Posted by WingZ on September 30, 2004 at 12:33 [159.91.114.121]
In Reply to: Re: Wot Is Luv? posted by The Voice Of Reason on September 30, 2004 at 08:48
"Your pupils dilate, the heart beats quicker, and when it all goes wrong then you feel a horrible knot in your stomach."
Lol...aren't you confusing love with an anxiety attack?
"2: Love itself may not be physical but love can infuse physical objects - eg love songs that you can buy on CD. The CD itself may be made of plastic, but in a sense what you're buying is a distilled, bottled version of love. (Granted, there is no "proof" scale that can measure love as with alcoholic drinks, though that's not a bad idea!) Ditto for books, films, hey even my post here is evidence of love isn't it? Or am I deluded as well?"
Given your reasoning....yes, yes you are. I can write about love if I so desired. I can also write about unicorns. Doesn't mean that either exist. Besides, since most people adhere to the ideal of love, its so familiar that it becomes especially easy (and often advantageous) to fake. You think every musician who wrote a love song was actually in love when they wrote it? (snicker). I'd have to believe they were out to sell records.
"As for proof that people love each other, to the best of my knowledge the marriage ceremony is a legally binding agreement in which you are asked if you love each other; therefore if you don't really love each other when you get married you are committing fraud. Of course some people get married for other reasons, but I think it's a bit much to assume that the majority of married couples have acted fraudulently. For most married couples the ring on their finger and the legally binding paperwork are as much proof of love as you can get."
Inasmuch as marriages are often done for practical or finanical reasons as well as to simply avoid the fear of dying alone, I would say that, according to your definition, most marriages are fraudulent. If you want to use marriage as an indication of love (which I believe to be faulty, but hey....you opened this box), then the high divorce rate can be used as evidence of a lack of love, or, at the very least, love's highly temporary nature.
"Now those Greeks knew a thing or two, and I find it hard to believe that they would have devoted so much effort to something phoney."
Love, in the Platonic sense, simply refered to expressing the highest degree of admiration. It has nothing to do with the romantic gesture associated with love today.
"Sex and love....why on earth should I stick my dick inside a hole if I don't get love vibrations from the person who owns that hole? What do I get out of the deal, especially if I can keep myself aroused as an alternative?!"
Very simple. Heterosexual males are biologically programmed to be sexually attracted to females. Ergo, sticking your dick in one is perfectly natural. What you get out of it is a pleasing physical sensation. Ask yourself: why do people find certain celebrities to be attractive? They do not know them and have no personal relationship with them, yet want to fuck them just the same.
"It's like eating food you don't like the taste of"
If your hungry, you eat. Doesn't matter if the food is your favorite or not something you particularly care for. Simple as that.
" I genuinely love myself not cos I think I'm God's Gift but cos I think I'm basically one of the good guys. I will always love myself and it tides me over at times when nobody else loves me."
If you will always love yourself regardless of what you have done, then your love is meaningless. It is love for love's sake and utterly baseless. Why even bother?
As per the 'why be with someone if it isn't love' the answer is simple. If you are lonely, another person can provide you with company. If you are horny, another person can provide you relief. If you are bored, you can find interest in another. Another can cheer you up and another can allow you to help them and restore your sense of self worth. All of those things are beneficial to you. None of them require being in love.