Old acquaintance

My form of philandering differs from that of the stereotypical mid-forties, mid-life-crisis-mired, married man who is seeking, or anyway will end up getting, a mistress who becomes in time his second wife. The last thing I want is a woman who would make a good wife, though I will freely admit that most of the women I fuck would make someone or other a good wife, and in a couple of cases I can imagine one of those someone or others being me. Still, that is not at all an outcome I seek. Perhaps marrying at all was a mistake, but I did not make another error by marrying C.

Another stereotypical philanderer is the guy who is attracted by the chase and the conquest, but loses interest once he has bedded a woman. That does not fit my style either - I find women get more interesting, more attractive, more exciting, the more I fuck them. I have known D for more than a year and a half, and we have had huge amounts of sex in that time. Yet she continues to surprise and amaze me, and herself, and I have no sense at all that we are approaching any limit. Sex with F gets better too. There are new things to do, or new ways to do old things, and each time the mood and tone and tempo of fucking or fingering is different.

Familiarity does not breed contempt at all, then. I like to fuck different women because they are different from each other, and adding new women is not a pursuit of novelty resulting from boredom with the women I already fuck. Difference is good, and there is something very satisfying in being able to be with two different women in the space of a few hours and to give both of them pleasure, to take great pleasure in them both, without in any way confusing or conflating them, or treating them as tokens of the same type. In the same way that I do not really think of myself as belonging to the general category 'man', so I do not really think of D, F, A, and so on as instances of the type 'woman'. I recognize that I am a man, and have many standard masculine characteristics; I know also that I am mainly attracted to women rather than men. But gender is not altogether a matter of chromosomes or genitalia, and there are plenty of androgynous men who I find sexier (and would rather fuck) than some ultra-feminine women.

But I have wandered from the topic. New acquaintances are exciting, and I have not made any in a long while. I would like to. But the most exciting thing about new acquaintances is that, in time, they become old acquaintances. True, I do not really have any time to spare, and so time for the new must be taken away from the old. Given how hard it can be to meet new and interesting women, it hardly seems worth it. But of course that argument, applied in the past, would have led to my not meeting F, who is magnificent. So I continue to eye w4m on CL occasionally, and send off the odd response to posts that look as if they might be genuine, and from someone who I would like to meet; nearly every time, I get no response. I do not do this out of dissatisfaction with my sex-life - given my weekly round, that would be absurd. I do it for the pleasure that it might give me, and the pleasure that I might be able to give.

The etymology of 'philander' suggests a lover of men, or else of people, rather than a lover of women, which I suppose is what I am; that would be 'philogyny'. But most fillings for 'phil-' yield something pleasing: philosopher, philologist, philatelist, philomel, philodendron, philanthropist, philippic, philtre, philharmonic. Given that sort of close company, only a philistine would object to the term.