2007-01-04 19:13:08 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Family & Relationships ➔ Singles & Dating
Who would want a poor performer reguardless of how long? Actually if it was a poor performance and long that would make it even more horrid.
Like hurry up and get it over with.
2007-01-04 19:36:42 · answer #1 · answered by Navulam 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Long/short in terms of what? Time or length? If i have to be biased i would simply ignore your question and say the best is long (whether in time or length) and good performance for that describes my case.
In any case none matters in this. What matters is good performance and not long or short. In this particular case therefore the "short but good" performer is better, not because of the "short" but because of the "good". It follows therefore that the "long but poor" is actually bad not because of the "long" but because of the "poor".
2007-01-05 04:22:17 · answer #2 · answered by aminu2763 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hm thats tough. ive had a guy that only ever lasted like 5 minutes but was reeeeeaalllly good but then he could get it back up within just a few minutes and he would only stop after he orgasmed at least 5 times. hes pretty fun :) i guess if i would go with short but good then.
2007-01-05 03:28:32 · answer #3 · answered by luvly_azn_hotti 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
depends on the girl. if i love her i take my time and include all the fancy stuph like candles and licking her...but if i don't like her a lot i just pump and come in 2 minutes flat
2007-01-05 03:25:21 · answer #4 · answered by Moyo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont mind quick, good sex since I orgasm easily.
2007-01-05 03:19:25 · answer #5 · answered by missprissy1004 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋