A few months ago, I was driving to a pool party in Sonoma, California, chatting on the phone with a new guy friend. Somehow, the topic of sex came up—I can't recall why—and he shared something brutally honest, and frankly unsettling. "Yeah," he said casually, "if a girl doesn't sleep with me by the fifth date, I'm not asking her out again."
"Seriously?!" I responded, stunned. "What if you really like her? What if she wants to wait?"
He paused briefly, then replied: "Well, I figure she's already given it to someone else, so why not me?" The comment struck me as deeply transactional, as though buying dinner entitled him to her body.
Weeks later, still disturbed by this exchange, I stumbled across a YouTube video titled "How to Get Any Man You Want," by Orion Taraban, a psychologist with nearly one million subscribers. Curious, I clicked and was immediately confronted with a similarly troubling message: "In today's sexual marketplace, you have to allow yourself to be used, women, in order to get what you want. And you may need to allow yourselves to be used longer than you might expect." He doubled down: "If you like a man, if you're attracted to him, and you see a potential future, you need to throw the good stuff at him as much as you can as fast as you can."
Then, almost mocking hesitation, he added, "Withholding sexual opportunity doesn't work with men with a lot of options. If your diner is closed, your customers aren't going to wait—they're going to another restaurant."
I felt repulsed—and angry. Is this what dating has come to? And how exactly is this empowering for women?
In the weeks following, I asked my New York friends about these expectations. The consensus was clear: people typically sleep together somewhere between dates three and six. Before date three seemed too eager; waiting beyond six might signal disinterest or prudishness. The goal: quickly assess "sexual compatibility."
Something about this felt off—arbitrary, even transactional. Does it really take only three to six dates to determine true compatibility? Or is this just enough time to satisfy social norms, signaling that a woman isn’t "easy," yet not so long that a man loses interest?
This easy-come-easy-go attitude is especially pervasive in fluid dating markets like New York City. I’ve had male friends brag about sleeping with five women in a week; women openly discuss dozens of partners a year. What is the emotional and spiritual impact of all this casual sex? Was this really the goal of feminism and the sexual revolution—to create a culture where women anxiously monitor their phones after casual encounters, wondering if the guy will ever text back?
Spend any time on Facebook’s "Are We Dating the Same Guy NYC," and you’ll see countless women lamenting men who disappeared after sex on the second or third date. Women advise one another to wait a few dates, but rarely longer. Could Dr. Orion be right? If you don’t "give it up" quickly enough, do you price yourself out of the dating market?
But alternative views exist. Aleeza Ben Shalom, the renowned matchmaker featured on Netflix's "Jewish Matchmaking," offers a refreshingly different approach rooted in her cultural heritage, which emphasizes waiting until marriage. She recommends the "five-date rule": no touching whatsoever for the first five dates. "Physical touch is very confusing," she explains. "The five-date challenge just says, 'Hey, don't touch.' If you like each other after five dates, you've got two confirmations." She elaborates, "There's greater risk in early intimacy… we were physically intimate, and now I'm brokenhearted."
That last part resonated deeply. Countless friends over the years have come to me heartbroken over men who didn't want a relationship after early intimacy. Curiously, men rarely seem to share this heartbreak, which raises a critical question: whom exactly do these norms serve?
A Mormon graduate school classmate’s wife once shared with me, "If you want your boyfriend to propose quickly… hold out." Years earlier, my Hebrew tutor in college eloquently explained his own approach: "I'm shomer negiah—the belief is that your souls should become best friends before your bodies do." I found this beautifully profound.
Another famous matchmaker, Maria Avgitidis, promotes waiting at least 12 dates, arguing that early intimacy can obscure true compatibility. I recently mentioned this "12-date rule" to someone I met. He initially scoffed: "I'm not waiting that long—I have needs." I pushed back gently: "But if you wouldn't enjoy 12 non-sexual dates with a woman, do you genuinely want to date her? Isn’t it a good way to find out if you truly like her, versus just enjoying the sex?" After a thoughtful pause, he nodded. "You know what? I think you're right."
The point of this essay isn't to advocate strictly for the 12-date rule, the five-date rule, or any other rigid guideline. Nor is it meant to judge those who choose casual intimacy. Rather, my goal is to invite reflection on whether our current dating norms might carry overlooked consequences, such as bonding prematurely with someone whose core values or life visions aren’t aligned with ours. Perhaps it's worth softening our perspectives and recognizing wisdom in cultures that encourage us to wait until our souls align first.
In recent weeks, as I've explored the roots of liberalism, I've repeatedly encountered themes that emphasize individual freedom and personal happiness. Feminism, deeply rooted in liberalism, intended to liberate women—especially sexually—to empower them to choose freely without judgment. Yet, have we fully considered the emotional, relational, and spiritual costs of this liberation?
The sacred cow I'm investigating here is the widely held belief that early intimacy is inherently good—a necessary test of compatibility. The "right" time to wait, apparently between three and six dates, feels arbitrary rather than timelessly wise. This approach aligns with pleasure-seeking individualism, suggesting that waiting is oppressive or outdated.
Yet, the outcomes suggest that perhaps we should reevaluate this approach, or at least proceed with caution. Divorce rates hover around 50%. How many of those divorced couples spent significant time early on discussing their values -- money, politics, or spiritual beliefs — topics that deeply influence long-term happiness? Traditional couples often prioritize these conversations early, suggesting that genuine compatibility, rather than physical attraction alone, might better sustain relationships.
Ultimately, perhaps it’s time to pause and reconsider our cultural rush toward intimacy, acknowledging that true love, lasting connection, and aligned values might indeed be worth waiting for.
P.S. If you prefer to watch, you can find a recording of this essay on YouTube here.
*Note: This piece was drafted with assistance from ChatGPT, which helped me quickly refine and articulate my points.
Share this post