I know some of you guys know me and, I'm a happy person right hehehe but a week ago, my gf broke up with me and we keep trying to make each other jealous, unfortunately both did get jealous. Now were in a big fight. What should I do.
How could you say something like that? Of course she does, that IS why the were in a relationship! If you are trying to get under her skin then don't. It will only blow up into something more serious.
How could you say something like that? Of course she does, that IS why the were in a relationship! If you are trying to get under her skin then don't. It will only blow up into something more serious.
lol. If she loved him, she would desire sexual intimacy, even the most abstinent women can show signals for. They're thirteen, and I doubt she desired intimacy between them. Besides, thirteen year old boys are disgusting. Acne, braces, hygienic problems, and stupid comments. I could never deal with a kid.
They were in a relationship to prove that he was more masculine than other men and that she was more feminine than other women. They didn't not actually feel any love. It's just for show.
Just dump her!Okay get her out of your life!But on the other hand if you love her that much,that is if you do!Be with her.No dump her!! muhahhaahh.Be with her be with her!!
I don't understand why you can't still be friends with the girl you had sex with? I mean, you were IN her, right?
In some cases this is the reason they can no longer be friends.
If she loved him, she would desire sexual intimacy, even the most abstinent women can show signals for.
This is debatable, but more importantly I find the premises underlying this statement worrying. I recommend you re-examine your working definition of "love".
In some cases this is the reason they can no longer be friends.
This is the irony of the whole thing. You would expect a woman to do this, but in most cases it doesn't work out. I just got very lucky. I don't know if you understood my tone, but I was questioning this fact more than anything.
This is debatable, but more importantly I find the premises underlying this statement worrying. I recommend you re-examine your working definition of "love".
What is your definition of love, as a person who seems like he has been there and back?
What is your definition of love, as a person who seems like he has been there and back?
I find it easier to stick to as basic a principle as possible. The reason I said "working" definition is because I don't think it's useful to have any concrete definition. For this reason I get a little worried whenever I see a statement that suggests that love requires or necessitates any kind of behaviour e.g. sexual.
So the principles I'd think of are care and commitment. This covers most/all forms of love from the ancient (Greek) etymology of the term (if I remember correctly). This way you can love a sibling, family, a friend, and partners, and not get bogged down in crossing particulars. Relationships, on the other hand, are a form of dynamic negotiations. That's when I'd start thinking about the sex.
I don't actually disagree with the statement that love in the context of a relationship commonly/usually involves sexual intimacy, but would be careful of when I think about those things, if only for practical reasons!
Freud said that all men secretly want to have sex with their mothers, and I believe I love my mother the most. I do believe that behaviours suggest that love is engaging. I believe that Freud also suggested that siblings are naturally drawn apart from each other, to prevent incest and subconsciously reveal their love towards each other.
Caring, commitment, and kindness are all shows of affection. Affection is different from love, but you can love someone and be affectionate towards them.
Caring, commitment, and kindness are all shows of affection.
In this case I'm not sure how you're differentiating affection and love, because I would have said that kindness, sure, is a show of affection, but caring and commitment is a principle that is reflected in actions, not an action itself.
Whatever the semantic, I would want to avoid a scenario that unfolds like this:
Girl: "I love you... but I'm not ready." Guy: "What!? YOU DON'T LOVE ME BAWWW." Girl: "How dare you!? All you guys want to do is get in my pants!!!"
Strop, I clearly see your point of view. Yes, it could be going into semantics, but love is also just an emotion.
Also, the guy in your example has to respect the fact that she doesn't love him, yet. She will be affectionate and care for him, but she will not love him for a while.
There is the argument that sex is a sign of love, but no. Sexual Intimacy has to involve eye contact, foreplay, and passion. I doubt you would get all that from a one night stand or a quickie.
Strop, I think we're getting a bit off-topic, but I would love to talk about this in a thread that is actually about this sort of thing. Let's not hijack this kid's thread.
