Quote:
Originally Posted by Chibi Neko
So BurningRanger, we are happy with things the way they are, so telling Angel so go out and get some is not going to accomplish anything because he is your opposite as far as the topic is concerned, not all men get a girlfriend just for sex.
|
That's not my point. No, not all men get a girlfriend just for sex. However, and this is a fact, there is not a single situation in which would be asked of someone he already enjoys the company of, "Would you like this person better if you could have sex with her?" and he would say no.
It's like asking, "If you had the same exact boyfriend, only slightly more attractive, would you like him more?" YES I KNOW your knee jerk reaction is going to make you say "Looks don't matter to me." And it's true, to the majority of people who aren't asshats, looks aren't important. But that doesn't change the fact that even the most non-asshattic person in the world would still like the person they're with 1% more if they were 1% more attractive.
Same situation with sex. No matter how much he says he's willing to wait for you, and sex isn't important to him, etc etc etc, he's not going to push you off of him if you jump on top of him screaming dirty phrases. He's going to be very happy.
NOTE: I AM NOT TELLING YOU TO GO AND DO THAT IMMEDIATELY. I speak hypothetically, nothing more.
Now, upon you saying that you would be okay with him getting his fix from other women, which is a
foul and egregious lie, I can no longer stay quiet about this. Whatever the veracity, saying what you said means you're making a few terrible assumptions.
If it's true,
A) You assume that your loving, sophisticated boyfriend, who is willing to wait for you, would ever want to have sex with someone without emotional attachment. (As you said, the condition of your acceptance was that it there be "no love.")
B) You also assume that sex is a purely physical pleasure. Which as others in this thread have agreed, it is not.
C) You assume,
probably, that it would be a one time thing. If it became a consistent thing then you most certainly would not stand for it. Who knows, after the years of celibacy, maybe he'd become addicted to it and run off with the girl. Chances are equally good he wouldn't, but he might.
If it's not true, and this really grinds my gears,
D) You assume that you have such a monopoly over him that he would never, ever take you up on the offer, giving you the freedom to say things like that to curry favor and look like the understanding, mellow girlfriend, without the fear of a bullshit call. Which is an insult. To him and to mankind.
In fact, your last post pretty much described D to the tee.
By the way:
Quote:
so telling Angel so go out and get some is not going to accomplish anything because he is your opposite
|
I believe you were the one who encouraged him to do so first.
Double Post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by a lurker
If you're incapable of understanding how you come across, maybe you should stop communicating entirely.
I wonder how 'stuck-up' even factors into anything. Words mean things, people!
|
At no point during the post you quoted did I specify a timeframe. Only that he should.
Quote:
Originally Posted by www.thefreedictionary.com
Adj. 1. stuck-up - used colloquially of one who is overly conceited or arrogant;
|
It is arrogant of her to say she condones adultery (in essence, I understand that they are not married) purely on the grounds that she knows he won't do it.