Important Question - How can we know when you actually LOVE a girl?

[strong like bull]

bump. the above post by kontroller is probably the best, most profound post ive read here in a while. probably one of the greatests "checklists" for a healthy relationship that ive ever seen.

there comes a certain point in life where your vision and focus is clear... and you see and decide things in no uncertain terms. and your actions follow those decisions and desires without hesitation... full force. as far as im concerned thats what being a dj, or better yet, a real man is all about.

as anti-dump would say, protect your heart. but if the woman is true and the love is strong, dont be afraid or too insecure to open yourselves. you might miss out on a wonderfully fulfilling experience.

-SLB

 

[AFC Savior]

believe it or not guys, i currently am dating 2 girls who i feel both really truly love me......yes im doing the player game on them, but it just seems like both are in love with me, and its all good and fun for now, but i dont know what im gonna do if both of them stick around..........player game gone wrong? lol

 

[aliasguy]

This will sound incredibly negative, but it really ISN'T.

There is no "LOVE."

Not in the way most of us think about it. Let's forget about women and their "love" (emotions in women are whimsical and transient, and probably totally inscrutable and undefinable, anyway.)

With us MEN, most of the time what we think of as "LOVE" is the mental/emotional state of sexual attraction. And once we f*ck the girl, she is a sort of "trigger" for arousal. She's been a source of sexual pleasure before, and when we see her, or think about her, or "miss" her, or whatever, all those little brain chemicals start doing their thing, and we get this FEELING. The more connection, the more this happens. Our brains are telling us to procreate, and we interpret this as "LOVE."

This is the short answer.

There's more to all this, because, in English, the word "LOVE" is also used for a lot of other things...."love" for family and friends, "love" for mankind (people) in general, "love" of sports, or knowledge, or Xbox, or cheseburgers, or whatever.

The way we think is limited and guided by our language. The underlying true emotion of all these "love"s are DIFFERENT, but since we use the same word for all of then, we confuse them. The Greeks had different words for these "love"s, like agape, eros, etc.

So, "romantic" "LOVE." is a construct that we have created. We "want" the object of this "LOVE," and I'm not saying it's only a selfish thing, either. We want to be with, and scr*w, and protect, and nurture the object of our sexual desires --- BECAUSE---> we are wired to procreate and protect our offspring, as well as the vessel which has (or WILL) carried and rear those offspring.

It's biology, and it's a "trick." We have convinced ourselves of something ethereal and almost magical, that doesn't really exist.

This isn't a BAD thing, it's really a good thing for the species, just not so much for the individual guy living in this society.

My recommendation is that we heed KontrollerX's ideas and his list above. Using that list will be better for us than going by "butterflies" in our tummies. We as men should recognize the realities, accept that our hormones and our emotions can fool us, and try to find, objectively, a woman that fits Kontroller's list above.

"LOVE" is rarely really defined, anyway ---- people argue/discuss what it really MEANS all the time. It's like a woman's flighty emotional state. Elusive, ambiguous, and, ultimately confusing and counterproductive.

I prefer to stick with a combination of THESE: respect, trust, attraction, kindness, etc.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

This will sound incredibly negative, but it really ISN'T.

There is no "LOVE."

Not in the way most of us think about it. Let's forget about women and their "love" (emotions in women are whimsical and transient, and probably totally inscrutable and undefinable, anyway.)...

Have you noticed the similarities between this and how marriage is typically defined?