Myra, *** isn't just something enjoyable. It's not a game of scrabble. There's an inherent emotional aspect to it. Also, while humans may not be a strictly "[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]monogamous[/font][font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif] species[/font]", they do exhibit pair bonding, and there's some evidence to suggest the ability to pair bond is weakened the more sexual partners somebody has. Social norms also exist for a reason and while they can change for the better, mindlessly rejecting everything "traditional" doesn't necessarily improve people's quality of life or happiness.Myra said:
Help Support Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum:
M
Myra
Guest
polyp said:
Thanks for your reply, but it's one wrong assumption after the other.
I don't think *** is "just something enjoyable". It can be boring, painful, dangerous, disgusting, and many other things too. You don't have to tell me that. But scrabble is not something I would compare *** to.polyp said:
I never denied that the body releases chemicals in response to physical touch, ***, falling in love, etc. that cause emotional sensations. In fact I probably went on enough about that stuff in this thread.polyp said:
"they do exhibit pair bonding". People exhibit all kind of things. People exhibit incest. People exhibit stock buying. People exhibit domestic violence. People exhibit ****. People exhibit car driving. People exhibit placing animals in cages for display. People exhibit murder. People exhibit a shame of being naked.polyp said:
We don't need anyone to collect "evidence" that if a pair is a relationship between 2 people, then less pairs are formed when people are free to choose alternative types of relationships. But it's nice that the evidence is supporting something so obvious.
1. Who is mindless? You?polyp said:
2. Who is rejecting everything that is traditional?
3. It's interesting how you view my personal opinion which is something that you don't agree with personally, to also be a threat to the social norms and the happiness and life quality of people.
How do I see love? I see it in my rear view mirror.
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]You have to keep in mind everything I wrote was under my impression that you think it's a bad, irrational thing for people to not want their partner to sleep with others and that they "might even dump them" for it. To me, you seem to have expressed a sort of flippant attitude towards monogamy as a concept. Correct me if I'm wrong about my impression.[/font]Myra said:
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]When you described *** as "something enjoyable", that seemed to overlook the emotional aspects of it. Lots of games can be painful, so that's really not relevant. Since you acknowledge there is an emotional aspect, wouldn't you agree that it's reasonable for a person to dislike being cheated on? [/font]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]As for what people exhibit, pair bonding, like the Westermarck effect, is a psychological phenomena, not an action, such as incest and putting birds in cages(are you a vegan by any chance?). Pair bonding also isn't a given. There's plenty of animal species which exhibit no such thing. So if we're talking about humans as a species, saying there is no biological basis for monogamous behavior(it's just cultural) is incorrect.
[/font]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]I do believe that if everybody began to believe that monogamy is just silly, old fashioned nonsense, that would have a negative effect on society and individual happiness. Since pair bonding is kind of a big deal for "relationships", I'm quite sure "alternative" ones are justifiably unappealing to people who want to be happy.[/font]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]So what's your personal opinion on monogamy again? [/font]
A
Aardra
Guest
Love is what makes you feel good, and what makes the other person feel good.
It's those endorphins, yo. Gimme that oxytocin. Gimme it.
It's those endorphins, yo. Gimme that oxytocin. Gimme it.
M
Myra
Guest
Yes, as I already remarked you have a lot of wrong impressions/assumptions. I kept that in mind all the time and pointed it out to you all the time. I have corrected you all the time. Flippant? That says something about how you feel, not about how I feel. You don't know whether I am monogamous or polygamous or what works for me personally. I pointed out that we cannot view the fact that *** outside a relationship is shunned, in isolation from the cultural and environmental contributions to our attitudes about monogamy. I am however not interested in discussing that with you. I have already said about that in this thread all I wanted to say.polyp said:
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Why does saying finding *** with someone pleasant also mean it excludes emotions? Again a strange and wrong assumption about what I think.
[/font]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif][size=small][font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Yeah, I don't know how scrabble was relevant either and why you brought it up. [/font][/font][/size]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]I stated that people dislike (DISLIKE=EMOTION FYI) being cheated on. It is VERY reasonable for a human being to want to avoid negative emotions. So why ask me that question? Did I say anywhere ever that humans are supposed to seek out emotional suffering?! NO.
[/font]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif][size=small][font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]Oh man you really can't stop with the assumptions. Again an incorrect, irrelevant assumption.
[/font][/font][/size]
I did not say that monogamy is only cultural. We would also have to distinguish between serial monogamy and lifelong monogamy to talk about that (which I don't want to discuss with you). I also did not say it has zero biological basis, I probably talked all the time about the hormones that make us seek out a mate.
Do you think I find it worth explaining to someone who refuses to read what I write and twists it into something else? I am not going into the actual topic any further because I am done with this topic already since months. But it was fun to challenge your assumptions although I don't think it helped haha. But thanks for the interaction and feel free to reply to this post, maybe another poster on here finds it interesting to continue this discussion.
How do I see it? As something that supposedly moves the world and gives most the reason to live. How many times have you heard someone say how their SO is the reason they keep going? But it's something I'll never experience.
Myra said:
Well, then. I think wanting the best for your "life partner" includes not causing them emotional suffering or lessening your ability to love them for momentary enjoyment. That is a condition, but it's a mutual one. There doesn't "need" to be a virtuous or deep component to it, but it helps. There also doesn't "need" to be universal suffrage. There's lots of thing we don't "need". I wont assume you disagree with me on anything in this post since you've made it clear that there's no subtext to what you've written.
Having contributed a few posts on this thread in previous weeks, I thought I'd add another post in light of what's been discussed since.
We can talk about theories and technicalities all day, but the bottom line to the whole question is really the core of a person and what constitutes that core. Whether it's healthcare, justice, the rules of the road or many other things, the keys to good human conduct and good relationships are respect, care, consideration, thoughtfulness, kindness...the list goes on. The point I'm making is that "love" encompasses these things and acts as a kind of cement to hold the bricks together.
Expressed another way, doing a kind of "love autopsy" and breaking love down into it's constituent parts doesn't really build anything. Love is a kind of building material, it holds us together in our families, in our relationships and in our society. When we take love as a complete unit and use it to the full extent of what it is capable of, we are doing a kind of life building project. Bricks are bricks, tiles are tiles and cement is cement, but only when we put them together properly do we make something worthwhile.
So, we can be scientific about it and pick love apart, or we can be positive and human about it and build on it.
I know which one I'm choosing...
We can talk about theories and technicalities all day, but the bottom line to the whole question is really the core of a person and what constitutes that core. Whether it's healthcare, justice, the rules of the road or many other things, the keys to good human conduct and good relationships are respect, care, consideration, thoughtfulness, kindness...the list goes on. The point I'm making is that "love" encompasses these things and acts as a kind of cement to hold the bricks together.
Expressed another way, doing a kind of "love autopsy" and breaking love down into it's constituent parts doesn't really build anything. Love is a kind of building material, it holds us together in our families, in our relationships and in our society. When we take love as a complete unit and use it to the full extent of what it is capable of, we are doing a kind of life building project. Bricks are bricks, tiles are tiles and cement is cement, but only when we put them together properly do we make something worthwhile.
So, we can be scientific about it and pick love apart, or we can be positive and human about it and build on it.
I know which one I'm choosing...
Christina Sarah
Well-known member
TheRealCallie
Princess Pink Love
polyp said:
I'm sorry, but what the **** does being vegan have to do with anything?
TheSkaFish
Jedi Guardian
Alyosha said:
+1 for the Mellon Collie reference, nice!
TheRealCallie said:I'm sorry, but what the **** does being vegan have to do with anything?
It means you won't eat anything that casts a shadow...
[youtube]N_Yaa_LMDcs[/youtube]
TheRealCallie
Princess Pink Love
TheSkaFish said:
TheRealCallie said:I'm sorry, but what the **** does being vegan have to do with anything?
It means you won't eat anything that casts a shadow...
[youtube]N_Yaa_LMDcs[/youtube]
No, I'm only a Level 1 vegan. Perhaps even a Level 0.5, since it was forced on me. :club:
ardour
Well known loser
Myra your reasoning is flawed (confusing actions with psychology in order to 'win' points ) and for someone who has a lot to say you react childishly when someone disagrees.
No-one said cultural conditioning or ego validation aren't factors, we are however a species with high parental investment in offspring, which correlates with long term pair bonding. And monogamy is a usually mutually agreed upon. The betrayal of trust when someone cheats is a wrong done to another.
No-one said cultural conditioning or ego validation aren't factors, we are however a species with high parental investment in offspring, which correlates with long term pair bonding. And monogamy is a usually mutually agreed upon. The betrayal of trust when someone cheats is a wrong done to another.
TheRealCallie
Princess Pink Love
What the **** does that even mean? Ardour is a "senior member" too. He just has his custom...
Also, pot/kettle, people.
Also, pot/kettle, people.
