[Parlay44]

So a recent thing that popped up in my Facebook feed was a pic of two gay guys getting married. It was posted by a girl I know with the caption "This is what it's all about".

So to this woman two dude slamming each other in the pooper = Love.

I always thought the point of love and marriage was to raise kids and maybe consolidate family wealth.

What the hell do I know.

I should mention that this woman is 40, married and has two kids. I find it odd that women can live one lifestyle and can still sing the praises of a contrary lifestyle. To women these days life is just a multiple choice exam with no wrong answer.

[HawkWrites]

Well, remember: men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Women are the gatekeepers to sex.

Of course they don't know what love is.

[Tengen]

From Sinfest's better past:

[runsonmagic]

^^

That comic strip used to be so good before the author got bit by the SJW bug. Now I can't even read it.

[JJ Roberts]

(09-07-2014 08:05 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

So a recent thing that popped up in my Facebook feed was a pic of two gay guys getting married. It was posted by a girl I know with the caption "This is what it's all about".

So to this woman two dude slamming each other in the pooper = Love.

I always thought the point of love and marriage was to raise kids and maybe consolidate family wealth.

What the hell do I know.

Curious.

What is your personal definition of the word love?

[ddjembe mutombo]

(09-07-2014 09:05 PM)JJ Roberts Wrote:  

Curious.

What is your personal definition of the word love?

Most women believe love to be that feeling that we often describe as "in love". It is usually the feeling of inferiority to the other person. Basically in the sense of "lucky to have them".

Real love is acts based. Love is picking someone up from the airport at 2AM when you'd rather be sleeping. Love is being a mentor for a child who doesn't have a father. It is a voluntary action in which one expects absolutely nothing in return.

Lust is the sexual desire to be intimate with someone.

[speakeasy]

(09-07-2014 08:05 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

So a recent thing that popped up in my Facebook feed was a pic of two gay guys getting married. It was posted by a girl I know with the caption "This is what it's all about".

So to this woman two dude slamming each other in the pooper = Love.

I always thought the point of love and marriage was to raise kids and maybe consolidate family wealth.

What the hell do I know.

I should mention that this woman is 40, married and has two kids. I find it odd that women can live one lifestyle and can still sing the praises of a contrary lifestyle. To women these days life is just a multiple choice exam with no wrong answer.

Trumpeting one's support of gay marriage is the liberal's way of saying "I'm a smarter, more evolved and progressive person than the rest of you." It's the same mentality with vocal anti-war activists and conspiracy theorists. Don't forget there's a selfish motive in there too.

However I'm sure if most these people stumbled upon their son getting pounded in the ass by another man they would recoil in disgust.

[Parlay44]

(09-07-2014 09:05 PM)JJ Roberts Wrote:  

(09-07-2014 08:05 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

So a recent thing that popped up in my Facebook feed was a pic of two gay guys getting married. It was posted by a girl I know with the caption "This is what it's all about".

So to this woman two dude slamming each other in the pooper = Love.

I always thought the point of love and marriage was to raise kids and maybe consolidate family wealth.

What the hell do I know.

Curious.

What is your personal definition of the word love?

I said it above. But I'll expand on it for you. Not that I'm religious but I prefer the traditional definition. Love is something shared between one man and one woman. The point of a relationship is to keep taking it to the next level. Dating leads to exclusivity leads to marriage, kids, grand kids etc. Creating a lasting family lineage.

For men love and sex used to be mutually exclusive. For women love used to equal sex. She wouldn't give a man sex unless she loved him.

With women gaining power these days their definition of love is more like a temporary crush. A woman just has to like you enough in the moment to give up the goods. Once the moment is over so is her interest in you.

The script has definitely flipped. It's men that are short end of the stick these days.

As far as gays are concerned ...I'm sure the two guys getting "married" feel something towards each other. But it's not love.

I don't acknowledge gay relationships as valid. Sure they have a right to exist and do whatever behind closed doors. But it's not love and it shouldn't be glamorized as being love.

[The Father]

(09-07-2014 08:05 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

So a recent thing that popped up in my Facebook feed was a pic of two gay guys getting married. It was posted by a girl I know with the caption "This is what it's all about".

So to this woman two dude slamming each other in the pooper = Love.

I always thought the point of love and marriage was to raise kids and maybe consolidate family wealth.

What the hell do I know.

I should mention that this woman is 40, married and has two kids. I find it odd that women can live one lifestyle and can still sing the praises of a contrary lifestyle. To women these days life is just a multiple choice exam with no wrong answer.

The most obvious fact about gay men, to anyone who has known any, is that they are first and foremost...men. They have testosterone coursing through their bodies. Not as much as you or I, perhaps, but enough to make them super horny. And so promiscuity is THE defining reality of gay "relationships". I'm told that, at gay parties, the real party is in the bathroom :/

Imagine, as a guy, if EVERY girl you went up to - hot, not hot, whatever - if you simply whispered "wanna fuck?", and she said "HELL YEAH!!" That's what it's like to be a gay man, as I understand it. If any gay men on this board wish to refine my understanding, I would welcome it. But that's my observation so far.

Now is that conducive to marriage? To love? What if YOU held yourself to that standard - you could "love" your woman, but you wanted to fuck anything that moved? Would you GF say, about your connection, "that's what its all about"?

And so, this is yet another instance where the Golden Rule of Women applies:

Ignore what they say, watch what they do.

[The Father]

BTW: I'm not religious, but ii seems to me that if this God person wanted men to use their lower intestinal tract as a sex organ, he would have made it conducive to that purpose...lubrication, lack of poop...something!

Homosexuality is a birth defect. It is not "just another lifestyle alternative". It is also (typically) not a moral failing. It's just someone who's hormones are ill-suited to their purpose. Homosexuality is not much different than Down's syndrome. Anyone who has ever baked a batch of cookies knows that some don't turn out so well. Who knows why. Does it matter why? Maybe it's an accident. But let's stop celebrating it any more than we celebrate those poor kids born without an immune system.

[speakeasy]

(09-07-2014 10:35 PM)The Father Wrote:  

BTW: I'm not religious, but ii seems to me that if this God person wanted men to use their lower intestinal tract as a sex organ, he would have made it conducive to that purpose...lubrication, lack of poop...something!

Homosexuality is a birth defect. It is not "just another lifestyle alternative". It is also (typically) not a moral failing. It's just someone who's hormones are ill-suited to their purpose. Homosexuality is not much different than Down's syndrome. Anyone who has ever baked a batch of cookies knows that some don't turn out so well. Who knows why. Does it matter why? Maybe it's an accident. But let's stop celebrating it any more than we celebrate those poor kids born without an immune system.

This.

I don't know why society can't just adopt this reasonable stance on homosexuality. It's caused by a hormonal defect and science stands behind that notion. It's not a choice for most of them and it's not immoral. But it's not equal to heterosexual normalcy either. At the same time, there's no reason to fuck with gays or hate them for something they didn't choose. But to gays, they need to stop flamboyantly shoving their ways down everyone's throats.

[The Father]

(09-07-2014 10:46 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(09-07-2014 10:35 PM)The Father Wrote:  

BTW: I'm not religious, but ii seems to me that if this God person wanted men to use their lower intestinal tract as a sex organ, he would have made it conducive to that purpose...lubrication, lack of poop...something!

Homosexuality is a birth defect. It is not "just another lifestyle alternative". It is also (typically) not a moral failing. It's just someone who's hormones are ill-suited to their purpose. Homosexuality is not much different than Down's syndrome. Anyone who has ever baked a batch of cookies knows that some don't turn out so well. Who knows why. Does it matter why? Maybe it's an accident. But let's stop celebrating it any more than we celebrate those poor kids born without an immune system.

This.

I don't know why society can't just adopt this reasonable stance on homosexuality. It's caused by a hormonal defect and science stands behind that notion. It's not a choice for most of them and it's not immoral. But it's not equal to heterosexual normalcy either. At the same time, there's no reason to fuck with gays or hate them for something they didn't choose. But to gays, they need to stop flamboyantly shoving their ways down everyone's throats.

You and I have the exact same stance. I suspect most straight men do. Then why is society's views towards gays what it is? It's easy to blame women, the morally more "variable" sex. But that can't be true. There has to be something else going on. I don't get what. Maybe it's the way gays have successfully conflated their "struggle" with the civil rights struggle. Maybe its backlash against 2,000 years of religion saying gays should be put to death. I dunno. I just hope someday things normalize and we can see it for what it is, exactly what you described earlier: Not a moral failing, not just another "choice" like long hair or short hair, but a fairly common (2-4%) malfunction of the hormonal profile. Just like some percent of people are color blind.

[Glaucon]

Women only know lust, not love....

[The Father]

(09-08-2014 12:36 AM)Glaucon Wrote:  

Women only know lust, not love....

It's true. I can't tell you how many women with boyfriends - or more! - who have slept with me and told me "when I'm with him I'm happy but when I'm with you, I can't resist the pull". That's hamster-speak for: "I'm happy with him and he has always fucked me well enough, but now my hypergamy is kicking in, and I REALLY like being fucked by you. Basically, I want the best of both worlds, and don't want to feel guilty about it, so i'll disguise my lust with nonsense words like 'strong pull' and 'helpless to resist' ".

[JJ Roberts]

(09-07-2014 10:28 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

I said it above. But I'll expand on it for you. Not that I'm religious but I prefer the traditional definition. Love is something shared between one man and one woman. The point of a relationship is to keep taking it to the next level. Dating leads to exclusivity leads to marriage, kids, grand kids etc. Creating a lasting family lineage.

None of that is "traditional" in the sense that it is NOT how human beings have lived for most of human history.

Living in tribes and having unfenced relationships is how how human beings have lived for almost all of human history.

What you are referring to is the "post invention of the notion of property" era of humanity which is only the last 10,000 years or the most recent 3% of human history.

(09-07-2014 10:28 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

For men love and sex used to be mutually exclusive. For women love used to equal sex. She wouldn't give a man sex unless she loved him.

With women gaining power these days their definition of love is more like a temporary crush. A woman just has to like you enough in the moment to give up the goods. Once the moment is over so is her interest in you.

The script has definitely flipped. It's men that are short end of the stick these days.

As far as gays are concerned ...I'm sure the two guys getting "married" feel something towards each other. But it's not love.

I don't acknowledge gay relationships as valid. Sure they have a right to exist and do whatever behind closed doors. But it's not love and it shouldn't be glamorized as being love.

You still have not given a specific definition of what (you think) love is.

You say that it is "something shared" but you don't say what it is.

You say that it is something "between one man and one woman" which would imply that parents do not love their kids.

I find it odd that you started a thread complaining that women have no idea what love is and yet you can't offer a definition yourself.

[Parlay44]

Geez dude. Do I need to sit you in a high chair and spoon feed it to you while making airplane sounds?

My definition is more than adequate.

[Ziltoid]

Who cares?

The LGBT lobby and activists are to gays, as neocons are to conservatives.
Gays aren't the enemy here, they're a tiny percentage of the population, and the majority of them are content to just go about their business, and probably roll their eyes at this fascistic politically correct idiocy as much as we do.

[Tengen]

[TigerMandingo]

For a woman, love is how she feels about you at the moment. As long as you're pushing all the right buttons, she'll utter those 3 words faster than Nicolas Cage signing up for a movie role. It means nothing, of course. I remember a few years back I was dating this cute 21 yr old. I fucked her well and about a week after we started dating she began saying, "I love you." She kept repeating it throughout the remainder of the relationship. We ended it over some asinine reason but I clearly remember her nonchalant and dismissive attitude when things went sour. So, in essence, it's not love to them, but rather conditional affection.

[Fighting888]

(09-08-2014 04:44 PM)The Father Wrote:  

(09-08-2014 12:36 AM)Glaucon Wrote:  

Women only know lust, not love....

It's true. I can't tell you how many women with boyfriends - or more! - who have slept with me and told me "when I'm with him I'm happy but when I'm with you, I can't resist the pull". That's hamster-speak for: "I'm happy with him and he has always fucked me well enough, but now my hypergamy is kicking in, and I REALLY like being fucked by you. Basically, I want the best of both worlds, and don't want to feel guilty about it, so i'll disguise my lust with nonsense words like 'strong pull' and 'helpless to resist' ".

Women have multiple desires - money/stability, sexual satisfaction, etc.

So women may fuck their doctor husband as compensation for providing a stable home life, but then cheat on the side to satisfy their sexual desires. That makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. Alpha impregnates the woman with his superior genes, but the beta sustains the woman and provides for her. That maximizes her reproductive fitness.

Alpha fucks, beta bucks.

[la_mode]

Has anything in history garnered as much collective amazement on facebook as that annoying red equal sign, in support of "marriage equality"?

Probably not.

For the record, I'm not against it, but there is nothing impressive about it. LGBT has been part of society for a long time (and historically more accepted in some societies than ever given credit for). It's really nothing new. It's nothing more than a political movement, and these happen every generation or so. There were whites back in the Jim Crowe days who befriended blacks, and whites today who are more racist than ever with a black president in office. You really can't re-invent the wheel at this point. Political movements can create an en masse tolerance on the surface, but besides some new laws such as gay marriage, it's not really that different. America will always be made of up of liberals/conservatives bickering at each other. They wouldn't have it any other way. Conservative regions (most of America) will typically have some sort of problem with it.

The other thing, a large portion of these women wouldn't be happy seeing a successful male/female marriage - because they don't have it themselves. The male/male marriage doesn't make them feel bad about themselves when they see it.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. I agree with Heartiste. The more gays, the better.

[Sp5]

Men: Love = sexual attraction (face and body) + emotional and intellectual affinity

Women: Love = sexual attraction (face + body + height + game) + emotional affinity (game) + entertainment value (game) + status (partly game) + provision value

[bojangles]

Personally I think one can only truly love their parents or their children. A partner is lust, an attraction, a way to make something you love.

[JJ Roberts]

(09-08-2014 06:41 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

Geez dude. Do I need to sit you in a high chair and spoon feed it to you while making airplane sounds?

My definition is more than adequate.

You have not put forward any definition.

Let's make it easy. Complete the following sentence (in no more that one sentence)

"Love is ...."

[OnlyMarryInTajikistan]

Western women will utter this nonsense while fucking men in nightclubs, getting trains run on them and overall becoming careerist whores.

Love for her is all about getting rammed in the ass by random strangers.