Cut Buddy

Another question. We keep referencing marriage, but what about the quality of the marriage/partner?

The quality of husband doesn't seem to be affected. The same % are married to a-holes as the rest of the folks I know. And actually when I think of the ones with the crappy husbands...they are married to the girls with limited sexual experience. Though that may be a coincidence.
 
What are your thoughts? You think casual sex influences the quality of man? or the quality of man is influenced by casual sex?

I'm not sure. I'm just questioning if the quality of man and the quality of marriage, if it happens, are affected by these kinds of things. Not just for the women who believe in cut buddies, but also for the women who don't. If men are having these experiences, it must alter the way they think of and interact with women in some way. For women, I wonder how it changes their thinking when they do get married. Are they more confident in their relationships or worried about fidelity?
 
Me too. They are the ones who skipped college. The college educated black sluts are unmarried.

I know anecdotes aren't really evidence, but in my experience, the loose girls from undergrad, who wanted to get married, are married already. Chicks who had 30+ bodies on their dance card by the time they were 21...married with a 3rd child on the way. I have a few other examples, too.

My point is there is no longer a tried and true formula in regards to Black female sexuality. While traditionally, it does not behoove a Black woman to be spreading it for any and everyone, if you are smart and discreet and know who to deal with, you can wild out and still make it to the altar eventually.
 
Sexually active and habitual casual sex aren't the same thing. There's a reason why Patti Stranger is always.telling her WHITE girls no sex before monogamy. You can watch the show and see the sad outcome of most of the women that just put out freely. That's the average. Most casual sexer are not the unicorn whores lock in down potentials left n right.

True. I don't know how many were seriously out there because they weren't sloppy with it.
 
i never had a cut buddy and don't believe in fwb's...the situation has alway been very beneficial to the men...why am i giving my lotus garden away for nothing because im horny- is just good enough a reason to do so...lolol

nah boo....
 
Yes!

I know some ged hoodboogers that can barely read that are engaged or married. The college educated black sluts---nope.

This post brings up an interesting element to the conversation thats def worthy of discussion.

Damn......me too, except 2 and they both joined a heaux-relocation program and had a "fresh start" thousands of miles away from their heauxing in the DMV.

Hmmmmmm.......
 
I know anecdotes aren't really evidence, but in my experience, the loose girls from undergrad, who wanted to get married, are married already. Chicks who had 30+ bodies on their dance card by the time they were 21...married with a 3rd child on the way. I have a few other examples, too. My point is there is no longer a tried and true formula in regards to Black female sexuality. While traditionally, it does not behoove a Black woman to be spreading it for any and everyone, if you are smart and discreet and know who to deal with, you can wild out and still make it to the altar eventually.
The sloppy part does seem to matter. You can't be known far and wide as willing to sleep with every guy who is interested. Keeping your business your business is something else I plan to teach my daughters.
 
I know anecdotes aren't really evidence, but in my experience, the loose girls from undergrad, who wanted to get married, are married already. Chicks who had 30+ bodies on their dance card by the time they were 21...married with a 3rd child on the way. I have a few other examples, too.

My point is there is no longer a tried and true formula in regards to Black female sexuality. While traditionally, it does not behoove a Black woman to be spreading it for any and everyone, if you are smart and discreet and know who to deal with, you can wild out and still make it to the altar eventually.

Have you seen the relationship forum or the single ladies thread?


I would agree with this if more black women knew how to date, most don't. There is a path of least resistance that's more like to be beneficial long term than not.

I don't think its a surprise or coincidence that this is one of the most thanked post in the thread:

Could the "cut buddy" and FWB culture be the reason so many of us are unable to find suitable mates?

Know this -- most men will travel the road of least resistance.

Though many of us will never admit it, we are shaping the way men treat women as a whole in the future by what we freely giveaway now.
 
In a perfect world, women should stop giving their stuff away for free. Stop rationalizing away biology. Human interaction in particular ways WILL have an effect on you physically, emotionally and psychologically. That is a fact. Stop making it reactive and about men as if you're so clever and getting one over on them. You're really not. They still get the sex and they still don't have to talk to you, marry you or respect you. Who wins in that game?:look: Sex is great, but what happens when you're not young anymore and all these men and cut buddies have moved on, married, had kids? What are the implications of doing these things on your emotional health? What do you about the baggage it creates? What are the implications of your actions when the younger generation has to pay for the climate you created? What about disease? Pregnancy? Women have to bear the brunt of all of that? Is an orgasm worth all of that? Women get orgasms, possible pregnancies, abortions and diseases (many incurable) and men get sex on demand for nothing? IMO, it's not worth it and that's not liberating. How are you free in that situation? Free to do what? Give men what they wanted without any responsibility or stigma with all the consequences falling on you? Simply put, keep it real. Say you're scared. Say you're tired of their BS. Say you don't trust them. Be HONEST. Be vulnerable and then advocate and hold out for what you really want AND THEN make your plan of action. I'm sorry, but you can smell the fear behind the thinly veiled liberation talk and to be frank, there's absolutely nothing wrong with feeling all of those things I listed above. It would be normal. I think women simply don't believe they can get what they really want from men, so they've convinced themselves that going along with the BS is their own idea and liberating. Just my opinion/theory, though.
I agree, but what about women that just want sex and no attachment s? Women need to be honest and stop with that we are equal to men crap. We aren't. We don't operate like them, we don't think like them, and we shouldn't have to. If we got past that the rules for us would be very different.
 
If you have to ask and analyze what the benefit is of having sex without attachments, then it isn't for you. I can't imagine that it requires this many posts.
 
this thread would have made a lot more sense if someone had linked prostitution to decreased motivation for men to have casual sex. that argument backs up these alleged altruistic POVs for the betterment of bw rather than the ones that were actually articulated. i admit i started skimming several pages ago though so if someone did make that connection i missed it.
 
this thread would have made a lot more sense if someone had linked prostitution to decreased motivation for men to have casual sex. that argument backs up these alleged altruistic POVs for the betterment of bw rather than the ones that were actually articulated. i admit i started skimming several pages ago though so if someone did make that connection i missed it.
You do it, because I'm not following. Are you saying that prostitution decreases men's use of casual sex?
 
If you have to ask and analyze what the benefit is of having sex without attachments, then it isn't for you. I can't imagine that it requires this many posts.

This thread went well beyond the original intent of the op. But just like LHCF, a subject can get beaten to 3 deaths depending on who throws the best bone in the thread....However this time I am glad this thread took the turn it did. There are times when I cannot articulate some of my thoughts and this thread has helped me with some of that plus brought a whole lot of different perspectives.
 
Did not read all 13 pages.....
I had to give my baby sis a very high praise. She recently caught up with a former college flame and things were getting hot and heavy (again)...but he was in grad school full time and she is a new Lawyer. Something in her told her to hold off on sex...even though he was like "Now that I have you again....lets make this forever...but we can take it slow." Just talking marriage and ring...and once he was done with school it was pretty much a no-brainer on his income as soon as he was done bc he's already had several job offers.
When he started pressuring her for sex (she 27 ya'll) she backed down, and he got attitude. Then all of a sudden he dumped her. She was sad, but just couldn't do it. He wanted to have a sexual long-distance relationship until he finished school in a year.
Sounds simple, sounds fine...but he couldn't even take the time to have a conversation with her...fullful her emotional needs bc she is lonely right now in that area.
But she held off on giving it up to someone she's already been with. I'm so glad she is learning her worth! Because in the end, he broke up with her due to lack of sex. And my DH and I told her she did good! He told her the one who is willing to wait...is the one she wants.

Most women would have settled for this because SO many checks are ticked off in this situation.
 
If you have to ask and analyze what the benefit is of having sex without attachments, then it isn't for you. I can't imagine that it requires this many posts.

LMAO!!!!

As funny as your post is I have found that it's also the people who should be asking, "What's in it for me?", who aren't asking. Myself included when I was in the position to have unattached sex.
 
Good point. I can definitely see that too.

All my mother taught me was "men see women as a piece of p****" which, if you knew my mother, would shock you as it did me because she is extremely prissy. And it meant literally nothing to me. I wish she would have taught me something about relationships instead.

I have a whole list ready for my kids.: look:

The underlined!

Hard for many parents.

My own mom who was married for 15 years did nothave a leg to stand on. It was an unhappy marriage at least 1/2 the time. My dad married her from guilt...a year and a half after I was born...a year after pretty much abandoning me and her. After a year of explaining to his girlfriend BACK HOME and his parents that yes his cut buddy is now is baby/mama now wife. So the marriage started off BAD. Plus she felt like the only way to have a happy marriage is to marry a rich man who makes way more than you do...in a certain high earning career...who was soft and just did whatever his wife told him to do. Something I thought I needed...but had to learn about RELATIONSHIPS first. A thing thats missing in most ladies' upbringing.
 
I agree, but what about women that just want sex and no attachment s? Women need to be honest and stop with that we are equal to men crap. We aren't. We don't operate like them, we don't think like them, and we shouldn't have to. If we got past that the rules for us would be very different.

I believe these women do exist, but from what I've seen for many women, it's a front and defense mechanism. I've seen too many women claim that they just want old dude for fun, but let him start talking to or dating another woman seriously and they're butt hurt. Like I said earlier, I think we're breaking down relationships into an a la carte menu and going against the very physiology of human interaction. I just don't think it will end well for most. Especially Black women.
 
The sloppy part does seem to matter. You can't be known far and wide as willing to sleep with every guy who is interested. Keeping your business your business is something else I plan to teach my daughters.

Ya...like if you asked some girls who are not known as "hoes" their partner count, you may be surprised at the amount. They just aren't advertising it or making out in public with any dude that tickles their fancy. They just kinda disappear into the ether with the guy and do their thing.

Have you seen the relationship forum or the single ladies thread?


I would agree with this if more black women knew how to date, most don't. There is a path of least resistance that's more like to be beneficial long term than not.

I don't think its a surprise or coincidence that this is one of the most thanked post in the thread:

I stay out of the relationship forum for the most part cuz it's depressing. I do agree that a lot of BW have no idea how to date whatsoever. Therefore, this whole casual sex thing is not for them b/c they've yet to master attracting and keeping a quality man's attention. I'm just saying...if you know what you're looking for and what you want, you can have a FWB. However, if you are looking for marriage, then do not engage in FWBs. It will not help you meet your goal.
 
There will always be women willing to have sex because contrary to popular belief, a lot of women like sex just as much as men.

The sooner people realize this, the better off they'll be.

^^^This right here is the TROOF.

I've had 2 cut buddys. It was really amazing. It was after a bad relationship so I needed to feel sexy and unattached. One guy was a friend who's in med school. He's hella goofy and nice I just wouldn't want to be with him. The other guy was a sweetheart who was younger than me. He used to bring me tea and snacks (and penis) when I was studying. I still say one of my best times was when I had sex with the goofy guy and sent him home. I took a shower and just rubbed myself in my big warm bed. I was so happy his arse wasn't hogging up the bed and I didn't have to think about him. I'm also someone who attaches feelings to sex but TBH that ish is tiring. I don't wanna feeeel so much all the time. All that emotion is ugh. So a cut buddy was super refreshing.

At the time in my life when I had one, it was the exact same thing. I didn't have to worry about anyone hogging my space or my time. Supplying a physical need with no added responsibility.

If you have to ask and analyze what the benefit is of having sex without attachments, then it isn't for you. I can't imagine that it requires this many posts.

It's been interesting reading through this thread and all of the analysis. I'll summarize so I'm not too verbose:

1) When I wanted a cuddy buddy, I went and sought one out. I made sure it wasn't someone that was in close circles with me so there was a lessened chance of interactions and awkwardness.

2) I chose someone I knew I wouldn't be attracted to for the long term. (Part of why I chose someone younger than me).

3) I wasn't looking to get married or get into a relationship. I was trying to finish my Radiology program and needed minimal distractions. However, the lack of penis was a distraction :look: so I fixed that problem by getting cuddy buddied up.

4) I was still dating while cuddy buddying. I didn't say no to dates and advances. I was still getting presents, free sh!t, dudes buying me stuff. The only difference was I wasn't flucking those dudes, cos I was already set :lol: This of course made some fall back, made some even more interested - but I wasn't trying to get boo'd up so they were all entertainment.

5)The sex was never unprotected. It would have been mighty dumb of me to get preggers by a cuddy buddy. Someone I didn't want to be my life partner ending up being the father of my child? Tragic. Wrapped up AND birth control. I too zero chances :lol:

My cuddy buddy tried to have a relationship with me at one point and I refused. He then said he needed a real relationship and we could make it work, and I said buh-bye :wave: TBH, SO was being scouted to be the next to fill the position before I fell in love with him :lol: I guess it's not for everyone but it fills the need for stress free sex for some of us. Accessible coitus without all the requirements of a girlfriend or a wife.
 
I'm not sure. I'm just questioning if the quality of man and the quality of marriage, if it happens, are affected by these kinds of things. Not just for the women who believe in cut buddies, but also for the women who don't. If men are having these experiences, it must alter the way they think of and interact with women in some way. For women, I wonder how it changes their thinking when they do get married. Are they more confident in their relationships or worried about fidelity?

There is actually objective data on this. Essentially, yes (of course), it has implications for marriage and fidelity. People are shaped and formed by their experiences, including sexual ones.

There's a blogger, Wharton MBA lady--Susan Walsh--who writes a lot about this stuff, and there is a study about marital satisfaction and prior sexual activity. From the article Manwhores: For Casual Sex Only: "The most significant finding of the study, in my view, is that for every premarital sexual partner, a man’s likelihood of being extremely sexually satisfied in marriage falls 5.3%. This means that a man with a number of 10 before marriage is 53% less likely to be describe himself as extremely satisfied in marriage. By implication, all men with 20 previous partners will feel moderately sexually satisfied in marriage at best."

There's an impact on incentive to get married and also an impact on marriage quality. In another post, Walsh talks about the tenfold increase in reported infidelity among those who were identified as sexually "unrestricted." http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/...-you-always-wanted-to-know-about-promiscuity/

I had a temp job a few months back where one guy was shocked that his coworkers considered an "N" of 17 to be a high number. And he was only 23. You take a guy like that who has been running through women left and right since he was, say 15, and do you really think he will have developed the character trait of faithfulness by the time he is "supposed" to settle down? His buddy was a guy in his mid-30s who had only been married a couple of years, but it was obvious he was looking. And that one talked about cutting a woman off who wanted to make their casual fling something more. And he went on and married someone else. Only to then get put on blast for trying to start something up with another coworker.

So yeah, men learn faithfulness or unfaithfulness and develop habits consistent with that. And women play an important role in teaching them. There's so much academic information and social sicence data about all of this that it is completely outside of the realm of personal opinion. At this point, what it is coming down to is that women are being and will be expected to settle for less and less, including the expectation of fidelity.
 
There is actually objective data on this. Essentially, yes (of course), it has implications for marriage and fidelity. People are shaped and formed by their experiences, including sexual ones.

There's a blogger, Wharton MBA lady--Susan Walsh--who writes a lot about this stuff, and there is a study about marital satisfaction and prior sexual activity. From the article Manwhores: For Casual Sex Only: "The most significant finding of the study, in my view, is that for every premarital sexual partner, a man’s likelihood of being extremely sexually satisfied in marriage falls 5.3%. This means that a man with a number of 10 before marriage is 53% less likely to be describe himself as extremely satisfied in marriage. By implication, all men with 20 previous partners will feel moderately sexually satisfied in marriage at best."

There's an impact on incentive to get married and also an impact on marriage quality. In another post, Walsh talks about the tenfold increase in reported infidelity among those who were identified as sexually "unrestricted." http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/...-you-always-wanted-to-know-about-promiscuity/

I had a temp job a few months back where one guy was shocked that his coworkers considered an "N" of 17 to be a high number. And he was only 23. You take a guy like that who has been running through women left and right since he was, say 15, and do you really think he will have developed the character trait of faithfulness by the time he is "supposed" to settle down? His buddy was a guy in his mid-30s who had only been married a couple of years, but it was obvious he was looking. And that one talked about cutting a woman off who wanted to make their casual fling something more. And he went on and married someone else. Only to then get put on blast for trying to start something up with another coworker.

So yeah, men learn faithfulness or unfaithfulness and develop habits consistent with that. And women play an important role in teaching them. There's so much academic information and social sicence data about all of this that it is completely outside of the realm of personal opinion. At this point, what it is coming down to is that women are being and will be expected to settle for less and less, including the expectation of fidelity.

Thanks for this post. You said it better than I could. Fun or not. Loving sex or not, these things have consequences for everybody and they are not in women and children's favour. I've always thought that if men and women have soo many partners (random and relationships) before marriage, when they finally do get married it is so much harder to be satisfied. There's too much to compare it to and the grass will always seem greener. Also, how do you develop an appreciation for loyalty and delayed gratification if you never had to practice it?
Sad all around. We're literally trying to reinvent the wheel :nono:.
 
Last edited:
Married men have always been the main proprietors of escorts and sugar babies. I'd argue most men period are typically moderately happy with marital sex regardless.

Eta: no woman wants to hear or admit that her husband was likely to be moderately happy with her through their lives. though, imo, that sounds like a very reasonable expectation.
 
Last edited:
There is actually objective data on this. Essentially, yes (of course), it has implications for marriage and fidelity. People are shaped and formed by their experiences, including sexual ones.

There's a blogger, Wharton MBA lady--Susan Walsh--who writes a lot about this stuff, and there is a study about marital satisfaction and prior sexual activity. From the article Manwhores: For Casual Sex Only: "The most significant finding of the study, in my view, is that for every premarital sexual partner, a man’s likelihood of being extremely sexually satisfied in marriage falls 5.3%. This means that a man with a number of 10 before marriage is 53% less likely to be describe himself as extremely satisfied in marriage. By implication, all men with 20 previous partners will feel moderately sexually satisfied in marriage at best."

There's an impact on incentive to get married and also an impact on marriage quality. In another post, Walsh talks about the tenfold increase in reported infidelity among those who were identified as sexually "unrestricted." http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/...-you-always-wanted-to-know-about-promiscuity/

I had a temp job a few months back where one guy was shocked that his coworkers considered an "N" of 17 to be a high number. And he was only 23. You take a guy like that who has been running through women left and right since he was, say 15, and do you really think he will have developed the character trait of faithfulness by the time he is "supposed" to settle down? His buddy was a guy in his mid-30s who had only been married a couple of years, but it was obvious he was looking. And that one talked about cutting a woman off who wanted to make their casual fling something more. And he went on and married someone else. Only to then get put on blast for trying to start something up with another coworker.

So yeah, men learn faithfulness or unfaithfulness and develop habits consistent with that. And women play an important role in teaching them. There's so much academic information and social sicence data about all of this that it is completely outside of the realm of personal opinion. At this point, what it is coming down to is that women are being and will be expected to settle for less and less, including the expectation of fidelity.

Thanks for sharing this. I just shared it also with my best friend. A true eye opener!
 
Married men have always been the main proprietors of escorts and sugar babies. I'd argue most men period are typically moderately happy with marital sex regardless.

Eta: no woman wants to hear or admit that her husband was likely to be moderately happy with her through their lives. though, imo, that sounds like a very reasonable expectation.

So, IYO men just overall don't want women in any meaningful way or marriage regardless of the circumstances. Isn't that really fatalistic and sexist?
 
Back
Top