Reply to Sexual self-control?

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Sexual self-control?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Why do you think a guy who is indifferent to sex is "better" than a guy who consistently wants it?[/quote]
Being a gentleman isn’t indifferent per se, it’s just not begging for it like you’re desperate. [/quote]

He waits for her to invite him in. That has nothing to do with "being a gentleman" it just means he is passive: that is generally NOT a positive attribute especially for a male.
Conversely, if he (actively) invited himself in, that's not "begging for it" or "desperate".[/quote]

Passive? You're nuts.[/quote]

No he is right. The passive man is not generally seen in a positive light, especially by women no matter what they say. The passive man is friend zoned the more assertive man gets laid. Simply the way it is. [/quote]

You sound like you've reading too much Red Pill stuff. [/quote]

You saying PP is wrong? You think a guy who waits to be invited in gets laid more than a guy who makes it clear he's interested in sex and expects to be invited in?  I think you are just bothered by the fact it is totally true. Why is that?[/quote]

Well said. It is just plain stupidity to think a passive man gets laid more than a man who makes his interest clear. After all, every great "romance" novel or movie centers around the nice guy too timid to make a move. Apparently, 'red pill" poster hasnt noticed most of these characters tend to be decisive and bold types. Study after study shows women respond and find assert and dominate far more sexually appealing than passive or even nice. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics