Turn on thread page Beta

Boyfriend thinks of other girls while having sex with me watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Please leave him... he's a ****ing ****
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    It makes me feel really crap and upset. Yes, he did actually tell me this.

    Is it normal?
    Shout someone else's name, eyes shut, before faking the most powerful orgasm ever.

    _Kar.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Maybe some blokes do that but the majority don't do that, I would talk to him about your feelings and that you don't like it, if he loves you then surely he would think of you not other girls
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grund)
    I totally agree with you. People don't understand the difference between having sex with the one you love to demonstrate your love and having sex just for the sake of sex.

    If you're with that person and are in a serious, loving and long term relationship it shouldn't be the latter.
    It's not a binary distinction.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by angger)
    It's normal that she thinks of other girls (i.e. celebrities,) but it's weird that he told you that.
    A mate of mine did with one girlfriend but never told her. In fact he ended the relationship shortly afterwards as she seemed anxious to get him up the aisle.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Have you, actually, ever even had sex?

    Of course how you do it makes a difference.
    Personal, much?

    I don't see how it matters whether you have wild sex up a tree, passionate sex in a car, first time, gentle sex in a bed or any other kind of sex. If you're doing it for love, then you should be focused on your partner alone. Unless, of course, you're under the impression that 'making love' is only boring sex that happens between a nuptual sheet, in which case, I can assure you that you're wrong.

    If you're having sex during a one night stand or with someone you only met a week ago, then it's unreasonable to expect that they won't be fantasising about someone else.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NeonSkies)
    Personally I think it's cruel that he told her he thinks of other women.

    It's like a big slap in the face like you're not good enough anymore, he needs to get off on thinking about other girls. It's not as bad as cheating, but in his mind he basically is even though he physically isn't cheating.

    Call me old fashioned but if you're in love with someone and you're having sex with them to demonstrate your love the only one you should be thinking about is that one person.
    My thoughts entirely.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    Personal, much?

    I don't see how it matters whether you have wild sex up a tree, passionate sex in a car, first time, gentle sex in a bed or any other kind of sex. If you're doing it for love, then you should be focused on your partner alone. Unless, of course, you're under the impression that 'making love' is only boring sex that happens between a nuptual sheet, in which case, I can assure you that you're wrong.

    If you're having sex during a one night stand or with someone you only met a week ago, then it's unreasonable to expect that they won't be fantasising about someone else.
    This is the second time you've resorted to straw-manning my arguments. Can you quote where I said that having gentle sex is boring?
    Just because I don't reduce sex down to some romantic notion, that does not mean that I do not love my partner.

    Emotions cannot be reduced down to actions.

    If you haven't experienced sex, and if you haven't experienced certain types of sex, then how can you claim any knowledge in that field? You don't have that experience.
    Moreover, how can you claim that your actions mean the same to you as me doing those actions for me. We have different experiences. Okay so there's an over lap in how we think (otherwise communication would be impossible) but that does not mean that when we do actions, those actions will have the same meaning.

    You might as well say that "if you punch someone you must be angry with them".
    The analogy follows through well because if you study some martial arts, some sensei's will train you to have a calm and relax frame of mind, to not tense up, and keep yourself in a certain mental state, one that does not contain anger, or fear, etc. The action cannot say what emotions, what mental state, you are in.

    This argument will probably be instrumental in your understanding of it:

    To put it in a slightly more complex manner, different mental states can cause the same actions. And so the same action can be the result of an almost infinite number of mental states.
    These states are probably dependent on several things:
    Brain chemistry.
    How one thinks about things.
    The information one has come across and deliberated on to reach their conclusions.

    Think about it a bit like this, brain chemistry=hardware.
    How you think about things, the categories you subscribe to, the syntax or logic you use, the structure of your thoughts = operating system.
    The information you utilise and process=software.

    The analogy of minds to computers has obvious limitations (like that of semantics). But for our purposes here it should help in showing you that, you can't reduce emotions down to actions. It's not nearly that simple.

    Out of interest, do you study philosophy at all?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    This is the second time you've resorted to straw-manning my arguments. Can you quote where I said that having gentle sex is boring?
    Just because I don't reduce sex down to some romantic notion, that does not mean that I do not love my partner.

    Emotions cannot be reduced down to actions.

    If you haven't experienced sex, and if you haven't experienced certain types of sex, then how can you claim any knowledge in that field? You don't have that experience.
    Moreover, how can you claim that your actions mean the same to you as me doing those actions for me. We have different experiences. Okay so there's an over lap in how we think (otherwise communication would be impossible) but that does not mean that when we do actions, those actions will have the same meaning.

    You might as well say that "if you punch someone you must be angry with them".
    The analogy follows through well because if you study some martial arts, some sensei's will train you to have a calm and relax frame of mind, to not tense up, and keep yourself in a certain mental state, one that does not contain anger, or fear, etc. The action cannot say what emotions, what mental state, you are in.

    This argument will probably be instrumental in your understanding of it:

    To put it in a slightly more complex manner, different mental states can cause the same actions. And so the same action can be the result of an almost infinite number of mental states.
    These states are probably dependent on several things:
    Brain chemistry.
    How one thinks about things.
    The information one has come across and deliberated on to reach their conclusions.

    Think about it a bit like this, brain chemistry=hardware.
    How you think about things, the categories you subscribe to, the syntax or logic you use, the structure of your thoughts = operating system.
    The information you utilise and process=software.

    The analogy of minds to computers has obvious limitations (like that of semantics). But for our purposes here it should help in showing you that, you can't reduce emotions down to actions. It's not nearly that simple.

    Out of interest, do you study philosophy at all?
    No, I don't study philosophy.

    And secondly, I didn't actually say that you said gentle sex was boring - that was simply what I inferred from your argument and felt the need to mention that it wasn't, just in case.

    Yes, you cannot directly compare actions to emotions, but the OP's question isn't really that complicated and I'm not willing to go into the nitty gritty of it. Obviously we have different standards, but I would personally expect a partner with whom I was in love and who loved me back, to concentrate on me when we're having sex. Is that really too much to ask?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    No, I don't study philosophy.

    And secondly, I didn't actually say that you said gentle sex was boring - that was simply what I inferred from your argument and felt the need to mention that it wasn't, just in case.

    Yes, you cannot directly compare actions to emotions, but the OP's question isn't really that complicated and I'm not willing to go into the nitty gritty of it. Obviously we have different standards, but I would personally expect a partner with whom I was in love and who loved me back, to concentrate on me when we're having sex. Is that really too much to ask?
    No, and AGAIN, AT NO POINT, I repeat, AT NOT POINT have I said it's not too much to ask.

    You made it look as if I was saying that gentle sex was boring, that implication was no where to be found in my argument. The possibility that for someone it could be, yes, but that it commonly, or necessarily, is, was no where in my argument.

    Comparing emotions and actions is one thing, a very complicated thing, reducing emotions down to actions, which is what you have been doing, is a completely different thing.
    Now there's finally something you are right about, the OP's question wasn't really that complicated, yet you've been talking about a different issue, and continue to claim that I'm making assertions that are no where to be found in my messages.

    I've implicitly said that it's not too much to ask when I explained that it wouldn't be unreasonable to be upset because of a partner doing that. Of course it's not too much to ask otherwise being in the standard format of relationship (monogamy) in our society would most likely be too much to ask. The reason being that we're possessive over our partners, we don't like the potential of them wanting someone more than us. That challenges us being validated by them.

    But to claim someone doesn't love their partner because they think about someone else is utter bull**** and I hope you understand why (if not, read through all of my posts on this topic again).

    If you're done leaving implications that mis-represent the messages I've submitted on this thread, I'll be happy to leave you feeling like the intellectual mess most people would feel like after having to correct you time and time again.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    No, and AGAIN, AT NO POINT, I repeat, AT NOT POINT have I said it's not too much to ask.

    You made it look as if I was saying that gentle sex was boring, that implication was no where to be found in my argument. The possibility that for someone it could be, yes, but that it commonly, or necessarily, is, was no where in my argument.

    Comparing emotions and actions is one thing, a very complicated thing, reducing emotions down to actions, which is what you have been doing, is a completely different thing.
    Now there's finally something you are right about, the OP's question wasn't really that complicated, yet you've been talking about a different issue, and continue to claim that I'm making assertions that are no where to be found in my messages.

    I've implicitly said that it's not too much to ask when I explained that it wouldn't be unreasonable to be upset because of a partner doing that. Of course it's not too much to ask otherwise being in the standard format of relationship (monogamy) in our society would most likely be too much to ask. The reason being that we're possessive over our partners, we don't like the potential of them wanting someone more than us. That challenges us being validated by them.

    But to claim someone doesn't love their partner because they think about someone else is utter bull**** and I hope you understand why (if not, read through all of my posts on this topic again).

    If you're done leaving implications that mis-represent the messages I've submitted on this thread, I'll be happy to leave you feeling like the intellectual mess most people would feel like after having to correct you time and time again.
    If you'd like to point out a time where I actually accused you of the above things, then I'd be very intrigued to know when.

    In the midst of my history coursework and a general I-don't-really-care attitude towards your argument, I was actually more interested in resolving this issue by stating what I believe about the OP's problem, in the hope of clearing up any confusion about what my argument is, than challenging yours. Thus, I think you'll find that my above posts have been general statements about my opinion rather than accusations about yours. If you insist on taking that personally and inferring things that simply weren't there, then that's your prerogative.

    Consequently, I don't think you've actually got any reason to correct me at all.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    And hes still your boyfriend? And you still have sex with him? :lol: Oh dear...................
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    If you'd like to point out a time where I actually accused you of the above things, then I'd be very intrigued to know when.

    In the midst of my history coursework and a general I-don't-really-care attitude towards your argument, I was actually more interested in resolving this issue by stating what I believe about the OP's problem, in the hope of clearing up any confusion about what my argument is, than challenging yours. Thus, I think you'll find that my above posts have been general statements about my opinion rather than accusations about yours. If you insist on taking that personally and inferring things that simply weren't there, then that's your prerogative.

    Consequently, I don't think you've actually got any reason to correct me at all.
    "Obviously we have different standards, but I would personally expect a partner with whom I was in love and who loved me back, to concentrate on me when we're having sex. Is that really too much to ask?"


    "If you're having sex during a one night stand or with someone you only met a week ago, then it's unreasonable to expect that they won't be fantasising about someone else."

    Because there's no implied meaning AT ALL...:rolleyes:

    And I've had many reasons to correct you, you continued to reduce emotions down to actions without taking into account other elements of mental states.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    "Obviously we have different standards, but I would personally expect a partner with whom I was in love and who loved me back, to concentrate on me when we're having sex. Is that really too much to ask?"


    "If you're having sex during a one night stand or with someone you only met a week ago, then it's unreasonable to expect that they won't be fantasising about someone else."

    Because there's no implied meaning AT ALL...:rolleyes:

    And I've had many reasons to correct you, you continued to reduce emotions down to actions without taking into account other elements of mental states.
    Well now it's my turn to correct you, if you insist on this turning into an immature squabble. Yeah, there was plenty of meaning in the above 2 statements but there was no accusation at all, as you well know. So just because you happen to disagree with what I'm saying, don't twist my words. Having 10,000+ posts doesn't automatically make you right, you know. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oranges)
    Could have sworn I saw another thread a short while ago where some guy admitted he pictured other girls while sleeping with his gf. :curious:
    samee!!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    Well now it's my turn to correct you, if you insist on this turning into an immature squabble. Yeah, there was plenty of meaning in the above 2 statements but there was no accusation at all, as you well know. So just because you happen to disagree with what I'm saying, don't twist my words. Having 10,000+ posts doesn't automatically make you right, you know. :rolleyes:
    :facepalm2:.

    You're right of course, you quoting me, you saying those things in your reply directed at me, no implied meaning at all. Of course you wouldn't be addressing me and my arguments there, you know, in your reply to my posts and arguments.

    Were you dropped on your head a lot as a child?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    :facepalm2:.

    You're right of course, you quoting me, you saying those things in your reply directed at me, no implied meaning at all. Of course you wouldn't be addressing me and my arguments there, you know, in your reply to my posts and arguments.

    Were you dropped on your head a lot as a child?
    Since when does my quoting you lead to accusations that:
    a) you said that expecting your partner not too fantasize about other women during sex is too much to ask;
    b) you said gentle sex was boring
    Which I believe was the original point.

    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Were you dropped on your head a lot as a child?
    Plenty of times. Why, do you think it's had a profound effect? :confused:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    Since when does my quoting you lead to accusations that:
    a) you said that expecting your partner not too fantasize about other women during sex is too much to ask;
    b) you said gentle sex was boring
    Which I believe was the original point.
    Quoting me and arguing against what I've said sets a context. You then wrote things that made it look as if I did say those things in that context without setting a new context. I swear to God, I shouldn't have to explain **** this simple.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Tell him you think of your best guy mates
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DumpOrStay?)
    Is it like Katy Perry and Rihanna and stuff?

    Or like Susie, Jade, and Rebecca Black from primary school?
    primary school.. bit young, not sure its even legal.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 4, 2011

1,509

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.