up to is nobody's business unless you say so.

And all of that only tangentially applies to personality disorders, so I'll stop talking now.

Some stats for the data-inclined: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/key_statistics/n.htm#numberlifetime (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/key_statistics/n.htm#numberlifetime)

My exBPDgf blurted one night that she had slept with a lot of people. It was late night and we had talked for hours and she brought it up. I think it was her way of telling me that she knew I was aware of her pathology. Come to think of it, she was pretty open about the excessive life style she lived.

She was open about her reckless behavior, but I chose to ignore it. Sometimes it seemed as if she was pushing the limits as to how much I was willing to accept her regardless. Maybe she was being open and honest and felt comfortable to so.

I would have accepted her past, but she has no willingness to change. That in itself is a major red flag.   

I think that's a completely fair point.

I am a woman who had a lot of lovers when younger. I refuse to use the term notch count, how ugly! The number of lovers I had would probably amaze people. I lived in wild times and for complex reasons led a wild life. Was some of it my own trauma history talking? Yes. But not all... .far from it. A lot of it was me feeling good and positive about my sexuality. I am still friends with many lovers I had. I have no regrets.

I also find it dismaying that a woman with many lovers, who engaged in group sex and so forth, is labelled a pathology. In my day this was called a vacation in France  :) It's especially troubling because there is a very SHAMING aspect when this is judged by a man who has done no different. The language I am reading is also very shaming. I cringe because I imagine what it would be like to be this woman, to have met a man who is doing much the same, and yet be reviled and scorned for the very same behavior. That feels unfair to me. It frankly feels like the woman getting painted black.

My girl told me a story how she was in a sauna (in Germany) where men and women go inside naked, together. An old man looked at her so she said she spread her legs to give him a good look "because he was old and I thought I'd do him a favor".

That's not a love of sex, it's being mean and twisted and sick and using your sex and body to manipulate and tease and hurt. And who know what else she did.

And again, there is the cheating and dishonesty , and ugly discards... .the self esteem issues and sycosis, the games and triangulation... .So that's why I use the word "pathology". It's part from a big dark picture. Before I realized all these other parts I embraced her sexuality. As I said before, people can do the exact same thing from two very different reasons, one healthy the other not.

And she does in fact live in France, which normalized for me her behavior. "Everyone cheats there" is what I told my self.

Dear fellows,

Thank you for contributing to my thread. I personally do not remember starting it or giving it a title, but maybe I pressed a wrong button or something. I thought, perhaps, one comment I made in another thread was separated by moderators and given the form of another thread. If that's the case, I'd like to thank them, too, as I believe this may be a worthy discussion in some senses.

As the host of this thread as my name in the "starter" section implies, I would like to be a good host as described in our community information. For that, I'd like to

a) Summarize the debate so far,

b) Write my replies to certain comments made and contribute to the evolution of the topic

c) Mention a couple of things I believe I need so that this thread is beneficial for me.

Due to some other obligations, I won't be able to do this right now, but I believe I'll have posted something in an hour.

I kindly request already contributing posters to kindly refrain from posting more replies before I am able to fulfill what I believe is my responsibility as a good host.

Thank you in advance for allowing me this little window and thank you for your understanding.

This is something I'm practicing for the first time in bpdfamily, so if I'm doing something that violates forum rules with this request, a reminder from the moderators will be very helpful.

Thank you,

       

You're right, most of the times there's this double-standard where men are allowed to have a high count of past partners, while women not... .that's very wrong and it is definitely due to cultural biases - which are slowly fading away over time in civilized countries anyway, since women are, and can be, much more emancipated with respect to the past.

Anyway, about the specific issue of having a high count of past partners: my opinion is that an high count is absolutely NOT a certificate of some ongoing personality disorder; however we can observe that, quite often, persons with BPD/HPD have an high-count of past partners (which is a different thing from a logical point of view).

So, for sure it's an indicator to look for, a red flag, but this does not mean that it implies a disorder!

"Everyone cheats there" (in France).

That's a sweeping statement, could be construed as black and white.

Everyone doesn't cheat in France. 

Even their president did, 1 year ago. Nobody made a big deal. He left his wife and joined the lover. The wife ended up hospitalized in a mental hospital. Google it.

Their president... .

Yes he did. But that doesn't mean that everyone cheats in France. Skewed logic.

Yeah, from a logical point of view is called association fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy).

"A cat has four legs - A horse has four legs - All horses are cats"

"Hollande is French - Hollande is a cheater - All french people are cheaters" :)

NCEA, please stop making trivial posts

For contributors to this topic:

To round up the discussion a little bit, I have attempted to give some background about this thread, summarize this topic and tried to find some questions to discuss. We are of course free to discuss other things that have been mentioned as well. I'll also post my ideas about a couple of them. Thank you for your thoughtful contributions so far.  

Now, the first post (my original post) was not originally a topic. It was a reminder of what I saw as a double standard in the way we sometimes state the number of  our experiences in a certain tone and that is a sign of confidence (as witnessed in relevant posts I made a comment about); however if a female with suspected BPD did the same, that would be something that would be perceived differently. That also was not just a protest about the social, cultural, sexuality inequality women face (I have more suitable places to protest that with some significant effect for my society). It may be a call for fairness, given the tone of some posts I have had read here though; at least, sometimes there seem to be double standards in what we define a hurtful action depending on the position of the "victim" and the "aggressor." 

The second part of my original post is not only a protest, it’s also a criticism about how I have had to read “which ones” offers best sex to men – disordered women apparently, with histrionics being better than BPD- which I find, as stated, objectifying, stereotyping. I personally don’t see anything to discuss there but anyone who needs a bit of explanation as to why it’s objectifying and stereotyping may ask here and I’ll do my best to clarify.  

The summary so far:

Some members think it’s inequality but difference should be accepted (as far as I understand). Some members think the “number” is symptomatic for females under any circumstance. Some members think it is something they personally do not find attractive in any sex. Some members agree that there is a double standard somewhere. Some people find these highly cultural or value based.  

The question:

How can we turn the focus more on ourselves so that these discussions offer some benefit to us in our detachment, and ultimately self-awareness.

Here are my suggestions, some questions:

1.   In many mental disorders,  compliance / non-compliance with the social norms does give a clue about the person’s mental health. This is something which is also used wrongly by mental health professionals sometimes (one of them once asked me if I ever slept with a man I met in a bar - checking for  bipolar impulsivity I think, that was his cultural limit about impulsivity). For this to be truly indicative, other symptoms are necessary – or maybe your partner simply likes one-night stands. If you think this impulsivity or lack of executive control actually was the case with your partner, in what other areas have you seen examples and how DID YOU respond?

2.   FTHT has a rather significant question: Is it really the number or how different it might be from our number? What is our discovery about ourselves here?

3.   To all the hurt and angry people here who think “disordered ones offer the best sex” is not so bad a comment – or that you have seen worse: Why do you think what happened to you is so bad and hurtful when, apparently, you don’t think objectifying a person is a very bad thing? Because, in the end of the day, this is what happened to you? What can you do for yourselves and in yourselves so that you don’t get hurt like this in the future?

What does any of this matter at the end of the day?  10, 100, 1000 partners ... .the only thing that matters is the one partner that brought us here.

Great posts TW, and awesome way to run a thread.


Shifting the focus back to ourselves, my ex had had sex with 3 or 4 times as many people as I had, I was intimidated by that, she knew it, and used it.  We're all at different levels of comfort with our sexuality, and someone who seems more comfortable, and more experienced, can be intimidating, it was for me.  Now my ex lied about everything so how many partners she's actually had is a mystery and ultimately irrelevant, except for the effect that knowledge had on me.

But when it got right down to it, as the relationship got under way, sex with her wasn't much fun.  She fcked, she didn't make love, had no concept of the term really, and it felt like masturbation to me, fine in a pinch I guess, but I wanted so much more.

Caffeine inspired random musing: A borderline seeks an attachment to 'complete' them, make them 'whole', a recreation of that symbiotic relationship they had with their mother, the one they never successfully detached from, the genesis of the disorder.  So in that unhealthy fusing of psyches to make one 'person' out of two, wouldn't sex with that other person, since they're not another person in a borderline's head, always be masturbation?

HurtiNW, thank you for your comment, I agree with everything you say and have tried to ask questions about that very thing where culture and science seem to overlap sometimes.

I want to clarify, due to my personal values, that I too am opposed to looking at people and our sexual performances with them as "notch counts" and I neither phrased it that way myself nor knowingly gave that name to this thread. In its original form,  I used the phrase after quoting a post by someone in this thread (and this notch count, by defalut etc, the entire clause was written there) and because I thought the reference was obvious, I didn't at that moment distance myself from it with quotation marks. I agree with you and now I'm very happy that I am able to do that distancing here in this post. (I needed it for myself.)

Yes, boys are conditioned to see the number of their sexual performances as some "success" and I consider myself lucky to have associated with whom I deem very valuable men who left this behind and are now able to respect sex in and of itself without attributing any "success" value to the number. That's actually a personal boundary for me in relationships, I don't tend to be intimate with people who bring numbers up or feel the need to talk about how popular they are in this sense because in my experience, I have never come across anything but a deep sense of insecurity in those people. And that insecurity has been one that attempts to harm rather than one that responds to encouragement. Ironically, in my relationship with the BPD I agreed to be with him under very different circumstances but this insecurity came up and I even encouraged his attention seeking attributing it to invulnerabilities caused by addiction. Wrong. Luckily, noticing this insecure / attention seeking quality kind of prevented me to emotionally attach with him 100%, it was always there as something at the back of my mind. It helps in my detachment, too.

It's interesting that the past seems to become a threatening issue for many of us - probably because it was presented in a threatening way. I was threatened by my ex's long relationships rather than his "numbers" because he managed to bring them into our relationship as unresolved (half-resolved?)  things. He didn't use numbers this way -"youth" was used this way, but I guess numbers would be as threatening if brought up in the same manner. I think it's the manner rather than the content. I don't think I would be threatened by any of this if it was brought up by a more secure person. Even when I didn't feel personally threatened by what he was saying, I felt threatened (uncomfortable) by the presence of a person whom I knew was trying to bring me down in some sense. I think that's the most uncomfortable thing.

I would say my ex used sex for control rather than a form of masturbation.

That's my boundary, if I feel uncomfortable or insecure about something, I talk about it once. If the person prefers only justifying themselves -rather than empathizing, or showing me some sign that they understand it- and then start doing it again repetitively, that's it. They have no regard for my feelings. To me, that's a very important red flag about someone. I believe we all have insecurities and someone who loves us helps and supports us in those, it's not only about who is right or wrong. It's about what we are doing to make each other comfortable. There is always a mid-way where one person learns to take a bit more risk about their insecurity and the other person is ready to change certain behaviours -even if partially- for the comfort of their partner . That says cooperation to me in a relationship and is valuable.

Yep, I agree, although the reason my ex was trying to bring me down is actually a compliment, and this is a reframe that I shall run with, yes I shall.

She thought I was pretty damn awesome, more successful, healthier, smarter, more ambitious, and she felt she couldn't measure up.  Bullsht I say, if I thought that about her I wouldn't have wanted to be with her, but I didn't know about BPD then and the fact it's a shame-based disorder; now it makes sense.  So she used her body and her sexual allure, her favorite attachment tools, as a way to get one-up on me in an area in a attempt to level the playing field.  Sad really, but then my sht showed up and off into dysfunction we went. 

But I'll go back to the beginning, the motivation for her going there, she thought I was pretty damn awesome, so I'll run with that, external validation is a good thing, and add that to the digging the pain that followed caused me to do and the resulting growth it inspired, and it's all good.  Hallelujah!

That ties in with what we were talking about a while ago TW: blurting our truth and noticing what we get back.  It can be stickier in a romantic relationship, so practicing that with everyone has become important, moving forward creating the life of our dreams, spill the beans, notice what we get back, remove the folks who either can't or won't give us what we want and need, and keep the ones who do.

It's like building a muscle, best to start out light, do the reps, let the muscle build, and work up to the big leagues of a romantic relationship.  That way I won't end up in another situation weak and unprepared.

Exactly! |iiii

Great idea to shift the focus back to ourselves and our healing!

For me this issue is triggering because I am the one with a broader sexual history than my BPD boyfriend. And he used that fact to shame me. When we got into conflict it was a way for him to insult and hurt me.

I think there are a lot of ways a BPD can paint someone black. They will use any tool in their arsenal. For my boyfriend, my sexuality was at first idolized. When we met he talked about how happy he was to have met someone who is sexually comfortable, confident, etc. It was part of the pedestal. Then when he began devaluing me he used the very same fact to paint me black. He would rage and mock me for having had many lovers.

I have accountability for my own reactions, many of which were not pretty. I did not see his own deep shame. His own history was having a narcissistic father and a martyr mother whom I believe engaged in emotional incest with him (not real incest, but she made him a mommy's boy while reviling her husband's sexuality to him; this really messed him up). I didn't take this as seriously as I should have. Relationships are supposed to be about respect. I did not respect his vulnerability and shame as much as I should have. That he shamed me does not remove my accountability. 

The discovery I made about myself is it is important for me to have a partner that respects my sexual history, and doesn't use it against me.

I suppose I could say more about the "number of sexual partners" issue, but I think, overall, this has to be judged, like all other things we observe someone saying and doing, according to our intuition, including our emotions. 

Some who come from a background of childhood trauma and abuse may have had their intuition "scrambled", so that they don't perceive it.  Or, it's a bit more complex than that, they could be hypervigilant for certain cues, and yet they keep making unhealthy relationship choices because it feels so... ."familiar".

I, however, am one who perceives things but don't always act on them.  I sometimes rationalize out of it ("well that's odd, but seems harmless", or, if it happens early on in a relationship/friendship, I notice it and my "antennae perk up", but I don't know what to do with the information because I don't feel I have a context for it yet. 

For instance, the first time socializing with uBPD former friend after the event we met at, we went for lunch.  She was very particular about some aspects of her order (had seen a nutritionist, suspected gluten issues, believed in the connection between food and mood, etc.)  It wasn't what she asked for, but how she asked for it... .her word choices, tone of voice, that I thought "stuck out", that's the best way I can say my intuitive noticings.  Remember on Sesame Street "One of these things is not like the other"?  Kind of like that... .

And I think it makes sense to judge our partners' sexual/relationship histories the same way... .how do they talk about their ex?  Who do they blame (if anybody) for the problems?  Tone of voice, word choices, do they have residual emotions?  When they talk about their sexual history, what is their attitude about it? 

Not to mention our own sexual histories.  If there are parts of it you are not proud of, how do you understand your feelings and needs at the time, and what have you/could you learn from it?  How do you feel in response to your partner's response to your sexual history?  Do they judge you (or themselves) on the basis of it?

Which made me think of trust.  What makes you trust/mistrust someone?  Is your "trust antenna" calibrated accurately?  And are you trustworthy yourself... .are you honest with yourself and others?

I found the comment/s in question very disturbing... .and reported them.  

Unfortunately current social language and ethos supports and reinforces this point of view... .males with multiple partners are "studs" (positive connotation)... .women who behave in a similar manner ... ."slu#s, sl#gs, who#es"... .

I'm struggling to think of a negative label applied to guys who 'sleep around'   ... ."players" perhaps?... .hmm rather tame and implies control... .in a jovial way.  

------------ preditor womaniser philanderer

------------ sleezeball ladiesman penishead

------------ cocksman player Tiger Woods  :)

I agree that in society, at a superficial level, a "Jame Bond female slayer" is a seen as a man amongst men and a women in a similar role (Madonna) would be seen as broken at some level. This imagery stands when there is no victim.

When we see the victim, take it out of the "fantasy", it often changes. We have many men viewed as pathetic philanders, Bill Cosby, Tiger Woods, Bill Clinton, Koby Bryant, Jesse James, Jim Bakker, Magic Johnson.

When you dial it down to real life social circles, it really varies. A group of bricklayers may have one standard. A group of Lutheran' men another. Regardless, when the philandering blows things up, the men are not seen favorably.

I think what stands out on this board from time to time is that there are some men who extol the virtues of BPD women because BPD women try to win the approval with sex - BPD women are more likely to have a sex addiction or be willing to enable another person (one of us) who has a sex addiction.

I say this as I don't think the issue is one of social imagery (society views are what they are), but more one of sexual addictions (something that matters here). Some people equate their value and worth with sex - some confuse love with sex - and so they seek an excessive number lot of sex partners or over-value sex in the relationship.

How many times do we read here, "she was a train-wreck, but I miss the great sex, I'm going to call her". Look at the price some have paid for "the sex".

As we look in the mirror, we should ask, "where are we" (it differs for each of us) in this regard?  Healthy? Emotionally mature? Have past patterns to embrace or to question?

Good points Skip, and in those scenarios the 'notch count' number might be more important.

Philanderers end up being the brunt of jokes too:

"Clinton was the president who was off with the intern between the bushes"

"A lion wouldn't cheat on his wife but a Tiger Wood."

I think there is an important question here as to how we see ourselves and our own actions not only as "receivers" of something good but as "givers" as well. I'll try to look at this from the other direction.  How to think about myself when I'm able to offer a disordered partner something that he likes and finds "me" attractive for? If he is a sex addict, offering his substance to him and trying to be attractive in his eyes in this regard is a bit like trying to lure someone into something with bribe- for lack of a better word, this isn't my native language. Unless this attraction is experienced in other areas of our life or maybe evolves into a deeper feeling, I would feel like I'm deceiving or using someone I. So, I think unless experienced with an emotionally healthy partner, being able to provide good sex and being liked for it means nothing to me - this would exclude relationships where there is some sort of intimacy or a longer, deeper relationship with the disordered partner I guess, mine wasn't one of those. A lot of us here talk about being liked for something but we don't exactly think who we are was understood or that person liked really matched the way we understood ourselves. I think this is like that. I don't want to be liked for something if I don't feel that that thing is actually "me." Retrospectively, I see that this gap was quite disturbing in my relationship with my ex with BPD. However, I didn't experience this very knowingly as I didn't know the scope of the problem, that it was this disorder through and through.

Which brings me to Eeks's very critical question about humiliation in this relationship. This is where I, reversely, was a "rejected taker". I feel humiliated by my partner in a lot of ways but basically two different types of humiliation. One is abstract. I think when we started living together my partner was engulfed - as I see it now. He had come out of rehab (dropped it) and I would be financing us for a while. We had an agreement about it, that he would continue his recovery, I would look after the house for three months or something so that he gained some strength in his recovery and then seek employment. He was OK with it, I was OK with it. As soon as he moved in he became a really nasty person for a couple of days - which he then attributed to coming out of rehab. I believe he was also engulfed and I was split black due to some reasons though, because I discovered an email written to his confidante ex that I was paying for everything BUT he didn't let me touch him. That "BUT" is probably one of the most humiliating things I have ever read about myself. Did he really think that? Was that something else? I'll never know. This was a blatant lie - the man who didn't let me touch him at that moment was also experiencing erectile dysfunction due to medication temporarily and was very fragile right out of rehab. I do not force fragile people out of rehab into anything, he went through withdrawal in the house because he dropped rehab anyway. All I did was to try to make him feel safe during this with a cuddle. If he soothed his feelings by representing me that way to his ex, good for him. I still think it is horrible (in the context of this triangulation especially, there is something woman to woman going on there).

A private life revealed in front of another female with lies about me was hurtful. (After those couple of days we had a very active sex life but that was of course not mentioned:)) So, the guy humiliated me with absence. It was as painful as some physical transgressions for me. I felt, maybe wrongly, that physical boundaries might somehow be established more strongly, however this capability of turning sex life into something humiliating like this could not be changed.  In physical boundaries a no is a no, here what am I saying no to? If I'm trying to train someone in basic rules of politeness, there is a big gap that may not be closed that easily. Like we discussed with a friend in another thread, sometimes we are ready to tolerate so many things like tantrums, rages, defensiveness but once a small e-mail does something so big, it becomes impossible to be intimate - for me. Of course it is impossible because the other party takes no action to repair the hurt, otherwise this is easily repairable.

This affected me so much that although in the last phase of our relationship I shut up completely emotionally and was trying to send him away without much damage to his fragile health (he overdosed very quickly) I brought this up. I said to him that I felt the way he represented me put me in the position of someone trying to get something (sex) from him by "looking after" him. I said, although he might have guessed otherwise I had no theoretical problems with trying to "buy" sex work but if I wanted to buy it I'd probably have bought it in more exciting settings with a professional whose laundry and dinner I wouldn't worry about afterwards. This gave him a silent shock. I felt like I restored some pride in the least abusive way I could - I believe I made a statement about myself without insulting him about his qualities. I think there was a power fight somewhere and I realize that the way these power fights work is to attribute a role to us (a "buyer" for instance) and then we protest in vain how we are not the "buyer" in vain. The moment I accepted the attributed position but told him how I would actually "buy" it, his established battle ground was shattered. This is my discovery. He explained to me that he always had a problem with a woman buying things (I think this is gender role manipulation, he has no problems with that, and I didn't buy him much. Would he like to walk around in hospital pyjamas really? Plus he is the most demanding male anyway, we split up, he still asks me to give him things like my second bicycle etc etc.) He is like a little child crying for toys in a toy shop.

I believe Eeks's suggestion, listening to the gut, looking at the manners and my decision to communicate more will protect me in the future. I simply will not date people with "odd but harmless" things - I know the feeling so well, I'm scaring myself. I believe whatever I experienced in sex is not about sex per se. It's an area where one aspect of this person is experienced.