@Fitzy and the downvoters: yes, it would have been better if he went to this forum some months ago. But also in the situation that he now is in, its a valid point to ask for help and perspective, to not worsen things any further. — Lot 29 secs ago

I agree with all but the start: he sent her topless pichtures and "He also told her that he wants to fight for her", knowing that she is in a relationship. There is reason enough to be mad at him. I flirted with some girls that were in a relationship from time to time. But that was very very subtle, just to see whether the relationship was serious and if it was backed off. This seems to be on a whole other level. — Lot 17 secs ago

I agree with the answer and the comment @Lot put on it. I'd also do a minor addition: do not be mad with your girlfriend, be mad with the guy. With ur gf, you havent established boundaries, so she hasn't overstepped any. The guy on the other hand did. If you turn against ur gf, she wuill turn against you. Be the cooler guy. The more mad you get, the more you are on the losing side. — Dragonturtle 10 secs ago

+1 I started writing a comment about the assumptions that the OP made in the question, and then noticed how you were exactly addressing those: these people don't get indulge in such self-centered talks on a purpose. There has been no attempt to manipulate the group by them in most of the cases. — Jan Doggen 44 secs ago

The last line here actually agrees with an experience I had with my partner, she went for a dinner and spoke with a guy and she legitimately didn't realise that the guy wasn't just being friendly. We had lots of arguments about the meal, the time they spent together but never once did i point out what the guy was doing. When i finally said that what he was doing, she immediately saw my frustration and understood. sometime pointing something like that out is enough, and if its not enough then nothing can be done — J.Doe 56 secs ago

@Upper_Case If I answered your every comment with my interpretation without acknowledging yours, I'm manipulating the conversation topic beyond what's acceptable. Regardless what you respond with, I always conitnue with what I want to talk about, therefore trapping you in the conversation I want to have. — Flater 9 secs ago

I'll better delete the question :) already downvoted by someone. Thanks! — metamorphosis 1 min ago

these people don't get indulge in such self-centered talks on a purpose I disagree here, at least partially. As a simple well-known example, Kanye West interrupting Taylor Swift is a textbook example of manipulating the conversation to what you want to talk about. We can talk about whether Kanye's world view is too narrow or not, but the fact remains that he should not behave this way. Doing it once might be a matter of a mistake, but repeatedly doing so is actively choosing to not behave appropriately, which is simply not excusable. — Flater 1 min ago

As much as I want to agree with your second paragraph, I have unfortunately met people like @Flater is describing, who purposely hijack the conversations. And these hijacks are so swiftly done that it is not easy to realize. Similar to what Kanye West did, though that act was easily seen as being rude. The ones I am referring to do a similar thing, but very swiftly that it is almost impossible to say that they have hijacked it. But, the facial expressions, esp, eye movement, tells a lot. — Sara 22 secs ago

@Clay07g: Just because some people can correctly plead insanity after committing a murder does not mean that murdering always means you're insane (yes, I know it's an extreme example but the principle is the same). Notice that I said that I partially disagree. I agree that there are cases where it's a psychological compulsion. But your answer almost opens the door to excusing all cases of narcissism because some people genuinely can't help it; which legitimizes the behavior and gives credence to ignoring any personal responsibility to those who voluntarily behave this way. — Flater 2 mins ago

@Clay07g: There has been no attempt to manipulate the group by them in most of the cases. This is only correct of those who are compulsive. This does not apply to anyone else who voluntarily manipulates the conversation because they choose to do so. As per Sara's (and my) experience, these people exist as well. As I mentioned in my (apparently deleted) comments, I partially agree with what you're saying but you're omitting those whose behavior is not classified as a mental disorder. Not al narcissistic or egotistical behavior is a psychological disorder. — Flater 6 secs ago

@Sara: Beats me. Someone is actively deleting the comments so I can't actually find out the reason for the downvotes. — Flater 10 secs ago

Can you please describe in greater detail an example conversation? Right now I have no idea what you mean (even having read all your comments). — 1006a 6 secs ago

+1, excellent answer. Especially the part about there being no reason not to ask after her relationship in the context of ordinary friendship. They're friends, and so it's expected that they would talk about major elements of their lives, including live-in significant others. — Upper_Case 1 min ago

+1 for "The pitch doesn't change a person's character, it reveals it" alone. — Peter Masiar 1 min ago