Does true love exist?

[FranklinX 37]

Does love really exist between two loving people as a couple? Love can be seen as a powerful emotion. However, is this really an emotion?

 

I don't think love truly exist between two loving people. Relationships require both parties to give and share with each other. In a relationship both parties are giving up resources such as money, sex, shelter, time, etc. Without both parties giving something up there will not be a relationship.

 

Sex plays a huge role in relationships. If one person does not want to have sex for a certain period of time then there maybe problems. The person who is not getting sex will either cheat or end the relationship.

 

Another example is society putting heavy pressure on a man to have money. If a man does not pay on the first date then his chances to continue dating a person is greatly lowered. The man is expected to pay on the first date. In matter of fact it is expected of a man to pay for everything and do everything on the first date. The women is going giving her time to the man.

[Marked 197]

Sex plays a huge role in relationships. If one person does not want to have sex for a certain period of time then there maybe problems. The person who is not getting sex will either cheat or end the relationship.

If they do not then its not 'true' love, is it?

 

Another example is society putting heavy pressure on a man to have money. If a man does not pay on the first date then his chances to continue dating a person is greatly lowered. The man is expected to pay on the first date. In matter of fact it is expected of a man to pay for everything and do everything on the first date. The women is going giving her time to the man.

That's probably a cultural thing too I think. Or maybe more so when they are slightly older. As a teenager that wasn't really the case.

[Chief 30]

I totally knew who made this topic before even clicking on it...

[Polraudio 122]

In a relationship both parties are giving up resources such as money, sex, shelter, time, etc. Without both parties giving something up there will not be a relationship.

Completely false in every way. In a relationship you dont really give anything up. You build them together.

Money - You both come together to make money and you tend to have more money being together then apart.

Sex - Dont see why you put that there. Both together have sex. How is that giving it up???????

Shelter??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? - How do you give this up? Seriously? If you live with eachother how are you giving up shelter? Maybe if your a person who likes to be alone maybe. But then i must ask. Why are you dating them if you cant live in the same place?

Time - You dont give up time because you are spending your time together. That dont mean you have to give up your friends. Most of the time you will have the same friends.

 

 

Sex plays a huge role in relationships. If one person does not want to have sex for a certain period of time then there maybe problems. The person who is not getting sex will either cheat or end the relationship.

That is true most of the time. Sex is a big part of a relationship. Most relationships stay together because of it. Sometimes sex is not always the thing to keep them going.

 

 

Another example is society putting heavy pressure on a man to have money. If a man does not pay on the first date then his chances to continue dating a person is greatly lowered. The man is expected to pay on the first date. In matter of fact it is expected of a man to pay for everything and do everything on the first date. The women is going giving her time to the man.

All depends on the girl. A girl i was seeing before likes to go half and half on everything. She wouldnt let me pay for the whole thing regardless of how hard i tried.

 

The relationship didnt end because of sex. It ended because we both agreed to be friends till we are not to far from eachother.

 

For me a relationship is a beautiful thing. Two people coming together to make things better for eachother. If your having problesm with sex, time or anything just talk to them instead of cheating. In the end your only cheating yourself.

 

 

 

To answer the big question. Yes! I do believe true love does exist.

Just because one person had bad luck dont mean everyone will. I know a few people that were together from 20 till death. People with the same interests will stay together the longest and have the best love life ever.

 

EDIT: If anything drugs/alchol is usually the thing to break relationships.

[FranklinX 37]

Completely false in every way. In a relationship you dont really give anything up. You build them together.

 

Nothing is false in this topic. It's an opinion topic.

 

Money - You both come together to make money and you tend to have more money being together then apart.

 

This isn't about making money togehter. Before the 20th century making money together was a key in marriage. However, that was removed in the 20th century and focused on love.

 

Someone is giving up money in a relationship such as men paying on dates. Haven't you heard from guy friends that girls are expensive? Men are paying on dates which costs money thus they are giving up money. Do some women pay on dates? Sure, but it is more common for the man to pay.

 

 

Sex - Dont see why you put that there. Both together have sex. How is that giving it up???????

 

 

It is giving your body to another person. If a relationship lacks sex or none at all then one partner may want to leave the relationship.

 

 

Time - You dont give up time because you are spending your time together. That dont mean you have to give up your friends. Most of the time you will have the same friends.

 

 

You contradicted yourself. When you spend your time with someone then you are giving someone your time.

[kellessdee 48]

My opinion on relationships is kind of negative, mainly because most people go about it the wrong way.

In most relationships one party generally tries to assume some kind of control or ownership of the other person, and in doing so often attempts to shape the person to their liking. I believe this is the 100% wrong way to go about it. It should be more like a friendship. If you don't like/love the person for who they are, why are you in the relationship in the first place? They should be supportive of each others decisions, and they should be free to do what they want (obviously not cheat or things like that, but if they are doing that then why commit to a relationship? Unless it is an open relationship, which needs to be clarified BEFORE entering the relationship. Which is interesting because most mutually open relationships I have seen have worked out better, longer and they have tended to actually mess around with other people ALOT less than non-open relationships I have seen).

 

Love on the other hand is something completely different. I think people look at love too much in the context of relationships (like marriage/girlfriend boyfriend) where the truth is, you DO NOT need to be with someone to love them. I love my friends MUCH MUCH more than any girlfriend I have ever had, and I still have my friends. Most of my ex girlfriends I am not even friends with anymore.

 

Love itself is psychedelic I think. It's the best way to describe it. It isn't an emotion but rather a wide range of human emotion. As humans, whether we like it or not, NEED the full range of emotion. We need happiness, sadness, anger, etc. We live for it. And love itself is all these things. It makes us feel great but can also be our worst enemies; as you may have noticed (especially if you have ever experienced love) that there is a mixed feeling about love: it is amazing, but it hurts. It is beautiful, but it sucks. The reason it is so beautiful, is because there is so much emotion associated with it.

 

So to put that in context (since most people probably associate the word psychedelic with drugs/trippy patterns/colours)

The term psychedelic is derived from the Greek words ψυχή (psyche, "soul") and δηλείν (delein, "to manifest"), translating to "mind-manifesting". ...

So mind-manifesting, that would refer to emotion, thoughts, dreams, etc (well encompassing the entire psyche really)

And isn't that what love is?

 

(Me and my buddy came up with that definition when we were stoned one time, he mostly came to that conclusion, but it made so much sense to me, and still does. Although he probably would have been able to explain it better as he is much more elegant with the english language)

 

And as another note: Love is very subjective, just by this topic alone we can see everyone has very different perspectives on what love is. So really, I think if you believe love exists, than it does, only to you. If you don't it doesn't, only to you. If you really think you are in love, even if you end up falling out of love; you were still in love.

 

Another note: I have also heard (I think it was from a song) love being used in this context, the fact that love is a verb, it's a doing word. It is not defined by what we think or how we feel but rather what we do, and how we act. If you are willing to do anything for someone, than I think that is a form of love in itself. Sex? Although generally treated as something else, and something superficial can be a form of love, just more physical. Although, I would like to mention that I do not believe sex should be absolutely necessary for love to exist. Most relationships do require sex to work but I think those relationships are built on lust rather than love. Although, in a relationship when you love some one, for the most part you want to share that through sex (and usually the sex is different than the raw, lusty "i wanna get some" attitude)

[shaggy91 0]

To be honest man i think love does exist but is more of a addiction than an emotion cause i have been with my other half for about 2 years. i know its not very long but most people my age (19) has been through 10 relationships during this time and i cant imagine life without her. like smoking (i do smoke too aha) but i cant imagine my life with out ciggerettes to me its a social thing to do because 90% of my friends smoke and i live in england so the law means we have to huddle together to keep warm during the cold nights at the pub aha. ooops went a bit off topic there but yeah i do beleave it exists as long as the 2 people understand, respect, and gives and takes you know? =] my opinion ;)

[Heretic86 25]

I think Humans are Sexual Creatures, which is necessary for the survival of the species. Other types of life can reproduce asexually. Like Bacteria. A bacteria isnt exactly alive in the way we would call alive as having a heartbeat and brain activity, and isn't exactly aware of its own existence in the way we perceive life. However I think there are still similarities between the two. Humans and Bacteria both need to eat to survive. Now, if the way our bodies were set up, if we werent rewarded in some way shape or form by our body (cellular) chemistry, and had no drive to do what we needed to do to survive, we would both be extinct. When people have sex, our brains reward us by releasing Endorphins as a pleasure reward response for that activity. When we eat something that satiates us, again, our brains reward us by releasing certain types of chemicals. I'll assume that something similar happens in Bacteria. It eats, thus, it "feels" better, and thus, is compelled to continue performing that same type of activity.

 

Did you know that 99.999% of ALL species that have EVER existed on this planet are now extinct? And I'm not just talking about the Dinosaurs either. Now we can go off on the whole Evolution bit, but as to not offend anyone or their beliefs, we can incorporate whatever methods you want into the same outcome. One thing I think we will both agree on is Genetic Diversification. If a person believes in Evolution, they may conclude that said genetic branch died off. Creationists may say something different, but I believe we do agree that Genetics is why children look very similar to the way their parents look. Another point that we will agree on is that everything dies. There is no immortal human, there is no immortal dog, or plant, or tree, or monkey, or bacteria, or fish, so on and so forth. Everything dies, eventually. I think where the Evolutionists get things mixed up is that they believe that such and such branch was a Genetic Dead End. Well, it was a dead end, but not because of genetics, however, because everything dies. Where genetics come into play is when a Wolf crossbreeds with a Coyote, you end up with a new species. The parents of that new species will die regardless, but the parents being one Wolf and one Coyote may be the last of their kind, but the offspring, I'll just call it a Wolfyote are still around. The Genetics were compatible enough that the offspring were able to survive. And someday, guaranteed, that offspring will die, but in the meantime, it may pass on its genetics to a new generation of Dog and Wolfyote.

 

I have a feeling that a lot of people will call BS in the cross species genetics. But it does happen. Not every new species can survive however. Human females have been impregnated with Human-Ape hybrid offspring. Not a single human female was able to carry the hybrid species to term. And it wasnt without risk to the parent. Several females died as a result of the type of offspring of their Pregnancy. So it doesnt all just magically work out. Most of the time, it doesnt. The greater the genetic diversity between the species, the higher the chance that their DNA wont be compatible. And that probability increases exponentially with more genetic diversity. Hence why we dont see Duckagators, or Fishonuts, or a Mosquitopottamus. The Wolfyote is real. So are Ligers, Grizzly Black Bears, and, of course, the Platypus. Humans are not exempt from the genetic cross breeding, however, we dont consider people from different herritages to not be human. We dont walk around saying African Americans are Human but Caucasians are a totally separate species. Genectically, we are, but as we dont classify Humans as being Human or Non Human based on color of their skin or ethnicity, we still acknowledge that an African America, an Asian, and Caucasian are all still Human. Just as we recognize both a Chihuahua and a Great Dane to be a Dog. We now have many multi ethnic families whose children have traits from both of their parents. There is some genetic diversity in those types of families, but those differences are not enough to prevent us from cross breeding. What people may think is odd is that a Chihuahua that was mated with a Great Dane usually wont be able to carry the puppies to term, if they even survive the pregnancy. We have bred in that much genetic diversity into the generalized class of dogs, but not all Dogs DNA is 100% compatible with other dogs, so genetic failure occurs even within the same species.

 

I think that one of the things that has guaranteed the survival of all life is the allowance of genetic exchange and diversity. We tend to think of all life on the planet as either the whole planet, or to focus only on one couple or one experiment. The whole planet is one big soup kitchen of various types of DNA which constantly interchange and cross mingle, a billion times every second of every day, for the last four billion years, and if we dont fuck things up for everything on the 3rd Rock from the Sun, for the next four billion years as well. Species will die off, not because of genetic incompatibility or dead ends, but because things die, but the hybrid offspring may sometimes survive. And with a billion experiments a second, it is pretty well guaranteed that one of those hybrids eventually will be able to survive being a hybrid creature, whose DNA is more compatible with both species of either of their parents.

 

Bacteria change as well, but not as a result of Sex, but because of mutations. Bacteria are so small that we are unable to see them without the aid of a microscope. Right now, you probably have no less than ten billion bacteria in your innerds. And to think that each one will clone itself perfectly from now until the end of time is absurd. One of those is going to come out being the retard of the bunch, and unfortunately, has the same chance of survial as the one that comes out being the genius of the group, the Albert Einstein of Bacteria, having an IQ of 0.000000001% as opposed to a flat out zero. But those types of traits dont benefit or hinder Bacteria as much as their ability to survive in different types of enviornments. If a Bacteria can survive being airborne, it has a better chance of survival than one that cant survive being airborne when its launched at a hundred miles per hour out of your snot locker. The constant exposure of billions upon billions of bacteria being launched into the atmosphere when, not just you, but any person on the planet sneezes, coughs, or even breathes, the odds are one of them eventually will be able to survive in the new enviornment.

 

But my schpeil isnt about the genetic diversity of Bacteria, its about Humans. Humans have gotten to where they are today because, lets face it, we're horny! We screw! We get drunk and wake up next to Coyote Ugly, well, that kid has a shot at survival. Maybe better than you think. We are hard wired to screw as much as possible. And we dont stay with one mate, as having sex with as many different partners as possible creates greater genetic diversity which has guaranteed the survival of our species, at least, this far. And we love to screw! Hell, most of our culture is about screwing! Rich people want to get rich so they can attract more mates that they can screw! A good dinner and a good movie might lead to you screwing who ever you took out with you, or them just screwing you over. Our brains release chemicals that are chemical rewards for us when we screw. If we didnt have that, we'd look at our naughty bits and wonder why they are even there in the first place. But thanks to the divine power of chemical rewards from our brains, we produce crotchfruit at the rate that even Rabbits envy! We are just higher on the food chain.

 

Now, to answer your first question, does True Love exist? I think it does. But we are not in love with what we think we are in love with. We are in love with screwing! And if your partner allows for it, will be in love with screwing you as much as you are in love with screwing them! And if that relationship fails, if we dont have the genetic hodge podge of both of the screwers DNA result in a new mutant hybrid mutation that crawls around on the floor and cries every twenty seconds as they wet themselves, we immediately try to find a new parter to screw! And we keep going at it until we finally reach our guaranteed fate of death, at which point, our Banana and Oyster Splits will try to screw anything they can find willing to screw them as much as they want to screw once they figure out that they are as in love with screwing as much as the previous ten million generations have discovered! And the cycle will continue from there!

 

So, does love exist? Sure. But it is more chemical based than most people are aware of.

[Arkbennett 16]

It does, but it is a rare experience.

 

There is no requisite for consistency. So, just because something doesn't work out, does not invalidate it ever happening.