Quote:
Originally Posted by ZiggyStardust
Are you sitting comfortably, children? Then I'll begin.
I'm probably going to take a disliking of the OP due to his ''fuckbuddy'' approach. For me to fuck someone, I have to be in love with someone, have an emotional connection. I probably read too much D.H Lawrence, but oh well.
People with ''fuckbuddy'' approaches are no better than prostitutes. Their lives revolve around the physical sex, the carnal hunger, the animal instinct, rather than the beautiful human love. Love is beautiful. Sex is noisy and messy, just the expression of love. Painting is beautiful, paintings are just the expression.
Can you have love and sex at the same time? Of course. But they've got to be in a balance. Too much of one will upset the relationship. Too much of a relationship that's solely based on the sex and it will undoubtedly fail. You will no grow to love her. You will just love her vajayjay. You've got to love her being, not her sexual organs.
That wasn't too bad, was it? That was probably I in my most philosophical.
|
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha **** you. If this is you in your "most philosophical" you should maybe not do philosophy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Engine
The idea that those two things are mutually exclusive is Lawrence's brand of misogyny. I'll gladly talk more about this but not on this thread, because it's a total derailment.
|
Exactly this. You're implying that having sex with a woman you're not in love with automatically qualifies as being disrespectful of her body but you're not even taking the woman's opinion into account. If the two of you aren't in love but she wants to **** you does that mean she's disrespecting her own body?
I've loved way more dicks than I have hearts. Get off your prudish high horse, *******.