Bad first time sex - is relationship doomed?

[donnamaybe]

I'm getting increasingly frustrated with the unwillingness of people to read carefully. I said two times in this page that I wasn't referring to her behavior, which I agree isn't normal, but the selfishness it displays. Is that distinction really that hard to grasp?

I read it. She was selfish. You defended it, saying that level of selfishness is "normal" in today's society.

 

WRONG!

[Mme. Chaucer]

There's something that strikes me as selfish about popping occasionally into threads, with no interest in helping the OP, just to express horror and moral righteousness. You're basically rubbernecking.

 

I have been happily and supportively participating in OG's threads about this unfolding relationship all along.

[Untouchable_Fire]

People constantly engage in ego gratification, yourself included. I agree that it's not healthy or acceptable, but you're demonizing OG, and acting like she's pathological, for behavior that is run of the mill human selfishness.

Yes, I would encourage her to dump him, but that's because I wouldn't personally care about the guy in that hypothetical.

Because I care about OG's happiness I'm hoping she can patch things up and allow this relationship to grow.

 

Are you trying to say that her behavior is normal? Maybe it seems normal to you.

 

There's something that strikes me as selfish about popping occasionally into threads, with no interest in helping the OP, just to express horror and moral righteousness. You're basically rubbernecking.

 

No... she is actually providing some insight, and giving you advice on how to handle OG. It's good advice too, so stop arguing.

 

Her *behavior* isn't run of the mill, but her selfishness isn't abnormal compared to other people. Of course I think she'd be happier if she weren't so wrapped up in her own ego, but to brand her as "pathological" in her selfishness is just silly and suggests a lack of understanding of human nature.

 

Yes it is abnormal, she displays a near complete inability to feel empathy. How is that normal?

[northern_sky]

Well, that's a problem.

 

I successfully raised a daughter (she is 23 now). I do, and have always loved her more than anything, ever, in life. Probably, even more than you love OG! When she did something wrong, I did not change my own value judgement about her behavior based upon my feelings of love for her. And when she was a child, I did my part to make sure that she experienced the appropriate consequences for her actions (good and bad). The fact that she has pretty severe ADD made that connection difficult for her (between her actions and the resulting consequences) and it is somewhat even to this day.

 

No, that is not some kind of "tough love." It's normal parenting. The result of this should, one would hope, be an adult who has a conscience, and who is personally accountable for their own stuff.

 

Not that I am trying to "parent" OG. Heaven forbid. Just making a point that wretched behavior is wretched behavior whether you care about the perpetrator or not. Victims of it are still victims, whether you care about the perpetrator or not.

 

I don't even think this is a matter of opinion; I take it as fact.

 

Just FYI. Now I'm done with this. I know it's off the topic of whether OG's relationship is doomed because of her boyfriend's bad sex technique. My bad. Blech.

 

I have only been critical of OG's behavior in this thread, so I'm not giving her special treatment because she's my friend. That's different than hoping she can pull it together and make this relationship work. What's wrong with that? Of course I'm going to care more about her needs than the needs of some guy who mistreats her.

[northern_sky]

I read it. She was selfish. You defended it, saying that level of selfishness is "normal" in today's society.

 

WRONG!

 

I never denied that she was selfish. Never. And I never said her selfishness was OK. The only thing I took issue with was that her selfishness was pathological.

[northern_sky]

LS's inability to understand NUANCE in arguments rears its ugly head again.

[hydorclops]

I never denied that she was selfish. Never. And I never said her selfishness was OK. The only thing I took issue with was that her selfishness was pathological.

 

Seriously, I live in a house with two schizophrenics, literally. I go to weekly group therapy with 6 others disabled by anxiety and depression like me. OG is more whack than any us.

 

Unless her posts are made up trolls.

[zengirl]

I never denied that she was selfish. Never. And I never said her selfishness was OK. The only thing I took issue with was that her selfishness was pathological.

 

Whether it's pathological or not will be demonstrated by how OG chooses to address this issue in the future, now that she's been given an array of views -- and while I think some of them are harsh, as is always true on LS, I don't think anyone is way off base, or that these 'harsh' comments aren't sincere and helpful -- and will presumably have another chance to improve this area of her relationship.

[Star Gazer]

NS, where exactly have you indicated that OG's behavior was atrocious? I've seen no such acknowledgment.

[Untouchable_Fire]

LS's inability to understand NUANCE in arguments rears its ugly head again.

 

Ok. What makes you think OG's attitudes and behavior are just normal selfishness vs. a deeper issue?

[Mme. Chaucer]

 

Unless her posts are made up trolls.

 

Seems more likely every day.

[LittleTiger]

I never denied that she was selfish. Never. And I never said her selfishness was OK. The only thing I took issue with was that her selfishness was pathological.

 

Just curious, but how do you know that it isn't?

 

I don't post much on OGs threads because she pays no attention to what I write but I do follow what she's up to because her battle with 'relationships' makes an interesting read.

 

I have to say that I don't consider any of her behaviour in her interactions with men (including her boss) to be 'normal'.

 

If she were to listen to my advice, I would strongly recommend she seek therapy.

[hydorclops]

From what she writes, her thinking is morbid. It's absolutely pathological in the strictest clinical sense. She is in the DSM IV somewhere for sure, Based on what she writes.

[hydorclops]

I don't think she is purposely malicious or malignant. I think she's not well.

[northern_sky]

Whether it's pathological or not will be demonstrated by how OG chooses to address this issue in the future, now that she's been given an array of views -- and while I think some of them are harsh, as is always true on LS, I don't think anyone is way off base, or that these 'harsh' comments aren't sincere and helpful -- and will presumably have another chance to improve this area of her relationship.

 

I don't think any of us has the right to claim that OG's selfishness is "pathological." That's an extremely strong assertion.

 

We're not psychologists, and none of us has even met her.

 

I suppose there is some extreme *behavior* that one could legitimately call pathological from an online forum, but it's just dumb, yes dumb, to pretend to be able to diagnose the extremity of a deep character trait like selfishness based on internet postings.

[northern_sky]

From what she writes, her thinking is morbid. It's absolutely pathological in the strictest clinical sense. She is in the DSM IV somewhere for sure, Based on what she writes.

 

Are you a trained psychologist/psychiatrist? Didn't think so. Then your opinion on her pathology is a piece of dung.

 

Do you even know what the word morbid means?

[zengirl]

I don't think any of us has the right to claim that OG's selfishness is "pathological." That's an extremely strong assertion.

 

We're not psychologists, and none of us has even met her.

 

I suppose there is some extreme *behavior* that one could legitimately call pathological from an online forum, but it's just dumb, yes dumb, to pretend to be able to diagnose the extremity of a deep character trait like selfishness based on internet postings.

 

I disagree with the premise that one couldn't know enough about the persona being presented to determine whether she is abnormally selfish (and if OG is trolling to this degree, and is really an 80 year old man, or something, that's definitely pathological). She shares enough of her thoughts to get an idea; I wouldn't have to meet someone to assess personality traits. Of course, that assumes she means what she says. If she's actively lying about it, and, say, this guy doesn't really exist, she has totally different problems.

 

However, I was using the more informal definition of pathological, meaning 'compulsively motivated' and kind of disregarded the idea of diagnosing anyone, one way or the other. So far as I know, there are no licensed therapists among us.

[hydorclops]

Are you a trained psychologist/psychiatrist? Didn't think so. Then your opinion on her pathology is a piece of dung.

 

Do you even know what the word morbid means?

Everyone's opinion of her pathology is dung? You've been asserting an opinion. Are you a psychologist?

 

Morbid means "indicative of disease". Do you know what it means?

[Star Gazer]

Are you a trained psychologist/psychiatrist? Didn't think so. Then your opinion on her pathology is a piece of dung.

 

You're not a trained psychologist either, so I suppose your opinion that she's not pathological carries the same amount of weight.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: You and OG really don't do each other or help each other at all. You're enablers of each other's unhealthy behavior.

[lino]

What a sh*tfight.

Feel sorry for the poor bloke.

[hydorclops]

Before this gets shut down, I do sympathize with OG. I think she's suffering terribly and I hope she gets her life together.

[oaks]

I'm beginning to feel sorry for OG for having to wade through the last several pages of this thread.

[northern_sky]

Everyone's opinion of her pathology is dung? You've been asserting an opinion. Are you a psychologist?

 

Morbid means "indicative of disease". Do you know what it means?

 

You're using the word like somebody who is studying for the GRE and has only memorized the dictionary definition, but doesn't understand the subtlety of how the word is used in context. That's a pet peeve of mine.

 

"Morbid thoughts" suggest thoughts about death or disease. That is different from thoughts that are themselves diseased. Get it?

[northern_sky]

I disagree with the premise that one couldn't know enough about the persona being presented to determine whether she is abnormally selfish (and if OG is trolling to this degree, and is really an 80 year old man, or something, that's definitely pathological). She shares enough of her thoughts to get an idea; I wouldn't have to meet someone to assess personality traits. Of course, that assumes she means what she says. If she's actively lying about it, and, say, this guy doesn't really exist, she has totally different problems.

 

However, I was using the more informal definition of pathological, meaning 'compulsively motivated' and kind of disregarded the idea of diagnosing anyone, one way or the other. So far as I know, there are no licensed therapists among us.

 

So are you actually claiming to have decided with confidence that OG's selfishness is PATHOLOGICAL from what she's written on LS? Wow.

 

I'm glad you're not using the formal definition, because you're right that your opinion would be worthless in that regard.

[hydorclops]

You're using the word like somebody who is studying for the GRE and has only memorized the dictionary definition, but doesn't understand the subtlety of how the word is used in context. That's a pet peeve of mine.

 

"Morbid thoughts" suggest thoughts about death or disease. That is different from thoughts that are themselves diseased. Get it?

 

Wrong. My usage is perfectly correct.