The Student Room Group

Settle an issue for me

OK, so we're travelling back in time 6 months or so. Guy meets girl at Godskitchen in Bournemouth when Paul Van Dyk, Judge Jules and Lisa Lashes played there. They were bowled over by each other. Girl was a runway model, and guy really dug her, and she really dug him.

Fast forward a few months and they've been texting and talking a lot, but still only met that once, him living on the south coast about 1 1/2 hours from her place in London. Still, the chats have been getting rather cosy and she has been getting rather emotionally attached. At this point, remember they have still only met once.

Anyway, she goes to Japan to model for (what he thinks is) 4 weeks. 5 weeks pass by, and still not a word from her, so he sleeps with somebody else.

Within a few days she gets in touch, and it turns out she had to stay an extra week. He mentions the girl he slept with within the context of them getting stoned together, and somehow she just KNOWS something went on. He denies it several times, but she bluffs it out of him and he admits it.

After hours of conversation, apologising and all sorts, she tells him quite plainly she wants nothing to do with him any more.

The question is..... how wrong was he to sleep with this other girl? He was never a couple with the model, and he hadn't heard from her in 5 weeks and assumed she had lost interest, considering he thought she would only be gone for 4 weeks.

Was he really, really in the wrong here? Should she have given him a chance to show he wouldn't do that if they had been together? Or did he truly deserve the brush off for this?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Hmm.. it seems that the girl is more into the guy than he may have realised but surely some form of communication (emails?) would have been possible from Japan. Disappearing off the face of the earth for 5 weeks with no contact would suggest a lack of interest (not the disappearing part but the lack of contact).

Verdict: girl should have made it clearer that she was interested. Guy shouldn't have told her about the other girl. They were only friends with a bit of flirting at this point. Not seeing each other and not a couple. How is it therefore cheating?
Reply 2
It depends what he was intending to happen, if before she went away he could tell the direction it was going in, could tell they both wanted more etc, then he is in the wrong. It was only one extra week and I would think it seems to the model that it was way too soon, like the second he thought she wasnt interested he got with someone else, kinda shows a lack of respect it hink. and then there was the lying about it, so even if the model would have been ok with the sex i assume lying about it will have really p*ssed her off
Reply 3
I think he was kinda wrong in that if he knew that the girl was getting emotionally attached,it might have been more considerate of him to just not sleep with the other girl. But on the other hand the guy and the girl weren't together so technically she has no rights over whether he sleeps with someone else or not. I reckon that the girl should try and forgive the guy and make it clear that she now wants a relationship,letting him know that he now can't sleep with other girls.
Reply 4
Emerald
I think he was kinda wrong in that if he knew that the girl was getting emotionally attached,it might have been more considerate of him to just not sleep with the other girl. But on the other hand the guy and the girl weren't together so technically she has no rights over whether he sleeps with someone else or not. I reckon that the girl should try and forgive the guy and make it clear that she now wants a relationship,letting him know that he now can't sleep with other girls.

The time for that is way past. This is purely to clarify to what extent the guy was in the wrong.
Reply 5
k then. I think the guy was only in the wrong to a certain extent. Should have been more considerate but didn't HAVE to be as they were not in a proper relationship.
Reply 6
I think its a bit crap to say thats the guy was 'allowed to do what he did'. i am allowed to do many things that i chooses not too because even if they are permitted it doesnt make them right. I dont think the guy should have slept with the girl, (my personal opinion) and i think it was breaking the rules when he lied about it.
Reply 7
You lost a model?

Unlucky.
Reply 8
Who says it was me? Who says this was even a real situation? Could just be a very interesting scenario?
Reply 9
Who says it was me?


Good point.

Someone lost a model?

Unlucky.

More seriously:

5 weeks is a heck of a long time sans communications, considering there had been flirting etc.

As has been said. This isn't 1912. She would have had plenty of opportunities to get in touch.

Still, if there was an understanding of sorts that it *might* go somewhere, any woman's probably going to interpret that as cheating.
Whether it's cheating is irrelevant.

Perhaps she doesn't like liars or men who have one night stands. The men on here are saying all the time that they don't respect girls who have one night stands, perhaps she feels the same way about men...
Reply 11
The guy is totally right. There was never any discussion of a full-blown relationship with the model. So therefore, no fidelity.
If she'd wanted him to be with her, and her only, she should have tried to talk to him about it before she left for the work in Japan.

Quite simply she wants to have her cake and eat it.
Reply 12
mipmapped
More seriously:

5 weeks is a heck of a long time sans communications, considering there had been flirting etc.

Well this was my thinking, but the lady in question claimed that she was literally working all the hours of the day and sleeping only, and she literally had no time at all. Again, not saying that I am the gentleman concerned in this situation, but I know that's what she said.

mipmapped
Still, if there was an understanding of sorts that it *might* go somewhere, any woman's probably going to interpret that as cheating.

Ah.
I wouldn't interpret it as cheating, just not the actions of a guy id like to be with.
Reply 14
squigaletta
I wouldn't interpret it as cheating, just not the actions of a guy id like to be with.

OK, why would that be? Is it because you think he should've waited longer before sleeping with someone? Is it because you think he should've trusted you to come back? Is it because of the fact that he had casual sex?
Reply 15
it couldn't be you because she'd be locked in the kitchen
Its because i think it shows a lack of self control that as soon as the dealine passed, sex was had, seems a lot too soon, and yes it shows a lack of trust, but its more the first reason, and no its not casual sex, i have nothing against that in principle
Well this was my thinking, but the lady in question claimed that she was literally working all the hours of the day and sleeping only, and she literally had no time at all. Again, not saying that I am the gentleman concerned in this situation, but I know that's what she said.


That's not unlikely for a model.

The basis of a woman's attachment is as much emotional as physical, whereas for men it tends to be "we hadn't slept together - what's the problem?"
Reply 18
So basically it shows a lack of trust and a lack of sensitivity? Well I can get behind that, but from the guy's perspective, he thought she wasn't bothered any more and couldn't even be bothered to let him know. Do you think that counts for nothing, or should she have considered it?
So basically it shows a lack of trust and a lack of sensitivity? Well I can get behind that, but from the guy's perspective, he thought she wasn't bothered any more and couldn't even be bothered to let him know. Do you think that counts for nothing, or should she have considered it?


He should have been more sympathetic to the woman's perspective.

She should have been more sympathetic to the man's perspective.