Re: Real issues around virginity

[Datelessman]

The word I always think of in these contexts is "connect." People attract lovers by finding/developing a connection with other people. For those who don't have the natural charisma to forge a connection with a wide range of people, the way it usually happens is by finding that smaller subset of people who you click with on a personality/values/lifestyle level, where that connection will develop more naturally.

That's it, "connection." Maybe I spaced on it because back in my day, "Love Connection" was a cheesy game show I never watched.

I think for myself and a lot of other inexperienced men, it's the concept of connection which seems like a foreign concept. At some point an interaction or meeting has to shift from platonic to romantic. At some point the other person has to go from "This person is interesting" to "I wonder what it would be like to touch their lips to mine." And for some, yes, this seems to be a more immediate thing due to charisma or looks (and we all have different tastes). But for others, it happens through a process than can seem like science fiction from those on the outside looking in. And while it isn't easy for most people -- and as DNL says, no one goes 100 for 100 -- most people have succeeded at it at least once before a certain age. What that age is varies, but I think we can all agree on 30 (most would say 25 but I'll go extreme here). That leads to a wondering or a belief that something wrong has to be internal, social, or personal beyond bad luck. Or one could be a lunatic and blame another gender blindly, like the incels do.

I find this interesting, because here you're advocating for a societal shift in how virginity is perceived. I fully agree that shifting perspectives on virginity and lessening or abolishing that stigma would certainly help many people. But DNL's advice about not letting your virginity define you by thinking of it as not a big deal (advice which you have said is unhelpful and frustrating to you) is basically the same thing, but on an individual level. You're essentially rebranding yourself internally. And while, no, that doesn't eliminate the stigma coming from society, and yes, it's important to acknowledge that such stigma does exist... ultimately, an individual can't bring about broad societal change. And just sitting around wishing for society to change is unproductive.

So I think the purpose of such advice isn't just to say "if you don't treat it like a big deal, it won't be a big deal." I think the bigger argument is that change has to start on an individual level before it can add up and become change on a societal level. And that making that individual shift in thinking at least gives you the power to change SOMETHING, even if it's only yourself. And then, if you can truly embrace the mindset that it isn't a big deal, other people you meet will sometimes also be convinced that it's not a big deal, and maybe their attitudes will shift a little bit. And that becomes a ripple effect that eventually pushes toward the kind of broad-reaching change that you would like to see in our culture (admittedly in a slow and gradual and you-may-not-even-notice-it-within-your-lifetime kind of way, but that's how most societal change happens anyway).

In fairness, DNL has stressed "if you don't treat it like a big deal, it won't be a big deal" more than once over the years. Which is fine for some things but a tad optimistic for others.

I think a discussion on trying to reframe what older virginity is or is called is a worthwhile one in a broader sense like this in a forum like this at times, but in terms of giving an individual person advice I wouldn't expect them to put themselves at a disadvantage for "the greater good" unless that was something they expressed interest in doing. If someone mentioned wanting to lead by example with his or her own love life, yes, preaching a concept of becoming the embodiment of chastity social justice is fair game. But if someone is essentially saying, "Dude, I'd just really love to know what it is like to be held," then I don't think suggesting they treat their "older than average" inexperience as either a personal flag or something they should dismiss as if it were their choice of pizza topping or roller coaster enthusiasm is as helpful as it seems. And I guess some of my problems with what DNL advises to virgins is that he leans too hard on the macro and not as much on the micro. We all would like a world where no one cares about how many or few people someone has slept with. But short of a nuclear holocaust or apocalyptic natural disaster that is clearly not going to happen in the next century. Why is he advocating that any untouched person whether they are 22 or 18 or 45 wear their biggest secret on their sleeves universally?

Another part of it is that DNL may think that encouraging virgins to be more honest, he's forcing them to confront that anxiety head on in a sink or swim mindset. The problem is that some people sink.

Perhaps better advice would be this; whether or not you reveal your status should depend on the individual you are with, your own moral or ethical codes, and whether or not you are looking for quantity over quality, or long term versus short term. I suppose part of that is suggesting that one should get better at reading people, but that's a universally good skill to hone, anyway. Sometimes it isn't always about reading people well, but second guessing yourself (or in my case, triple and quadruple guessing). If an older male virgin (OMV) is genuinely only looking for deeper connections with fewer lovers of quality and he is getting the vibes that he is with an open minded, patient, compassionate, and overall receptive person, then yes, maybe letting it be known by date #2 or #3 might be a fair gamble. But if the OMV is just looking for lower pressure and shorter term sex, and/or isn't sure of what they want (like a large proportion of the dating public anyway), then maybe it isn't best to risk pooching good reactions with a secret which carries social baggage. I genuinely think that as difficult as it is for anyone to adopt an abundance mentality, that older virgins struggle with it especially so, because they are literally living with the idea of it seeming like "no one wants me."

I know if I told a woman I was on a second or third date with that I was a virgin and that she was literally the 4th woman I ever dated in my life, and if she reacted by immediately cutting the date short and ghosting me (a benign, highly probable, but negative reaction), I wouldn't feel like I'd "dodged a bullet" or "Golly, she wasn't right for me," or anything like it; I'd assume I blew it by being too honest (or that I misread the situation or person drastically). And I don't think this is a unique or irrational reaction.

Those articles on Japan are an interesting case study in themselves. Some only talk about men, which casts the whole issue in terms of being a failure of masculinity, and it's that which I think leads to anger and despair. The ones that give the full figures show that women are just as affected: start from that point and late virginity seems to be more about a complex mix of factors that aren't any gender's fault.

Recognition that sexual privilege exists does seem to be gradually gaining ground. That is simply the understanding that some people never have to try particularly hard to find willing partners, while others try and try and struggle to get any opportunity. In itself that's not at all hateful or misogynist - what's dodgy is blinkered and over-simplified explanations.  

Societal attitudes can actually change surprisingly fast, but as KMR says it first requires some people to stand up and model the behaviours they want to see from others.  

For me I see "sexual privilege" as those in positions of social or economic power to use that to coerce (or outright force) sexual relations on others. And in fairness there is a backlash about that happening now, too. That the "rah rah frat bros" stuff isn't cool anymore, nor is the tycoon who pressures his secretary and so on. That a lot of what a lot of men (not all or maybe not even most, but a lot of men) saw as "conquests" or good times were traumatic to women, or seen as peer pressure, or were outright crimes. But maybe that's me disagreeing with the term. It is true that some people just don't have to try as hard for various reasons. But for others, things just fell into place for them without them necessarily having to be beautiful or charismatic. Is it just luck?

I don't think it is any particular gender's fault (though since men usually run everything, if any gender is at fault in a society it is usually them). More a byproduct of economic downturns and social trends clashing across generations. In Japan I did like the idea of focusing on art than "slamming dem ladies" for the Yaramiso. I just saw it as a contrast in some ways worth looking at.

[KMR]

In fairness, DNL has stressed "if you don't treat it like a big deal, it won't be a big deal" more than once over the years. Which is fine for some things but a tad optimistic for others.

Yeah, he's definitely said this. But my point was that this advice goes beyond just that simple phrase, and I was trying to expand on the implications and overall reasoning behind why that advice is being given.

For the record, I do generally agree with the sentiment, even in its own right. The way we frame something and craft a narrative around it does generally impact how others perceive it. That's human nature. And my personal experience has generally supported this notion.

Perhaps better advice would be this; whether or not you reveal your status should depend on the individual you are with, your own moral or ethical codes, and whether or not you are looking for quantity over quality, or long term versus short term.

I would agree with this. I don't think someone needs to disclose their virginity if they don't want to, particularly if they're not being asked directly about it. It's up to the individual to decide whether they'd feel more comfortable disclosing or not bringing it up, as well as when and how they would want to bring it up, if they did choose to do so. If someone asks directly, I'd say it's best to be honest in a low key way (this is where the "don't treat it like a big deal" advice comes in), and that you can also decide how specific (e.g. "I'm a total virgin") or vague (e.g. "I don't have much experience") you want to be about it. Although in my personal experience, beyond a certain age, people just sort of assume that a given person has had some kind of relationship experience and don't really ask these kinds of questions.

[waxingjaney]

I think for myself and a lot of other inexperienced men, it's the concept of connection which seems like a foreign concept. At some point an interaction or meeting has to shift from platonic to romantic.

I've been sitting on the sidelines for a while, but I'll have a go with this. It took me 25+ years of reading about other people's experiences to figure this out, but I don't form emotional connections with people. Forming, nurturing, and compounding those emotional connections seems to be how romance is made.

[Enail]

About the art class thing, you know that the vast majority of life-drawing classes and drop-ins are nude by default, right? At least in North America, I can't speak for Japan. (and 100% non-sexual, I'm honestly a little weirded out at the yaramiso classes making even an oblique connection to sexual experience, but nude life-drawing is a place where one can get comfortable being around naked people in a non-sexual and generally welcoming-to-all situation, so I guess it makes sense on that level).

[inbloomer]

I know if I told a woman I was on a second or third date with that I was a virgin and that she was literally the 4th woman I ever dated in my life, and if she reacted by immediately cutting the date short and ghosting me (a benign, highly probable, but negative reaction), I wouldn't feel like I'd "dodged a bullet" or "Golly, she wasn't right for me," or anything like it; I'd assume I blew it by being too honest (or that I misread the situation or person drastically). And I don't think this is a unique or irrational reaction.

Seriously, you're doing it again ...

I was previously, more subtly, trying to draw attention to these paragraphs with lots of nested ifs and woulds. When you do that, you need to question the assumptions you're making.

It keeps coming across that this persona of your hypothetical date is sexually confident herself and goes about dating in a very blunt and hard-nosed fashion. Yes, there are women like that, and you're probably disproportionately likely to meet them through online dating. Yes, it's a possible scenario that you go on a first date and her opening salvo is "Right, what's your relationship history?" - but that says more about the failure of online dating as a technology than it does about you.

But with this laser focus on a particular persona and set of conditions you are missing a lot of other possibilities, not least that she has exactly the same fear (whether a virgin herself or not) that men are going to demand a level of sexual performance that she won't be able to live up to. Or that by the time the issue comes up, she has long since guessed that you have little to no relationship experience and doesn't care.

Things aren't easy - we're all clear on that. As that Atlantic article suggested, I increasingly get the sense that being intimate with other people is like speaking a foreign language: the ability withers without regular practice. But my concern, and I guess that of other people here, is that circling round and round these hypotheticals is creating a wall of impossibility for you.

[Hielario]

¿Is it really the societal perception aspect that important to you people?

I've been just fucking furious and miserable about an entire lifetime of being completely unable to satisfy my most important instinct in a way that doesn't feel artificial and/or demeaning. With a side of seeing that every other (censored) actually gets to do it while I'm rotting in a corner. What other people think of me for that doesn't affect me. (Well, except for that one time).

(I'm aware it's nobody's fault specifically. I can be angry without directing that anger towards specific people.)

[Werel]

The sense I get from most of the posts in this thread is that it's less about the societal perception aspect itself, and more about the fact that societal perception includes the perceptions of potential partners...? Like, if most people stigmatize older virgins, and all your potential partners are people, then most of your potential partners may stigmatize older virgins.

But with this laser focus on a particular persona and set of conditions you are missing a lot of other possibilities, not least that she has exactly the same fear (whether a virgin herself or not) that men are going to demand a level of sexual performance that she won't be able to live up to. Or that by the time the issue comes up, she has long since guessed that you have little to no relationship experience and doesn't care.

Yes. Round of applause to the suggestion to empathize with/imagine others who might have their own hangups or bad experiences or insecurities; while inexperience is certainly one type of big baggage, there are lots of other types. And people who're kind and open-minded will be more willing to work with baggage in general, whether it's virginity or trauma or confusion about identity/orientation or whatever, as long as you are willing and able to carry your end of it. And that means... not slapping somebody's hand away when they reach out to try and help you carry your baggage. And it means not living inside elaborate hypotheticals and projection-loops where you're only interacting with the way you think other people feel and act, not how they actually feel and act.

[Datelessman]

I may tackle this in two replies, we'll see how it goes.  

Yeah, he's definitely said this. But my point was that this advice goes beyond just that simple phrase, and I was trying to expand on the implications and overall reasoning behind why that advice is being given.

For the record, I do generally agree with the sentiment, even in its own right. The way we frame something and craft a narrative around it does generally impact how others perceive it. That's human nature. And my personal experience has generally supported this notion.

I would agree with this. I don't think someone needs to disclose their virginity if they don't want to, particularly if they're not being asked directly about it. It's up to the individual to decide whether they'd feel more comfortable disclosing or not bringing it up, as well as when and how they would want to bring it up, if they did choose to do so. If someone asks directly, I'd say it's best to be honest in a low key way (this is where the "don't treat it like a big deal" advice comes in), and that you can also decide how specific (e.g. "I'm a total virgin") or vague (e.g. "I don't have much experience") you want to be about it. Although in my personal experience, beyond a certain age, people just sort of assume that a given person has had some kind of relationship experience and don't really ask these kinds of questions.

I do genuinely think there is a limit on how much acting like "something is no big deal" or mirroring the behavior you expect works out. Of course nothing works 100% on everyone, and I do think DNL advises that in park to psych people up as much as he intends it as a genuine strategy.

I suppose for some it is easier to craft a more positive narrative around older male virginity than others.

I am glad you agree with my advice, because I genuinely believe that "revealing" such a thing shouldn't be a default thing but one which really depends on the individual one is dealing with, reception, and instincts. And that may be true of revealing anything about oneself which could be considered taboo or risque or controversial, or traumatic, or so on. I know that some people may roll it out in order to weed out people they don't want to be near, and that's fine if that is deliberate. But if it isn't it could be counterproductive and lead to rejections by people who are not "a-holes" or akin to "dodging bullets" who otherwise would and accepted someone. After all, someone is only a virgin until they're not.

One of the few advantages to dating while older is the fact that most people are not going to ask someone if they are a virgin or even grill them too much about previous lovers as bluntly as a teen or a college person might. That said, over the course of long conversations, especially past a first date, it isn't uncommon for someone to mention some past relationship (even if in passing). But even if not, as I mentioned in the past, some of the symptoms of older virginity, or vice versa, can seem like "false positives" for other things. Things like anxiety and social awkwardness are universal regardless of romantic experience. But one could argue at least a virgin has some fair reason for missing cues about hand holding, or so on.

I think for myself and a lot of other inexperienced men, it's the concept of connection which seems like a foreign concept. At some point an interaction or meeting has to shift from platonic to romantic.

I've been sitting on the sidelines for a while, but I'll have a go with this. It took me 25+ years of reading about other people's experiences to figure this out, but I don't form emotional connections with people. Forming, nurturing, and compounding those emotional connections seems to be how romance is made.

Exactly. It's not easy and it can seem like sorcery or random circumstance to some of us on the outside looking in. I understand it on an intellectual level but I haven't experienced it personally, so it can lead to a lot of introspection...positive and negative. I doubt I am alone.

About the art class thing, you know that the vast majority of life-drawing classes and drop-ins are nude by default, right? At least in North America, I can't speak for Japan. (and 100% non-sexual, I'm honestly a little weirded out at the yaramiso classes making even an oblique connection to sexual experience, but nude life-drawing is a place where one can get comfortable being around naked people in a non-sexual and generally welcoming-to-all situation, so I guess it makes sense on that level).

My mother actually worked as an art model in similar settings for over half a decade, but I didn't know how common it is universally. I imagine it's only as effective if the people taking the class are mature and don't act like goobers or leering jerks about it. I just rarely saw such a thing suggested for awkward virgins on this side of the coast, is all. But then again, maybe American society dismisses art too often at times. Writing may not be the same as drawing, painting, dancing, or sculpting but I certainly respect and see value in all arts, and I genuinely believe that almost anyone can benefit from expressing themselves through some form of it.

(I did have some interest in drawing when I was younger but I haven't done much since college. My style at best was very cartoony.)

I was previously, more subtly, trying to draw attention to these paragraphs with lots of nested ifs and woulds. When you do that, you need to question the assumptions you're making.

It keeps coming across that this persona of your hypothetical date is sexually confident herself and goes about dating in a very blunt and hard-nosed fashion. Yes, there are women like that, and you're probably disproportionately likely to meet them through online dating. Yes, it's a possible scenario that you go on a first date and her opening salvo is "Right, what's your relationship history?" - but that says more about the failure of online dating as a technology than it does about you.

But with this laser focus on a particular persona and set of conditions you are missing a lot of other possibilities, not least that she has exactly the same fear (whether a virgin herself or not) that men are going to demand a level of sexual performance that she won't be able to live up to. Or that by the time the issue comes up, she has long since guessed that you have little to no relationship experience and doesn't care.

Things aren't easy - we're all clear on that. As that Atlantic article suggested, I increasingly get the sense that being intimate with other people is like speaking a foreign language: the ability withers without regular practice. But my concern, and I guess that of other people here, is that circling round and round these hypotheticals is creating a wall of impossibility for you.

In my defense, the "blunt and hard nosed fashion" stuff is more borne out of how people (not just women, but people in general across genders) act in New York where I live. We're all in a rush doing 50 things at once and tend to be blunt or want to get to the point quickly, and few people here suffer fools lightly. If you want to scare the wits out of a New Yorker, be a total stranger and say, "Good morning" to one. There are always exceptions but it is a stereotype for fair reason. Regions do matter sometimes when planning things.

I think I passed a mere "wall of impossibility" years ago. At this point it is a Labyrinth of Impossibility with a Minotaur of Self-Doubt at the center.

I am well aware that there are a multitude of hypotheticals out there besides the one I usually refer to (although seriously, the last one I presented I thought was fairly realistic). In theory one of the advantages to dating women my own age as I am now, or even older, is that they're dealing with a lot of society's judgments themselves about being "too old" or pressure to be a certain type of woman "by now" and so on, and not seen as sexy. Many women have kids and a lot of men are put out by that alone, which is pretty absurd and unfair to me. I imagine I would be a fine lover to someone just coming out of a domineering relationship who could use someone more passive. And there are times I imagine a woman rolling her eyes somewhere when I used to go on rants at the old forums about how I would fantasize about foreplay and cuddling about as much as actual sex and yet I considered myself undatable. In theory to a woman who was struggling to see herself as sexy, getting to be the first lover of some wayward virgin could be seen as recapturing something she never thought she'd experience again. Besides the fact that a lot of men plow through sex like it is a chore or routine and an older virgin might be very receptive to focusing on the act itself like it never happened before, because it hasn't. I suppose in theory there is a way to successfully present an image of being a man who has all of the passion and energy of a younger person in the bedroom alongside the real life perspective of maturity to not be a slave to hormones and handle it properly.

That's all theory, and there's probability, though. The odds of me running into someone who would lose interest if they knew are far higher, at least where I am. So it is what I prepare for. Life in general outside of dating has given me an extremely cynical outlook on things. Hoping to run into positive and supportive women seems like a more fantastic outlook than being prepared for them to reflect society's default opinion and being surprised if they buck it or not. I can't speak for others, but for me, I often see positive romantic reactions to me as the stuff of fantasy, because it appears more improbable. The virginity itself symbolizes it. I can tell my emotions that I'm just a stud who never had a shot yet, but it's tough to tell that to my memory.

¿Is it really the societal perception aspect that important to you people?

I've been just fucking furious and miserable about an entire lifetime of being completely unable to satisfy my most important instinct in a way that doesn't feel artificial and/or demeaning. With a side of seeing that every other (censored) actually gets to do it while I'm rotting in a corner. What other people think of me for that doesn't affect me. (Well, except for that one time).

(I'm aware it's nobody's fault specifically. I can be angry without directing that anger towards specific people.)

I am glad you brought this up, because anger and frustration I think are unfortunately a part of the experience (of having no experience). It is real and genuine, and I think sometimes DNL loses some of his points by suggesting that it's all an illusion presented by society and someone is just a fool to have it. That it is as easy to release as telling oneself "virginity is just a social construct" in a mirror enough times.

It's what someone does with that anger and frustration, of course, that is key. I channel it into other things like writing, for instance. I'll never have a picture, but I can sure come up with a thousand words. To me the most important thing is not to direct it at the opposite gender and allow that anger and frustration to dominate not just interactions, but the very philosophy one has with them.

The sense I get from most of the posts in this thread is that it's less about the societal perception aspect itself, and more about the fact that societal perception includes the perceptions of potential partners...? Like, if most people stigmatize older virgins, and all your potential partners are people, then most of your potential partners may stigmatize older virgins.

Pretty much, yeah. The biggest problem with doing stuff involving people is usually the people.

Yes. Round of applause to the suggestion to empathize with/imagine others who might have their own hangups or bad experiences or insecurities; while inexperience is certainly one type of big baggage, there are lots of other types. And people who're kind and open-minded will be more willing to work with baggage in general, whether it's virginity or trauma or confusion about identity/orientation or whatever, as long as you are willing and able to carry your end of it. And that means... not slapping somebody's hand away when they reach out to try and help you carry your baggage. And it means not living inside elaborate hypotheticals and projection-loops where you're only interacting with the way you think other people feel and act, not how they actually feel and act.

As discussed earlier, I think one problem is that older virginity may be "social neutral" in itself but it mimics other red flags in terms of behavior or experience that is what leads to a lot of misunderstandings. Even in "THE 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN," the lead's virginity only seems benign in the end because his crush initially misunderstood him to be a rapist or serial killer due to his odd behavior. It's a blunt example but it has some merit.

You are absolutely right, though, that a lot of older virgins would behoove themselves to be as open and understanding, and patient, as they would want their lovers to be. I certainly try be that and feel I am understanding to a fault, potentially willing to give chances to some people who others might reject for legitimate reasons. I have befriended many people who went through far more trauma than I have. I'd argue it's almost impossible to be friends with women and not be able to do that, because so many are survivors of rape, abuse, or attempts at those. I have linked this comic before but I imagine my first relationship, where I to have one, might require reassurance on par with this: https://tapas.io/episode/73563

I've lived a life where even my own mother has encouraged me to lie about my virginity and many of my best friends see it as a punchline or something to pity or shake their heads at. I imagine you understand the difficulty of assuming some random stranger from a MeetUp or a bar is going to be any more merciful or understanding about something which is universally considered taboo than people who have known me for half my life, if not longer. That is, at least, part of how "projection loops" begin. And a lack of experience sadly means that a lot of things have to exist in the hypothetical realm until or unless experience supplants it.

[Hielario]

The minotaur thing could be the basis for an interesting story. Maybe it's because of the kind of porn i like, but I think it might work as a sexy story...

[Enail]

My mother actually worked as an art model in similar settings for over half a decade, but I didn't know how common it is universally. I imagine it's only as effective if the people taking the class are mature and don't act like goobers or leering jerks about it. I just rarely saw such a thing suggested for awkward virgins on this side of the coast, is all. But then again, maybe American society dismisses art too often at times. Writing may not be the same as drawing, painting, dancing, or sculpting but I certainly respect and see value in all arts, and I genuinely believe that almost anyone can benefit from expressing themselves through some form of it.

(I did have some interest in drawing when I was younger but I haven't done much since college. My style at best was very cartoony.)

It's the norm, especially in any kind of official college or art class setting - there's some "beer and draw" or other more casual sessions that don't involve nude models, but since that's the more unusual situation, they tend to specify that there's clothes involved. I've never seen anyone behave inappropriately to or about the models, and that's something that I think most teachers or organizers would crack down on extremely harshly. At first it seems weird having a random naked person in the room, especially if it's a more informal setting and they're chatty or if they come around and look at people's work, but it comes to seem very normal and very...business-like? very quickly, not at all sexual or even uncomfortable, so there's a solid norm of behaviour to make people keep it polite.  It's actually pretty fun and a great way to improve, if you ever have some more room for leisure in your life and feel like giving it a go - drop-in sessions are very welcoming to all skill levels and styles, but I found it really helpful starting with beginner life-drawing class to get oriented and get some guidance in how to approach drawing that way.

...this is getting pretty off-topic, sorry.

[inbloomer]

It's the norm, especially in any kind of official college or art class setting - there's some "beer and draw" or other more casual sessions that don't involve nude models, but since that's the more unusual situation, they tend to specify that there's clothes involved. I've never seen anyone behave inappropriately to or about the models, and that's something that I think most teachers or organizers would crack down on extremely harshly. At first it seems weird having a random naked person in the room, especially if it's a more informal setting and they're chatty or if they come around and look at people's work, but it comes to seem very normal and very...business-like? very quickly, not at all sexual or even uncomfortable, so there's a solid norm of behaviour to make people keep it polite.  It's actually pretty fun and a great way to improve, if you ever have some more room for leisure in your life and feel like giving it a go - drop-in sessions are very welcoming to all skill levels and styles, but I found it really helpful starting with beginner life-drawing class to get oriented and get some guidance in how to approach drawing that way.

...this is getting pretty off-topic, sorry.

Indeed off-topic and maybe for a separate thread, though interesting. Looking up, lots of schools (posher schools than the one I went to) have life drawing classes or clubs, yet it's also become a popular activity for stag and hen dos, so whether it's at all sexual or not seems quite ambiguous.

I've never been able to draw - the closest situation to that I've been in was a "living museum" in Africa, where the local villagers dress up traditionally (i.e. women topless) and do dances and craft activities in front of you, then put their jeans and t-shirts back on to go home...

[Datelessman]

The minotaur thing could be the basis for an interesting story. Maybe it's because of the kind of porn i like, but I think it might work as a sexy story...

I am always pleased when someone enjoys some of the creative metaphors or rants I do.  

As someone who has a fetish he'll never reveal, I try not to judge the porn tastes of others unless it gets into criminal or just universally weird territory. Furries aren't quite so bad, though not quite my bag. I have probably RP'd with one or two on my game forum, though.

The Minotaur of Self-Doubt could be a basis for an interesting story, though. It's self-doubt makes it unlikely to put up much fight, but its sheer size makes moving it very difficult. "She really doesn't like you," it grumbles, as it sits down. "And you're not moving me with those arms, buddy."  

It's the norm, especially in any kind of official college or art class setting - there's some "beer and draw" or other more casual sessions that don't involve nude models, but since that's the more unusual situation, they tend to specify that there's clothes involved. I've never seen anyone behave inappropriately to or about the models, and that's something that I think most teachers or organizers would crack down on extremely harshly. At first it seems weird having a random naked person in the room, especially if it's a more informal setting and they're chatty or if they come around and look at people's work, but it comes to seem very normal and very...business-like? very quickly, not at all sexual or even uncomfortable, so there's a solid norm of behaviour to make people keep it polite.  It's actually pretty fun and a great way to improve, if you ever have some more room for leisure in your life and feel like giving it a go - drop-in sessions are very welcoming to all skill levels and styles, but I found it really helpful starting with beginner life-drawing class to get oriented and get some guidance in how to approach drawing that way.

...this is getting pretty off-topic, sorry.

S'okay, my minor in college was in Digression.

There are times I considered it, but I'd have to go to a school other than the one where my mother used to work, since her creepy older friend who made passes at me works there still.  

Indeed off-topic and maybe for a separate thread, though interesting. Looking up, lots of schools (posher schools than the one I went to) have life drawing classes or clubs, yet it's also become a popular activity for stag and hen dos, so whether it's at all sexual or not seems quite ambiguous.

I've never been able to draw - the closest situation to that I've been in was a "living museum" in Africa, where the local villagers dress up traditionally (i.e. women topless) and do dances and craft activities in front of you, then put their jeans and t-shirts back on to go home...

That...certainly sounds like an interesting experience. Call it exposure therapy. The double entendres write themselves.

I suppose to get on topic, while of course the circumstances and the individuals matter, even the mechanics of revealing one's virginity to another person alone can bring up anxious thinking. Exposing it may relieve some tension, but worrying about revealing it to a relative stranger can be itself anxiety inducing. And then there's now technical you want to be. "I haven't had much experience" implies SOME experience, and that depends on the individual (i.e. some people have kissed before or so on).

Knowing myself I would likely just slip it into a stupid joke.

"Did you just request extra virgin olive oil with that salad? Funny you should mention that..."

"Cut me a little slack, this really is my first rodeo. Though I promise I'll last longer than ten seconds."

"While we're revealing secrets, I may as well mention that I've been touched less than a porcupine at a petting zoo."

DNL suggests replying if someone follows up with a "why" question by claiming you "never found the right woman," but I question how solid that is as an answer. I would recommend only using it if it is genuine true, and you are someone who was genuinely looking for A right woman, not ANY woman (like me, and some others). I also wonder if even that answer could trigger a follow up question ("Why couldn't he find the right woman?"). Which I why I would recommend only revealing it if the situation and person is right, and all of the vibes point to them being supportive. And NOT to just use a woman's revelation of her own trauma as an opening in and of itself. I've seen some people hear something like and and feel it is their turn to share without at least offering support and whatnot.

[Enail]

Of course in the original myth, Theseus never would have beaten the Minotaur without help from Princess Ariadne, who was madly in love with him but in most versions he abandons for reasons later on. I guess men have always been cads.

<mod> Hey, making negative generalizations about groups is against forum rules, and that includes "men," so please watch it how you talk about things like the existence of cads or other male stereotypes. Thanks! </mod>

[Datelessman]

Of course in the original myth, Theseus never would have beaten the Minotaur without help from Princess Ariadne, who was madly in love with him but in most versions he abandons for reasons later on. I guess men have always been cads.

<mod> Hey, making negative generalizations about groups is against forum rules, and that includes "men," so please watch it how you talk about things like the existence of cads or other male stereotypes. Thanks! </mod>

Understood. Removed offending line.

[Datelessman]

So in keeping with some of the things that Werel and Glides were talking about back on Page 1, I found a Tweet from illustrator Mark Siegel which I think touches on what they were talking about about...touching. Which can be intimate but doesn't in itself have to lead to "sexy times" all the time, even if it might sometimes:

https://twitter.com/marksiegelbooks/status/1209123318340759553

(FYI, he works on a series of YA graphic novels called "5 Worlds," which are excellent. In my alter ego I have read a few for a website.)

It's "tuning in" exercises for couples and aside for the breathing thing they all seem like things I'd love to do with someone I cared about. Lord knows I used to fantasize about spooning in college at least often as...other things. If not sometimes more so. These all look great, and I am sort of mentally filing them in the back of my mind just in case.

But in real life of course being so inexperienced I'd be nervous about moving in for a hand hold or a touch in the forearm. I've gotten better at reading signals but even with that I would be extremely hesitant, which is a problem since body language is a big component in dating. While sexual experience alone is not a universal cure all, I imagine at least for some people it makes them less uptight about taking those kinds of risks.

"May I touch your forearm to reflect the high point of that anecdote as well as to test the waters of any mutual attraction?" may be hot if it's coming from the Vision or Clark Kent, but in real life it's kind of awkward.

[inbloomer]

There are various clubs and classes where touch and/or intimacy play quite a big role in the activity and are learned as part of developing the skill. Acting, dance and martial arts are three areas that spring to mind. Although you'd absolutely have to go along in the right spirit (NOT "nuts to this exercise - when do I get to do sex scenes with hot women?"), it's legitimate to recognise they can build your confidence with different kinds of interaction. I've only done a tiny bit of taught acting, but it really does help you get out of your own head, so you turn off that voice that says "I look stupid, everyone's judging me" and focus on responding to the person in front of you.

Obviously that's still not the same as a relationship and I don't think there's much evidence that actors are better and happier daters overall. But for someone who has very low confidence in their ability to be intimate at all, I personally think that's a healthier line of strategy than going to sex workers or surrogates.

[Datelessman]

There are various clubs and classes where touch and/or intimacy play quite a big role in the activity and are learned as part of developing the skill. Acting, dance and martial arts are three areas that spring to mind. Although you'd absolutely have to go along in the right spirit (NOT "nuts to this exercise - when do I get to do sex scenes with hot women?"), it's legitimate to recognise they can build your confidence with different kinds of interaction. I've only done a tiny bit of taught acting, but it really does help you get out of your own head, so you turn off that voice that says "I look stupid, everyone's judging me" and focus on responding to the person in front of you.

Obviously that's still not the same as a relationship and I don't think there's much evidence that actors are better and happier daters overall. But for someone who has very low confidence in their ability to be intimate at all, I personally think that's a healthier line of strategy than going to sex workers or surrogates.

I have to say I didn't expect someone to suggest martial arts classes as being a part of a discussion revolving around intimate touching or getting used to either that and/or body language. I'm not dismissing it or disagreeing with it per say -- my martial arts experience was limited and unsuccessful, since I didn't have the dedication to pursue it as a kid -- but more curious that it was even suggested. Aren't martial arts kind of aggressive? I suppose it can aid with general confidence (which is good overall), and there's exercises meant to develop the body and adopt defensive postures, but ultimately the goal is to eventually spar with an opponent. The only spooning you're doing is in an attempt to get a "take down", right? And doesn't this risk acknowledging some of the macho man baloney that can sometimes negatively effect guys who, let's be honest, already think they're inadequate? "I have to learn how to kick butt in order to get some butt" seems like a simplistic strategy which may be borne out of this. And while I know DNL practices some martial arts and had an article years ago about approach anxiety called something to the effect of "Learn how to Take the Hit," even he doesn't usually preach that much as something to try, at least not as much as dance classes.

I have heard of there being "cuddling classes" or people who more or less promote their services as doing that and not much else. One of the "older male virgins" who blogs on Wordpress that we mutually follow went to one of those before he eventually lost his virginity (and has gone on to have a more normal dating life, onto his 2nd or 3rd relationship) went to one of those. Dancing and acting classes also sound like good suggestions for those able to afford it or are light on their feet. I don't think I have the coordination to dance, but improv acting is something I think I could manage and have some talent for. I am bad with remembering lines but good for rolling with a premise or a "character". And yes, I know live action tabletop RPing like D&D is not quite the same.

I only did "a tiny bit of acting" myself, at least in terms of a formal class in high school and college. Again, I was not good at remembering lines or some of the more abstract bits (I recall one college professor suggested our term project was to "become" an inanimate object and that was too heady for me for what was at the time an elective I was taking on a whim), but the improv exercises I usually always responded well to. At least so long as I was going for a laugh, which is my strength anyway.

There is the anxiety around having more of an audience, though, I won't lie. A lot of these things which we discuss I am extremely sensitive about, and I doubt I am alone. It's tough to admit to myself that I have these sorts of problems, and it would be tough enough to acknowledge and work thru with another person (whether a therapist, a cuddle peddler or a sex worker). There being an audience alongside that wouldn't be helpful, at least right now. I wonder if a lot of people choose the surrogate or the sex worker over some of those classes, besides the fact that they want to "get to the meat" faster, is because they figure if it's going to be anxious and nerve wracking anyway, at least they may as well cut out the middle man? If it is going to be a shameful and embarrassing experience anyway, they may as well accomplish a goal?

And the other part of it is I am good at doing things so long as they're split into categories and not as good as combining certain things, and I wonder if others are too. I've literally cold called people and gotten them to donate to a charity they'd never heard of by credit card -- many times. I was hardly the master at it but I was at least average at phone sales. What I can't do is smile, go over to a woman and say that I like her and would she kindly like to share a cup of coffee with me. So there is always a part of me which worries that I'll become a swing dancing martial artist who still can't talk to women. I've done multiple speed dating events; for others that seems nerve wracking but I've done about 4 of them over the past decade and they're fine, I just haven't succeeded with them.

Maybe it's like a swim class. Some of us remedial students would need more focused attention at the start? I don't know. Those are are great suggestions, though.

[inbloomer]

I did martial arts as a student. With some caveats, I think it’s a really good alternative for someone who isn’t going to enjoy drama or dance.

There’s a whole debate around how much risk of getting hurt people in the class should face. Too much and those who came to martial arts because of some kind of anxiety simply get even more anxious and ego-driven. Too little and they risk getting dangerously overconfident about their ability in a real fight. Clubs can be bad at encouraging the latter by playing the One True Faith card, i.e. claiming their particular interpretation of a sub-branch of a particular lineage is the one martial art that actually works and everyone else is just wasting their money. In reality getting in a street fight is far better avoided and is a low risk for most people anyway, and the mechanical principles that do work are found in the high levels of many martial arts and indeed in non-combat sports too.

So if you go for a class that isn’t heavily based on sparring, in effect what you’re going to learn is a form of choreography that gradually gets faster, harder and more improvisational as you improve. A significant aspect of that is getting used to someone being inside your normal personal space boundaries and touching you (often arm to arm), along with developing awareness of your own body and of matching your responses to the context. My experience was that groups are always majority male but with a consistent female minority. I guess both had similar motivations deep down, though on the surface men were more looking for something precise and technical, while women often had Asian heritage that they wanted to explore.

It was all very appropriate and non-sexual, with the exception of one awkward-funny moment. This was doing something unusually intimate in the first place, but the class had wanted to go over lots of “school bully” attacks like headlocks and rugby tackles and how to counter them. So the instructor went through all these, including the position where the attacker is straddling you on the floor and pinning your wrists down. The response is to roll sharply to lever them off you, using your thigh in their groin as a fulcrum. If you’re a male attacker this is very uncomfortable and you will inevitably loosen your grip. But when practising it with a female training partner (who I was then quite keen on), what I now realise is that it was having a masturbatory effect. She was embarrassed but in a happy way, and joked that I was welcome to roll around as much as I liked. At the time though I didn’t understand the nuances of what was going on.

Anyway, doing martial arts didn’t revolutionise my overall confidence or ability to talk to women. But it did give me a sense of how you choreograph with someone else’s body and how communication is critical to that – on their first lesson, everyone is either far too soft and feeble or far too hard and aggressive – and also that someone who’s getting very little touch can get used to doing more.

[Datelessman]

You seem to be describing something closer to Tai Chi than what most people (myself included) think of when they think of martial arts. Tai Chi is itself a martial art of course, but its practitioners, to the best of my knowledge, use it mostly to focus on honing their own bodies, balance, and grace more than sparring. I live in an area with a growing Asian community so if I am near a park anytime around sunrise it's not uncommon to find some people, usually 60+ years old, doing it. I am sure it's not the only martial art or school which does that, but that's what it reminded me of in my area.

The other key thing is it seems to come down on how good your school of training is as well as the instructors and their philosophy. I suppose this goes with many things. I mean, I had to get exposed to a lot of other "dating experts" before I stumbled on DNL. And while I hardly practice everything he preaches or agree with all of his stuff, he's the one I have hovered around the longest versus anyone else. Maybe it isn't just his tips or tricks, but because I get the sense he's a more genuine person who wants to help, while others usually let their own bitterness or capitalistic tendencies shine through.

That story about your, um, "training partner" was certainly interesting. The karate schools I have seen in my area bare out in similar ways to yours; definitely male dominated but with a consistent minority of women practicing too. I wouldn't say it was out of exploring Asian heritage, though. From my limited experience I saw a variety of women there; they may have been outnumbered by dudes about 4:1 but it wasn't just Asian women.

The closest experience I had to that was a First Aid class I took in college; it was a brief course but it taught us things like CPR and applying basic slings and so on. It was a small and fairly intimate class (under 20 people if memory serves) and one of the young women I sat beside I had quite a crush on at the time. Part of the lessons involved getting on mats and practicing certain things together, such as basic meditation and applying slings or bandages. We were often paired together because we happened to sit next to each other which certainly added an extra element to my usual stammering non-attempts to ask her out (as in I never actually did that, I just made small talk until I could gauge whether she was single or not or how compatible we are, before ultimately doing nothing regardless). Come to think of it she was probably one of the shyer women I ever crushed on. I usually crushed on far more boisterous or aggressive women.

Anyway, one class was about applying various bandages and slings and we had to practice on each other. It was kind of awkward and the teacher didn't help (or maybe was trying) when he joked to the two of us, "So, you're all really tying each other up, are you?" I forget if we both blushed but it felt like we did.

But to get back in topic, many people (including director John Carpenter) often compared martial arts to a bit of a dance anyway, so I can see some overlap on that level. I can understand how it helps towards confidence in general and getting to know your own body (and how to make it flexible). In my brief experience I was usually too aggressive and impatient. I also had a tendency to go into "Rocky syndrome," where I was willing to endure a great degree of punishment to land shots. I had a few sparring matches with my friends in high school and usually the one hallmark I established was I seemed able to endure a lot of pain. But I never considered trying to explore it in a less aggressive way.

Interesting suggestion and addition to the current trend of the conversation, though!

[inbloomer]

Tai Chi is a self defence art but a very long-term one: it takes years of training before you have the technique to defend a basic punch, but once you get to that point you're very good. So it's more common just to take the beginner movements and use them for health. Similarly, many boxing clubs now offer non-contact classes.

Certain people have strong views that you can't learn self-defence without facing people who have both skill and actual intent to beat you. I understand where they're coming from - I got to the point where I could handle attackers moving at full force and speed and with techniques of their choice, but it still wasn't an actual fight or contest. The argument is that in a very stressful situation, most training goes out of the window and it reverts to being a playground brawl anyway. I think you can still learn good self-defence without putting yourself through that, even if the most useful things you learn are about assessing and avoiding threats in the first place.

The one-off acting class I did included quite a bit of intimacy - definitely intense eye contact, and there may have been arm/hand touching as well. It was a good class but for me was pushing a bit too far and fast at once. Dance classes, of which I've done a similarly low but non-zero number, have similar exercises though in my experience are actually more rigid, in terms of having to follow fast and complex sets of instructions.

As you say, all groups vary and finding one with the right vibe and a trustworthy instructor is critical. I think what I'm getting at is that there are opportunities for practising various aspects of intimacy which are under your control to take, don't involve doing anything unethical, and for which your level of sexual experience is totally irrelevant.

[Datelessman]

Point well taken. You are correct, there are many ways to try to become more accustomed to touch than paying for "hug therapists" or other similar services. I can easily imagine certain acting courses being more intense or intimate in some ways than martial arts were. DNL is naturally a big fan of dance classes, or at least he recommends them often enough to be. It certainly offers a lot of opportunities.

So last week, DNL actually had two letters across two different days dealing with older male virgins. That's actually quite a lot even considering how often the topic normally comes up (i.e. once a month at least). The cool thing is that they featured guys coming at it from different angles, which made for some interesting responses. Naturally those of us dealing with this "experience" all are coming at it from different angles, mindsets, and expectations. Since this topic is essentially all about older male virginity in general, I figure relinking some of DNL's articles as they come is a fair way to keep things on topic while varying things a bit.

So on Dec. 30th (Monday), DNL answered a letter from an older male virgin whose problem isn't attracting women; it's essentially figuring out what he wants. It actually covers a lot of things that came up in our chat, or some of the things KMR and Enail mentioned: https://www.doctornerdlove.com/i-cant-bring-myself-to-have-sex-and-i-dont-know-what-to-do/

Now, figuring out what you want out of any sort of romantic relationship, long or short, is a universal thing; it isn't just something that older virgins face. And DNL is on the ball with most of his advice, that the LW needs to sort out what he wants and realize that his first lover is unlikely to define his life and so on. Just in terms of practicality or trying to find an ideal lover, at least settling on whether one wants a long term thing or no strings alone is worth sorting thru.

But then DNL reuses one of his old lines and no matter how he remixes it, I don't think it works:

Virginity isn’t a state of being, it’s just a case of having never had a particular experience. I’ve never jumped out of a perfectly good airplane, but letting that define who I am as a person would be absurd, as much as believing that doing so would lead to massive changes in my life.

I get the point, but with all due respect, people who jump out of airplanes allow that to define who they are all the time. They call themselves daredevils, or thrill-seekers, or, naturally, sky-divers. In fact, I imagine a lot of women who were on a date and learned that the guy sky-dove as a hobby would at least find him more interesting than a lot of other dudes' hobbies just on that factor alone. I still hate that DNL gives comparisons like this, because even in 2020, the average person is not expected to have ever sky-dived, yet it's universally accepted that the vast majority of people will have sex at least once in their lives, and a majority of those do it by their early 20's. Skydiving it not something which, due to social norms or expectations, the average person is expected to have done, or ever done, period.

After you’ve lost your virginity, you will be the exact same person you were before. The only way it will change you is if you decide to change, a decision you could’ve made at any time. Like Dumbo’s magic feather, all this did was give you permission to unlock the potential that you could’ve accessed at any time, if you’d so chosen.

I think at times DNL equates the changes in demeanor that some people (not all, or even most, but some) get once they've had their first sexual experience due to the sheer act of gaining the experience itself as being a change to the personality or to their true selves. It isn't, and naturally people who think it will be that are likely mistaken. But there are times where I wonder if the practice of advocating to so many older virgins that their lack of experience is of no more consequence than a lack of daredevil experience or a difference of pizza topping and that the sheer adrenaline rush they may get from the act is something they could have unlocked at any time is as much of a "Dumbo's magic feather" than anything else.

In theory I could enter a dating campaign telling myself that I can genuinely and positively please a woman sexually, to the point that I will outshine other lovers she's had before due to my sheer tenacity or imagination or willingness to listen and be considerate or some such, and that I should have the same amount of self confidence as any other man she meets. The problem is that such a belief would be based on absolute nothingness; it would be faith at best and delusion at worst. It would be based on zero evidence. It would be no different than telling myself I can fly through the air with enough pixie dust. Now, I concede that an argument could be made that such a delusion would at least be more positive and encouraging than believing the alternative -- that being a virgin is shameful and different. And to a degree I believe that DNL leans on this side of things as he'd rather tell older virgins encouraging things which are not true in the name of getting them to help themselves and get out there than he is of being realistic about it; he is a dating coach after all. I just sometimes cringe when he insists on tossing in this ol' regular in with his more customized advice.

After having sex, it becomes easier to enter romantic situations based at least on the idea that it's happened once before, if nothing else. That isn't to say that people can't be anxious or awkward about dating even if they've had a dozen lovers, but that entering romantic situations with at least a little more of an educated opinion or perspective after having actually done the deed is natural. I mean I am stuck here having to analyze it from a cold, clinical perspective entirely because I have never experienced it. I look at sex as some people might look at a statue.

The letter from January 3rd came from another perspective, and easily garnered more of a response in the comments. It features a 26 year old virgin who paid two younger online gamer friends for nude pictures and how horrible he feels about doing so: https://www.doctornerdlove.com/paid-friends-for-sex-make-me-creepy/

Now, from my perspective, there are some potentially creepy details to this. The biggest for me is that these women were not necessarily "sex workers" or professional sexters per say; the LW essentially suggested they could do so after they confided to him some money concerns amid their usual chats about video games, and they agreed. In other words, the only thing keeping this from being really sleazy is that the online pals were willing participants. But then again, I suppose the same could be true of a variety of things. He did come at this from the perspective of being an older man (according to him, he was 24 and they were about 20), which at times can be a factor. DNL was of the attitude that the LW was blowing this out of proportion and making more of it than he should have, which is true to a degree, especially since the LW is another dude who has taken #MeToo to an extreme. Most of what followed was really more of a defense of sex workers and/or those in similar industries and how they're not all abused slaves or so on. It also led to a conversation about older virgins employing the services of sex workers to "get over the hump" and the complications that come up, usually due to how they themselves feel about it.

My own views on sex workers and possibly employing their services have softened drastically over the past 4-5 years, albeit perhaps for self serving reasons. I am getting older, and my own opportunities and odds to lose my virginity through the course of "normal" dating grows ever bleaker and more remote with each passing year. I still doubt I ever would, but I am more open to it now than I was even in 2018. Yes, it does take a lot out of the experience when you know someone is being paid to act like you're a cool guy and a nice lover versus it being genuine, but on the other hand, I have literally never heard the words before and simply hearing them might be a profoundly positive experience for me. I could easily imagine myself handing a sex worker her roll of hundreds or whatnot and her giving me a customary, "By the way, you were pretty good for a rookie there chief," and me sitting up with a gushing smile going, "Gosh, REALLY!?" like it was true. And of course it could be true, but the point is a sex worker would rarely not be courteous about it.

But much like with the previous example, in between DNL's usual spot on and tailored to the letter advice, comes one of his regular lines which takes me out every time I see it.

there’re plenty of times that their deciding to sleep with you has nothing to do with you, and everything to do with them.  The fact that you hooked up with someone you just met at a bar doesn’t mean that you were “chosen”, that you’d “earned” anything or that you were the best possible choice in a room full of dudes. Sometimes the reason why someone slept with you is because you were the nearest, least-objectionable warm body.

I think what DNL perhaps misses is that even if a choice is that random, there is still a reason a particular woman will pick that particular "dude." Someone will usually always have more than one choice of "nearest, least-objectionable warm body;" and if there isn't, then there had to be a reason they chose that someone versus going home alone. There is always a reason why she chose a particular one. And that many (not all, but many) older virgins know this; they know that not everyone who has sex does it because they were fated kismet or one of them is a seduction demigod (or goddess). If anything, that makes it hurt worse. That in a world where it seems like "random people hook up all the time", no "random" person chose you. That only feeds into the idea that something is profoundly or uniquely wrong. I have been in plenty of situations where a woman, whether due to being a friend or mutual associate or so on, if she wanted "the nearest, least-objectionable warm body," she could have had me for nothing, and instead chose one of my pals. Clearly, there is choice involved even in seemingly random, one night flings. Of course there is. So why does DNL try to sooth some older virgins by essentially saying that random chance plays as big a role as anything they present?

I'll concede that I am probably too far on the other end of the spectrum, in that I see older virginity as something to hide. It is strange and unusual, and most people fear what they do not understand. I just have problems when DNL goes too far in the other direction in my opinion.

Incidentally, I do have an experience somewhat similar to the one that the second LW had, but this post is already getting absurdly long so I will end it here.

[inbloomer]

I agree with your self-assessment, that the "correct" view on this issue is probably about halfway between yours and DNL's. Someone on his pages once pointed out the key fact, which is that society sees getting your first partner as a rite of passage just like passing your driving test or becoming legal drinking age, but actually it isn't like those because it always depends on someone else's wishes. So you shouldn't feel irretrievably broken if it doesn't happen within a particular narrow window. That said, I don't underestimate the challenges. There was a newspaper article a few months ago about "the joy of losing your virginity in your 30s", and to be honest, the case studies they gave didn't ooze joy, they oozed grim, hatchet-faced relief at having finally ticked off the milestone.

I agree that DNL can sometimes feel like he's flip-flopping between saying a huge amount of it is luck and some people are doing all the right things but still can't find any success, and saying if you're not getting any success you must be doing something wrong.

I was thinking about it a lot over Christmas, and looking over my high school diaries and journals from what's now nearly 20 years ago. What comes across is that I was trying very hard, and frankly then as now I was having a lot of good interactions with women and had a lot of things that briefly seemed promising. But every time it got to that point where it's going to go one way or the other, the woman involved started subtly and gracefully backing off. And that, basically, is what's happened every time since. The one thing that has definitely changed is that I'm a lot sharper at reading signals, nuance and context, like why doing x is fine in situation y but not cool in situation z. That's unquestionably good, and DNL's site has been a helpful strand for me in developing that awareness. But many people don't have a perfect sense of boundaries as a teenager, and it doesn't greatly hold them back. That's where I get back to the unresolvable question I started this thread with, which is whether I am doing something specific wrong, or have just been very unlucky, or am self-sabotaging in a way so subtle I can't even spot it ...

[Datelessman]

I agree that most of the articles I have read about people who lost their virginity at older ages have usually conveyed a sense of relief more than outright joy. Even some of those in which the person (always a man) utilized the services of a prostitute in order to do so. And for the record I have probably read about 3-4 articles which involved a sex worker and 75% of them were positive, for what it is worth. And many of them often said that the former virgin was now pursuing something closer to a normal dating life.

I started a Wordpress blog (it is the link under my avatar next to the email button) in July 2014 to essentially act as a journal to analyze most if not all of my major memories and feelings about my love life or lack thereof. It was also around the time I first started reading DNL with any regularity and it has helped overall. Then again, so has life in general teaching me more perspective, as well as having jobs (cell center mostly) where I got better at reading people.

One of my fellow older virgin peers at Wordpress, whose blog I follow, was on a quest to lose his virginity to the point that he had date counters up every time he went on one. He lost his virginity in his early 30's a year or so ago. And after that it was tough getting another lover and he did get depressed. However, now he's on his second relationship and things are going very well for him. I was very happy for him and while DNL is right -- in that his core personality is the same -- to deny that the act of doing the deed had no effect on him is simply absurd. Not to say that losing one's virginity has a positive effect on someone's life overall, because that is not true. But to deny that there isn't at least some boost of experience or confidence level at "checking off that box" and that relief alone can't have a cathartic effect, even if it may be a placebo in a way, is also inaccurate to me. Literally every man I have ever known who lost their virginity at whatever age it was saw a net positive boost in demeanor and execution from it. Just the idea of being able to tell yourself, "well, it worked once" can be huge.

I feel in a similar spot to you, although I likely have a more grim and pessimistic view of it despite my best intentions. In my defense, I am also older and may have been dealing with these feelings longer. There is a part of me which feels that it isn't entirely fair for me to base my future dating projections based on my past because it was so long ago. My last date took place before Barack Obama was elected president. Even my last speed dating event was about 4.5 years ago. My everyday demeanor has changed and my ability to read people is much better than it was in my 20's. I feel I would be able to handle rejection much better, if only because I have handled some of my unrequited crushes much better than I did in high school and college (and there were a lot of them). In my analysis I narrowed down that I had approximately 3 opportunities to potentially have a romantic relationship (two dates and one other incident) and each time I botched it. However, that core reason why I botched them -- disbelief -- has not changed. I would be in the same disbelief now than when I was in college at a date actually accepting my invitation. The longer I have been a virgin has made it seem even more insurmountable than when I was in college, precisely because now I am in that category where it seems more strange and unusual, and where missing ques or being hesitant about casual touching stands out more.

All I could suggest it that it is a factor of both. I think you and I have been unlucky, but there was also something, even if subtle, which we didn't do a certain way which led to this. For me, if I had been able to suspend my own disbelief a bit at least by college, I would have been better off. I am certainly a better conversationalist now, and just being older has made me care less about rejection. I expect it. Oh, a woman thinks I am romantic pond-scum? It must be a Tuesday. Nothing she tells me is as bad as what I tell myself every day when I wake up. But I struggle with having the time and especially the will to rack up the numbers needed to get to those positive experiences. I see my ratio is 100:1 to get a first date, and then 100:1 first dates get to a second, and so on. That means however I do it, I have to commit to a large degree of approaches or attempts and I haven't had the will for that for a long time. And then if I did get a positive reaction...I cannot trust myself not to botch it. I haven't forgiven myself for botching my last genuine chance when I was about 24. I certainly would never forgive myself if I did it now, and that's even more expectation and pressure. And then there is the pressure of having to bottle so much about myself in the pursuit. I'd have to hide the fact that I am a virgin, and my extreme anxiety and years worth of baggage, for one. I'd have to hide the fetish, which I am even more shy and uptight about. I'd have to hide the fact that my next date would literally be my 4th in life, and sheer inexperience is a factor. And my own disbelief -- the Minotaur of Self-Doubt -- would have to be bottled too. So that is a darn lot of stress on just getting a cup of coffee with someone who didn't think I looked hideous on POF or OKC, and I haven't been able to do that in ages.

I suppose that is why DNL leans toward disclosing such secrets; what he doesn't realize is that even admitting such secrets to someone who is a relative stranger is itself stressful and awkward. Maybe I don't want to lay out all my baggage to everyone I date. Maybe I want to pretend I am not a circus freak just once in my life. If dudes can lie about felony convictions and baby mamas, why can't I gloss over the fact that the average Pope has more romantic experience than I do and still succeed? Maybe sometimes I don't want to be the Dateless-Man anymore, not advertise as Dateless-Man INC. But I agree, feeling at such a crossroads is normal for those in our situation.

[inbloomer]

I guess the difference is that I feel I could do it. Yes there would be a learning curve, yes there might be aspects that I'm never great at or don't work for me. But seriously, when I think about some of the people I've known over the years who have succeeded in negotiating relationships and sex, I don't believe it is beyond my potential.

But however hard I work at everything that is within my control, it still would require someone actually to get off her backside and make the effort to be around me, and take on some of the risk. I mean that in the nicest possible way.

As I've mentioned, there's one time only that I've had what was unquestionably a romantic offer. There were several good reasons not to take it, including that she was very intense, in a way would definitely have counted as creepy had the genders been reversed. But I nonetheless have a lot of respect for her. She saw the things in me that I think are good, and quickly decided she was going to try for it, at the risk of getting hurt. I did at the time think that having got one offer, more would start coming. I really didn't think that would still be an unequalled personal best 15 years down the line.

[Datelessman]

I guess the difference is that I feel I could do it. Yes there would be a learning curve, yes there might be aspects that I'm never great at or don't work for me. But seriously, when I think about some of the people I've known over the years who have succeeded in negotiating relationships and sex, I don't believe it is beyond my potential.

Intellectually I don't feel it is beyond my potential either. Although to be all honest I stopped focusing a lot on the "how could this jabronie get laid and I can't" sort of thing after college. I'm ashamed to admit there was a time in my teens and early 20's when I rode the "women must like jerks" train too, but I eventually wised up and dumped that philosophy. Or, I simply turned a lot of that loathing and frustration inward, as I tend to do as an introvert anyway. Emotionally and spiritually, though, I just never had the will for the numbers game, or had much faith in myself to capitalize on rare opportunities. I was not willing to ask out 100 women to find the 1 who said yes, especially since if I did, I would never buy it.

It's like that Rod Stewart song. "Some guys have all the luck. Some guys have all the pain. Some guys get all the breaks; some guys do nothing but complain [...] it seems so unfair, when there's love everywhere, and none for me..."

And yeah, there are times when I go "why me" and all that. But eventually I just settled on that most other people either were better socially calibrated, had better luck, or just were willing to try harder in areas where the odds were better than I did.

But however hard I work at everything that is within my control, it still would require someone actually to get off her backside and make the effort to be around me, and take on some of the risk. I mean that in the nicest possible way.

I am sure you do, but I'd advocate not staying on such thoughts too long. It did remind me of a scene from 2005's "HITCH," starring Will Smith and Kevin James, where he went into what he called the "90/10" philosophy. To his character (a dating coach), men had to put in the 90, and women put in the 10. This is only a movie and I don't entirely subscribe to it, but it sounds like you're frustrated by what you see as woman not putting in some effort around you. The rough part is that if you don't strike their fancy in some way, they won't. It isn't anything bad about you or them, just about being someone's type. Although it can be frustrating to feel like you're nobody's type.

I suppose DNL would state that is why his strategy usually relies on mastering what you can control and selecting the locations and groups which increase the odds of success.

Unfortunately for me, I have never found a woman who found failure to be an aphrodisiac. If I did, I'd be unto a god.  

I think one thing I am tired of sometimes is when someone tells me that forming a connection with someone romantically is the same as forming a connection with them as a friend, and in my experience that is so not true. Can one lead to the other? Yes. Is platonic friendship a priceless, wonderful thing? Yes. More than once I proved I was less willing to sacrifice that to tease at anything more. I chose to be a woman's friend instead of yet another guy who hit on her who she didn't like in that way more than once, and over time I have not regretted those decisions. But a romantic connection seems different. From the outside looking in it can feel like an invisible barrier. To use a gamer metaphor, friendship can feel like the "free" version; romance is the version you pay $9-$35 a month for to get all the gimmicks and tricks. And much like a game, sometimes it can be wonderful, or feel like a waste, or even lead to harm. Some people can make that romantic connection fast and early, and others take a little time, but to attain neither can  be frustrating just on an intellectual level.

As I've mentioned, there's one time only that I've had what was unquestionably a romantic offer. There were several good reasons not to take it, including that she was very intense, in a way would definitely have counted as creepy had the genders been reversed. But I nonetheless have a lot of respect for her. She saw the things in me that I think are good, and quickly decided she was going to try for it, at the risk of getting hurt. I did at the time think that having got one offer, more would start coming. I really didn't think that would still be an unequalled personal best 15 years down the line.

Speaking for myself, there are perhaps 3 opportunities that could have led to more had I reacted or capitalized on them differently. Two of them were dates; one at the end of high school and the other off OKC during college. Both of them involved a woman showing initial interest, but my initial disbelief after a lifetime of bullying, false positives, and low self esteem caused each to lose it. A third moment wasn't a date per say, but it involved a complicated situation where a woman who was an acquaintance more or less was talking to me and I got the sense she was fishing for me to admit I liked her, and I refused to. I did not think it was mutual, and it involved a potentially hypocritical situation. I had hovered around her and my pals at a party when all of them got extremely drunk to prevent anyone from being taken advantage of, yet considering my own crush on her, I didn't know if I'd have been so noble had she turned her drunken attention to me versus one of my friends (who she briefly dated after). Was it possible to not want to see friends make a mistake due to alcohol while also happening to have a crush on one of the parties, or was that just hypocrisy? Was I a white knight or rooster blocking? Could I be both? I thought it would open a hornet's nest, so I basically omitted the truth. I've always regretted it. But that was a lifetime ago.

But even all that happened within a span of 7 years. It was the peak of my romantic opportunities; I just didn't realize it. Maybe if I had, I would have tried harder. I lived my life, built a social circle, went on activities with the gang, and so on, just like everyone said. I was just never the dude anyone crushed on. I was usually the wacky pal of the dude they crushed on. And then everyone coupled up, and I was alone.

In more recent times (i.e. within the last 3 years), one of my mother's old friends from work made it abundantly clear that she would be willing to sleep with me because I am her fetish ("younger white men") if I so chose. This was due to years of sporadic, uninvited and awkward flirting  attempts she lobbed to me in brief bits between random gatherings like holidays or parties after college. She's in her 60's and not only is not my type physically or in terms of personality, she kind of creeps me out (especially since we first met when I happened to spend a day at work with mother when I was about 6-7). But if I ever wanted to simply not be a virgin anymore by sheer technicality and get the physical grinding over with, it is the only option I have ever had. And as disgusting as it is, it is one I considered at least briefly. Beggars, after all, cannot be choosers. Intellectually, I thought that many people's first times are usually not ideal and in fact are usually regretful; was it worth it to follow suit just to finally not be in the same class as serial killers, circle freaks, and the clergy? I decided it wasn't, so I didn't. A woman has to at least be my time either physically or in terms of personality (ideally both, but at least one out of the two); I will not sleep with her if she is neither, even if offered. It's a low bar, but I have known people who didn't even have that as a threshold. I suppose I could have been more bitter and frustrated that this was my "only chance," but one of the advantages of being dateless so long is I have a "what else is new?" look at things. Besides, women who were about 30+ years older than me have always shown extreme (and often awkwardly blunt) interest in me romantically. THEY certainly were willing to download the pro model. I just wasn't willing to be what I have joked, "a nursing home gigolo."

[Sponsored content]