Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why do you think a guy who is indifferent to sex is "better" than a guy who consistently wants it?
Being a gentleman isn’t indifferent per se, it’s just not begging for it like you’re desperate.
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".
I'll take "How are women insanely impossible to please" for 200, Alex.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why do you think a guy who is indifferent to sex is "better" than a guy who consistently wants it?
Being a gentleman isn’t indifferent per se, it’s just not begging for it like you’re desperate.
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".
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why do you think a guy who is indifferent to sex is "better" than a guy who consistently wants it?
Being a gentleman isn’t indifferent per se, it’s just not begging for it like you’re desperate.
Anonymous wrote:Why do you think a guy who is indifferent to sex is "better" than a guy who consistently wants it?
Anonymous wrote:What did the other guys do?
Anonymous wrote:Ugh...did you really have to call him loser? Maybe sex with you is just okay gor him.
-Female