First sex date: More than just a Dream

JayPatelIndiaGuj

In case you're new here and unfamiliar with the mantra of this site, it's "move fast, skip steps where you can, and take women to bed as soon as possible if you want to stand the greatest chance of keeping them around." The rationale, of course, is that it's easier to keep dating a girl you're already lovers with... than one you aren't.

But what about getting to intimacy on the first date? Can you really get first date sex with girls with any degree of consistency?

Or is it just a myth?
I have a confession to make. Before I spent much time learning about getting girls, and even for some time after, I really, truly believed that only "easy" girls slept with someone on the first date.

I believed that, if a girl went to bed with a guy, and it was only the first time they were going out together... well... clearly, she was the kind of girl who just does that with everyone!

This was not what you might call a "helpful mentality." In fact, it hurt me quite a bit. It led to me:

Losing girls that part of me knew wanted me quite badly, because my logical mind kicked in and told me, "Look man, it's only the first date... and she's not that kind of girl! So just hold off."

Projecting my own mentality onto women through my words, actions, and subcommunication, leading to them acting conservative and cagey around me where most of the time they were not that way.

Making women around me uncomfortable, because they could tell that I was judging them: either a girl was a "good girl," or she was not.

You could probably just chalk this off as being the "inexperienced guy's mentality" about first date sex. True, I didn't have experience... but I was certain that this was the way it was!

When I used to talk to other guys learning how to get girls early on in my growth curve, I'd frequently hear them saying you could take "pretty much any girl" to bed quickly enough if you pushed the right buttons on her. Poppycock! I told them. I'd had some girls come to bed with me fast too, but that's because they were the kind of girls who did that! There were OTHER girls... more CONSERVATIVE girls... who simply did not go for that kind of thing.

They were different.

I was certain of it. Totally certain. But my certainty did not come from experience... it came from speculation.

And speculation is the mother of all incorrect assumptions.


YOU ARE YOUR IDEALS
Jonathan Haidt, a professor of psychology at New York State University’s Stern School of Business, came up with something based on his research into the mindset differences between liberals and conservatives he called the "Moral Foundations Theory." In his time spent examining the predispositions of individuals on both sides of the moral spectrum, he found six different moral foundations which influence someone's perception of the world, and how he views and feels about things morally. They are:

Care/harm: kindness and nurturance geared at keeping others safe and away from damage and harm.

Fairness/cheating: reciprocity and proportionality, generating justice, rights, and autonomy.

Liberty/oppression: reaction and resentment to being oppressed or dominated, and in tension with #5, authority.

Loyalty/betrayal: in-group cohesion, patriotism, and self-sacrifice for the good of the group.

Authority/subversion: deference to legitimate authority, respect for traditions, and adherence to the hierarchy.

Sanctity/degradation: extends out of disgust and contamination, and views immoral activities as contaminants. Leads to striving for nobility.

What Haidt found regarding the difference in the valuation of each of these six elements was quite fascinating. He found this:

The more liberal someone is, the more the first two elements (care/harm and fairness/cheating) become all important, and the less the last four elements matter.

The more conservative someone is, the more all six elements are weighed to be of equal importance.

This leads to some rather intractable problems when you have liberal-minded individuals and conservative-minded individuals debating with each other over one thing or another. The liberal may want to do something that makes things more "fair" for someone, while the conservative may view this action as a "betrayal" or "subversive." The liberal, in turn, wonders how the conservative can possibly support "cheating" by his opposition to the action.

What I quickly realized as I began learning seduction was that I was very conservatively-minded by nature, while almost everyone who was any kind of significant figure in the seduction field was liberal.

And we had very different ways of viewing things.

But, my goal was not to moralize; rather, it was to learn, to improve myself, and to cast aside my own prejudices and inhibitions. I could never adopt the free-wheeling (to me) mindset of the majority of seducers, but I could certainly figure out where they had points, and where I was wrong, and where I could stand to learn a thing or two.

And with time, one of the areas I learned I was wrong was with getting to sex on the first date. For as much as my conservative predispositions made me want (in those days) to believe that there are just some girls out there who cannot be "turned" to first date sex, the more experienced I gained as a seducer, the more I found myself disproving this notion, and proving the notion of my more liberally-minded friends.


FIRST DATE SEX... WITH CONSERVATIVE GIRLS
When I was new to picking up girls, I assumed that most women are too conservative for first date sex. And that, if you did happen to sleep with a girl on the first date whom you thought was conservative, well... obviously, your read was off.

But, as I advanced as a seducer, I began to push myself harder to sleep with girls more and more quickly, and I began to take girls to bed more and more consistently on the first date... and many of the ones I didn't I could tell wanted me to, but I simply didn't make the move.

And I began to wonder... are all of these girls open about sex? Are all of them liberal? Every single one? At first I just assumed that if something happened fast with a girl I thought was conservative, I must have just misread her.

But this was happening with almost every girl I got out on a date.

If I'd only been meeting girls in, say, loud, boozy nightclubs, I could chalk that up to picking up girls in a den of iniquity. That would explain it.

But I wasn't. I was meeting girls in :

Bars
Nightclubs
Parties
... yes, but ALSO in:

Bookstores
Coffee shops
School alumni events
Trains and airplanes
The street
... some of whom had never even BEEN to a bar or a nightclub.

And all these girls reacted almost exactly the same.

Some of them were quite nervous about physical intimacy, while others were clearly confident and in their element. Some of them had no idea what they were doing in bed, while others were pros. Some of them put up a fair amount of last minute resistance before we became lovers, while others virtually tore their clothes off themselves (or literally, in a few cases).

But they all had one thing in common: most of them, when I did things right, went to bed with me on the first date.

How could this possibly be, and how could women move so fast?
In the article about dating without sex, we talked about marriage as a sociocultural construct; basically, something created by culture, not by biology.

If you woke up tomorrow on a deserted island, just you and some girl, and the two of you fell in love, you probably wouldn't ever end up getting "married," because there wouldn't be much point. But you'd still do all the things necessary as biological organisms to mate and reproduce.

Well, at least with marriage, while it isn't biologically based, it's still something pretty ubiquitous throughout most of the world's civilizations. But dating...? How ubiquitous is dating?

Truth is, in most parts of Asia and Africa, "dating" as a concept does not even exist. Even in North America, the originator of dating, the tradition itself only stretches back to after the Gilded Age; it's only about a hundred years old. Prior to the turn of the 20th century, the phrase "go on a date" meant a man was buying time with a prostitute.

So when I hear all the noise and hubbub about how you "shouldn't have sex before the third date" or you see women preaching from the rooftops about how they "simply won't have sex before at least the tenth date," I write it off as ridiculous carrying on about rigid, arbitrary rules surrounding a tradition that's existed for a mere blink of the eyes in cultural time, and already shows signs of wearing pretty thin (how many people do you know who regularly "go on dates" anymore?).

There is no biological rule ingrained in the female human mind that says, "There must be three (3) discrete dates before mating may occur." No; dating is a cultural construct, with precisely zero basis in biology except for this:

Females of the species need to be able to assess a male's mating value and quality.

That's it. That's the purpose that dating serves today; it's a vetting period, to replace the courtship process of bygone years.

And all vetting procedures have three elements in place:

A logical element,
An emotional element, and
A logistical element.
And if you can remove any logical objection for why a woman should not sleep with you right now... and if you can remove any emotional objection for why a woman should not sleep with you right now... and if you can remove any logistical reason why a woman should sleep right now... guess what?

She's going to sleep with your right now.


THE PSYCHOLOGY OF FIRST-DATE SEX
We get a fair amount of female commenters on this site (in light of its target demographic, in any event), representing a fairly even dispersion of opinions:

Half of them say, "Actually, this is surprisingly true... I didn't think a men's dating site would pin down female logic and behavior so well, but you've got it."

And the other half say, "Go screw yourself! Never in a million years would I do what you're saying women do! You don't know women AT ALL!"

(Usually I just delete the latter comments, since this is a place for well-reasoned, balanced arguments, and not for vitriol-laden diatribes aimed at relieving the angry individual's emotional angst; for the record, I also normally delete the "Women are evil and don't make sense at all!" comments from bitter men, too)

That caveat is in there just so that when you see the "Women aren't like this at all / you must only be sleeping with SLUTS but I'm a good girl and would NEVER do this!" remarks in the comments section, you know where it's coming from: women who aren't emotionally in-tune with the article.

What happens is, most women who get upset read or hear something like how women go to bed with men quickly in the right situations with the right men, and their hackles go up, they get defensive, and they react to it the way they would if someone personally attacked their ego, self-image, or reputation.

But I'm not attacking anyone personally. I'm talking about human beings, meeting, attracting, and mating.

And when a woman meets a man who makes her FEEL completely full of lust, and desire, and raw, throbbing, potent sexual need... when she sees NO REASON to object to going to bed with this man right now and taking him as her lover... when she will never see him again, and no one will ever know, and her body aches for him as it has never ached for anything else... and when it just happens, and suddenly they are alone, and he is on her, kissing her, touching her, bringing her to the point of surrender... then yes; even for a normally conservative girl, she will release her hold on logic and rigid rules, and she will take this man she longs for as her lover... even if it is the first and last time they will ever see each other.

• Add Comment