I see. I apologize for assuming. I sometimes forget that I'm often dealing with people who are much younger than me here.Relish in Chaos said:Hmm. That's a fair enough argument. Not entirely whether or not I agree with it, or whether I even can, since I have little to no experience of relationships.loc978 said:You actually quoted my explanation there. It implies ownership. A human being owned by another human being. I understand that for most the ideal is more like a symbiosis, but my experience viewing other people's relationships is that the ideal is very rarely realized... and people become property in all but name more often than not.Relish in Chaos said:Could I ask you why exactly it "disgusts" you?loc978 said:the standard, implied exclusivity our culture is so fond of flat-out disgusts me. Sorta implies ownership, from where I stand.
Those who are strong enough end those relationships. Most aren't, and stay in 'em until they become a train wreck.
I suppose I'm just incapable of seeing that point of view. I become emotionally invested in plenty of people. I say unhesitatingly and without reservation that I love my friends and family... but sex is not part of love, at least as far as I'm concerned. It's about as emotional as a game of ping-pong.Relish in Chaos said:I always thought that, if you were going to be in an actual relationship with someone beyond mere sex, it would be hard to become emotionally invested in them if you're basically sharing it between a bunch of other people, making none of them particularly special.
And I mean, I couldn't blame anyone for feeling unnerved if they found out they were just their partner's "bit on the side" or just another plaything. I mean, it works for casual sex, but not for mature relationships.
I don't want to be "that guy", but after a while, if you're just moving from one girl to the next without any real connection beyond genitalia-juggling, you'd start to get bored, wouldn't you?
The bits where you throw around terms such as "mature relationships" and "real connection" as though any relationship worth the name has to involve romance and possible sex shows that you and I could never see eye-to-eye on this matter. I would see you as brainwashed, you would see me as either an alien or a liar.
Suffice to say, our culture says you're correct in your assessment, and I say our culture is very, very wrong... that we've warped human relations into something completely unnatural. That disgusts me.
Don't get me wrong, I have no problems with people having casual sex. Maybe I've been watching too many films, but wouldn't you get bored after a while? Perhaps it's a black-and-white outlook, but wouldn't the alternative to not getting bored having sex with one person after another be to just...settle down with one person that you love a lot?
Or maybe it's a double-edged sword, and you can't win either way. I think we could see eye-to-eye, because I'm always open to different viewpoints of certain matters. Like I aforementioned, I have little to no experience of relationships, and even I would have no idea what I'd do (or what I "should" do) if I was dating a girl. I'm socially awkward enough as it is even with people, both male and female, that I'm not particularly close to.
As for getting bored... well, one would pretty much have to get bored with life to be bored with sex. I know the archetype of a womanizer who is searching for "something more" is a common one in romance films... but I'm not a womanizer, nor a stunningly handsome rich young man who is constantly assailed by party girls looking for a free ride.
I've found fulfillment... one could say I have settled down; with the friends and family I grew up with. There isn't a deeper or more fulfilling love out there, and there doesn't have to be. It took me traveling three continents, seeing more suffering than I thought could exist in the first world and nearly being killed several times in a war to realize that, though.