Has anyone else here given up on love...

[BillyDeath]

So people don't actually love their mates, or their children?

And they don't love Izods, the most.

[BrassFusion]

And they don't love Izods, the most.

What did I just say?

[Rayne]

Alittle full of yourself sweety?

Me, never.

[celestial]

knowin is just paying attention, i heara weird sound in my car 8 timesout of 10i know exactly whats wrong,just like when you liston to someone and you can tell if something is bothering them or there acting funny. If its a friend, you know them really well, if its the object of your affection you love them. Love is just a word created to discribe a feeling no one understand, but when it comes down to it, its just how the body reacts to things.

[BrassFusion]

I didn't say that. I'm merely stating that love is not necessary in order to pro-create.

Yeah, it kinda is.

[BillyDeath]

Love... Love will tear us apart again.

[BrassFusion]

Lawv... Lawv will tear us apart. Again.

Lawv... Lawv will tear us apart. Again.

Lawv... Lawv will tear us apart. Again.

I could sit here all day.

[torn asunder]

Yeah, it kinda is.

no, it really isn't... procreation can come from a one-night-stand, which doesn't require any "love"...

[BrassFusion]

no, it really isn't... procreation can come from a one-night-stand, which doesn't require any "love"...

An unloved child isn't gonna grow up successfully. Childrearing is part of procreation.

[torn asunder]

An unloved child isn't gonna grow up successfully. Childrearing is part of procreation.

i disagree - procreation, to me, is the physical aspect of reproduction. of course, i haven't looked up the definition yet. i suppose i should do that, before someone throws that at me...

[torn asunder]

ok, here's the definition page, and nowhere on it does it state that child-raising has anything to do with procreation. it basically states that it means "to reproduce"...

:innocent

[Steven]

love is for those with no direction in life. They need someone so they dont feel alone, isolated. Love is just chemical reactions in the brain,nothing mystical about it, nothing special, call it what you want.

Um, I think I'll call it a void as it may apply to you.

By the way - I love love, I'm fucking good at it.

[Steven]

Love's a by-product of evolution. If we didn't love, we'd fuck less (SOME of us!!!), and we wouldn't rear our children. Our genes wouldn't be passed on. But those creatures that did develop hormones and pheronomes and what-have-you WOULD succeed.

And that's what's happened. Just because it's chemical doesn't mean we can't enjoy it.

aw Brass....how I do love (oops - wrong word) your posts.

personally I think your wrong but your a great sport and I love (oops!!!!) that about you.

[BrassFusion]

aw Brass....how I do love (oops - wrong word) your posts.

personally I think your wrong but your a great sport and I love (oops!!!!) that about you.

lol, i love you too, steven, and that feeling is STILL a by-product of evolution!!!

we humans are pack animals, essentially, and when you're a woman it pays to win the affections of a big group of guys who will all bring you a little bit of the antelope they killed, even if it doesn't end up nurturing their own offspring.

and ta... procreation over more than one generation necessitates childrearing. you can't just leave them in dumpsters and expect them to grow up and eventually reproduce on their own. stop splitting hairs!!!

[pharoh]

Um, I think I'll call it a void as it may apply to you.

By the way - I love love, I'm fucking good at it.

Oh baby is he ever!

[pharoh]

lol, i love you too, steven, and that feeling is STILL a by-product of evolution!!!

we humans are pack animals, essentially, and when you're a woman it pays to win the affections of a big group of guys who will all bring you a little bit of the antelope they killed, even if it doesn't end up nurturing their own offspring.

and ta... procreation over more than one generation necessitates childrearing. you can't just leave them in dumpsters and expect them to grow up and eventually reproduce on their own. stop splitting hairs!!!

In my opinion to MAKE a child all you need is a boner and a vagina. There is no love required in that, only lust. Now to RAISE a child....yes there should be love involved, or byproduct of intercourse is gonna be a child without love in thier life, which has so many different bad side effects on the child, you can start a crapload of different threads with that just alone.

Just my two cents

[BrassFusion]

Ok, I'll define my terms. I've been saying "reproduction" and "procreation" as though they mean "a population of living things bearing offspring in general, over many generations." Which they can, really.

I agree that no love is necessary to impregnate a woman, but love is necessary to raise the offspring to an age where it can reproduce itself, which is, ultimately, where the genetic makeup of the first coupling (the grandparents) is validated.

Back to the real topic, now?

[torn asunder]

I didn't say that. I'm merely stating that love is not necessary in order to pro-create.

Yeah, it kinda is.

i disagree - procreation, to me, is the physical aspect of reproduction. of course, i haven't looked up the definition yet. i suppose i should do that, before someone throws that at me...

ok, here's the definition page, and nowhere on it does it state that child-raising has anything to do with procreation. it basically states that it means "to reproduce"...

:innocent

and ta... procreation over more than one generation necessitates childrearing. you can't just leave them in dumpsters and expect them to grow up and eventually reproduce on their own. stop splitting hairs!!!

procreation, in and of itself, does not require love to complete. child-rearing isn't included in the definition of procreation, therefore, in the strictest sense,froyn was correct, and you were incorrect.

i do agree that the continuance of a species does require child-rearing, but then one will get into a debate regarding whether child-care stems from love, or is solely an animal instinct ingrained in us to allow our continuance, which we have decided to label as love, and i'm not going to get into that!!

[torn asunder]

and, yes, back to thereal topic!!

[Steven]

and, yes, back to thereal topic!!

yes: dating tall women and the benefits thereof:

[creatureofthenyte]

yes: dating tall women and the benefits thereof:

Dating tall women, if you are a short man means you dont have to bend down far to give oral. But if you are a tall man and are dating a tall woman, that means that you dont have to try too hard to get your meat into her fridge if ya smell what Im cookin

[celestial]

im 6'1, if a female is taller than me one does not simply think she is a female at first *looks for the adams apple*

[BrassFusion]

procreation, in and of itself, does not require love to complete. child-rearing isn't included in the definition of procreation, therefore, in the strictest sense,froyn was correct, and you were incorrect.

You asked for this, you know.

Since we were using the word "to procreate" without a direct object, I'll refer to the appropriate definitions YOU posted.

–verb (used without object)

3. to beget offspring.

4. to produce; bring into being.

Since the direct object isn't stated but implied, it could be a number of things, couldn't it? To produce offspring. To produce babies. To produce children. To produce future generations...

Any of the forms are acceptable. I was just using a broader definition than Froyn. We were both right, but he was wrong in calling me out for a narrower definition than I was referencing and YOU'RE wrong for validating his doing so. Neener neener.

i do agree that the continuance of a species does require child-rearing, but then one will get into a debate regarding whether child-care stems from love, or is solely an animal instinct ingrained in us to allow our continuance, which we have decided to label as love, and i'm not going to get into that!!

So if love isn't an animal instinct, what is it? You can't tell me, Disney has tried, but can't tell me, teenagers and emos try to write songs about it but most of the songs are about how they don't UNDERSTAND it. Occam's razor, my good man. Love created itself through evolution.

[Steven]

You asked for this, you know.

Since we were using the word "to procreate" without a direct object, I'll refer to the appropriate definitions YOU posted.

–verb (used without object)

3. to beget offspring.

4. to produce; bring into being.

Since the direct object isn't stated but implied, it could be a number of things, couldn't it? To produce offspring. To produce babies. To produce children. To produce future generations...

Any of the forms are acceptable. I was just using a broader definition than Froyn. We were both right, but he was wrong in calling me out for a narrower definition than I was referencing and YOU'RE wrong for validating his doing so. Neener neener.

So if love isn't an animal instinct, what is it? You can't tell me, Disney has tried, but can't tell me, teenagers and emos try to write songs about it but most of the songs are about how they don't UNDERSTAND it. Occam's razor, my good man. Love created itself through evolution.

go to bed Brass, its almost 3 am.

see what Love does to ya?

[Homicidalheathen]

yup, on all kinds...just feel used and abandonned