Do you care about your significant other's sexual past?

[*Deidre*]

Oh no; he thought stripclubs were dens of indecency (and... yeah... so?) and he was always talking disparagingly about his friends' interest in porn.  Total prude.  Sex was pretty decent with him, though, as long as I didn't talk or make any noise.

It would be funny if you were to discover now, that he was quite the opposite. Often times, extreme prudes have a lot of sexy secrets. 

I keep thinking Pat Robertson is like this. lol  

[robvalue]

No, I don't care To me sex is far from the most important thing in a relationship anyway. For a long term partner, I reckon if you require sex in order to be with them, you don't have a good foundation in the first place. I see sex as icing on the cake. It shouldn't be the cake.

I think this is why so many relationships are doomed, after the initial excitement people find out they don't even get along. Of course this is absolutely dandy if you're just out to have fun, but for a long term partner, it's the wrong way round in my opinion.

I don't have anything against sex at all, it's great! And being with a prude is no fun. If you're thinking I'm a bit weird, consider this: if your partner got in an accident and couldn't have sex any more, at least regular sex, would you leave them?

[*Deidre*]

No, I don't care To me sex is far from the most important thing in a relationship anyway. For a long term partner, I reckon if you require sex in order to be with them, you don't have a good foundation in the first place. I see sex as icing on the cake. It shouldn't be the cake.

It's not the most important thing...what is this nonsense you speak of? 

jk 

ok, maybe I'm a little serious.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Nope. I've been with my fiancé for 8 years, so our sexual past is each other ^_^

[robvalue]

No, I don't care To me sex is far from the most important thing in a relationship anyway. For a long term partner, I reckon if you require sex in order to be with them, you don't have a good foundation in the first place. I see sex as icing on the cake. It shouldn't be the cake.

It's not the most important thing...what is this nonsense you speak of? 

jk 

ok, maybe I'm a little serious.

Sure, this is only my opinion. I'm not meaning to preach. I understand that to some people, it may be much more important. I'm not saying it isn't important, just not as much to me as it seems it is to most people.

[paulpablo]

I was reading the random slut-shaming troll thread and scrolling through it I was a little surprised at the number of people who seemed to think that it mattered at all. It doesn't. I couldn't give half a care about who I'm datings sexual past. I never even ask unless it comes up in normal conversation (which of course it normally does anyway, because sex is a pretty interesting conversation topic.) Why does anyone seem to care?

I care and I think most people do.

First of all I don't think the thread that guy started was slut shaming.  The words slut or anything of that kind weren't mentioned.  He wasn't shaming the girl because no one on this forum knows who the girl is, we don't even know who he is, he's pretty much anonymous and so is she.  He actually didn't even say there was anything inherently wrong with her, just that his beliefs and hers don't gel.
Secondly I think the question, do you care about your partners sexual history, is such a vague question because there are obviously some scenarios in which any rational person would be worried about concerning their partners sexual history.
Some examples would be if your partner told you they had a history of molesting children throughout most of their life and they had never been caught and they still look at children the same way now.  Personally that would matter to me.
Another example is if I was a woman and dating a guy who told me he had sex with men all his life but was now a Christian and wanted to date only women, I'd be concerned due to his sexual history that he was actually a repressed homosexual and using me as a means to try and portray himself as a straight man.
Or even if the girl said she had a fetish for cheating, she'd cheated on all of her previous 10 boyfriends multiple times and she loved the feel of doing it.  If she told me this then expected me to trust her if she said she was just visiting a male friend or something like that I can't honestly say I would.
Or even if the scenario is less extreme and by sexual history what we're really talking about is just numbers, how many people the woman or man has had sex with.  This doesn't matter much to me.
If we're talking just purely about the amount of men a woman has slept with I would only really get concerned if the number was over 150 or around that area. 
It actually works both ways though, because I do care slightly when a girl tells me she's had threesomes or lesbian sex of if she's on fetlife.  I'd take preference to a kinky experienced girl over a none experienced seemingly non kinky girl.  It's not a huge deal but the girl definitely gets some kudos from me if her sexual past is quite extreme so I'd say I also care about sexual history in that sense also.
And these are just my standards, I don't hold it against anyone for being a so called prude, I wouldn't hold it against someone who says they have no care about their partners sexual history I would just find it hard to believe that they don't care in the slightest.

[*Deidre*]

It's not the most important thing...what is this nonsense you speak of? 

jk 

ok, maybe I'm a little serious.

Sure, this is only my opinion. I'm not meaning to preach. I understand that to some people, it may be much more important. I'm not saying it isn't important, just not as much to me as it seems it is to most people.

lol I was being facetious.  I agree with you.

Truthfully, if a couple has a bad relationship outside of the bedroom, the bedroom doesn't 'cure' that. I was never into having 'angry' sex ...well, maybe once. lol 

[robvalue]

Hey, congrats on the atheism as well I don't know if that sounds weird, but I think it's a big deal anyhow.

As to what Paul says above, then yes if they had been abusively sexual, that would bother me. I didn't consider that as part of the question as I read it.

[Mudhammam]

Right after high school I dated my art teacher who was 31 years my senior and from what I gathered she was quite promiscuous in her youth... I want to say the number of partners she had mentioned was upwards of 200... but that may be a drastic embellishment of my memory. I know it was a lot. And to be honest I didn't give a shit. All I thought was, "Wow! And she says I'm a good lover... I'm the man!" It was definitely a confidence booster. 

[MJ the Skeptical]

Do I care? I suppose it depends. If I'm going to be in a relationship with someone, it's kind of hard to be with them if they've been many people because I'm having to stack up with all the people they've been with, I'm no casanova, I'm just your average joe, not from a disney movie just someone decent at their sexual craft. I'm not someone who gets around a lot so I usually prefer someone around where I am experience-wise or even less so than me. But do I care what others do? No, have at it. If someone wants to have an open relationship or something like that, cool, I may even be open to that to an extent because long term relationships get old. But, if I ever have a fling, I want it to be with someone who doesn't do it a lot, like me, just a preference.