Would you date a guy who had female roommates?

If your so will cheat on you with a roommate because he is attracted to her, he will cheat on you with a chick in the apartment next door because he is attracted to her, or the chick he works with because he is attracted to her, or. A chick in his clas etc, basically you have a bum lol. My opinion still counts regardless as my roommates have no idea of my sexuality and they have been nothing but respectful and cool. Living together and sleeping together are not cause and effect.
jennboo said:
Bolded: Why? Simply bc you are roommates?

So roommateness precludes any potential for physical or emotional attraction or interaction?

Your position is skewed anyway if you aren't even into dudes :lol:
Click to expand...



Sent from my SPH-M910 using Long Hair Care Forum App
 
RachelRegina said:
LOL this made me hungry and thirsty! :lachen::lachen::lachen:

Ok so I have an example for you , then. Would you date a man in the military? The navy recently allowed women to serve on submarines. Submarines are historically for men only and they are very VERY small about 150 people. Some men even share beds (navy term is called hot-racking). Sub go out to sea for deployments.

Even serving on a ship. I have plenty of stories of men cheating on their women even even when they are not on deployment :lachen::lachen:.

What about a man that works? Would you stop dating a man that work? We're all aware about office romances. He can go on trips abroad with co-workers. Am I not supposed to date a man then, lol.
Click to expand...

First Bolded: Nope, i would never date a man in the military.

Second Bolded: You are comparing two individuals in a work environment to two individuals in an intimate home environment. If you can see the potential for a workplace romance, surely you'd be able to see the potential of a co-ed roommate romance. I'm not discounting the likelihood of workplace romances, surely we know they exist. All i'm saying is, the likelihood of a physical something happening among two people who are attracted to one another living together is probably higher than two folks who are working together. There are too many barriers in the workplace, and while some people are trife and don't give an *** in the workplace.... folks REALLY won't give an *** if they are in the comfort of their own homes :lol:.
 
Mortons said:
If your so will cheat on you with a roommate because he is attracted to her, he will cheat on you with a chick in the apartment next door because he is attracted to her, or the chick he works with because he is attracted to her, or. A chick in his clas etc, basically you have a bum lol. My opinion still counts regardless as my roommates have no idea of my sexuality and they have been nothing but respectful and cool. Living together and sleeping together are not cause and effect.



Sent from my SPH-M910 using Long Hair Care Forum App
Click to expand...

My assertion that the likelihood of a coed roommate romance is high does not negate the fact that if a man wants to cheat he will cheat anywhere. Do you think i'm saying that a co-ed roomming situation is the only situation in which a man will be tempted to cheat? Not at all, so no need to run down the list of where and when a man could potentially cheat.

What i'm saying is this: You don't put yourself in certain situations. Co-ed roomming is like a contrived and unnecessary temptation where you had a choice to opt out of that situation. You can't worry about things you have no control over, such as workplace sparks, classmate sparks, neighbor sparks.

Work environment, can't help who your co-workers are
Neighbors don't count, can't help who your neighbors are
Classmates don't count, can't help who enrolled in your classes.

You CAN opt to not live under the same roof as a member of the opposite sex though.
 
I wouldn't date a guy who had female roomies...but...I wouldn't date a guy who had male roomies either. hehe.
Seriously, I'd feel uncomfortable unless I met them and saw their living dynamic...probably wouldn't sit well with me if some girl that's not me is walking around in a wifebeater and panties in my boo's apartment.
 
mischka said:
Hmmmm... so if you aren't worried about every available woman (and unavailable woman, since obviously some of the time these female roommates will have their own boyfriend) then you don't really love your boyfriend?

Is it ever the case that a woman is secure enough in herself and in her relationship that she isn't worried about every temptation being a potential source of conflict? She doesn't REALLY love her boyfriend if every woman is not viewed as a threat? Loving your boyfriend and being concerned about keeping the relationship going well is one thing. Thinking every woman nearby has the potential to break you guys up is an entirely different thing. That's called jealousy and insecurity, not intense love.

It's not even like we're talking about an extremely serious relationship here because if the relationship was heading for marriage I would think the two people would live together if one of them needed a roommate. So we're really talking about a dating/short term relationship situation.

Yeah, if a relationship can't withstand a roommate of the opposite gender, it's doomed. Maybe feeling concerned about every other woman spells true love to some. But believe it or not there are truly women out there in the world who aren't threatened by other women (yes even beautiful ones). That's what this question all boils down to: are you threatened by other women? My answer is no.
Click to expand...

Bolded: Thing is, i don't 'worry' about ish i have no control over. Like i said in an earlier post, workplace romances, romps with the next door neighbor, sparks between classmates are all things that have a chance of happening, but i'd have no control over things happening in these types of environments/set-ups.

However, you do have control over whether or not you decide to be with a man who chose to have female roommates.

Again, this has less to do with trust and insecurity and more to do with naivety and total overestimation and trust in the will power of man.

I can think i'm the hottest thing walking, and that i got my man on 'lock' but i'm not stupid enough to believe that my man would NEVER EVER EVER slip up. Shoot, I can't even promise that.
 
Last edited:
Exactly though. People are gonna slip up if they're gonna slip up. Does having a roommate of the opposite gender give heightened opportunity for there to be a slip up? You think it does. I guess I just don't. If I would **** my roommate, I would **** the guy at work, or the guy I met the other day, so it's not gonna make a difference for me. It doesn't matter who it is or where the interaction is happening - I'm either gonna do it or I'm not. I'm not interested in being with a man who can't operate in a similar manner. Or what's he gonna say, oops, I slipped up and f*cked that girl but it wouldn't have happened if she wasn't my roommate! Yeah right! All this does is give the guy an out to blame the woman as a temptress. This cheating is no different from other cheating. The magical apartment is not to blame.

It's like you put me up against a dude and scroll the background out to something new each time. Work - home - school - friend's house - party - club - mom's house - car - parking lot - restaurant - and the background is just cycling through and it doesn't make a difference.

Cheating is cheating; no one scenario is more enticing than any other. If you're a cheater, you're a cheater.

My reply was at the poster I quoted though, so I wasn't saying you were insecure about it. Even so, for some it's an issue and from a distance I guess I can see why, but it wouldn't be an issue for me.
 
mischka said:
Exactly though. People are gonna slip up if they're gonna slip up. Does having a roommate of the opposite gender give heightened opportunity for there to be a slip up? You think it does. I guess I just don't. If I would **** my roommate, I would **** the guy at work, or the guy I met the other day, so it's not gonna make a difference for me. It doesn't matter who it is or where the interaction is happening - I'm either gonna do it or I'm not. I'm not interested in being with a man who can't operate in a similar manner. Or what's he gonna say, oops, I slipped up and f*cked that girl but it wouldn't have happened if she wasn't my roommate! Yeah right! All this does is give the guy an out to blame the woman as a temptress. This cheating is no different from other cheating. The magical apartment is not to blame.

It's like you put me up against a dude and scroll the background out to something new each time. Work - home - school - friend's house - party - club - mom's house - car - parking lot - restaurant - and the background is just cycling through and it doesn't make a difference.

Cheating is cheating; no one scenario is more enticing than any other. If you're a cheater, you're a cheater.

My reply was at the poster I quoted though, so I wasn't saying you were insecure about it. Even so, for some it's an issue and from a distance I guess I can see why, but it wouldn't be an issue for me.
Click to expand...

Bolded: Really?

See, i disagree with this because i am of the opinion that everyone is susceptible to slipping up to doing some effed up stuff given the right (or wrong:look:) scenario/environment/situation.

So, yes, certain situations would be more enticing and would provide the right mix of whatever for certain behaviors to occur.

For instance, if you've been with your man for years..the man has never cheated on you, railed against it thought it was the most despicable and low down thing on earth to do, then he got stuck on a remote island for months with a hot native and they ****...can you really call him a low-down cheater? Did he always have it in him to cheat?

If i'm destitue, homeless, hungry as hayel, and i rob some bananas from a convenience store...did i really aways have it in me to be a dirty thief?

Environmental and situational circumstances are a huge governance of one's behavior, you know that. The way folks react under condition A can be totally different than their behavior under circumstance B.

Stanford prison experiment and Milgram, case in point.

Again, my point being, if you don't want certain behaviors or actions to emerge that MAYBE wouldn't have otherwise, you don't put yourself in certain situations. We are ALL capable of trife given the right scenario.
 
I am saying your likelihood of cheating is the same in any environment. It is no higher or lower depending on circumstances. Some people have high probability (in any scenario) and some have low probability (in any scenario). I'm not saying some people are not, EVER, susceptible to "slipping up."

I see my Fred Flintstone background analogy was ineffective.
 
mischka said:
I am saying your likelihood of cheating is the same in any environment. It is no higher or lower depending on circumstances. Some people have high probability (in any scenario) and some have low probability (in any scenario). I'm not saying some people are not, EVER, susceptible to "slipping up."

I see my Fred Flintstone background analogy was ineffective.
Click to expand...

Or maybe your ability to articulately get your point across is :lol:.
 
jennboo said:
Bolded: Really?

See, i disagree with this because i am of the opinion that everyone is susceptible to slipping up to doing some effed up stuff given the right (or wrong:look:) scenario/environment/situation.

So, yes, certain situations would be more enticing and would provide the right mix of whatever for certain behaviors to occur.

For instance, if you've been with your man for years..the man has never cheated on you, railed against it thought it was the most despicable and low down thing on earth to do, then he got stuck on a remote island for months with a hot native and they ****...can you really call him a low-down cheater? Did he always have it in him to cheat?

If i'm destitue, homeless, hungry as hayel, and i rob some bananas from a convenience store...did i really aways have it in me to be a dirty thief?

Environmental and situational circumstances are a huge governance of one's behavior, you know that. The way folks react under condition A can be totally different than their behavior under circumstance B.

Stanford prison experiment and Milgram, case in point.

Again, my point being, if you don't want certain behaviors or actions to emerge that MAYBE wouldn't have otherwise, you don't put yourself in certain situations. We are ALL capable of trife given the right scenario.
Click to expand...

Your analogies are incongruous.

Deserted on an island = no other options. A man in a relationship obviously has a preferred other option at hand.

If you're homeless and hungry again you have no other options than to steal. Cheating with a roommate is an entirely conscious CHOICE that is not forced by hunger or helplessness.

The Milgram experiment was about ordinary people subjugating themselves to an AUTHORITY FIGURE. You misunderstand the psychological concepts being studied here if you remove the entire "authority figure" part of the equation. A roommate is not an authority figure and usually is not ordering the other roommate to have sex with him/her.

You are comparing what is a choice to circumstances of force. You freely choose to be a cheater.

The contention here is that you feel like having a female roommate is a "dangerous scenario" that would cause a dude to behave in ways he otherwise would not.

I just don't. I don't treat men like animals who only respond to physical stimuli instead of human beings who are capable of making ethical choices just like women do. And I wouldn't be dating with a man who didn't understand the difference between the two.
 
jennboo said:
My assertion that the likelihood of a coed roommate romance is high does not negate the fact that if a man wants to cheat he will cheat anywhere. Do you think i'm saying that a co-ed roomming situation is the only situation in which a man will be tempted to cheat? Not at all, so no need to run down the list of where and when a man could potentially cheat.

What i'm saying is this: You don't put yourself in certain situations. Co-ed roomming is like a contrived and unnecessary temptation where you had a choice to opt out of that situation. You can't worry about things you have no control over, such as workplace sparks, classmate sparks, neighbor sparks.

Work environment, can't help who your co-workers are
Neighbors don't count, can't help who your neighbors are
Classmates don't count, can't help who enrolled in your classes.

You CAN opt to not live under the same roof as a member of the opposite sex though.
Click to expand...

Some of us have to live in a place that is safe, convenient, and affordable. That is what lead to myself and 2 guys rooming together. Sure, we could have searched for 18 more months to find the "perfect" situation to room in that would make all of our non existent future SO's happy, however as homelessness and the simplicity of the minds of others did not override our need for shelter, we went ahead and did the darn thing :lachen:

Now if you would like to narrow down your pool further, that is of no issue to me. You should completely do what is comfortable to you. I just personally feel it's a bit odd, as I'm sure the majority of guys who have cheated have likely done with with a girl who they pursued outside of their domicile.
 
mischka said:
Your analogies are incongruous.

Deserted on an island = no other options. A man in a relationship obviously has a preferred other option at hand.

If you're homeless and hungry again you have no other options than to steal. Cheating with a roommate is an entirely conscious CHOICE that is not forced by hunger or helplessness.

The Milgram experiment was about ordinary people subjugating themselves to an AUTHORITY FIGURE. You misunderstand the psychological concepts being studied here if you remove the entire "authority figure" part of the equation. A roommate is not an authority figure and usually is not ordering the other roommate to have sex with him/her.

You are comparing what is a choice to circumstances of force. You freely choose to be a cheater.

The contention here is that you feel like having a female roommate is a "dangerous scenario" that would cause a dude to behave in ways he otherwise would not.

I just don't. I don't treat men like animals who only respond to physical stimuli instead of human beings who are capable of making ethical choices just like women do. And I wouldn't be dating with a man who didn't understand the difference between the two.
Click to expand...

The analogies are extreme, but not incongruous, since they were put forth to challenge your assertion that "no one scenario is more enticing than the other". The analogies are extreme in that they are predicated on dire situations, but they nonetheless prove the point i was attempting to make... that indeed one scenario can be more enticing (for certain behaviors to occur) than others. The Milgram experiment is but one way to illustrate this point, even with the addition of the authority figure, which is that folks will behave differently than they normally do depending on the scenario. There is no misunderstanding of psychological principle, as the analogies and referece to Milgram were used to challenge your earlier statement, which it did.

This has nothing to do with treating men any type of way :lol: or viewing them as pavlovian dogs...it's about not turning a blind eye... or being naive and thinking that everyone, all the time, has a moral compass of gold. This has to do with undesirable situations that could potentially bring out the worst in a person, and acknowledging that that is a possiblility, regardless of the perceived ethicality of an individual or Man in general.

It's also funny how you added "like women do"...trife a** women out there too.
 
Your scenarios were not about temptation, they were about force. And for the record, there are people out there that would starve to death before they steal (or at the very least they would beg rather than steal). Circumstances exacerbate what is already there. Not create new people. Unfathomable, I know, but some people do have a code of honor they live by.

Anyway... I don't think I can expound any further than I already have; we agree to disagree.
 
Last edited:
As much as I have learned through reading these last few posts... and as open minded and comfortable/confident as I'd love to be under allllll circumstances (oh how freeing that would be :lol:) I still wont feel comfortable with any man I'm dating, seeing, about to be marrying lving with a female roommate. Thank God I dont have to deal with that...But I thoroughly enjoyed reading all the view points.
 
mischka said:
I don't treat men like animals who only respond to physical stimuli instead of human beings who are capable of making ethical choices just like women do.
Click to expand...


Slightly off topic: I find that a lot of times, many double standards and excuses are made for men because " they can't control themselves" or " they are more prone to" whatever unsavory behavior is out there. That really gets my goat. Always. All the time in life.

Carry on.
 
i´ve had male roommates, so its ok for him to have female roommates.
like others have said just because you live together it doesnt mean that you´re sleeping together.
 
Thanks ladies for your responses, please keep 'em coming.

So since a good number of women are stating that it'd be alright for their bf/someone they were dating to live with a female roommate(s) because "a man will cheat anywhere anyway"...How would you feel if they had to share a bedroom? According to the logic in here, you should be able to trust your man under any circumstance, all the time.
 
jennboo said:
Thanks ladies for your responses, please keep 'em coming.

So since a good number of women are stating that it'd be alright for their bf/someone they were dating to live with a female roommate(s) because "a man will cheat anywhere anyway"...How would you feel if they had to share a bedroom? According to the logic in here, you should be able to trust your man under any circumstance, all the time.
Click to expand...

No because then we couldnt have sex
 
jennboo said:
Thanks ladies for your responses, please keep 'em coming.

So since a good number of women are stating that it'd be alright for their bf/someone they were dating to live with a female roommate(s) because "a man will cheat anywhere anyway"...How would you feel if they had to share a bedroom? According to the logic in here, you should be able to trust your man under any circumstance, all the time.
Click to expand...

If I had an adult boyfriend who had to share a bedroom with another grown person? :lachen:The problem would not be "omg he may phuck her and fall in love". The problem would be "wtf man!? Yall grown as**** can't afford your own damn bedroom?!" I wouldn't date a grown man who was sleeping in the same bedroom as a man NOR a woman. I mean unless you're talking about dorms (even then, they don't place opposite sexes in the same room. Building, yes). And I'm too old for that **** :lol: When I go over my mans house, I need to be able to get naked in his bedroom. And that can't happen if someone else lives in the room.

So, no, I wouldn't date him. I wouldn't be worried about him and the girl having sex. Same rules apply, as far as I'm concerned. I'd be worried about US being able to have sex! :lol:
 
I probably wouldn't have cared about 10 years ago. But, now? I'm side-eyeing any grown man with roommates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Would You Date Him??
Replies
6
Views
117
ThatJerseyGirl
ThatJerseyGirl
Poohbear
  • Poll
Would u date a guy that...
2 3 4
Replies
112
Views
2K
Poohbear
Poohbear
Glib Gurl
  • Poll
Would you date a grown man with roommates?
2
Replies
47
Views
1K
kandyland
kandyland
V
Can I get some translation?
Replies
21
Views
325
Vinyl
V
X
He got a date
Replies
25
Views
487
Makenzie
Makenzie
Back
Top