Once a Player...?
 

Always a Player?

This goes for both males and females. Do you guys think that if someone has a history of dating several people at the same time w/o them knowing about each other (re: playing folks), they will ever be able to be in a monogamous and honest relationship? OR do you think that they will always have trouble being with just one person.

Re: Once a Player...?
 

of course.

The real question is emotional maturity, not opportunity. Whether we're just casually dating or dating "with a purpose," eventually most of us reach a point in life where we're ready for a relationship deeper and more meaningful than anything we may have had before. At that point, a "mature" man will walk past 1,000 available women to reach the woman who touches his heart.

Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

TonyB06, well put. But until a man reaches that point in life; men are only as loyal as their options.

dating multiple people makes someone a player?

:confused:

i figure that's just keeping options open.

can't put all your eggs in one basket when you're single.

I think it's the dating multiple people without them knowing about each other.

they don't have to know.

it's none of their business.

i don't see the point in letting them know about each other unless feelings begin to progress.

Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

Absolutely, TonyB06.

I'm a "reformed player" myself. I was all about the conquest but I grew up and realized that real life isn't that way. I'm in a strictly monogamous relationship currently. I credit God's intervention 100%.

Re: Once a Player...?
 

I'm not sure I would consider this description a player . . .

This sounds like social dating to me, which I believe is pretty healthy. It allows a person to get a lot more romantic experience, meet new and interesting people, and build a mental database on what is actually out there and how different people and behaviors compare to each other.

I think in this case, and I don't mean to put words in your mouth, you are using the word player to describe a man that is good with women but sees women more as commodities and as a way of keeping a kind of social score with himself.

This as opposed to someone that might just have really good social skills, be attractive to members of the opposite sex, and sees casual dating as good fun.

Now will he stop being that way? Yes and no.

While he is really into you he should cleave to you exclusively. So as long as you have has interest all is good.

However, I have noticed that the purpose of labeling a relationship as "committed" or "engaged" or married even, is to keep the other partner in the relationship when they are no longer as interested as they used to be.

Otherwise we wouldn't need labels right?

I think in that case the "player" will be more likely to leave you or cheat because . . well they just have that option.

They have that option because they are attractive to memebers of the opposite sex and have dated easily enough thats mostly effortless for them. To them dating isn't a big effort in and of itself.

So to summarize, I believe that you would have no trouble with a player as long he is in-love with you. But a player will be much quicker to leave or stray if he falls out of love . . . .

Hmmm...I disagree. I think if you're going to be talking to different people, you should let them know that you are not looking to be exclusive. It's only fair.

but it should be known. when i first begin to start dating someone, that person should never assume anything. it's none of their business. that's how folks get hurt, by assuming their the only person that their new someone is talking to. unless it's explicitly known, and discussed anything goes.

Re: Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

I'm a "reformed player" too. But then I became a Christian last spring. If yall don't already know, God looks down on players. Yall should ask him to repent to avoid dem hell fires. Also, women of good quality, such as me, completely look down on that mess.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

What did God do that was so bad, and why should he repent?

We repent, and He forgives. :o

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

Thank you very much for your lesson. :rolleyes: Ain't this like the third or fourth time you corrected me? I suggest that you get off of my tail, and MIND YOURS. You betta find someone else because there will be no womens riding ShamikaT's tail.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

Get over yourself. There aren't ANY men who wants to ride your nasty "tail", let alone any other woman.

Hey, how was your Thanksgiving? :D

^^LMAO hecks naw.

Hmm... interesting conversation.

I think that if you are someone who is going to date several people at the same time there is nothing wrong with that. Keeping your options open is great. However, like someone said it becomes a different story when feelings become involved. And I believe that for men and women the whole issue of feelings is dealt with very differently. I wouldn't say that women just naturally assume that they are the only person that they are dating. This is 2005 and I think we are all old enough to know that exclusivity is not something that you should make assumptions about. I think in some cases they expect to be told and in others find themselves w/ feelings for someone, even though they "know" that things might not be exclusive. For a woman who has feelings for a man, it is not so easy to just be kept in the dark and then be say, "surprised" by the fact that the guy she has been dating is all of a suddent dropping her to be with someone else. I think in the case of a man who has feelings for a woman, the same thing goes.

Along the same lines, what are some of your definitions of a player? I find it interesting that doing that is called "dating." Is there a such thing as a player to some people?

PS. I do think that players can be reformed. Its just messed up that they may have left a whole slew of broken hearts along the road to reformation. At one point I was a player (according to my own definition) without even knowing it. But all it took was hurting one person and being able to connect with how they were feeling to make me feel that I would never "play" or do things that I knew would hurt someone else again. Then after I went through it myself I definitely knew that I wouldn't.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

LMAOOOOOOOOOO@U, you are not right!:p :D

Now be nice to Miss Shamika....:)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

LMAO!

Starang, I agree with what you are saying if two people are just casually dating. Now, if they decide to date each other exclusively, then the other steps out - then that's being a player to me. Basically being a cheater.

Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

James, I think that the point of labels is the point of any verbal communication - to have a mutual understanding of what is going on. Otherwise, you get caught up in assumptions, assuming what you think is going on.

no one can keep anyone in a relationship that that person doesn't want to be in. Not even labels - otherwise, the term "breaking up" and "divorce" wouldn't exist b/c they necessarily imply that there was a committed relationship or a marriage that one party (or both parties) could not be forced to stay in

SC

LoveHaiku84, I think that as adult women and men, we need to take control of destiny by simply opening our mouths and asking what's going on if our hearts are in it. Women (and men) spend too much time hoping that the other person is going to read our mind and whala! provide us the answer to the question that we have been pondering but never even asked. We can take responsibility for our deep we get into a relationship that might or might not be committed. Now if you the two of you *say* that you're going to commit and it's not genuine, then that's another story....
SC

if women wouldn't expect men to always read minds, the world would be a more peaceful place.

but to date exclusively....you have to sit down and have a discussion on it. it's not an assumed thing. just because you're dating for x months, exlusivity shouldn't be expected without being discussed.

i agree. that's what i was trying to communicate.
sc

come on now, don't generalize. :)
but i do agree that it's been my experience that our gender tends to expect men to be mind readers. i'm not saying that a man should have to be spoon fed but we need to learn to just say how we feel more.

sc

i'd prefer to be spoon fed, lol.

I agree with this.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Once a Player...?
 

LMAO!!! Whoa ...

I don't like the term "dating", because the meaning is too easily confused. One may, for example, be in a relationship that involves "courting" or a relationship that only involves "casual socializing". The expectation of establishing exclusivity and commitment either exists or it doesnt, respectively.

Consequently, it is not wrong to casually socialize with multiple individuals. However, one should never court two or more at once, IMHO. It is not healthy, socially or emotionally, and it consistently leads to drama.

Now, I agree with lovehaiku84 that "exclusivity is not something that you should make assumptions about." However, when a certain level of intimacy comes into play, exclusivity should not only be expected but demanded... and, of course, discussed for confirmation purposes (so that there is no misunderstanding).

I consider a 'player' someone who pretends to court several individuals in exchange for intimacy with them.

Thats a clever differentiation between dating and courting. :)

Do you think that there are implied promises in behavior?

For example, many males learn courting behavior in dealing with females romantically . . . so even if he wants to just date, he may act is if he is courting because thats the way he has learned to behave.

Even if he makes some blanket comment like "I'm not looking for anything serious," would you agree that his courting behavior might be seen as an implied promise to a female even if its only unconsciously?

And thus color her perception of what the relationship really is?

If it looks like a duck etc etc, even if it denies being a duck . . it might as well be.

In your opinion, what is the definition of dating and the definition of courting? Are there any differences? :confused:

who uses the term courting still?

no there is no difference.

The term is still used. :)

Re: Once a Player...?
 

It completely depends on the person. I think some people hitthat point where they want someone stable, or where they so completely fall for someone that the negatives of having several S.O.'s outweigh the positives. Then there are others who will just keep going with their ways and will never settle on one person.

I think it's possible, but there's no set rule to how often it happens.

You touched on an important point. If the young man SAYS that he is not looking for anything serious, then THAT is an important communication that the young lady MUST consider (and accept as true). If what she wants is, ultimately, an intimate and exclusive relationship, then the two should politely part ways. She shouldn't expect that she will be able to change him or his attitude. [He is not a player if goes on to socialize with others, having informed her of his intentions.] If, on the other hand, he says nothing (and she says nothing), then she may be blindsided. That is why communication is vital as soon as, and preferably before, the level of intimacy in the relationship escalates.

In short, though I do think there should be implied promises in certain behavior, I know that just isn't the world we live in today. For that reason, discussion is key. ;)

Guess I'm an old married person now...
 

Awhile ago, I would have agreed with most of what the ladies are saying and pleaded against what the gentlemen and saying...

Now, life's different for me...

Let's be blunt:

Folks date various other folks for different reasons.

If you date a player, you know you are gonna get played. You might have a good time by getting in the VIP lines with sex in the Champagne Room. But eventually, you will get played.

If you date a nerd, you will develop a relationship with that person. You may not go to all the "hoopla parties" anymore and will have plenty of dinner dates. But you will have something stable...

Just like TonyB said, it is a matter of maturity and also you need to know what "equipment" you require and what the regimen you need to follow...

If you can slang dates 8 days a week, 25 hours a day, the go on wif yo' baad sef...

But if you cannot hang with 1 date because you are that "clingy" or "possessive", then maybe you ought to be by yourself awhile and get some perspective about what kind of relationship you really want...

Believe me, if you ain't figured it out once the ink is dry on the marriage certificate, then you will be having problems with "communication"...

People can change. As my grandmother said, eventually we all come in. The question becomes can you wait for the change.

Dating = social one on one get-togethers AND Courting = meetings toward marriage.

Re: Guess I'm an old married person now...
 

I concur con mi amigo. Also, I would like to add that maybe there should have been an understanding in the very beginning of those x months. Then there wouldn't be an assumption. Now you don't have to tell a person all your business when you are getting to know them. That would be crazy. However, an open conversation about dating, relationships, friendships, promiscuity, etc... would help both parties understand who they are dealing with. Then there wouldn't be any surprises.

But I don't think dating women who are unaware of each other makes you a player. It makes you a liar if you are telling a woman that she is the only one. But if you aren't telling women that, then you are strictly exercising your GOD given right to be single. The only disadvantage is that you usually pass over a potential soulmate(s) exercising that right...:rolleyes: