Actually I see no legitimate or logical argument against it because if a woman does ONLY the man benefits. Zen Lill, if you can tell we what benefit a woman gains by sleeping with the man before that I will consider your argument.
So far all you have suggested is “other vetting methods (observing other behaviors) that have to be taken into account if your looking fr a nice/good/keeper man for the next few or many years…”

I fell to see how employing those “other vetting methods” during the 90 day period can’t be done. For me and I’m sure a lot of others, it is not about looking for “the one..” It is about making certain that the guy shows enough promise to get between these legs.
If he can do that in 90 days to my satisfaction, I will consider sleeping with him. But if he doesn’t, I will either cut him loose or extend him more time depending on what I discover during those 90 days.

The logic and principle behind the 90 days is to prevent me from sharing by body with an outright loser or cad or Slam-Bam-thank-you-maam. The 90 days doesn’t promise that at the guy that last 90 days will be a winner, but it does say he was a LOT better than those that cut and ran because they couldn’t bed me before the 90 days.

Kristy, you can feel that way if it serves you. I just try to use my observational skills to discern what’s what…for some (*not all) men, who likely know the gist of Steve Harvey’s vetting process it may be part of their game, date several fr 90 days and have a friends w benefits situation until a ‘good one’ enters the crosshairs, who knows? I’m just saying there are other vetting methods (observing other behaviors) that have to be taken into account if your looking fr a nice/good/keeper man for the next few or many years (who knows how long even a properly vetted relationship will last) and life is lived in shades of grey it’s not a black and white and people (women included) are not always looking for the ‘one’ and dating and possibly choosing (at her own emotional risk, must take responsibility for your own actions) for a time, a less than permanent type of arrangement with a man, beneficially, if you will, to both parties.
If you insist that women gain nothing ever from a laiason unless it’s searching 90+ days first and he spends x amount if dollars first then you have created false criteria by which a relationship is created (90 + is fine just shouldn’t be on a list of stuff) – I’ve dated enough to know how to be watchful of certain types of ‘player’ behavior and that’s the stuff that’ll tip you off faster, it also helps to have a list of ‘non-negotiables’ ex and this is a fairly benign one, I don’t and won’t date men with young children, though I’m
Totally cool with older kids (12+) it’s always been that way for me, bc I know the work involved with younger ones (way back when I had a 3 yr luv w 2 young ones, very difficult to break up, the little one and I were in love, thus I choose not to repeat that) so those things are important to know about yourself so you’re not vetting someone who won’t even with even if they’re awesome for 90+ days….
That’s my drift and I hope you catch it?

That’s it from me, gotta roll…!

Luv, Zen Lill

PS Howie, if and when you’re up for it a debriefing would be great.