Girls. Would you dump a guy if..... Watch

Nixon1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
He was below par in bed would you dump him, even if you were perfect together but lacked in bed, would you stay and teach/make it work?
0
reply
infairverona
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
Depends how lacking, if there just wasn't much sexual chemistry then would probably dump. If there was a spark but he was a bit clueless, would try to teach. But not very attractive to have to teach, tbh.
0
reply
xmertic
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
(Original post by Nixon1)
He was below par in bed would you dump him, even if you were perfect together but lacked in bed, would you stay and teach/make it work?
I think if someone dumps another person because they aren't 'satisfying' in bed... then that's really messed up to me.
0
reply
Supermanxxxxxx
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
Lol you mad bro


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
SyOnGuitar
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by Nixon1)
He was below par in bed would you dump him, even if you were perfect together but lacked in bed, would you stay and teach/make it work?
Everyone has to start somewhere, so no it's not a reason to dump someone imo. I mean... part of being in a relationship is growing up together if you get me, so if that means growing more experienced in bed together too, it's just part of it. At least, from my eyes.
0
reply
RFJ
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
Sexually experienced men only. Inexperienced men aren't attractive, I don't know enough myself to teach; somebody has to take the sexual lead.

Tbh, I would know if they were sexual experienced enough or not. If not, it wouldn't progress at all; let alone get to the point where I could dump them.
0
reply
royal1990
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
I think it's pretty unfair of anyone to get dumped because of this, regardless of preferences. You cannot expect every partner you experience to be akin to some "sex god".

The fact is, not everyone is at the same level. If a girl dumped me for my 'lack of' sexual ability I'd be pretty disgusted with her, and needless to say she would be out on her backside (simple!).

I've had sex numerous times, and had two girlfriends in my time, therefore, I'd say I was suitably sexually experienced (to an adequate level) for most women. If that isn't enough then I would probably reconsider the sort of girl I was dating and think well...she's a bit of a ****, if she can't accept a reasonable standard of activity in the bedroom, then she ain't for me. Why should one have to change to suit such promiscuous rubbish?

I think it's degrading to expect people to be sexually superior in bed, we cannot expect each other to be man whores or sluts. Not everyone has lack of self respect of their bodies.

Deary me, where is respect and class in today's world!!
2
reply
royal1990
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by RFJ)
Sexually experienced men only. Inexperienced men aren't attractive, I don't know enough myself to teach; somebody has to take the sexual lead.

Tbh, I would know if they were sexual experienced enough or not. If not, it wouldn't progress at all; let alone get to the point where I could dump them.
How would you define "sexually experienced" in a man??

It seems the majority of women on here are expecting a lot.- and I'm actually quite offended. With the man having to jump through endless hoops to satisfy. This isn't the "woman's prerogative" (sorry to say), and what if the tables were turned and I was to say I don't want a woman that is sexually inadequate?

I think that many women would be repulsed and I'd be pelted with threats and labelled a **** for even considering dumping a girl for this. Somehow it's okay when the shoe is on the other foot. With absolutely nobody saying anything (other than myself).

Women hold a man to unattainable and unrealistic standards more than people like us to believe and I guess it's the feminist movement of the 'we hate men' brigade and general misandry that is to blame.

In short, dumping because of perceived sexual flaws is inherently wrong. Love is love. You like them regardless of sexual ability.
2
reply
royal1990
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by SyOnGuitar)
Everyone has to start somewhere, so no it's not a reason to dump someone imo. I mean... part of being in a relationship is growing up together if you get me, so if that means growing more experienced in bed together too, it's just part of it. At least, from my eyes.
I second this completely. A relationship is a journey, one that is travelled together. Sex isn't just some fun activity, like people like to make out these days. Everything in today's world is riddled with superficiality and materialistic rhetoric. Sex has to be about how good someone is, it's no longer about the act of two people bonding and connecting (in a spiritual sense). There is no deep meaning, it's all about lust.

Love isn't about love. Attraction isn't about feelings anymore, it's about how good looking of visually appealing someone is (unfortunately). Everything is all surface level rubbish.

People should look into their hearts instead of thinking lustfully.
0
reply
bittr n swt
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
Lol give him time to improve at least!
0
reply
RFJ
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by royal1990)
How would you define "sexually experienced" in a man??

It seems the majority of women on here are expecting a lot.- and I'm actually quite offended. With the man having to jump through endless hoops to satisfy. This isn't the "woman's prerogative" (sorry to say), and what if the tables were turned and I was to say I don't want a woman that is sexually inadequate?

I think that many women would be repulsed and I'd be pelted with threats and labelled a **** for even considering dumping a girl for this. Somehow it's okay when the shoe is on the other foot. With absolutely nobody saying anything (other than myself).

Women hold a man to unattainable and unrealistic standards more than people like us to believe and I guess it's the feminist movement of the 'we hate men' brigade and general misandry that is to blame.

In short, dumping because of perceived sexual flaws is inherently wrong. Love is love. You like them regardless of sexual ability.
I understand your point but you're incorrectly assuming that I would blame or criticise a man for making the same decision I would. I feel that we're all entitled to make choices about who we want to be with. If you don't want to be with somebody who's sexual inexperienced that's fine, just like it's mine to choose not to be with somebody inexperienced.
0
reply
royal1990
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by RFJ)
I understand your point but you're incorrectly assuming that I would blame or criticise a man for making the same decision I would. I feel that we're all entitled to make choices about who we want to be with. If you don't want to be with somebody who's sexual inexperienced that's fine, just like it's mine to choose not to be with somebody inexperienced.
The point I'm actually trying to make is that people in general seem to have become wrapped up with superficiality in our world. If you love them I'd doubt you'd dump them if they were sexually not up to par, regardless of your own individual preference. If a person did dump because of that, well it's there loss.

As much as it seems it was directed at you (because I quoted you), it was also more a general observation on this thread. I seemed to notice an overwhelming majority stating that if a man was rubbish in bed they'd get rid. I guess I'm just pretty bitter, society reeks of selfishness in the face of sex. I understand we're all sexual beings, but really, I don't think below par sex should be a deal-breaker.

As long as of your able to have sex, and fulfil a moderately okay sex life, why should it be a problem? I think sometimes as sexual beings we forget our partners and selfishly assume the show is all about us.

Yes everyone has the right to decide what they want, but bearing in mind your choices and what you say will dictate how people will hold opinions on you, just as much as behaviour does. I think it's important to strike a balance and reach compromise- rather than say, 'your no up to my standards, your out the door'.
0
reply
royal1990
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by RFJ)
I understand your point but you're incorrectly assuming that I would blame or criticise a man for making the same decision I would. I feel that we're all entitled to make choices about who we want to be with. If you don't want to be with somebody who's sexual inexperienced that's fine, just like it's mine to choose not to be with somebody inexperienced.
Also, I don't think it's fine to make such a cut throat decision, and judge somebody on something like sexual ability. People don't necessarily get to choose the amount of sexual experience they're exposed too, therefore why should any women (or man for that matter) decide based on something so ridiculous.

Why make decisions based on something so out of ones control? Sure a person can gain confidence, change appearance to an extent, but at end of day, if they don't get sex they don't get sex, thus their experience is lacking. They shouldn't be dropped as a potential partner because of this.

For example, a guy that isn't particularly social may be lacking in sexual experience due to his inept ability to socialise and be in the right situation and context for sex to happen. Is this his fault?? No I don't think it is. Should a potential partner get rid of him because he has little or no sexual experience. No, not if they actually like him, however, judging by they level of surface level materialism in this thread, yes the majority would. It's a sad world we live in.
0
reply
Inazuma
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by royal1990)
How would you define "sexually experienced" in a man??

It seems the majority of women on here are expecting a lot.- and I'm actually quite offended. With the man having to jump through endless hoops to satisfy. This isn't the "woman's prerogative" (sorry to say), and what if the tables were turned and I was to say I don't want a woman that is sexually inadequate?

I think that many women would be repulsed and I'd be pelted with threats and labelled a **** for even considering dumping a girl for this. Somehow it's okay when the shoe is on the other foot. With absolutely nobody saying anything (other than myself).

Women hold a man to unattainable and unrealistic standards more than people like us to believe and I guess it's the feminist movement of the 'we hate men' brigade and general misandry that is to blame.

In short, dumping because of perceived sexual flaws is inherently wrong. Love is love. You like them regardless of sexual ability.
Well you assume a lot. Many people are repulsed by this idea equally. No need to assume that 'oh all woman would be repulsed and it be bad oh no'

Everyone is entitled to their preferences including YES, including men!!

Anyway,
I doubt anyone or many would dump because of this reason alone but more because it would lead to becoming frustrated or going off them in the long term, no chemistry etc. Which is a reasonable reason to end a relationship if it does make it dissolve, even if one doesn't want it to.
Also that's another reason why abstinence till marriage or a long time is bad
1
reply
joker12345
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
Of course not. If we still had chemistry and I knew he was attracted to me and vice versa, physical likes and dislikes can be learnt and he'd get better with time.
0
reply
SyOnGuitar
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
I just wanted to add though, I'd rather a guy broke up with me cos he thought I was inadequate in bed rather than cheat on me.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
(Original post by infairverona)
Depends how lacking, if there just wasn't much sexual chemistry then would probably dump. If there was a spark but he was a bit clueless, would try to teach. But not very attractive to have to teach, tbh.
yeah this, a relationship that doesn't have a highly satisfactory sexual component is not going to last anyway, so the question is whether the situation is salvageable and if so whether its worth the effort.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
Its not about "ability", as if there was some kind of professional technique that you can master like its a ****ing sport. its more about a) what kind of kinky **** you're into and b) whether you're a selfish ****.
1
reply
pinkbullets
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by Nixon1)
He was below par in bed would you dump him, even if you were perfect together but lacked in bed, would you stay and teach/make it work?
Depends - if I was his first sexual partner then I wouldn't dump him, a bit of experience would probably improve his performance massively. If he was "below par" but enthusiastic and willing to try new things then I wouldn't dump him. But if he had no intention of improving and wasn't bothered that I wasn't enjoying myself then I would probably dump him for my own sanity.
0
reply
ApeMob
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
(Original post by Nixon1)
He was below par in bed would you dump him, even if you were perfect together but lacked in bed, would you stay and teach/make it work?
If we're perfect together, that includes satisfying me sexually.
But no one's perfect together so if he gives me my basic wants/needs but can't Idk last long or is shy to **** with the lights on or doesn't wanna give me oral or be adventurous I mean....sighhhhh...fine...
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Who do you think will be the next PM?

Boris Johnson (160)
74.77%
Jeremy Hunt (54)
25.23%

Watched Threads

View All