>>33208072Strongly disagree with this, because assuming you want to have a lot of casual sex, you want to select for women interested in having a LOT of it in a timely manner.
The men and women having a lot of sex are overwhelmingly nowhere near as attractive as anons think they are. Every swinger, kink scene participant, and polyamorous person is having 800x the sex you and basically EVERYONE else is, and they do it by being "the kind of person who doesn't have a problem fucking the other EXTREMELY horny and homely people". You, too, can thrive among them if your goal is exclusively to fuck.
This kind of slow-roll bullshitting means you're lying about your intentions in a way that aware women will pick up on and detest, is explicitly selecting for women who are going to date slower, is going to lead to them scrutinizing your personality and grilling you much harder than someone casual, and if you do care at all about the moral aspect of it, is generally just a shitty thing to do. Would recommend avoiding this.
>>33207267>You should be spreading your seed to as many women as possiblefirst, you don't actually wanna get these women pregnant generally, you just wanna fuck, and second, even if you did, what you're describing doesn't work in an era of DNA testing. Match group dating apps are responsive to subpoenas in parentage cases, which can compel disclosure of name, phone number, pictures, and basically all necessary info to serve papers. The real question is
>do you want to pay child support to random tinder chicksfor which the answer is obvious.
>>33207903The have fun stance is pretty much what you should go for - it's a more positive spin on "this probably isn't going anywhere formal" without putting a hard no on that.