Transitioning from one sister to the other: Ever been done?

[Luke]

If you don't know the dude, it's fine?

If I don't know "what" happened with "who", then yes. But to pursue someone that a buddy has slept with is beyond icky to me. Stomach turning actually.

[irixith]

If you don't know the dude, it's fine?

If I don't know "what" happened with "who", then yes. But to pursue someone that a buddy has slept with is beyond icky to me. Stomach turning actually.

Are you sure you like girls?

[Luke]

Are you sure you like girls?

I don't swap spit with buddies and I don't accept my friend's sloppy seconds.

And I prefer women over girls.

[Ivo]

If you don't know the dude, it's fine?

If I don't know "what" happened with "who", then yes. But to pursue someone that a buddy has slept with is beyond icky to me. Stomach turning actually.

One of the first things I thought about was that even if your buddies tell you "what" happened (which, IMO, is poor form) maybe you shouldn't believe it (unless I guess the woman confirms it). I have a bias for thinking that men who talk to buddies about "what" happened are probably also men who may make stuff up about "what" happened.

The other was that I still don't think this is entirely consistent. I reiterate jfrost's question. I think maybe you actually have issues regardless of it being a buddy of yours or not, as long as you know "what" happened? That would be more consistent, and I think far more understandable. Then it just so happens that if it is with a buddy you are far more likely to know "what" happened?

In any case it is none of my business, was just curious to understand these philosophies. As far as I know you are happy with your wife so there is no need for you to consider ladies that were previously with your buddies (I dislike the terminology "sloppy seconds").

For the record, I also didn't understand Irixith's comment above.

[Luke]

[ As far as I know you are happy with your wife so there is no need for you to consider ladies that were previously with your buddies (I dislike the terminology "sloppy seconds").

Save for one ex-friend, I trust my friends 100%. There is no need for my friends to exaggerate their sexual endeavors, as they no I don't care. That, and I don't hang out with people who brag about their exploits.

I find most of the posts in this thread baffling. Guys who don't mind sleeping with a woman who has been passed around. The op actually wants to date someone with little moral integrity. Also find it extremely weird that I have to defend the position of not wanting to sleep with someone that a close personal friend has already slept with.

[Hobie-wan]

Guys who don't mind sleeping with a woman who has been passed around.

Um, the older you get, the more everybody is likely to have been 'passed around'. I get what you mean about not wanting to know someone's history, but just don't hang out with or date people that feel the need to talk about their intimate exploits. Then don't think about it. Obviously if someone has offspring there's a reminder, but it is like not thinking about your parents having sex to create you.

Yes everyone, you're welcome for that image in your head now.

[Luke]

Um...

Um...

[irixith]

Are you sure you like girls?

I don't swap spit with buddies and I don't accept my friend's sloppy seconds.

And I prefer women over girls.

Maybe I should have done the blue text thing.

Seems to me to be an awfully hard line to take, considering that unless you exclusively pursue virgins, everyone has been "passed around" if you will. Pretty much every single person you look at, speak to, converse with on an internet forum, etc. has had sex, will be having sex later, or maybe they just had sex right now. It seems rather arbitrary to avoid pursuing something simply because someone you're friends with pursued it before you.

[Ivo]

I'm not attacking you, I was just curious.

It is nice that you trust your friends and that you don't hang out with people that brag about their exploits, but how then would you know what happened just because a friend had been dating a particular lady? Surely just dating doesn't imply sex and further it does not imply anything specific.

If you objected "a woman who has been passed around" I could understand that, but you apparently only objected those that were passed around by your buddies. This is what I found puzzling!
For completeness, like with "sloppy seconds", I also don't think your wording is the most flattering there!

Finally, in my first post of the thread I suggested that if the sister would indeed go for the op straight, that probably would mean she wasn't such a nice person, so (barring some possible specific circumstances) I agree with you there.

Ivo.

[SamuraiMegas]

why do we even have this thread
this is not appropriate racketboy behavior guys
shame