[討論] 男生為了"性"追求女生,比重多少?
不可否認 "性" 在兩性關係中非常重要
並不反對性行為或是婚前性行為
也許是因為原PO是個性愛無法分離的人
總覺得~ 性愛是在雙方交往後,自然而然發生的
(姑且不論交往後多久發生,但至少是交往後吧?! 我承認我好保守)
總覺得~ 性愛是一個plus,並不是一開始交往的主體
總覺得~ 情感需求應得到滿足後,才能進展到性需求
很想知道...
有大 "比重" 的男性是因為 "性需求" 而展開追求,進而交往?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(單純砲友、不交往,暫不討論)
是否能大膽假設,幾乎所有男性都是下半身思考,差別只在於掩飾技巧???
(曖昧期間就顯露明顯的"性"趣,是太飢渴? 還是笨?或者已上皆是?)
或是樂觀的假設,只有玩咖會如此,不論吃相如何,只要讓女生心甘情願答應即可?
哀~ 雖然不排斥、不反感,但一想到對方動機不單純,粉紅泡泡真的會瞬間消失,
變的好清醒 ! 總會覺得這不是"真心的"喜歡...
P.S.
因為原PO是女生,所以拜託先不要戰 "女生也會因為性需求而.....",原PO比較渴望
知道男性的想法。
--
我是貼心的匿名帳號Boygirl1,有需要就寄信給我吧!
來信記得附上發文類型與標題,以便小板主代發匿名文作業唷!
1.分享 2.心情 3.求助 4.討論 5.問卷 6.公告
若想要刪除匿名文章時也可以來信給小板主 但小板主無法幫忙刪掉不屬於您的文章唷!
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.171.245.82
推
02/15 22:17, , 1F
02/15 22:17, 1F
推
02/15 22:17, , 2F
02/15 22:17, 2F
推
02/15 22:27, , 3F
02/15 22:27, 3F
→
02/15 22:27, , 4F
02/15 22:27, 4F
→
02/15 22:28, , 5F
02/15 22:28, 5F
→
02/15 22:28, , 6F
02/15 22:28, 6F
→
02/15 22:29, , 7F
02/15 22:29, 7F
噓
02/15 22:39, , 8F
02/15 22:39, 8F
→
02/15 22:42, , 9F
02/15 22:42, 9F
推
02/15 22:46, , 10F
02/15 22:46, 10F
噓
02/15 22:54, , 11F
02/15 22:54, 11F
推
02/15 22:59, , 12F
02/15 22:59, 12F
→
02/16 00:14, , 13F
02/16 00:14, 13F
→
02/16 00:14, , 14F
02/16 00:14, 14F
→
02/16 02:13, , 15F
02/16 02:13, 15F
→
02/16 02:15, , 16F
02/16 02:15, 16F
推
02/16 08:52, , 17F
02/16 08:52, 17F
推
02/16 09:02, , 18F
02/16 09:02, 18F
→
02/16 09:02, , 19F
02/16 09:02, 19F
→
02/16 09:56, , 20F
02/16 09:56, 20F
推
02/16 10:27, , 21F
02/16 10:27, 21F
推
02/16 11:04, , 22F
02/16 11:04, 22F
→
02/16 11:33, , 23F
02/16 11:33, 23F
→
02/16 11:34, , 24F
02/16 11:34, 24F
噓
02/16 11:49, , 25F
02/16 11:49, 25F
噓
02/16 11:58, , 26F
02/16 11:58, 26F
→
02/16 11:58, , 27F
02/16 11:58, 27F
推
02/16 12:05, , 28F
02/16 12:05, 28F
噓
02/16 12:28, , 29F
02/16 12:28, 29F
噓
02/16 13:43, , 30F
02/16 13:43, 30F
推
02/16 14:08, , 31F
02/16 14:08, 31F
→
02/16 14:08, , 32F
02/16 14:08, 32F
→
02/16 14:08, , 33F
02/16 14:08, 33F
噓
02/16 14:40, , 34F
02/16 14:40, 34F
→
02/16 14:40, , 35F
02/16 14:40, 35F
→
02/16 16:03, , 36F
02/16 16:03, 36F
噓
02/16 16:10, , 37F
02/16 16:10, 37F
→
02/16 16:31, , 38F
02/16 16:31, 38F
噓
02/16 16:40, , 39F
02/16 16:40, 39F
推
02/16 17:48, , 40F
02/16 17:48, 40F
推
02/16 18:14, , 41F
02/16 18:14, 41F
噓
02/16 18:22, , 42F
02/16 18:22, 42F
→
02/16 18:23, , 43F
02/16 18:23, 43F
→
02/16 18:23, , 44F
02/16 18:23, 44F
推
02/16 21:52, , 45F
02/16 21:52, 45F
→
02/16 23:33, , 46F
02/16 23:33, 46F
噓
02/17 08:54, , 47F
02/17 08:54, 47F
噓
02/17 09:41, , 48F
02/17 09:41, 48F
噓
02/17 11:32, , 49F
02/17 11:32, 49F
→
02/17 11:57, , 50F
02/17 11:57, 50F
推
02/17 12:14, , 51F
02/17 12:14, 51F
噓
02/17 15:06, , 52F
02/17 15:06, 52F
推
02/17 15:18, , 53F
02/17 15:18, 53F
推
02/17 16:43, , 54F
02/17 16:43, 54F
推
02/17 17:34, , 55F
02/17 17:34, 55F
推
02/17 18:59, , 56F
02/17 18:59, 56F
噓
02/18 05:11, , 57F
02/18 05:11, 57F
噓
02/18 06:33, , 58F
02/18 06:33, 58F
推
02/18 10:14, , 59F
02/18 10:14, 59F
噓
02/18 17:48, , 60F
02/18 17:48, 60F
→
02/18 17:49, , 61F
02/18 17:49, 61F
噓
02/20 02:16, , 62F
02/20 02:16, 62F
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文 (最舊先):
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 8 篇):