Safety/risk involved in one night stands

Giselle

analucija wrote: »

I wonder what the reaction would be if somebody started the thread "I'd never wear a low cut top or a short skirt because it makes you a magnet for sexual predators." Or maybe a man starting a thread "I'd never have a ONS because some girl could have sex with me just to get pregnant and then demand maintenance of me".

But I honestly can't see anything in the OP thats comparable to those statements!

The Op even explicitly states that she believes the fault for any assault lies with the perpetrator.

Perhaps it could have been couched differently but its obvious, to me anyway, that the intent to offend or judge wasn't there. Its a sensitive subject though, so its probably always going to be open to misinterpretation.

Fluorescence

If we can stay on the topic of the thread and not debate the merit or morality of having such a thread, that'd be awesome. Thanks :cool:

Motorist

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

By risk do you mean violence? Or theft? Or sexual assault? I'm just wondering why you specifically targeted one-night-stands out of all the bazillion "risky" things people do? For that reason it appears to me to be more of a bizarre moralistic effort to put people off having one-night-stands under the guise of concern for their safety than anything else...

Besides, any statistics I can find (HERE for instance) suggest the vast majority of rapists are known to their victims - one in five are partners/spouses. Given only 9% are strangers that would imply a woman is actually safer in that respect with a one-night-stand than with someone she knows or lives/works with...

I could be biased tho - having been attacked by a boyfriend and now married to a one-night-stand... :cool:

How are strangers defined ? If you spend a night talking to someone, how are they still strangers?

Is this 9% not referring to a someone walking home and attacked by a criminal they have never seen before?

Giselle

chatterpillar wrote: »

But, the thing is, this isn't a focus group being run by the OP.

It's a discussion forum. Raise a topic, and posters will go off on tangents, and offer their own opinions. They mightn't be opinions that the OP is interested in, but they are all relevant, and might be of interest to other users of the forum - if not to the OP.

That is all true Chatterpillar

I'm just concerned that the OP's motives were being questioned in a unjustifiably confrontational way.


Edit: Sorry Fluoresence, posted before I saw your warning.

helimachoptor

chatterpillar wrote: »

You know, in a funny way, if I were to go home with a stranger, I'd far rather go to his place than mine! You'd sort of expect it would be the other way round, wouldn't you?

Not really, most girl friends said they'd go to his so their dad/brothers didn't hear them going at it. In my own personal experiences girls are generally keener to go to mine, in saying that it's been quite some time since my last ons.

A good mate of mine a number of years ago was basically assaulted, she was out met a guy back to his things get heavy(penetration) she wants to stop, the guy does but then knocks her about for wasting his time, she'd had a few ons til that Point but not since

The Big Red Button

helimachoptor wrote: »

Not really, most girl friends said they'd go to his so their dad/brothers didn't hear them going at it. In my own personal experiences girls are generally keener to go to mine, in saying that it's been quite some time since my last ons.

God, there is no way I'd bring a fella back to my dad's place or my brothers' places anyways! I would obviously never consider bringing a guy back to my parents place for a ONS! That's not what I meant at all!!! Can you imagine?!

Tigger99

helimachoptor wrote: »

A good mate of mine a number of years ago was basically assaulted

Sorry if this is off topic but I couldn't let it go past without commenting on it. She wasn't basically assaulted. She was assaulted.

helimachoptor wrote: »

she wants to stop, the guy does but then knocks her about for wasting his time

Maybe its just poor phrasing but this sentence is awful:mad:. Its almost like justification for assaulting her. It sits very badly with me.

Lia_lia

I've never had a ONS. Actually I've never even kissed a stranger! Just not for me. Not because of safety or anything, I often put myself in very unsafe situations. I just have to know someone before I have sex with them.

helimachoptor

Tigger99 wrote: »

Sorry if this is off topic but I couldn't let it go past without commenting on it. She wasn't basically assaulted. She was assaulted.

Maybe its just poor phrasing but this sentence is awful:mad:. Its almost like justification for assaulting her. It sits very badly with me.

That was how she described it not me.

And for the second part those were his words, along with a few others i won't post! His view was that he spent the night chatting her up buying her drinks and paying for the taxi, his expectation was sex ultimately it fell short of what he expected and he took it out on her.

helimachoptor

chatterpillar wrote: »

God, there is no way I'd bring a fella back to my dad's place or my brothers' places anyways! I would obviously never consider bringing a guy back to my parents place for a ONS! That's not what I meant at all!!! Can you imagine?!

Well this is why girls are more likely to go with guys, I mean as a guy I couldn't care less if my parents heard me however as a girl I'm sure I'd have a different outlook and the last thing you want would be your dad coming in mid sex.

I must re-read your post and others i seem to picking up the wrong end of the stick

The Big Red Button

helimachoptor wrote: »

Well this is why girls are more likely to go with guys, I mean as a guy I couldn't care less if my parents heard me however as a girl I'm sure I'd have a different outlook and the last thing you want would be your dad coming in mid sex.

I must re-read your post and others i seem to picking up the wrong end of the stick

Well what I mean is that, if I was staying at my parents' or any other family member's house, there is no way I'd even consider bringing a fella back there!

Similarly, I would not go back to a man's parents' house, especially not on the first night ... eeewwww!

Are you still living at home or something?

Kooli

Motorist wrote: »

How are strangers defined ? If you spend a night talking to someone, how are they still strangers?

Is this 9% not referring to a someone walking home and attacked by a criminal they have never seen before?

That's how I'd interpret it.

A ONS isn't a stranger. You know each other's names, you've potentially spent hours together, it may be a friend of a friend.

I don't think the OP intends to be judgmental AT ALL. But I think it's difficult to talk about how a woman reduces the risk of being sexually assaulted without the tone of victim-blaming or a woman's responsibility for sexual assault creeping into the discussion. Saying that it's not the intention doesn't really change that.

helimachoptor

chatterpillar wrote: »

Well what I mean is that, if I was staying at my parents' or any other family member's house, there is no way I'd even consider bringing a fella back there!

Similarly, I would not go back to a man's parents' house, especially not on the first night ... eeewwww!

Are you still living at home or something?

Nope.. i'm getting married in 4 weeks, so as i said a while since I had ONS

ViveLaVie

I know a lad who had a ONS a few years ago that ended in assault. He went back to hers and she suggested they kink it up by tying him to the bed. She then took out a tennis racket and started hitting him with it!

I do think there's an element of risk in having one night stands. However I believe a similar level of risk applies to moving in with randomers, walking home alone, going to a party with people you don't know well etc.

Montrealer

Never had a ONS, and have always been worried about the risks involved in doing it. I mean, I would NEVER go to his place. I am more comfortable with the idea of taking him to my place (I live by myself), but the problem is that if I do, he will know where I live. The alternative is to go to a motel or something, but there's just as much danger involved in that as there is in going to his place, IMO...

LittleBook

Kooli wrote: »

A ONS isn't a stranger. You know each other's names, you've potentially spent hours together, it may be a friend of a friend.

To be honest, I don't think "ONS" is even the issue for discussion here. You can have a one night stand with someone you've known on and off or from a distance for hours/days/weeks/months/years.

I think one of the core points of the discussion (and where the safety element NP is referring to when she mentions "randomers") is one night stands with complete strangers.

PrincessLola wrote: »

I mean if rape or something were to happen I would probably get victim-blamed because I chose to go home with him..

And I think (NP correct me if I'm wrong) this is the other core point.

We've had many discussions here which have been peppered with the "well if you leave your car unlocked in a bad neighbourhood, you've only yourself to blame if it's stolen" mentality. Just read back over the threads on the RCC posters or the Slutwalk campaign, it's shocking how easy it is for some people to victim-blame.

I think NPs post is provocative, but not in the way that's been truly grasped so far. No-one on this thread (least of all NP as far as I can see) really questions the "morals" of women who have one night stands. The question is more about risk versus reward.

Sorry if I've misinterpreted/misrepresented/repeated anyone, haven't had my second coffee yet

Eve_Dublin

I've had ons and I've always felt safe. I've never heard of a friend or acquaintance who had a bad experience either, so I suppose that might be the reason I've never been turned off. There's some things I simply wouldn't do because I've heard first hand of stories of people either getting injured or getting killed. I wouldn't get into a car with a drunk driver, I wouldn't touch heroin, I smoked but I've stopped, I tend not to eat a lot of fatty food, I generally wait 'till the little green man appears till I cross the road (particularly with these mental Latin drivers), I wouldn't do most kinds of extreme sport because in all these cases, I've heard first hand of the risks involved and have met people or heard of people who've suffered the consequences.

I suppose I trust my gut instinct and it hasn't led me astray yet so I'd continue to trust it. Perhaps this is simply down to luck on my part as a couple of posters here have had bad experiences.....but I suppose I haven't heard enough to turn me off completely and that's what it comes down to really.

Edit: I suppose I don't have that "stranger danger" mentality having moved around a lot on my own. I've found most people trustworthy and would presume dangerous people are a small minority and the chances of me getting into trouble with someone were minimal....just going by previous experience.

Motorist

ViveLaVie wrote: »

I know a lad who had a ONS a few years ago that ended in assault. He went back to hers and she suggested they kink it up by tying him to the bed. She then took out a tennis racket and started hitting him with it!

I do think there's an element of risk in having one night stands. However I believe a similar level of risk applies to moving in with randomers, walking home alone, going to a party with people you don't know well etc.

Ive heard similar. I know a guy who went home with a girl. Her friend, who he had never seen before, entered the room in the middle of the night and started screaming abuse at the guy. Then the girl who had brought him home turned on him too assaulting him. He said he had alcohol on him and genuinely feared for his safety.

Honey-ec

I've had ONS and have never once had a bad experience. As others have said, you just have to exercise a bit of cop on and trust your own instincts. That's not to say that people who've done this haven't run into bad situations, but I genuinely think the risk is negligible.

And fwiw, I'd always prefer to go back to the man's place. That way, I can just get up and leave whenever I feel like it, close the door behind me and that's it.

And jesus christ, do people who live at home actually bring ONS home with them? Cringe. Or go home with a ONS who lives with his parents? That's just disrespectful on both sides, imo.

Ickle Magoo

LittleBook wrote: »

I think NPs post is provocative, but not in the way that's been truly grasped so far. No-one on this thread (least of all NP as far as I can see) really questions the "morals" of women who have one night stands. The question is more about risk versus reward.

Is there greater risk than reward tho? What evidence is there to suggest that - other than some finding the general idea of sex with people they don't know well unpalatable?

Any suggestion that women can be responsible for getting themselves attacked or raped makes me really uncomfortable - especially just because they don't live according to the rather spurious notion that all men (and women) should be viewed as potential rapists until X time has passed and they can be considered "safe".

I'm also uncomfortable how this variant on the blame-game results in the categorisation of rapes - those within relationships or with trusted friends are no fault of the poor victim - but those in which she chose to take someone home/go home with someone, well, if she wasn't asking for it she did put herself in that position...

Life is inherently risky - sadly even with those we do know and trust there are no guarantees. I don't think questioning the judgement of those who have ONS helps those who have taken all precautions and still find themselves victims of rape/sexual assault or those who are attacked after going home with someone/taking someone home with them.

LittleBook

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Is there greater risk than reward tho? What evidence is there to suggest that - other than some finding the general idea of sex with people they don't know well unpalatable?

I honestly don't know but I'm speculating that that's what NP is trying to find out and (again, I don't want to be putting words in her mouth) I don't think that not being able to "fathom having sex with a man I did not know and trust" is the same thing as finding it "unpalatable" or immoral.

I am incapable of being with someone sexually that I don't "know" (how well do we ever know anyone?) and frankly I'll admit to being jealous of men and women who can as I would assume they had a lot more fun than I did! :pac:

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Any suggestion that women can be responsible for getting themselves attacked or raped makes me really uncomfortable - especially just because they don't live according to the rather spurious notion that all men (and women) should be viewed as potential rapists until X time has passed and they can be considered "safe".

Yes, me too ... and this is an area I'm dealing with more and more as my teenage daughter grows older. How can I teach safety without instilling a sense of fear? It's a minefield.

Which is why, I guess, I found this topic interesting as I felt NP was genuinely trying to discuss general safety without straying into victim blaming territory in much the same way as we would discuss safe internet dating, safety on first dates, etc.

But I might be missing something because she and you are two posters who I normally agree with on pretty much everything!

Ickle Magoo

LittleBook wrote: »

I honestly don't know but I'm speculating that that's what NP is trying to find out and (again, I don't want to be putting words in her mouth) I don't think that not being able to "fathom having sex with a man I did not know and trust" is the same thing as finding it "unpalatable" or immoral.

I'm not getting that NP is "trying to find out" anything out, tbh. From the OP:

neuro-praxis wrote: »

I want to propose that if sex is with someone you do not already know and trust, then it's by definition seriously un-safe.

neuro-praxis wrote: »

It seems to me that one night stands with strangers really ought to be avoided.

And last but not least:

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Also to women who enjoy one night stands with people previously unknown to you, do you ever feel fearful, or have you ever regretted the experience?

Specifically seeking confirmation bias re an opinion they clearly already hold...

LittleBook wrote: »

I am incapable of being with someone sexually that I don't "know" (how well do we ever know anyone?) and frankly I'll admit to being jealous of men and women who can as I would assume they had a lot more fun than I did! :pac:

How do you define "know" tho...as I said earlier I took my now husband home the first night we met because my I judged him to be a nice guy I could trust, I thought we had a connection and I wanted to have sex with him. I made a decision based on experience, my instincts and adult judgement and my views on him would have been the same on date 2, 3 or whenever. To me, it seems rather pointless to assume danger and risk from people we don't know well but who have given us no reason to assume them a threat given there is no magic time-line when "rapist" will appear on their forehead.

LittleBook wrote: »

Yes, me too ... and this is an area I'm dealing with more and more as my teenage daughter grows older. How can I teach safety without instilling a sense of fear? It's a minefield.

Which is why, I guess, I found this topic interesting as I felt NP was genuinely trying to discuss general safety without straying into victim blaming territory in much the same way as we would discuss safe internet dating, safety on first dates, etc.

Specifically because of the choice of negative language used; it does smack of victim blaming, it also smacks of disapproval which in itself is a kind of moralising - NP has already stated it wasn't intentional but imo, it's certainly there...which is one thing between mother and daughter but, perhaps unsurprisingly, universally unappreciated between peers.

If someone wants to live their life assuming all men (people?) are potential rapists or that women should only be having sex with those they have known for [insert arbitrary time-frame here] then they are free to do so, obviously. I just don't think it's unreasonable to object to any (mildly condescending tbh) inference that it would be sensible or wise or clever for everyone to automatically view those they've just met with such mistrust and cynicism...doubly-so given the appalling statistics on those we do know.

neuro-praxis

Ickle Magoo, I simply reject outright your assertion that I am victim blaming. It's a lie. Victim-blaming goes against everything in which I believe and your behaviour borders on slanderous.

This topic is one that is pro-women and anti-sexual violence, or violence of any kind.

I severely regret starting this thread and am pretty disgusted with your behaviour Ickle Magoo, and with the behaviour of those who have repeatedly thanked your comments in which you misrepresent me so disingenously and with such callous indifference.

I repeat for the final time: I have no beef with anyone dictating their own sexual mores to any degree.

My point could be boiled down to one sentence:

All things are permissable, but not all things are advisable.

Ironically I am one of the few posters who has actually asserted this. This thread is rife with posts about qualifications about when it is and isn't acceptable to have sex with someone. I have done no such thing. All men and women ought to have total freedom to do as they see fit without judgement from anyone.

I started this thread to raise a discussion regarding the physical safety of women who engage in one night stands. I believe that, as you quoted me out of context Ickle for your own ends, that the risk associated is probably not worth the pay off. You'd swear I'd called you a harlot and declared it National Drown All The Kittens day. I am delighted for you that your ONS turned into marriage. For the poster Novella, it turned into a sexual assault. Just as your story matters, so do those that differ.

Stating that physical safety is paramount is not controversial, despite the outcry here.

Thanks to those who engaged with the topic rather than using it as a stick to beat me with, and thanks also to everyone who sent PMs of support.

I now retreat entirely from the thread as I really cannot be wasting time on something that ought to be an enjoyable and enlightening past-time but which has actually been quite stressful. Ironically I have been judged nine ways til Sunday on this. If it wasn't so pathetic it might be funny.

Honey-ec

neuro-praxis wrote: »

I started this thread to raise a discussion regarding the physical safety of women who engage in one night stands. I believe that, as you quoted me out of context Ickle for your own ends, that the risk associated is probably not worth the pay off.

Several women who've engaged in ONS, myself included, have posted to say they've never felt at risk. You've chosen to ignore pretty much all of them, and keep insisting that the risk is far greater than the reward, despite the opposing experience of many of the women on this very board. You can hardly fault people for getting frustrated when you remain so obtuse.

The bad experiences of a few people who engage in an activity do not necessarily make that activity inherently risky.

neuro-praxis

Honey-ec wrote: »

Several women who've engaged in ONS, myself included, have posted to say they've never felt at risk. You've chosen to ignore pretty much all of them, and keep insisting that the risk is far greater than the reward, despite the opposing experience of many of the women on this very board. You can hardly fault people for getting frustrated when you remain so obtuse.

I could multi-quote myself and show you all of the places where I have acknowledged all the valid points that others have made, or areas that I have conceded? Sorry, you're simply wrong there.

And that is my final post of defending myself. (Will I ever learn?)

The Big Red Button

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Ickle Magoo, I simply reject outright your assertion that I am victim blaming. It's a lie. Victim-blaming goes against everything in which I believe and your behaviour borders on slanderous.

This topic is one that is pro-women and anti-sexual violence, or violence of any kind.

I severely regret starting this thread and am pretty disgusted with your behaviour Ickle Magoo, and with the behaviour of those who have repeatedly thanked your comments in which you misrepresent me so disingenously and with such callous indifference.

I repeat for the final time: I have no beef with anyone dictating their own sexual mores to any degree.

My point could be boiled down to one sentence:

All things are permissable, but not all things are advisable.

Ironically I am one of the few posters who has actually asserted this. This thread is rife with posts about qualifications about when it is and isn't acceptable to have sex with someone. I have done no such thing. All men and women ought to have total freedom to do as they see fit without judgement from anyone.

I started this thread to raise a discussion regarding the physical safety of women who engage in one night stands. I believe that, as you quoted me out of context Ickle for your own ends, that the risk associated is probably not worth the pay off. You'd swear I'd called you a harlot and declared it National Drown All The Kittens day. I am delighted for you that your ONS turned into marriage. For the poster Novella, it turned into a sexual assault. Just as your story matters, so do those that differ.

Stating that physical safety is paramount is not controversial, despite the outcry here.

Thanks to those who engaged with the topic rather than using it as a stick to beat me with, and thanks also to everyone who sent PMs of support.

I now retreat entirely from the thread as I really cannot be wasting time on something that ought to be an enjoyable and enlightening past-time but which has actually been quite stressful. Ironically I have been judged nine ways til Sunday on this. If it wasn't so pathetic it might be funny.

NP, this post is completely histrionic, and out of character for you, and, to be honest, quite worrying.

Perhaps you have had a bad experience recently? If so, please do follow the advice that I know you would give to someone in your position, and seek the appropriate help.

I really do wish you all the best. I too, will bow out of this thread now.

Babybuff

chatterpillar wrote: »

NP, this post is completely histrionic, and out of character for you, and, to be honest, quite worrying.

Perhaps you have had a bad experience recently? If so, please do follow the advice that I know you would give to someone in your position, and seek the appropriate help.

I really do wish you all the best. I too, will bow out of this thread now.

I have no idea what's going on here but even I find that post offensive. I don't think np sounds like she needs help. This is very bullying behaviour, what a load of condescending bs. I'm actually blown away by the level of bs in this thread.

Kooli

chatterpillar wrote: »

NP, this post is completely histrionic, and out of character for you, and, to be honest, quite worrying.

Perhaps you have had a bad experience recently? If so, please do follow the advice that I know you would give to someone in your position, and seek the appropriate help.

I really do wish you all the best. I too, will bow out of this thread now.

I think that's kind of unfair to insinuate 'personal issues' to discredit the point she's making.
I think N-P is making sense, but I do NOT agree with her.

N-P I'm sorry this thread has been hard on you, and it's no wonder it's upsetting to be accused of being moralistic and judgemental when you would never intend to be either.

HOWEVER, I do think it would be worth considering the points people are making without taking it so personally (after all, the points you made in the first post have been made countless times by others, you didn't invent them). You may not intend to victim-blame, you may not intend to imply that a woman plays some part in a rape, but your first post genuinely does that, and I accept that wasn't your intention, but in a way that doesn't matter.

Your first post plays into a larger cultural narrative about educating women about risk, how to prevent rape and sexual assault, and it works on stereotypes/myths such as a man you don't know very well being more likely to rape you than a man you know very well. And it's part of a slut-shaming narrative too.

The fact is that the only thing that causes a woman to be raped is to be alone with a rapist. And seeing as we have no way to know who is or is not a rapist, we cannot expect women to never be alone with any man ever. So for that reason, ANY focus on a woman's actions as increasing her risk of rape IS victim-blaming. Victim-blaming is simply the insinuation that a woman has ANY role to play in her own sexual assault.

Some people (including myself) have a zero-tolerance attitude to victim-blaming, which is partly why this thread has got such a strong response. I'd really encourage you to think about it rather than put up your defences. Victim-blaming is part of our culture. It doesn't make you a bad person to think about things this way, we all absorb it until we're forced to really think about it.

I used to think that way. I used to roll out all the usual comparisons (if someone left their car unlocked they'd have to accept responsibility if it was robbed etc etc) while still maintaining that I would NEVER victim-blame. But as time has gone on and I've read more and more about it, I just won't tolerate it anymore.

I'm sorry that this has felt like an attack, but people feel really strongly about this stuff. And your intentions don't really matter that much if what you're saying is potentially hurtful and offensive.

Babybuff

Kooli wrote: »

The fact is that the only thing that causes a woman to be raped is to be alone with a rapist. And seeing as we have no way to know who is or is not a rapist, we cannot expect women to never be alone with any man ever. So for that reason, ANY focus on a woman's actions as increasing her risk of rape IS victim-blaming. Victim-blaming is simply the insinuation that a woman has ANY role to play in her own sexual assault.

Some people (including myself) have a zero-tolerance attitude to victim-blaming, which is partly why this thread has got such a strong response. I'd really encourage you to think about it rather than put up your defences. Victim-blaming is part of our culture. It doesn't make you a bad person to think about things this way, we all absorb it until we're forced to really think about it.



I'm sorry that this has felt like an attack, but people feel really strongly about this stuff. And your intentions don't really matter that much if what you're saying is potentially hurtful and offensive.

I've always read NP's posts and anyone who has read them knows she would be the first person to agree with you. I don't understand what the issue is here really. I don't find the op offensive.

Giselle

chatterpillar wrote: »

NP, this post is completely histrionic, and out of character for you, and, to be honest, quite worrying.

Perhaps you have had a bad experience recently? If so, please do follow the advice that I know you would give to someone in your position, and seek the appropriate help.

I really do wish you all the best. I too, will bow out of this thread now.

To me this is the most offensive and condescending post in the entire thread.

NP does not need to seek the 'appropriate help' because she feels the need to defend herself against the accusations and assumptions made about her.

Malari

As the OP has made herself clear several times now I'll accept that there is no judgement intended! Although that was the impression I got on initial reading.

I haven't ever had a one-night stand with someone I've only met that night before, but I certainly wouldn't consider it dangerous. Sex with a stranger actually sounds infinitely more appealing to me than making small-talk to a stranger on a blind date. :-D

eviltwin

I'm shocked by some of the risks my single male and female friends take re ONS

They would never get into a car with stranger at the wheel but feel quite happy to get into a taxi and bring a person they have only just met home. I had a bit of a falling out with one friend over this because she had her phone off the entire next day and I was convinced she was dead. She couldn't see why I was concerned.

I have no issue at all with ONS, I don't have a problem with casual sex but for heavens sake please be careful about it!!! Let people know where you are going, send a quick text etc and use protection.

Babybuff

In my experience the option of having ons was ultimately safer than being in a relationship, or even with fwb. And it does seem sad that it had to be that way. I often wondered would anyone else relate to this. On the one hand it was a substitute for intimacy, as being involved with someone to me was the more dangerous option. I spent quite a few years comforting myself with ons and eventually discovered that I could have intimacy without actually having to be physically involved with someone. So I look back on those times and to answer the question in the op, not with regret exactly but with clarity as to why I was in that space and what I was hoping to achieve from it and hope maybe I've grown as a person since then. I know I've definitely gained a lot more self respect. Hope this answers some of your questions.

Eve_Dublin

eviltwin wrote: »

I'm shocked by some of the risks my single male and female friends take re ONS

They would never get into a car with stranger at the wheel but feel quite happy to get into a taxi and bring a person they have only just met home. I had a bit of a falling out with one friend over this because she had her phone off the entire next day and I was convinced she was dead. She couldn't see why I was concerned.

I have no issue at all with ONS, I don't have a problem with casual sex but for heavens sake please be careful about it!!! Let people know where you are going, send a quick text etc and use protection.

Just in terms of safety, you say you've no problem with ons but you do have a problem with your friends going home with a stranger? That's what a ons is...

Listen, I see where you're coming from but would your friend have been any safer if she sent you a text to say where she was going? Personally I don't think that text would make a difference. If the guy is going to attack, he will regardless and there's little you can do about it.

And going by what I hear and my own experiences, you're not in anymore danger going home with a stranger for sex than you are with your own family/neighbours/friends of the family etc. Most rapes and assaults happen by people we already know and why is this point being ignored by some posters?

How many attacks actually happen as results of ons? Are the dangers real or just imagined?

Another point, would you be so concerned if you're friend went on an official date with a guy and slept with him on the second date or even the first (with the intention of seeing the person again)? I'm guessing many wouldn't and it doesn't make sense. How does this make it any less risky?

And the advice about protection. If a person doesn't use protection with a complete stranger then they're going to be the kind of person who doesn't use protection generally and I'm guessing they're the minority. People should use protection anyway. To me that'd be a given.

yawha

Surely this is fairly simple:

• The majority of people are not rapists
• The majority of rapes are carried out by a person known to the victim

Of course there's a risk - you're putting yourself in a situation where you're alone and vulnerable with a person you don't know. However, "stranger danger" is hugely overblown, and thus, I wouldn't consider a ONS to be unacceptably high risk to one's safety.

Eve_Dublin

yawha wrote: »

Surely this is fairly simple:

• The majority of people are not rapists
• The majority of rapes are carried out by a person known to the victim

Of course there's a risk - you're putting yourself in a situation where you're alone and vulnerable with a person you don't know. However, "stranger danger" is hugely overblown, and thus, I wouldn't consider a ONS to be unacceptably high risk to one's safety.

I'd be interested to understand why the "stranger danger" mentality is so prevalent in some people but not others. I'm wondering are the kinds of people who'd be nervous about ons (when something hasn't happened to them previously) would be nervous in any situation involving being alone with a stranger, such as getting a taxi home alone at night or going to a house party after the pub with strangers.

I've had ons, I've also travelled for 11 months on my own, got taxis home alone, moved country alone, gone to parties of strangers alone, I now live alone...I've no idea why I've never been afraid of the unknown but there you go. Perhaps my parents never instilled it in me and gave me a fair amount of freedom growing up, I don't know.

Are people who are nervous about ons the kinds of people who'd be nervous around strangers when they're alone generally? Perhaps the fear of the unknown exists in some and not others and it's not so much a fear of ons specifically but a fear of all similar situations involving strangers...

Montrealer

Honestly, though ,it's not rape that I'd be worried about.. I'd be worried about being murdered.... we had a case of gruesome murder here in Montreal in recent weeks (you may have heard of it), and it always comes to mind every time I think about ONS. Granted that in the case I'm talking about, it was not a ONS, but such dealings with total strangers are inherently risky... that's not to say that it will necessarily happen, or that all men are inherently bad/rapists/murderers... but it does happen, and it has been happening more often than ever before...

I think, though, that when it comes down to it, I will eventually go for a ONS.. but it boils down to whether you've interacted with the guy long enough (an hour or two?) to realize that he's not a creep.. then again, with these things, you can never know... oh well,... I don't know!

yawha

Montrealer wrote: »

but it does happen, and it has been happening more often than ever before...

What leads you to that conclusion?

christmas2012

one night stands are done by women not championed as the way to go,but if it does happen there can be that one just..one time you can contract an std,and your sexual partner is not always going to be honest some even claim to have never slept with even one partner,honesty counts and in a one night stand situation you mightnt get that,just a nasty suprise like hepititus or genital warts or something along those lines..

gara

If you were to always be fearful about somebody having the potential to harm you, you'd never leave the house

cheesefiend

Initially when I think of a ONS and risk my gut reaction is that it is too risky. However, when I actually take a minute to think about it, if I met someone who seemed to be a genuinely nice person (as much as you can tell from knowing someone for a couple of hours), if I meet a few of his friends the same night and get a better feel for who he hangs around with, we went back to my place (where there would be other people in the house), and we used protection than I don't think the risk is extremely high.

I can definitely see where you're coming from, NP, but in a situation like the one I described above I think the risk would be low enough for it to be (hopefully ) worth it.

I can understand your view that it would be best to avoid ONS but using the same logic and taking into account the statistics quoted earlier then we would be safer avoiding men altogether (and women too, actually).

Montrealer

It's actually funny that, a day after I posted my comment on ONS, I met a guy at the bar who seemed interested in me and was kinda implying he wanted to go to my place ... Being a stupid girl, I didn't pick up on the hint fast enough.. but we're meeting up today again, at the bar, and I'm gonna invite him over.

Having noted in my earlier post that I think it's very risky, I now realize, having talked with the guy long enough, that it really is about "reading" a person. The guy I met, was with a friend, and they're on a business trip... Having spent a good 4 hours with this guy, I can say that I'm not at all scared about what he might do...

eviltwin

Eve_Dublin wrote: »

Just in terms of safety, you say you've no problem with ons but you do have a problem with your friends going home with a stranger? That's what a ons is...

Listen, I see where you're coming from but would your friend have been any safer if she sent you a text to say where she was going? Personally I don't think that text would make a difference. If the guy is going to attack, he will regardless and there's little you can do about it.

And going by what I hear and my own experiences, you're not in anymore danger going home with a stranger for sex than you are with your own family/neighbours/friends of the family etc. Most rapes and assaults happen by people we already know and why is this point being ignored by some posters?

How many attacks actually happen as results of ons? Are the dangers real or just imagined?

Another point, would you be so concerned if you're friend went on an official date with a guy and slept with him on the second date or even the first (with the intention of seeing the person again)? I'm guessing many wouldn't and it doesn't make sense. How does this make it any less risky?

And the advice about protection. If a person doesn't use protection with a complete stranger then they're going to be the kind of person who doesn't use protection generally and I'm guessing they're the minority. People should use protection anyway. To me that'd be a given.

I know, it makes no sense at all for me to feel that way but I do worry more when a friend has a ONS for some reason. I would feel better knowing they had met the person even just once or twice before. I don't know why, maybe because the people involved have had ONS under the influence of alcohol so maybe are best placed to judge, their defenses are down and I worry they might not pick up on red flags they might see in the cold light of day.

But you're right, an attack can happen anywhere and at any time.

LegacyUser

I feel alot of the posters on here a) never have had a one night stand, so cant comment accurately until they have had this experience, and b) are very judgemental, so I am going to post this unregged.

I've had 3 ONS and let me tell you my experience. 2 I knew, 1 I did not.
I am a completely normal girl, and I do not have any self-esteem issues. I simply am not in a relationship, but I enjoy sex. I respect myself as equally as the "against crowd-couldnt do it because I respect myself" on here.

I have been in 3 long-term relationships, and I wanted simply put, to have some fun. I NEVER thought that I would be interested in ONSs. EVER. I actually used to have the opinion that it was not something I would ever do.

But life and opinions change, and I one. Would I do it again? Yes. With a stranger? Yes, if I felt I got on with him. Do I know the risks? Yes. Would it make me change my mind? No. I cant get what I want if I dont take risks. And I am willing to take them.

Again, MY opinion may change if I ever do have a bad experience. I am open to that. But please posters, dont come on here and say that you will never do something. Thats closemindedness and a bit naieve. Life is all about experiences and risks. Simply put, when you drive a car in the morning, you are taking a risk. Will you risk the car drive to get to where you want to go?

Giselle

dontjudge wrote: »

I respect myself as equally as the "against crowd-couldnt do it because I respect myself" on here.

Has anyone actually said that??

beks101

I've had a few ONS, mostly as a student, but a few recently in my mid 20s before I met my boyfriend. A few of them I regretted, but purely because it took me a few too many to realize that I'm not emotionally equipped to handle them. No-strings sex just feels damaging to me after a point, but that's just a personal thing.

My own safety is not something that ever concerned me. Sure, on the face of it it seems like an absurdly risky thing to do - 'picking up a randomer in a bar' or whatever, but that's to take it completely out of context. For me anyway, I'd often know them by association - friend of a friend type thing - and spend the night talking, getting to know them and their friends, in every case. There'd be stuff in common that would lead to the end result - similar backgrounds, friends, interests upon which an attraction would build over the course of a few hours.

Now I'm not naive enough to think you can ever fully 'know' someone is not a risk after spending a mere few hours in their company, but I do tend to rely on my instincts, go with my gut and pick up on weird behaviour pretty quickly when I'm out and about. I've travelled and lived abroad for years and made all kinds of new friends and boyfriends through this process. That's just life, isn't it? I've gone on blind dates, met random guys from the internet, gone back to apartments, met up for group activities with strangers such as hiking, running, whatever...as well as the one night stands and random hookups.

There's risk involved in all of these activities, but what else are you going to do, sit at home all day and talk to no-one? IMO as long as you have a good vetting process in place before you decide to do something impulsive, have a friend who can check in with you regularly and most importantly practise safe sex, there's absolutely nothing wrong with having a bit of fun with a 'stranger' any more than there is in going home with your boyfriend/husband/partner/whatever.

Motorist

Montrealer wrote: »

It's actually funny that, a day after I posted my comment on ONS, I met a guy at the bar who seemed interested in me and was kinda implying he wanted to go to my place ... Being a stupid girl, I didn't pick up on the hint fast enough.. but we're meeting up today again, at the bar, and I'm gonna invite him over.

Having noted in my earlier post that I think it's very risky, I now realize, having talked with the guy long enough, that it really is about "reading" a person. The guy I met, was with a friend, and they're on a business trip... Having spent a good 4 hours with this guy, I can say that I'm not at all scared about what he might do...

http://ugc.kontain.com/photo/20090105/prod_8d4951ed-ca2c-4378-96d6-0059135d75e2/tb_640x480.jpg

:cool: Read a person? Or as another poster said ,"Get a better feel for who he hangs around with".

Just as long as you know that one of the key features of sociopathic personalities is superficial charm. Ted Bundy was good-looking, intelligent, had a way with words and knew what to say and when to say it. This allowed him to woo women and lull them into trusting every word he said. When he was caught, he confessed to over 30 murders (majority of them were young women). Authorities think it was a much higher number than this and his lawyer revealed after his execution that it was in excess of 100 people.

So next time you think you're "reading" someone to be okay, just think did any of Bundy's 100 victims, most of whom he raped and murdered, read Bundy to be okay?

ihsb

I read most of the posts on this thread.

I see both sides, even though I don't understand it, I see why people have ONS and fcuk buddies etc. It is fun, without the strings attached. Some people can separate the feelings from the physical and that is fair enough.

I never have had casual sex. Nor would I want to. To have someone that I have no feelings for in me is something that I wouldn't like. Also, safety is something that I think about. I have read that most girls have not had problems with physical safety but sexual safety is something that I would be really worried about. No matter how safe you are with anyone you are not fully safe. If you are in a relationship, hopefully there is trust there so STDs etc are less likely.

What consenting adults do is their own business as long as they are not putting anyone else in danger, health or safety wise.

Montrealer

Motorist wrote: »

http://ugc.kontain.com/photo/20090105/prod_8d4951ed-ca2c-4378-96d6-0059135d75e2/tb_640x480.jpg

:cool: Read a person? Or as another poster said ,"Get a better feel for who he hangs around with".

Just as long as you know that one of the key features of sociopathic personalities is superficial charm. Ted Bundy was good-looking, intelligent, had a way with words and knew what to say and when to say it. This allowed him to woo women and lull them into trusting every word he said. When he was caught, he confessed to over 30 murders (majority of them were young women). Authorities think it was a much higher number than this and his lawyer revealed after his execution that it was in excess of 100 people.

So next time you think you're "reading" someone to be okay, just think did any of Bundy's 100 victims, most of whom he raped and murdered, read Bundy to be okay?

Yes, yes, but the point is, for every Bundy, there are 10,000 men out there who have had ONS with women and have not harmed them. I am an extremely cautious person, so most of the time I would not even trust my instincts.. But like other posters here have noted, by the same token, if your argument is a good enough reason not to practice ONS, it's also a good enough reason to lock ourselves up in our houses and have zero social lives.. At some point, you gotta have trust in people. That's not to say that some people won't misjudge and suffer as a result, but the odds of that ever happening are so low (because most people are NOT sociopaths). At any rate, those women were wrong to judge him as incapable of harming them; someone else might have avoided getting killed by him, by being smarter when judging his character. I usually am hesitant to trust extremely outgoing and over-confident types. I am smart enough not to be fooled by some compliments. In fact, the guy I am planning on having a ONS with tonight is more of the shy , not extremely confident type; not at all pushy; left the ball in my court last night, even though he DID want to have a ONS..

So I'm guessing you absolutely refuse to travel by air, right? Because the odds of your plane crashing are way higher than the odds of you getting killed by someone during a ONS.

Motorist

Montrealer wrote: »

Yes, yes, but the point is, for every Bundy, there are 10,000 men out there who have had ONS with women and have not harmed them. I am an extremely cautious person, so most of the time I would not even trust my instincts.. But like other posters here have noted, by the same token, if your argument is a good enough reason not to practice ONS, it's also a good enough reason to lock ourselves up in our houses and have zero social lives.. At some point, you gotta have trust in people. That's not to say that some people won't misjudge and suffer as a result, but the odds of that ever happening are so low (because most people are NOT sociopaths). At any rate, those women were wrong to judge him as incapable of harming them; someone else might have avoided getting killed by him, by being smarter when judging his character. I usually am hesitant to trust extremely outgoing and over-confident types. I am smart enough not to be fooled by some compliments. In fact, the guy I am planning on having a ONS with tonight is more of the shy , not extremely confident type; not at all pushy; left the ball in my court last night, even though he DID want to have a ONS..

So I'm guessing you absolutely refuse to travel by air, right? Because the odds of your plane crashing are way higher than the odds of you getting killed by someone during a ONS.

In Bundy's case it wasn't just over-confidence, charm. He was a chameleon who would adapt depending on his victim. His victims did not fear or question him. Often he would feign injury by wearing a cast on his leg and ask for help carrying his stuff to his car. I dont think it's a ONS tonight if you met him already last night.

I fly regularly enough. I am aware of the risks involved. I dont consider flying to be risky. I am usually concerned for the 3 minutes after take-off and eight minutes prior to landing where 80% of crashes occur. Any dangerous activity I engage in is done with my eyes wide open.

" The torment of precautions often exceeds the dangers to be avoided. It is sometimes better to abandon one's self to destiny "