Is it wrong to pursue a girl in a relationship? My brain tells

>>17646910

Yes, it's technically wrong, and it's also likely a waste of your time, but it depends on your relationship with this girl. For example, do you know her well? Is this something that's organic and you're realizing you have feelings for each other?

Or is this just some hot chick in your class or something that you don't know all that well and want to date because she's hot or you're fixated on the idea of her?

If it's the latter, don't bother and go find some other chick and get over it. If it's the former, then I say pursue it - the reality of relationships is that sometimes we get in the wrong one, and it takes meeting the right person to realize it.

What would you think of a guy constantly hitting on your gf?

Seriously, there are no winners here.
>You don't get the girl, get turned down and it's awkward for everyone.
>You DO get her, but this means loyalty isn't her strong site and there'll always be a slight feeling of distrust
>There's also a certain chance of getting the shit kicked out of you by her boyfriend/husband, no matter of the outcome

>>17646910
>My brain tells me it's creepy and weird, but movies tell me it's romantic and totally A-ok
Your brain is smarter here. Life is not a rom-com.

You wouldn't want someone who demands to be chased anyway. That's a cruel practice, and should not be encouraged. Make your approach, but if she says no, assume she means it.

File: 1381894984178.gif (2MB, 316x213px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 316x213px

>>17646910

The inherent problem with pursuing a girl in a relationship is that even if you talk to her behind her boyfriend's back and convince her to break up with him and be with you there is always a great chance that once you become her boyfriend she'll break up with you to be with some other guy she's talking to behind your back.

That's what untrustworthy women do; go from guy guy chasing the feeling of being wanted as opposed to an actual relationship.

>>17646910
Best option here is to take the middle road.

Don't flirt or hit on her but try to be the best damn guy you can be. Maybe she already has a lot of annoyances with her boyfriend and might realize he's a shitty person and leave him.

But honestly, don't count on it. Pursue other women. If this one goes single then you can try shit

>>17647007

I hate this false equivalency. There's a huge difference between someone who monkey branches and someone who leaves a relationship for someone else. If you're not an idiot, it's easy to spot.

This "relationships should be iron clad and people should never leave them" meme needs to stop. Unless you're married, you're allowed to end things instead of desperately trying to glue together the pieces.

For a relationship; No. If she's willing to cheat on her guy for you, she would do the same to you.

For sex; Yes, but accept that there could be complications if her boyfriend finds out.

If you're friends with her and she bitches about her boyfriend to you, don't waste your time because you are in the friendzone.

Generally, it's a waste of time when you can be hitting on single girls where there are far less complications. I wouldn't advise it.

>>17647549
You don't get it, theres a difference between someone choosing to leave a relationship because it's not working, and someone allowing themselves to be pulled away from it. It shows that they were windowshopping from the beginning. When I'm with someone I like, you can't pull me from them. I will not be looking for other guys, I will stomp out any advancement from other guys.
If you're involved with someone else, and you allow for other people to come at you sexually/romantically, thats your sign that you don't like the person you're with and should dump them immediately. But if you continue to be wishy washy, trying to have the best of both worlds with your loving partner and your side dudes "harmlessly flirting", then yes. You did it to him, you'll likely do it to someone else. You were never "off the market" you were always just taking what you got while looking for something better.

You don't have to fuck someone to be a cheater. You cheat if you allow yourself to be secretly engaged in romantic activity behind your partners back as well. If you accept obvious advances while still in a formal relationship, you are a cheater. And once a cheater always a cheater. You had no issue doing it the first time, you'll have no issue doing it time and time again

>>17647800

You're probably not around, but just in case...

That is outright bullshit, if you're in a relationship, you can't just wall yourself off to all interactions with the opposite sex unless you're a total sperg that has no life outside of your partner.

There's a difference between someone "coming at you" romantically/sexually, or the natural chemistry that appears between people who are in the same environment semi-regularly. The other person may not be "better," but they may be a better fit for you as a person, and that's when you know it's time to go.

"Window shopping" means you're intentionally looking for another partner as opposed to falling into something, and you can tell who a window shopper is. My point still stands - if you're anywhere near adept at learning about people, you'll be able to tell who left their partner to "upgrade," and who left because they really care about you.

>>17647549

I don't think you read properly. You also used the term "false equivalency" wrong.

Not once did I say it was unacceptable or wrong to date a girl who had previously been in a relationship. What I DID say, if you would of taken the time to read it, was that pursuing a girl in a relationship is inherently flawed because if she's allowing you to pursue her, i.e (flirt, text late at night, hang out "just as friends") while she's in a relationship she isn't trustworthy and will most likely do the same thing to you.

If you express your feelings for a woman in a relationship and say "I'd like to take you out if things with you and your current boyfriend don't work out" and keep a respectful distance, then you probably don't have much to worry about. Pursuing a girl in a relationship is a whole different situation.

The key word is "pursue", here.

I understand outrage is a very easy reflex but you might want to read a little bit more carefully before hopping up on your contextually inaccurate soapbox.

>>17648371

>That is outright bullshit, if you're in a relationship, you can't just wall yourself off to all interactions with the opposite sex unless you're a total sperg that has no life outside of your partner.

Ok, you're not reading again. Nowhere in any of these replies did anyone say that.

Interacting with the opposite sex and not setting proper boundaries with people of the opposite sex while in a relationship are two different things and we're talking about the latter.

We're talking about purposefully attempting to build romantic relationships with other people while you're already in one, not incidentally stumbling across someone's path and falling for them.

Seriously man, this debate would go so much easier if you stop putting words in people's mouths and actually respond to the things we're saying, not the illogical bullshit you keep claiming we're saying.

>>17648394
>>17648405

I'll respond logically to logical replies - thanks for that.

Thanks for being clear on the "pursue" thing in your arguments. I have a tendency to think people here are always in pure desperation about relationships, and are super jealous and fearful about cheaters.

As mentioned, I think it's okay to fall for someone and end your relationship, and it's not a reflection on your future relationships. All I really wanted to point out.

I'll also make sure how to use "false equivalency" correctly.

>>17646910

>Girl code 1028
When a girl finally ends it with a guy she already has a another guy lined up.
>Girl code 1029
The guy she has lined up is never her orbiter*

*unless under one night sand rules (see code 2705) and when the pity sex card is played (see code 4505a)

>>17648439


>>>/r9k/

Back to your containment board, edgelord.

>>17648446
If you find that edgy then you must new here.

>>17648461

Retarded and edgy are two different things.

>>17648463
Then call me retarded and not edgy.