100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: What is a gentleman? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I will trust my track record as a man slut before I trust the cussing God boy of worldly lusts....seriously.
Talk is cheap. Stop fallng for it people. (I measure my man skank status in butt hickies) Put up or shut up. Doubt the godguy will play. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some people don't like to be questioned on what they think. So, instead of responding, they'll just completely ignore any questions like those that have been asked of him. This is very true. Some people become angry when asked to explain their opinions. Likely because their ideas are not very well thought out. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems he has come to the conclusion that discretion is the better part of valor and headed for the hills. Doesn't seem gentlemanly to me though. Any thoughts? Calling someone less than a gentleman because he does not continue to dual with someone who clearly wants to argue rather than debate with snide remarks or not picking with insults and questioning a person's "man card", sanity, or truthfullness seems more like not wasteing your breath. I think he makes valid arguements about when so called choice to have sex borders on addiction and shear numbers start suggesting lack of self control. If the list of people you say you care enough about to be intimate with starts looking like the phone book then the term "care for someone' or real intimacy is pretty loosely defined. I can say I love Scondrel's ability to make the guitar talk but if he even tried to tell me he loved me and cared for me after the number of women he claims to have been intimate with I would have serious serious reservations about the quality of that intimacy simple because it never seemed to actually go to the level of being something he wanted or maybe his partners wanted to continue.IMHO if you really care and respect someone enough to be jumping in the sack with them you should want tp be with them for more than the night in an intense way. A way that clears the deck of interest in another partner and a way that goes beyond just enjoying the heck out of knocking boots. Don't for a minute get me wrong and say that the mechanical part of sex might not be mastered (Ghezz pretty much the parts fit universally and it is not exactly rocket science to get someone to orgasm) but there is a place that real intimacy takes you that just finding someone who can curl your toes for the moment can't take you. And I will admidt for a long time I thought that was Hogwash but once you do have it the whole jumping ahead before the self control and committment lets that intimacy develope will make a lot more sense. Once someone really loves you the screwing just doesn't hold much charm. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems he has come to the conclusion that discretion is the better part of valor and headed for the hills. Doesn't seem gentlemanly to me though. Any thoughts? Calling someone less than a gentleman because he does not continue to dual with someone who clearly wants to argue rather than debate with snide remarks or not picking with insults and questioning a person's "man card", sanity, or truthfullness seems more like not wasteing your breath. I think he makes valid arguements about when so called choice to have sex borders on addiction and shear numbers start suggesting lack of self control. If the list of people you say you care enough about to be intimate with starts looking like the phone book then the term "care for someone' or real intimacy is pretty loosely defined. I can say I love Scondrel's ability to make the guitar talk but if he even tried to tell me he loved me and cared for me after the number of women he claims to have been intimate with I would have serious serious reservations about the quality of that intimacy simple because it never seemed to actually go to the level of being something he wanted or maybe his partners wanted to continue.IMHO if you really care and respect someone enough to be jumping in the sack with them you should want tp be with them for more than the night in an intense way. A way that clears the deck of interest in another partner and a way that goes beyond just enjoying the heck out of knocking boots. Don't for a minute get me wrong and say that the mechanical part of sex might not be mastered (Ghezz pretty much the parts fit universally and it is not exactly rocket science to get someone to orgasm) but there is a place that real intimacy takes you that just finding someone who can curl your toes for the moment can't take you. And I will admidt for a long time I thought that was Hogwash but once you do have it the whole jumping ahead before the self control and committment lets that intimacy develope will make a lot more sense. Once someone really loves you the screwing just doesn't hold much charm. I say Joelcool's behavior isn't gentlemanly because he's refusing a lady's request. I've only said I love you to four women in my life and one of them was my mother. The other three I was involved with for a number of years and two of the I have a child with. It's my feeling that any woman I decide to become mutually exclusive with would appreciate that I'm with her out of choice and not for a lack of options. This should make her feel she has something other women may not have. Something unique to her alone. And of course, she does. That's why I'm with her. I also feel I'm respected more when she knows there are other women that would be all over me given the opportunity. You pay more attention to things when you know you could lose them. It's like when you know people are getting fired, you pay attention to your job if you want to keep it. If this makes me less of a gentleman in your eyes, c'est la vie. I can assure you it doesn't in her eyes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems he has come to the conclusion that discretion is the better part of valor and headed for the hills. Doesn't seem gentlemanly to me though. Any thoughts? Calling someone less than a gentleman because he does not continue to dual with someone who clearly wants to argue rather than debate with snide remarks or not picking with insults and questioning a person's "man card", sanity, or truthfullness seems more like not wasteing your breath. I think he makes valid arguements about when so called choice to have sex borders on addiction and shear numbers start suggesting lack of self control. If the list of people you say you care enough about to be intimate with starts looking like the phone book then the term "care for someone' or real intimacy is pretty loosely defined. I can say I love Scondrel's ability to make the guitar talk but if he even tried to tell me he loved me and cared for me after the number of women he claims to have been intimate with I would have serious serious reservations about the quality of that intimacy simple because it never seemed to actually go to the level of being something he wanted or maybe his partners wanted to continue.IMHO if you really care and respect someone enough to be jumping in the sack with them you should want tp be with them for more than the night in an intense way. A way that clears the deck of interest in another partner and a way that goes beyond just enjoying the heck out of knocking boots. Don't for a minute get me wrong and say that the mechanical part of sex might not be mastered (Ghezz pretty much the parts fit universally and it is not exactly rocket science to get someone to orgasm) but there is a place that real intimacy takes you that just finding someone who can curl your toes for the moment can't take you. And I will admidt for a long time I thought that was Hogwash but once you do have it the whole jumping ahead before the self control and committment lets that intimacy develope will make a lot more sense. Once someone really loves you the screwing just doesn't hold much charm. Asking questions based on what he wrote was simply to find out where he was coming from and why he thought what he did. If he was unable to answer those questions, there's not much else to be said, I guess. I can't say I know many who would say someone is addicted to sex simply because they have had 12 partners, though. So, I'm interested in hearing why he chose that number and why he thinks what he thinks. Since you say he makes valid points, maybe you can shed some light on what he's said? Is 12 partners really so many that you'd think someone has a sexual addiction? Does 12 partners equal "sheer numbers?" Why 12? Is it much different than 10 or 11? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Man, no one comes back to explain when they're asked to explain what they've said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Man, no one comes back to explain when they're asked to explain what they've said. You could send him a message. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was referring to PacificStar this time, since I asked her questions as well.
I'd rather keep the discussion in the forums than in private messages. |
|
|
|
|
