Ongezellig
IAZ and soft NAZ
[Return] [Thread list] [Index] [Catalog] [Bottom] | Replies: 111 | Views: 5 | Currently viewing: 1
actually its legal and moral to have sexual fantasies about mymy!!!
no matter what ((they)) say its true! its not bad nor immoral
>truth brother nothing but it
She deserves pure and innocent love only
TSMT
People hardly can fall in love with western animation characters because they aren't designed to be someone's goon material unlike the japanise animated films
Falling in love with cartoon characters is faustian, and frankly, very aryan too.
Love and lust are the same thing. Loving someone means you want to have children with them, which involves sexual attraction.
Try to name a single, real-world example of (non-platonic)love and lust being differentiated.
old married couples? the idea that the same love you have for your family doesn't extend to your girlfriend or wife is retarded or you are so porn brained that you are too far gone or you are brown
>>110603
What are you implying? That they would leave each other to fuck someone else if they didn’t truly “love” each other. They’re old… who are they going to find who is going to want to have sex with them?
Try to find another example.
I'm not the poster you're replying to, but how can you feel a "family love" to unrelated to you characters? Also, old couples are just the kind of couples that have already done their "mission" and that's to say bearing children and continuing their lineage, and went out of their reproductive age as well
what is the point of this debate you are going to just make excuses every time, i cant argue with you when your whole worldview is centered around lust and you don't believe in love we will simply never agree. people stay with their wives during and after pregnancy because they love them and their children, or if their wife or girlfriend gets seriously ill or becomes handicapped. you can be a jaded swarthy retard thinking the only thing that matters from women is sex all you want its not my problem
>>110606
We only got 2 messages into this discussion and you’re already backing out of it…
Men stay with their wives because they want to have children (a sexually-oriented motivation). They stay with the children to ensure they grow and further his bloodline (also a sexually-oriented motivation). They would stay with the handicapped woman because they’re still going to get free sex out of it… if their bedroom was completely dead, they would seek out extramarital affairs sooner or later.
Asking this and adding in (non-platonic) is like saying “there are no examples if you don’t count all the examples we found”
“Non-platonic love” means same-sex friendships and relations with family members. Sexual activity would never, under usual circumstances, ever arise within these relations.
>your whole worldview is centered around lust and you don't believe in love we will simply never agree.
Continuing my objection (>>110605), it's more reasonable to consider "lust" as an inseparable part of love, not that lust = love, but that love, obviously, contains some of lust, or something like that. I assume you got the idea.
>>110608
"Platonic love" isn't the love we have been talking about, though.
>>110609
Wait, you actually mean "platonic love", right?
Yes exactly so you can clearly love someone without lusting for them.
No. The love one has for friends/family differs from the love one has for possible sexual partners. There can never be a scenario in which you would want to start a family with someone without feeling sexual attraction towards them.
Yes obviously romantic love is different from platonic love. But you said love and lust are the same thing which is completely untrue. If your point is romantic love and lust are the same thing then say that.
Yes, romantic love and lust are the same thing. That has been the point I’ve been making the entire time.
It only works towards the zellig sisters and only due to the fact we love them platonically (I hope you do too)
But surely you don’t think that lusting after someone automatically means you romantically love them?
>>110617
If you want to have sex with someone, you (whether consciously or not) want to have children with them. That is “love”.
The idea that love is some abstract, mystical thing is a fictional notion. Most people in the world behave and think similarly to each other… there really isn’t that much of a difference between one woman and the next… or one man and the next. If your wife/husband died suddenly, you would be sad for a little while… but you would eventually get over it and remarry.
So to you the love felt by two people engaging in a one night stand is no different than the love felt by people who have been dating for years or a couple that have been married for 2 decades? It sounds like you just don’t believe romantic love even exists, not just that it is the same thing as lust.
Tbh I would rather separate romantic love (let's call it "strong lust") from trivial lust ("momentual, temporary lust"). But it's more a moral question than strictly biological.
>discuss it
>>110619
I don’t believe in “romantic” love… as I said, I believe that non-platonic love = lust.
The people who have been living with each other started out their relationship no differently than the people who met each other in a bar for a one-night-stand… they saw each other, noticed that they were sexually attracted to each other, and the relationship grew from there. The only difference in this context is the duration that the two people have dwelled together.
What about people who date but do not live together? You don’t think they feel any more love for each other than two people who don’t even know each other’s last names before they have sex?
>>110623
You mean like soldier wives who stay at home while their husband goes out to service? They probably have some sort of agreement set up (they own a home together, they have kids already, they have some form of mutual committment or another) which causes them to stay “together”.
That’s the “ideal” explanation. In reality, it is very common for soldiers to get cheated on when they are away… so common that it’s become a “meme”. They refer to them as “Dear John” letters.
No I mean like people who meet and start dating, live in the same city, but both have their own house/apartment.
What about it? People can’t be expected to move in together as soon as they start dating…
You said it was dwelling together that makes people feel differently in a relationship over time. But couples can live separately for months into a relationship. You don’t think they at any point have feelings that aren’t found in a one night stand until they cohabitate?
Post actions
[Return] [Thread list] [Index] [Catalog] [Top] | Replies: 111 | Views: 5 | Currently viewing: 1