Pyro Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 Duct tape and rope work better! I guess that is why so many people buy duct tape.
threebyfate Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 I guess that is why so many people buy duct tape.Which way should I take this?
dreamingoftigers Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 They are these days. People should expect relationships not work out so they are not let down and if they do work out they will be pleasently surprised. Optimism tends to produce better results in relationships overall.
dreamingoftigers Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 If you want a loyal partner, get a partner who is less than you. For women, get an ugly man and for men, get a poor woman (with prenup of course). Duct tape and rope work better! I guess that is why so many people buy duct tape. The marry-down philosophy doesn't work, the person with less confidence will often cheat to boost it. I would stick with the duct tape and rope if I were you MM.
sumdude Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 I guess that is why so many people buy duct tape. Cheaper than a waxing I suppose.
Imajerk17 Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 If you want a loyal partner, get a partner who is less than you. For women, get an ugly man and for men, get a poor woman (with prenup of course). Isn't it the other way around though: Men, get an ugly woman, and women, get a poor man.
lemonlegs Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 Isn't it the other way around though: Men, get an ugly woman, and women, get a poor man. Not many men I know would purposely date an ugly woman. If it meant only being laid and never being in a solid relationship, I still think men would choose the latter option over the first.
Isolde Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) I understand the OP. The whole serial relationships thing is a very difficult thing for me to swallow. On the other hand, to some extent, "it is what it is." Realistically speaking, in the "good old days" people were born into a particular place and station in life, making it simpler to find a compatible person and stick with them. Nowadays, the frantic pace of life shakes things around, and the sheer diversity of lifestyles and life choices available now also makes it harder to find someone who's in the same mindset as you, at the same time. While I agree that people have gone too far to one side in terms of dating and exploring their options, I also feel like there are certain advantages to not necessarily settling down at 20. Not that we shouldn't try our hardest to maintain good relationships, just that we shouldn't fear loss to an unreasonable extent. Overall, I don't feel people have changed *that* much in what they want. For certain, there will always be people out there who just want to play the field eternally. But for every person like that, there's many who would like nothing more than to ultimately settle down in a happy marriage. Edited April 10, 2011 by Isolde
LeaningIntoTheMuse Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 I don't believe love is disposable. Relationships without love...well, that's up to opinion.
Pyro Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 Which way should I take this? sarcastic? Cheaper than a waxing I suppose. It's a tough economy out there.
Mr.Cairo Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) First of all, plenty of unmarried women, got pregnant, 50 years ago. People have always been guided by their desires and if the choice was there, and if the desire was telling them to do it: they would have sex. As for relationships being disposable. Of course relationships are disposable. Nearly every relationship has an expiration date. Relationships lasting 2 years are termed 'long-term relationships', because most relationships don't reach the 2 year mark. Don't you see people celebrating 3 years of marriage? My grandparents celebrated 50 years of marriage. But what if they hadn't been born during a fascist society? Would they have had a more open view of the dating world? What if they hadn't been chastised by the Church into marrying/having only one partner? The way I see it(and I'm very practical), relationships take a LOT of time, require several types of investment, and can end with disastrous repercussions. What's the difference between a girlfriend and boyfriend, and our friends? We don't have sex with our friends(usually). So, the best course of action is to have casual encounters with the opposite sex, and have the need for friendship, satisfied by one's friends. This way a person doesn't put all of the eggs in the basket, and when one of those baskets breaks, not all of the eggs are ruined. I don't believe love is disposable. Isn't it cute how human beings have visited the moon, developed the cures for most of the diseases and medical conditions Mankind has suffered since it's birth, but we still put so much importance on a silly chemical reaction, commonly known as 'love'. Did you know that love was a word coined by the Poets of centuries past, to better sell their works? That most people of the past were married off, without the chemicals being involved? And that science has pointed down that the chemicals of 'love' reach their peak at the 2 year mark, and then decline, until 'love' disappears? or that love is made to last long enough for a baby to be made and raised, for some years? How amusing it is to see people jump from relationship to relationship, buying into 'commitment' and legal repercussions, saddling themselves with debt, obligations, and 'responsibility', and all because people are taught to pursue such chemical illusion, instead of smiling at it, remembering all of the resulting problems coming from responding to such a stimulation brings and waiting for it to cease its existence. And what's with the prenup obsession? Prenups aren't fix-everything remedies. Prenups can, and have been made useless by judges. The law is constantly changing and if you guys and gals aren't keeping track of it, everyday, you might end up having to pay 1k just for looking at hot people, and how funny it is when people have their assets and all of the work they achieved, taken away from them, assuming that the prenup was going to protect them. Edited April 10, 2011 by Mr.Cairo
Recommended Posts