|
|
smithey
Promising
Supreme Hero
Yes im red, choke on it !!!
|
posted January 05, 2014 04:07 PM |
|
Edited by smithey at 16:08, 05 Jan 2014.
|
LOL no woman will walk up to you and just say kk, we're a couple now, they have their bag of tricks as do we, and of course 1.2.3 is not the only way, after all they say for a reason "all is fair in love and war" I just said its the "formal behavior"... However I do firmly believe that there is no love without all three stages present and whether you understand it or not you indeeed were attracted to the "less glamorous" girl, its just that sometimes attraction is not there on a first sight nor always physical but if attraction is not there all you have is friendship or a partnership like gay dudes have... Which brings me to - Holy cow, just yesterday I was told Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Will Smith are all gay dudes in a closet 
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 05, 2014 04:44 PM |
|
|
|
But we are not talking about lack of attraction, we are talking about attraction being the first stage. And while in most cases, it is so, it's not a rule or anything. Btw, I stopped listening to that sort of celebrity gossip long ago. At some point, they whisper everyone is gay. I'm sure with their level of looks, fame and money, the movie stars are quite bored with regular stuff and there's a lot of experimenting going on in Hollywood but I highly doubt that ALL of the people you mention are gay.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 21, 2014 09:33 PM |
|
|
Hey, jj, I didnt know your pen name was Erica Jong:
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 21, 2014 09:45 PM |
|
|
Interesting picture, considering *I* am probably best known for the coining of the term "zipLESS [f-word]". 
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted January 21, 2014 09:47 PM |
|
|
I didn't know girls had zippers down there
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 21, 2014 10:20 PM |
|
|
they do. it's what's underneath the zipper that's neat. 
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted January 21, 2014 10:43 PM |
|
|
fred79 said:
they do. it's what's underneath the zipper that's neat.
Is it urine? 
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 21, 2014 11:00 PM |
|
|
|
no, that's further up. try again. concentrate. the force is strong in you.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 24, 2014 03:41 AM |
|
|
I think someone made the distinction between love and unchallenged relationships.
maybe there are only the relationships that are broken by the challenges and the relationships which have not faced yet a big enough challenge to get broken. that would depend more on the personalities and abilities of the couple (and their synergy) than on something called love.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted January 24, 2014 03:51 AM |
|
|
Do you mean that perhaps any relationship can be broken? I'd think so, in principle, if you've all the resources and tech you want, you could alter reality itself around the person.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 24, 2014 04:02 AM |
|
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 24, 2014 03:34 PM |
|
|
I guess you could do that, but that's a bit exagerrated.
for example, 2 people who are patient and caring (with everyone) are more likely to make a couple that lasts long I believe.
|
|
Alexgaeien
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted March 11, 2014 01:57 PM |
|
|
What love is depends on where you are in relation to it. Love is the driver for all great stories: not just romantic love, but the love of parent for child, for family, for country. Love's the one thing that can never hurt anyone, although it may cost dearly.
______________________
[URL=http://voteservices.co.uk/buy-facebook-votes-contest-votes-apps-votes]buy facebook votes[/URL] l [URL=http://voteservices.co.uk/buy-facebook-votes-contest-votes-apps-votes]buy contest votes[/URL] l [URL=http://voteservices.co.uk/buy-facebook-votes-contest-votes-apps-votes]buy facebook vote[/URL]
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 11, 2014 04:31 PM |
|
|
One person's "love for country" is another's "crazy militant nationalism".
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 11, 2014 09:04 PM |
|
|
|
yeah, love doesn't mean anything. most likely just a feel-good word to justify your feelings. you may look totally crazy to everyone else, but in your mind it's just love, so hey, that means it's good and it's right. and they can't understand anyway.
|
|
Baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted March 11, 2014 10:17 PM |
|
|
Quote:
What love is depends on where you are in relation to it. Love is the driver for all great stories: not just romantic love, but the love of parent for child, for family, for country. Love's the one thing that can never hurt anyone, although it may cost dearly.
This is by far the deepest thing that a robot ever said. That's some Steven Spielberg shyte right there.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Humanoid
Bad-mannered
Known Hero
Rest in Peace Juvia (48-499)
|
|
posted March 12, 2014 07:58 AM |
|
|
The love is stupid thing make you things you never want , and never make you what you want...
|
|
georgekamble
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted March 22, 2014 12:53 PM |
|
|
Love is when the chemicals in your brain kick in and you feel an emotional high, exhilaration, passion, and elation when you and your lover are together.
____________
[URL=http://www.praguekabinet.com/en/catalogue/contemporary-art]contemporary art in prague[/URL] l [URL=http://www.praguekabinet.com/en/catalogue/contemporary-art]prague art gallery[/URL]
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 26, 2014 03:34 AM |
|
|
OhforfSake said:
How is it going with trying an open relationship, btw. Mvass?
mvassilev said:
It's going well.  She has another boyfriend and lives with him, not because he's her primary (he's her secondary) but for logistical reasons, as they have jobs in the same geographical area, but I live elsewhere. Soon I'll move there, though, and then she'll live with me. For now, we visit each other once a month.
Polyamory is great.
OhforfSake said:
Good to hear
*Hides*
mvassilev said:
Additional note: People sometimes ask, "How do you deal with the jealousy?" I don't - there isn't any to deal with.
artu said:
So she lives with someone else, you see her only once a month and you think nothing's about to change? I'd say be waiting for one of those "we have to talk" telephone calls.
Tsar-Ivor said:
I don't think that there's going to be a call.
mvassilev said:
You people are so cynical. 
It's been like this for months now. And she's not as close to him as she is to me, despite living with him. She tells me he could never be her primary (and from what she tells me about him, I see why). He's nice, though.
It's convenient for her to live with him, so she does. She'd rather live with me, but that would be difficult due to geography.
OhforfSake said:
Sometimes I feel like "cynical", "judgemental" and "narrow minded" gets mixed up.
mvassilev said:
They go together sometimes, but "cynical" was what I was going for.
Stevie said:
You seem to cling to this "primary/secondary" thing a lot. Does that bring you some sense of security? And I'm guessing he doesn't even know about your "open relationship", cuz otherwise he wouldn't waste time or resources on someone who'd ditch him in the end. Anyway, this whole thing is just stupid imo (not to say immoral). You probably settled for this compromise cuz you couldn't have the real thing. Just my 2 cents.
artu said:
Well, it sounds like she's managing you. I would consider your claim a possibility if you didnt see her so seldom but if you're visiting someone only once a month when she is sharing a bed with someone else every night, it's really hard for you to be the one who's actually closer. But I dont know her, so I'll just node my head "whatever" and skip this one.
mvassilev said:
"Primary/secondary" is a distinction that describes the difference between something roughly like a monogamous relationship and something less committed. And yes, Stevie, he does know about me, and he's satisfied with this arrangement as well. She doesn't plan to ditch him, although probably they won't be together for life - and that's fine! They both know that and are satisfied with what they have. This isn't a compromise, this is what I prefer, and my relationship is very much "the real thing". It makes us both happy, so there's not a single thing that's immoral about it.
artu, you can spend time with someone every day and still not be that close to them. While time spent together contributes to closeness, it is far from the only factor. She talks to him more, and spends more time in his presence, certainly, but in terms of relationship closeness, she's closer to me. As for how often we see each other, we'd like to see each other more often, but airplane travel is both expensive and time-consuming, so we can't do it that often. We talk to each other every day, though.
xerox said:
also for open relationship Mvass, it's the only type i'm willing to accept
i'm going to ask his girlfriend for permission
mvassilev said:
I recommend talking to the guy about it first, seeing if he would be interested, then asking him to ask his girlfriend for permission.
artu said:
So you already got the whole etiquette for this, heh 
Corribus said:
Quote:
And yes, Stevie, he does know about me, and he's satisfied with this arrangement as well.
I bet he is. Lots of sex plus no commitment. Sounds like the perfect deal for a 20-something male. Congratulations, mvass. You managed to cut Seinfeld's Gordian knot.
mvassilev said:
artu said:
So you already got the whole etiquette for this, heh
It would be silly to ask the girlfriend before asking the guy. "Your girlfriend said it was okay for you to have sex with me, so do you want to?" "Uh... No."
Also, the romantic partners involved would be better at discussing this than one partner and some outside person would be, since they would be able to address any concerns to each other.Corribus said:
Lots of sex plus no commitment. Sounds like the perfect deal for a 20-something male.
No, not no commitment, just not the high level of commitment of a primary relationship. And plenty of people (even 20-somethings) want commitment. Away with these stereotypes.
xerox said:
mvassilev said:
xerox said:
im going to ask his girlfriend for permission
I recommend talking to the guy about it first, seeing if he would be interested, then asking him to ask his girlfriend for permission.
this is how I imagine it will go:
in school
xerox: Can I sleep with your boyfriend? its ok, he's straight
girlfriend/classmate: ok have fun
friday
xerox: can I sleep with you now
boyfriend/classmate: eh why not, plus its your birthday anyway
monday in school
xerox: hey gf! we have soooooooooo much to talk about now!
Quote:
romantic partners
there's nothing romantic or partnery about it
artu said:
I think it's more likely for a straight girl to do that experimenting stuff, a straight guy wont go to bed with another man just out of curiousity. Dont get me wrong, but even picturing yourself in that position can be quite revolting.
Corribus said:
Stereotypes exist for a reason.
xerox said:
that's why I originally asked if it would be okay for a straight girl with a boyfriend to have sex with another girl
for some reason, that's more socially accepted which is stupid, since with one exception, the intimate things I can do with this person are the same things he can do with his girlfriend (that is also part of my reasoning why it should not be a big deal)
mvassilev said:
Quote:
this is how I imagine it will go:
in school
xerox: Can I sleep with your boyfriend? its ok, he's straight
girlfriend/classmate: ok have fun
Haha, if you just say this out of nowhere, I don't expect it'll go as you describe. Quote:
there's nothing romantic or partnery about it
By "romantic partners" I meant him and his girlfriend, who are each other's romantic partners.
Quote:
Stereotypes exist for a reason.
Yes, but you're making quite the assumption about this specific guy. Imagine the kind of person I'd date. Would this person be interested in someone who fits that stereotype?
xerox said:
well I know these people quite well since we've been high school classmates for the last three years
mvassilev said:
I've known some people my age for longer, and my reaction would still be "Huh?" if they asked me something like that.
Corribus said:
mvassilev said:
Yes, but you're making quite the assumption about this specific guy.
Fair enough. On the other hand, you just sound very naïve.
Quote:
Imagine the kind of person I'd date. Would this person be interested in someone who fits that stereotype?
I have no idea what kind of person you'd date. And in any case, a seeming majority of people choose mates who are not very good fits for their personality types anyway, in large part because they choose mates based on what their testicles want rather than what their brains want. For all I know you are dating someone who is just using you, and you allow yourself to be used just because she has a nice pair. How the hell should I know?
What I do know is that Fred was only half right. Women AND men both are just bags of hormones and they do what they do in large part to satisfy natural urges. Claiming to be otherwise is just willful ignorance of physiology.
mvassilev said:
Quote:
I have no idea what kind of person you'd date.
Someone doesn't read the Love thread.
In any case, I don't think we're going to agree here.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 26, 2014 03:35 AM |
|
|
Xerox said:
For some reason, that's (female homosexuality) more socially accepted which is stupid.
The sociological part is, manhood is socially constructed as something that can be lost (like virginity in agricultural times) but I don't think that's just it, keep in mind that in high-mammals that live in herds, alpha males sometimes feminize potential rivals by raping them. The whole gender role is built different also on a biological level.
Corribus said:
Women AND men both are just bags of hormones and they do what they do in large part to satisfy natural urges. Claiming to be otherwise is just willful ignorance of physiology.
You've said before that you think we follow our chemistry and that's the major force behind our motives and this post also fits to that point of view. I don't disagree completely, however, take yourself as an example, you are a monogamous (unless you're cheating on your wife) male, while your "chemistry" leads you in the opposite direction all the time. Your biological programming is to impregnate as many females as possible. How about that?
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
