Posts by lonegardener

Sean Cruz said:Not necessarily—if he manages to survive the fallout, he might just earn some credit. 😁 🤣

By the way, I can't believe you've actually lost interest in debating a topic; it feels like I'm single-handedly draining your will to argue. 😛 🤣

That’s not really the point... we're just drifting away from the topic here. If everyone were constantly going off on tangents, it wouldn't be an issue, but right now it just looks like we're hijacking the thread.

There are other reasons too, but explaining them would just be more digging into side topics. 😬

Sean Cruz said:Look, it’s a double-edged sword. If someone tells me they find me attractive, I’m immediately suspicious of their motives. But if they don't say anything and I find out from someone else later? Well, then I’m coming for them. 😁 🤣

The bottom line is that we can only guess what's going on in someone's head and why they act the way they do.

So, it looks like that old cliché holds up: it is impossible to please a woman. 😬 🤣

steeltiger2 said:It’s always "shoot first, ask questions later" with some people, isn't it? Honestly, I don't know how they do it. I spend half my life overthinking every single word, carefully weighing my phrasing just so I don't accidentally bruise someone's ego or cause unnecessary drama. I'm constantly walking on eggshells, trying to be tactful. But them? They just blurt out the raw truth and move on like nothing happened. It’s wild. You can tell someone the hard truth, sure, but you do it with enough grace that they aren't left reeling or spiraling afterward. There's an art to it, really.
Do you think they actually have no idea what they're after? Because if that's the case... well, that's just not a good look. Honestly.

Yeah, that’s totally plausible. Honestly, I know I catch some eyes at my office—and trust me, there are definitely some good-looking guys around—but I’d feel like such a phony if I actually went around telling people I was desirable. It’s just not something I care about in life. That's all there is to it. Why would you even go out of your way to whisper something in someone's ear just to mess with their head? The only reason to do that is to stir up jealousy, which is just such an immature way to act. And really, why bother?

Honestly, he’s pushed me so far past my limit with all this nonsense that I’ve actually started thinking about how to go out and arm myself. I mean, seriously—I’m sitting here wondering how to get enough gear so I can actually fight back. If I’m going to protect myself and stand my ground, I need more than just words. What else is there to do? I need some way to defend myself before I lose it completely.
Picture this: your heart is absolutely hammering against your ribs, your head feels like it’s seconds away from an outright explosion, and your blood pressure is spiking so hard you can practically feel the pulse in your temples. Just imagine that kind of raw, white-knuckle tension sustained for as long as it takes to finally burn itself out. Now... just think about what you'd actually *do* with all that frantic, unspent energy.🤷

How exactly can someone tell that kind of truth without causing worry? I'm genuinely curious. What kind of wording should he have used instead?

steeltiger2 said:It’s always "shoot first, ask questions later" with some people, isn't it? Honestly, I don't know how they do it. I spend half my life overthinking every single word, carefully weighing my phrasing just so I don't accidentally bruise someone's ego or cause unnecessary drama. I'm constantly walking on eggshells, trying to be tactful. But them? They just blurt out the raw truth and move on like nothing happened. It’s wild. You can tell someone the hard truth, sure, but you do it with enough grace that they aren't left reeling or spiraling afterward. There's an art to it, really.
Do you think they actually have no idea what they're after? Because if that's the case... well, that's just not a good look. Honestly.

Yeah, that’s totally plausible. Honestly, I know I catch some eyes at my office—and trust me, there are definitely some good-looking guys around—but I’d feel like such a phony if I actually went around telling people I was desirable. It’s just not something I care about in life. That's all there is to it. Why would you even go out of your way to whisper something in someone's ear just to mess with their head? The only reason to do that is to stir up jealousy, which is just such an immature way to act. And really, why bother?

Honestly, he’s pushed me so far past my limit with all this nonsense that I’ve actually started thinking about how to go out and arm myself. I mean, seriously—I’m sitting here wondering how to get enough gear so I can actually fight back. If I’m going to protect myself and stand my ground, I need more than just words. What else is there to do? I need some way to defend myself before I lose it completely.
Picture this: your heart is absolutely hammering against your ribs, your head feels like it’s seconds away from an outright explosion, and your blood pressure is spiking so hard you can practically feel the pulse in your temples. Just imagine that kind of raw, white-knuckle tension sustained for as long as it takes to finally burn itself out. Now... just think about what you'd actually *do* with all that frantic, unspent energy.🤷

I don't know, I can see it both ways. You ask "why plant a seed," and I'm asking "why stay silent if you've already noticed?" You obviously "noticed" those guys at work like you, right? You remember it, and you probably thought about it too... by your own logic, that means they like you just because you picked up on it. 😬

In my view, it's the truth in both your case and his. 😈 That's just how it works; your subconscious is telling you what this actually means for your relationship, even if your conscious mind isn't ready to accept the conclusion.

steeltiger2 said:Example No. 2:

Him: "Hey, just wanted to give you a heads-up, since I know it might bother you later... I think I've caught the eye of that woman I work with."
Her: "Okay, and why would that bother me if you actually cared? But clearly, you don't care much when you're busy bringing it up, do you?"
Him: "No, it's just... I noticed it and wanted to tell you so there wouldn't be any issues down the line.
Her: "What wouldn't be an issue? I don't even get what you're planning to pull with her that I'd need to worry about! And how can you even tell she likes you? Is she biting her lip when you walk in? Giving you those little coy laughs?
Him: "Geez... forget it... maybe I shouldn't have mentioned anything at all. You just... you just feel it, you know? You don't need them to do anything, you just know when someone's into you, right?i>
Her (now completely exasperated, wondering if he's trying to kill her or how he became so incredibly clumsy and dense overnight): "No!!! I don't "just know," unless it's glaringly obvious, because I'm not obsessed with looking for it in my life—and I certainly wouldn't be running over to tell you, especially not about some stranger I'm seeing for the first time. And obviously, you must be into her too if you can "just tell."
Him: "I'm not into her. She's attractive, sure, but who cares? I mean, when are you finally going to start believing that I'm not interested in other women? I haven't been since I met you."
Her: 😕 😢

🤣 Man, he's totally confused... just like me, LOL. He doesn't really know what he wants, and honestly, he doesn't quite get himself either. On the other hand, if this is a realistic portrayal, it seems to me he’s just suffering from an excessive need to be honest. 🤷

For instance, if he noticed that woman "reacting" to him, he might feel like it would be "suspiciously secretive" not to mention it to you. Because, say, someone else might bring it up—like a coworker at a place like Starbucks or an office in Chicago. ("...hey, just so you know, Stephanie is really into your boyfriend... she's always hovering around him... 😬"). So he thinks that if you hear it from them and he hasn't said anything, you'll assume he intentionally hid it because he has some ulterior motive... or that he was trying to keep his options open.

It isn't even necessary for him to think that way ("what if you hear it from others"); it might simply be unacceptable to him to "intentionally" keep it to himself once he's already noticed it.

Sean Cruz said:When I say "selfish," I mean that romantic love is focused on one specific person; it isn't "sharable" like other types of affection. Essentially, we want to "possess" the person we love, and that is the definition of selfishness. Jealousy stems directly from the fear of losing what is "ours." Personally, I find it perfectly natural for people to feel this way—provided they don't take it to an extreme. I don't buy into those fairy tales about "unconditional" or "eternal" love; it's a myth. If such a thing actually existed, an unconditional romantic love would exist outside the realm of selfishness—meaning you could honestly be happy seeing the person you love find joy in someone else's arms without feeling a sting. 😬

He probably thinks that's what you want to hear. 😬

He claimed he was showing me respect, even though he knew damn well it was getting on my nerves. 🙄

Like I said, the point isn't about what you notice, whether you intend to or not; it's about your intentions, your plans, your motives, and so on. There is a massive difference between noticing another attractive woman and actively contemplating how to get with her—actually weighing that "option" as a possibility.

That’s exactly my point—there are "valid" situations where jealousy is justified (or at least feels that way), and then there are situations where it's completely irrational. Take something as harmless as glancing at someone else; we're all a little vain, and everyone enjoys being noticed by the opposite sex. You don't necessarily have any ulterior motives, but a partner might still feel jealous. I think most people experience that. And if a partner is prone to infidelity and gives you reasons to doubt them, it's only natural for that jealousy to intensify. However, once you truly know a person—their habits, their character, etc.—it becomes easier to manage those feelings and look at the situation objectively.

Well, lol, you answered your own question. It started one way and ended just as predictably. I'm not saying I'm smarter than you... I'm just brutally honest, heh.

🤣
But you don't actually know how it ended. 😁

Let me reiterate: honesty is *one* of the foundations, and without it, nothing works. But it isn't enough. At least, it isn't for me. I’m not saying you can't have a different standard; if that’s how you choose to define things, that's your prerogative. I see it differently—for better or worse.

I never claimed it was the sole foundation, just that it's vital to me. Personally, I’d much rather take a blow to the face than a knife in the back. And honestly, how could anyone think honesty alone is the only foundation? It’s simply impossible—relationships are incredibly complex, and there's an entire web of factors that determine whether a connection actually succeeds.

Not quite. 🤷 If you apply that same logic to yourself—basically allowing someone else to "own" you in the exact same way—then how can you possibly call it selfishness? If you aren't truly your own person to begin with, where is the self to be selfish? 😕

I’m not a fan of that term. To me, it feels like an attempt to "amnesty" what I see as pure selfishness. If we label everything above as just being selfish, then we're implying that selfishness isn't inherently bad—and once you go down that road, you can justify just about anything.

Of course, it’s pure selfishness. If you want to possess someone else while claiming you only belong to yourself—as if that somehow preserves your "autonomy"—you're just being self-centered.

Sean Cruz said:When I say "selfish," I mean that romantic love is focused on one specific person; it isn't "sharable" like other types of affection. Essentially, we want to "possess" the person we love, and that is the definition of selfishness. Jealousy stems directly from the fear of losing what is "ours." Personally, I find it perfectly natural for people to feel this way—provided they don't take it to an extreme. I don't buy into those fairy tales about "unconditional" or "eternal" love; it's a myth. If such a thing actually existed, an unconditional romantic love would exist outside the realm of selfishness—meaning you could honestly be happy seeing the person you love find joy in someone else's arms without feeling a sting. 😬

He probably thinks that's what you want to hear. 😬

He claimed he was showing me respect, even though he knew damn well it was getting on my nerves. 🙄

Like I said, the point isn't about what you notice, whether you intend to or not; it's about your intentions, your plans, your motives, and so on. There is a massive difference between noticing another attractive woman and actively contemplating how to get with her—actually weighing that "option" as a possibility.

That’s exactly my point—there are "valid" situations where jealousy is justified (or at least feels that way), and then there are situations where it's completely irrational. Take something as harmless as glancing at someone else; we're all a little vain, and everyone enjoys being noticed by the opposite sex. You don't necessarily have any ulterior motives, but a partner might still feel jealous. I think most people experience that. And if a partner is prone to infidelity and gives you reasons to doubt them, it's only natural for that jealousy to intensify. However, once you truly know a person—their habits, their character, etc.—it becomes easier to manage those feelings and look at the situation objectively.

Well, lol, you answered your own question. It started one way and ended just as predictably. I'm not saying I'm smarter than you... I'm just brutally honest, heh.

🤣
But you don't actually know how it ended. 😁

Let me reiterate: honesty is *one* of the foundations, and without it, nothing works. But it isn't enough. At least, it isn't for me. I’m not saying you can't have a different standard; if that’s how you choose to define things, that's your prerogative. I see it differently—for better or worse.

I never claimed it was the sole foundation, just that it's vital to me. Personally, I’d much rather take a blow to the face than a knife in the back. And honestly, how could anyone think honesty alone is the only foundation? It’s simply impossible—relationships are incredibly complex, and there's an entire web of factors that determine whether a connection actually succeeds.

I’d say something along those lines, though I might frame it a bit differently. I could also see myself coming to a slightly different conclusion.

Sean Cruz said:When I say "selfish," I mean that romantic love is focused on one specific person; it isn't "sharable" like other types of affection. Essentially, we want to "possess" the person we love, and that is the definition of selfishness. Jealousy stems directly from the fear of losing what is "ours." Personally, I find it perfectly natural for people to feel this way—provided they don't take it to an extreme. I don't buy into those fairy tales about "unconditional" or "eternal" love; it's a myth. If such a thing actually existed, an unconditional romantic love would exist outside the realm of selfishness—meaning you could honestly be happy seeing the person you love find joy in someone else's arms without feeling a sting. 😬

He probably thinks that's what you want to hear. 😬

He claimed he was showing me respect, even though he knew damn well it was getting on my nerves. 🙄

Like I said, the point isn't about what you notice, whether you intend to or not; it's about your intentions, your plans, your motives, and so on. There is a massive difference between noticing another attractive woman and actively contemplating how to get with her—actually weighing that "option" as a possibility.

That’s exactly my point—there are "valid" situations where jealousy is justified (or at least feels that way), and then there are situations where it's completely irrational. Take something as harmless as glancing at someone else; we're all a little vain, and everyone enjoys being noticed by the opposite sex. You don't necessarily have any ulterior motives, but a partner might still feel jealous. I think most people experience that. And if a partner is prone to infidelity and gives you reasons to doubt them, it's only natural for that jealousy to intensify. However, once you truly know a person—their habits, their character, etc.—it becomes easier to manage those feelings and look at the situation objectively.

Well, lol, you answered your own question. It started one way and ended just as predictably. I'm not saying I'm smarter than you... I'm just brutally honest, heh.

🤣
But you don't actually know how it ended. 😁

Let me reiterate: honesty is *one* of the foundations, and without it, nothing works. But it isn't enough. At least, it isn't for me. I’m not saying you can't have a different standard; if that’s how you choose to define things, that's your prerogative. I see it differently—for better or worse.

I never claimed it was the sole foundation, just that it's vital to me. Personally, I’d much rather take a blow to the face than a knife in the back. And honestly, how could anyone think honesty alone is the only foundation? It’s simply impossible—relationships are incredibly complex, and there's an entire web of factors that determine whether a connection actually succeeds.

Sure, the reason could be legitimate, or it might just be something someone made up. Personally, I tend to think it’s usually based on reality—that's your subconscious picking up on an actual situation where there's a genuine reason to feel jealous. It stems from that underlying fear that you're eventually going to lose what you consider "valuable."

So, people who claim they aren't jealous are really just devaluing what they supposedly "have." They tell themselves there are a million others just like you, all before the breakup even happens. Honestly, it makes the split so much easier to stomach if you've already mentally checked out and convinced yourself you're replaceable.

It reminds me of that old joke about John. When people ask him why he went and married such an unattractive woman, he just shrugs and says, "So I won't feel too bad when she eventually leaves me." 🤣

Sean Cruz said:When I say "selfish," I mean that romantic love is focused on one specific person; it isn't "sharable" like other types of affection. Essentially, we want to "possess" the person we love, and that is the definition of selfishness. Jealousy stems directly from the fear of losing what is "ours." Personally, I find it perfectly natural for people to feel this way—provided they don't take it to an extreme. I don't buy into those fairy tales about "unconditional" or "eternal" love; it's a myth. If such a thing actually existed, an unconditional romantic love would exist outside the realm of selfishness—meaning you could honestly be happy seeing the person you love find joy in someone else's arms without feeling a sting. 😬

He probably thinks that's what you want to hear. 😬

He claimed he was showing me respect, even though he knew damn well it was getting on my nerves. 🙄

Like I said, the point isn't about what you notice, whether you intend to or not; it's about your intentions, your plans, your motives, and so on. There is a massive difference between noticing another attractive woman and actively contemplating how to get with her—actually weighing that "option" as a possibility.

That’s exactly my point—there are "valid" situations where jealousy is justified (or at least feels that way), and then there are situations where it's completely irrational. Take something as harmless as glancing at someone else; we're all a little vain, and everyone enjoys being noticed by the opposite sex. You don't necessarily have any ulterior motives, but a partner might still feel jealous. I think most people experience that. And if a partner is prone to infidelity and gives you reasons to doubt them, it's only natural for that jealousy to intensify. However, once you truly know a person—their habits, their character, etc.—it becomes easier to manage those feelings and look at the situation objectively.

Well, lol, you answered your own question. It started one way and ended just as predictably. I'm not saying I'm smarter than you... I'm just brutally honest, heh.

🤣
But you don't actually know how it ended. 😁

Let me reiterate: honesty is *one* of the foundations, and without it, nothing works. But it isn't enough. At least, it isn't for me. I’m not saying you can't have a different standard; if that’s how you choose to define things, that's your prerogative. I see it differently—for better or worse.

I never claimed it was the sole foundation, just that it's vital to me. Personally, I’d much rather take a blow to the face than a knife in the back. And honestly, how could anyone think honesty alone is the only foundation? It’s simply impossible—relationships are incredibly complex, and there's an entire web of factors that determine whether a connection actually succeeds.

That isn't actually true, is it? I mean, would you honestly enjoy getting attention from someone who’s just a terrible person? Someone you don't even like, or who actually makes your skin crawl?

Only give your attention to the things you perceive as "positive." You could even go so far as to say, only focus on what you deem "eligible" from your own perspective. 😬

Sure, I’ve definitely run into people like that—the type who crave attention from absolutely anyone and everyone. To me, that feels like a pretty strange way to feed one's ego. Honestly, it just doesn't make any sense.

Sean Cruz said:When I say "selfish," I mean that romantic love is focused on one specific person; it isn't "sharable" like other types of affection. Essentially, we want to "possess" the person we love, and that is the definition of selfishness. Jealousy stems directly from the fear of losing what is "ours." Personally, I find it perfectly natural for people to feel this way—provided they don't take it to an extreme. I don't buy into those fairy tales about "unconditional" or "eternal" love; it's a myth. If such a thing actually existed, an unconditional romantic love would exist outside the realm of selfishness—meaning you could honestly be happy seeing the person you love find joy in someone else's arms without feeling a sting. 😬

He probably thinks that's what you want to hear. 😬

He claimed he was showing me respect, even though he knew damn well it was getting on my nerves. 🙄

Like I said, the point isn't about what you notice, whether you intend to or not; it's about your intentions, your plans, your motives, and so on. There is a massive difference between noticing another attractive woman and actively contemplating how to get with her—actually weighing that "option" as a possibility.

That’s exactly my point—there are "valid" situations where jealousy is justified (or at least feels that way), and then there are situations where it's completely irrational. Take something as harmless as glancing at someone else; we're all a little vain, and everyone enjoys being noticed by the opposite sex. You don't necessarily have any ulterior motives, but a partner might still feel jealous. I think most people experience that. And if a partner is prone to infidelity and gives you reasons to doubt them, it's only natural for that jealousy to intensify. However, once you truly know a person—their habits, their character, etc.—it becomes easier to manage those feelings and look at the situation objectively.

Well, lol, you answered your own question. It started one way and ended just as predictably. I'm not saying I'm smarter than you... I'm just brutally honest, heh.

🤣
But you don't actually know how it ended. 😁

Let me reiterate: honesty is *one* of the foundations, and without it, nothing works. But it isn't enough. At least, it isn't for me. I’m not saying you can't have a different standard; if that’s how you choose to define things, that's your prerogative. I see it differently—for better or worse.

I never claimed it was the sole foundation, just that it's vital to me. Personally, I’d much rather take a blow to the face than a knife in the back. And honestly, how could anyone think honesty alone is the only foundation? It’s simply impossible—relationships are incredibly complex, and there's an entire web of factors that determine whether a connection actually succeeds.

Sure, you can do that. But like I said, staring facts straight in the face isn't always helpful. If the reality of the situation is actually bad—meaning you have a legitimate, valid reason to feel jealous—then what does "facing the truth" really achieve? How is knowing you're right supposed to help you control the jealousy when the facts are just confirming that your suspicion is justified?

Sean Cruz said:When I say "selfish," I mean that romantic love is focused on one specific person; it isn't "sharable" like other types of affection. Essentially, we want to "possess" the person we love, and that is the definition of selfishness. Jealousy stems directly from the fear of losing what is "ours." Personally, I find it perfectly natural for people to feel this way—provided they don't take it to an extreme. I don't buy into those fairy tales about "unconditional" or "eternal" love; it's a myth. If such a thing actually existed, an unconditional romantic love would exist outside the realm of selfishness—meaning you could honestly be happy seeing the person you love find joy in someone else's arms without feeling a sting. 😬

He probably thinks that's what you want to hear. 😬

He claimed he was showing me respect, even though he knew damn well it was getting on my nerves. 🙄

Like I said, the point isn't about what you notice, whether you intend to or not; it's about your intentions, your plans, your motives, and so on. There is a massive difference between noticing another attractive woman and actively contemplating how to get with her—actually weighing that "option" as a possibility.

That’s exactly my point—there are "valid" situations where jealousy is justified (or at least feels that way), and then there are situations where it's completely irrational. Take something as harmless as glancing at someone else; we're all a little vain, and everyone enjoys being noticed by the opposite sex. You don't necessarily have any ulterior motives, but a partner might still feel jealous. I think most people experience that. And if a partner is prone to infidelity and gives you reasons to doubt them, it's only natural for that jealousy to intensify. However, once you truly know a person—their habits, their character, etc.—it becomes easier to manage those feelings and look at the situation objectively.

Well, lol, you answered your own question. It started one way and ended just as predictably. I'm not saying I'm smarter than you... I'm just brutally honest, heh.

🤣
But you don't actually know how it ended. 😁

Let me reiterate: honesty is *one* of the foundations, and without it, nothing works. But it isn't enough. At least, it isn't for me. I’m not saying you can't have a different standard; if that’s how you choose to define things, that's your prerogative. I see it differently—for better or worse.

I never claimed it was the sole foundation, just that it's vital to me. Personally, I’d much rather take a blow to the face than a knife in the back. And honestly, how could anyone think honesty alone is the only foundation? It’s simply impossible—relationships are incredibly complex, and there's an entire web of factors that determine whether a connection actually succeeds.

Look, I didn't mean it like that—I know how this comes across. But honestly, you were the one who said it was already over, so I'm just going by what you told me.

Sean Cruz said:When I say "selfish," I mean that romantic love is focused on one specific person; it isn't "sharable" like other types of affection. Essentially, we want to "possess" the person we love, and that is the definition of selfishness. Jealousy stems directly from the fear of losing what is "ours." Personally, I find it perfectly natural for people to feel this way—provided they don't take it to an extreme. I don't buy into those fairy tales about "unconditional" or "eternal" love; it's a myth. If such a thing actually existed, an unconditional romantic love would exist outside the realm of selfishness—meaning you could honestly be happy seeing the person you love find joy in someone else's arms without feeling a sting. 😬

He probably thinks that's what you want to hear. 😬

He claimed he was showing me respect, even though he knew damn well it was getting on my nerves. 🙄

Like I said, the point isn't about what you notice, whether you intend to or not; it's about your intentions, your plans, your motives, and so on. There is a massive difference between noticing another attractive woman and actively contemplating how to get with her—actually weighing that "option" as a possibility.

That’s exactly my point—there are "valid" situations where jealousy is justified (or at least feels that way), and then there are situations where it's completely irrational. Take something as harmless as glancing at someone else; we're all a little vain, and everyone enjoys being noticed by the opposite sex. You don't necessarily have any ulterior motives, but a partner might still feel jealous. I think most people experience that. And if a partner is prone to infidelity and gives you reasons to doubt them, it's only natural for that jealousy to intensify. However, once you truly know a person—their habits, their character, etc.—it becomes easier to manage those feelings and look at the situation objectively.

Well, lol, you answered your own question. It started one way and ended just as predictably. I'm not saying I'm smarter than you... I'm just brutally honest, heh.

🤣
But you don't actually know how it ended. 😁

Let me reiterate: honesty is *one* of the foundations, and without it, nothing works. But it isn't enough. At least, it isn't for me. I’m not saying you can't have a different standard; if that’s how you choose to define things, that's your prerogative. I see it differently—for better or worse.

I never claimed it was the sole foundation, just that it's vital to me. Personally, I’d much rather take a blow to the face than a knife in the back. And honestly, how could anyone think honesty alone is the only foundation? It’s simply impossible—relationships are incredibly complex, and there's an entire web of factors that determine whether a connection actually succeeds.

I completely agree. I’d much rather take a hammer to the head than a knife in the back, or a bullet to the forehead than being impaled on a stake. Just because there’s something even worse out there doesn't make the current situation "positive." Saying a knife in the back is worse doesn't mean you should celebrate getting hit with a hammer, or that it's something to be grateful for, LOL. You wouldn't say you "appreciate" a mugger just because he didn't kill anyone during the robbery. 🤣

Did you forget where we started this conversation? We began with an "honest" stance—that we’ll stick together until we find something better. The fact that being shady is even worse than our current spot doesn't make it a good thing. It’s simply choosing the lesser of two evils. That's my take on it, anyway; feel free to disagree if you think this is actually ideal. 😬

steeltiger2 said:Sure, but at least you can walk away from someone who just hates on you because the truth stings. Honestly? It might actually hurt even more if that truth was kept hidden for this long.

Exactly.☕

Exactly, and that’s precisely why I value honesty. My point was just that *that kind* of honesty isn't automatically the "foundation" for an "ideal relationship" LOL.

Of course it isn't "better" if it's built on deception. But just because torturing someone is worse than shooting them in the face doesn't mean the latter is actually a good thing. 😬

Sean Cruz said:It’s neither snow nor swans. 😁

That’s just one—well, two—of the ingredients in the messy concoction they call "love," but it certainly isn't the only one.

There’s also an element of attraction involved, though I suppose that’s a given.

I’m an agnostic—which is basically just a polite way of saying I'm 98% atheist. LOL.

Did you end up taking that spirituality assessment? 🤣 Me too, though I don't fit any of those descriptions.

Letting go would truly be the ultimate act of love under these circumstances. But if anyone honestly believes they wouldn't feel a bitter sting of jealousy in this situation, then they’re clearly giving themselves far too much credit—they're acting like they've got a halo.

Some people claim they can pull that off—they’re probably operating on some "higher" plane than I am. Personally, I don't see myself ever reaching that level. People often label jealousy as mere selfishness, but that logic doesn't hold water for me. At its core, romantic love is inherently selfish. I truly cannot wrap my head around the idea of someone not feeling a shred of jealousy when the person they love is with someone else, much less being happy for them about it. 🙄

I find myself wondering the same thing. Judging by some of the people in this thread (cough), you’d think one could just "realize" that everything is happening inside their own head—that it's all under their control, their responsibility, and so on. And then, apparently, that feeling is supposed to just magically vanish. I don't know. Maybe it would disappear, but you’d also get rid of it if you went in for a lobotomy or decided to get high.

I’d honestly rather undergo a lobotomy. 😁

Well, now you’re doing exactly what you were questioning just two paragraphs ago. Honestly. Realizing the cold, hard truth doesn't necessarily have to kill that unpleasant feeling, though I suppose you could still use a little comfort.

Under your definition of "facts," I assume every man—unless he’s blind—is supposed to see it. 😬Sure, he might check out an attractive woman. But why on earth would I go out and cause trouble just because of that? Honestly, what bugs me more is when he stares and I *know* he’s staring, yet he has the nerve to look me in the eye and claim he isn't. It’s that feeling that, in his mind, I’m the only one who exists—as if he can just ignore reality to keep me happy. 🙄 Well, that's exactly what sets me off—literally. 😳

It always comes back to that "better than nothing" mentality. That’s exactly why I argue that relationships are mostly—if not entirely—illogical.

Logically speaking, they make zero sense. But humans have this innate, desperate need to be loved and to feel connected—we’re social animals, after all. Besides, you can't exactly "rationally" perceive love, so logic isn't even part of the equation. 😁

Honesty isn't enough. Not even close. If you look someone straight in the eye and tell them you despise them from the bottom of your soul, should they really be thanking you for your "beautiful transparency"? LOL.

I tend to swing between intense affection and total disdain in the same breath. Usually, I’m pretty upfront about it, too. 🤣 Look, I’ll be blunt: I tend to be brutally honest. Most of the time.

Look, I’m not saying cheating is "better"—honestly, I value sincerity far more than that. But this specific brand of "honesty" where people say, "Let's just stay together until someone better comes along"? That doesn't exactly strike me as a rock-solid foundation for a relationship.

I’m certainly no saint. I might indulge in a little white lie now and then, but for the most part, I’m an open book. To me, honesty is the bedrock of any relationship. It’s actually absurd that you think my "greatest love" started in a way that contradicts your definition of a solid foundation. Honestly, it would have been the romance of the century if we hadn't gone our separate ways. 😬

I mean, if that’s really how things stand, you have to wonder why anyone would even bother "formalizing" the arrangement or calling it a "relationship." If that's the case, "friends with benefits" is a much more accurate way to put it, LOL.

I’ve never been a fan of the whole "open relationship" concept—in my experience, it’s usually a total mess. I haven't personally ventured down that path, but watching the people around me, it's clear that these arrangements are rarely as "free" as they claim to be. It’s almost never a win-win situation. There is always one person who ends up more emotionally invested, essentially playing the martyr just so the other person can do whatever they want without feeling guilty.

I don't know, I'm not really fond of using the word "selfish" here. Why call it selfishness? To me, a feeling isn't selfish—actions are. I don't view certain types of jealousy as an "expression of selfishness." It's just a negative emotion resulting from a realization or an insight (or sometimes a delusion). That feeling itself isn't selfish; it only becomes selfish depending on how you choose to act when you feel it.

Sean Cruz said:It’s neither snow nor swans. 😁

That’s just one—well, two—of the ingredients in the messy concoction they call "love," but it certainly isn't the only one.

There’s also an element of attraction involved, though I suppose that’s a given.

I’m an agnostic—which is basically just a polite way of saying I'm 98% atheist. LOL.

Did you end up taking that spirituality assessment? 🤣 Me too, though I don't fit any of those descriptions.

Letting go would truly be the ultimate act of love under these circumstances. But if anyone honestly believes they wouldn't feel a bitter sting of jealousy in this situation, then they’re clearly giving themselves far too much credit—they're acting like they've got a halo.

Some people claim they can pull that off—they’re probably operating on some "higher" plane than I am. Personally, I don't see myself ever reaching that level. People often label jealousy as mere selfishness, but that logic doesn't hold water for me. At its core, romantic love is inherently selfish. I truly cannot wrap my head around the idea of someone not feeling a shred of jealousy when the person they love is with someone else, much less being happy for them about it. 🙄

I find myself wondering the same thing. Judging by some of the people in this thread (cough), you’d think one could just "realize" that everything is happening inside their own head—that it's all under their control, their responsibility, and so on. And then, apparently, that feeling is supposed to just magically vanish. I don't know. Maybe it would disappear, but you’d also get rid of it if you went in for a lobotomy or decided to get high.

I’d honestly rather undergo a lobotomy. 😁

Well, now you’re doing exactly what you were questioning just two paragraphs ago. Honestly. Realizing the cold, hard truth doesn't necessarily have to kill that unpleasant feeling, though I suppose you could still use a little comfort.

Under your definition of "facts," I assume every man—unless he’s blind—is supposed to see it. 😬Sure, he might check out an attractive woman. But why on earth would I go out and cause trouble just because of that? Honestly, what bugs me more is when he stares and I *know* he’s staring, yet he has the nerve to look me in the eye and claim he isn't. It’s that feeling that, in his mind, I’m the only one who exists—as if he can just ignore reality to keep me happy. 🙄 Well, that's exactly what sets me off—literally. 😳

It always comes back to that "better than nothing" mentality. That’s exactly why I argue that relationships are mostly—if not entirely—illogical.

Logically speaking, they make zero sense. But humans have this innate, desperate need to be loved and to feel connected—we’re social animals, after all. Besides, you can't exactly "rationally" perceive love, so logic isn't even part of the equation. 😁

Honesty isn't enough. Not even close. If you look someone straight in the eye and tell them you despise them from the bottom of your soul, should they really be thanking you for your "beautiful transparency"? LOL.

I tend to swing between intense affection and total disdain in the same breath. Usually, I’m pretty upfront about it, too. 🤣 Look, I’ll be blunt: I tend to be brutally honest. Most of the time.

Look, I’m not saying cheating is "better"—honestly, I value sincerity far more than that. But this specific brand of "honesty" where people say, "Let's just stay together until someone better comes along"? That doesn't exactly strike me as a rock-solid foundation for a relationship.

I’m certainly no saint. I might indulge in a little white lie now and then, but for the most part, I’m an open book. To me, honesty is the bedrock of any relationship. It’s actually absurd that you think my "greatest love" started in a way that contradicts your definition of a solid foundation. Honestly, it would have been the romance of the century if we hadn't gone our separate ways. 😬

I mean, if that’s really how things stand, you have to wonder why anyone would even bother "formalizing" the arrangement or calling it a "relationship." If that's the case, "friends with benefits" is a much more accurate way to put it, LOL.

I’ve never been a fan of the whole "open relationship" concept—in my experience, it’s usually a total mess. I haven't personally ventured down that path, but watching the people around me, it's clear that these arrangements are rarely as "free" as they claim to be. It’s almost never a win-win situation. There is always one person who ends up more emotionally invested, essentially playing the martyr just so the other person can do whatever they want without feeling guilty.

He probably thinks that's what you want to hear. 😬
I'll say it again: the point isn't what you notice, whether you want to or not. The point is your intentions, your plans, and your motives. There is a massive difference between noticing another attractive woman and actively wondering how to get with her—actually weighing that "option" as a real possibility.

Sean Cruz said:It’s neither snow nor swans. 😁

That’s just one—well, two—of the ingredients in the messy concoction they call "love," but it certainly isn't the only one.

There’s also an element of attraction involved, though I suppose that’s a given.

I’m an agnostic—which is basically just a polite way of saying I'm 98% atheist. LOL.

Did you end up taking that spirituality assessment? 🤣 Me too, though I don't fit any of those descriptions.

Letting go would truly be the ultimate act of love under these circumstances. But if anyone honestly believes they wouldn't feel a bitter sting of jealousy in this situation, then they’re clearly giving themselves far too much credit—they're acting like they've got a halo.

Some people claim they can pull that off—they’re probably operating on some "higher" plane than I am. Personally, I don't see myself ever reaching that level. People often label jealousy as mere selfishness, but that logic doesn't hold water for me. At its core, romantic love is inherently selfish. I truly cannot wrap my head around the idea of someone not feeling a shred of jealousy when the person they love is with someone else, much less being happy for them about it. 🙄

I find myself wondering the same thing. Judging by some of the people in this thread (cough), you’d think one could just "realize" that everything is happening inside their own head—that it's all under their control, their responsibility, and so on. And then, apparently, that feeling is supposed to just magically vanish. I don't know. Maybe it would disappear, but you’d also get rid of it if you went in for a lobotomy or decided to get high.

I’d honestly rather undergo a lobotomy. 😁

Well, now you’re doing exactly what you were questioning just two paragraphs ago. Honestly. Realizing the cold, hard truth doesn't necessarily have to kill that unpleasant feeling, though I suppose you could still use a little comfort.

Under your definition of "facts," I assume every man—unless he’s blind—is supposed to see it. 😬Sure, he might check out an attractive woman. But why on earth would I go out and cause trouble just because of that? Honestly, what bugs me more is when he stares and I *know* he’s staring, yet he has the nerve to look me in the eye and claim he isn't. It’s that feeling that, in his mind, I’m the only one who exists—as if he can just ignore reality to keep me happy. 🙄 Well, that's exactly what sets me off—literally. 😳

It always comes back to that "better than nothing" mentality. That’s exactly why I argue that relationships are mostly—if not entirely—illogical.

Logically speaking, they make zero sense. But humans have this innate, desperate need to be loved and to feel connected—we’re social animals, after all. Besides, you can't exactly "rationally" perceive love, so logic isn't even part of the equation. 😁

Honesty isn't enough. Not even close. If you look someone straight in the eye and tell them you despise them from the bottom of your soul, should they really be thanking you for your "beautiful transparency"? LOL.

I tend to swing between intense affection and total disdain in the same breath. Usually, I’m pretty upfront about it, too. 🤣 Look, I’ll be blunt: I tend to be brutally honest. Most of the time.

Look, I’m not saying cheating is "better"—honestly, I value sincerity far more than that. But this specific brand of "honesty" where people say, "Let's just stay together until someone better comes along"? That doesn't exactly strike me as a rock-solid foundation for a relationship.

I’m certainly no saint. I might indulge in a little white lie now and then, but for the most part, I’m an open book. To me, honesty is the bedrock of any relationship. It’s actually absurd that you think my "greatest love" started in a way that contradicts your definition of a solid foundation. Honestly, it would have been the romance of the century if we hadn't gone our separate ways. 😬

I mean, if that’s really how things stand, you have to wonder why anyone would even bother "formalizing" the arrangement or calling it a "relationship." If that's the case, "friends with benefits" is a much more accurate way to put it, LOL.

I’ve never been a fan of the whole "open relationship" concept—in my experience, it’s usually a total mess. I haven't personally ventured down that path, but watching the people around me, it's clear that these arrangements are rarely as "free" as they claim to be. It’s almost never a win-win situation. There is always one person who ends up more emotionally invested, essentially playing the martyr just so the other person can do whatever they want without feeling guilty.

Haha, well, you basically answered your own question. You started this way, and you’re ending it the same way. I’m not saying I’m any smarter than you... I’m just being brutally honest, heh.

Let me reiterate: honesty is one of the fundamental pillars, and without it, nothing works. But on its own? It isn't enough. At least, it isn't for me. I’m not saying you can't define things differently—if that's how you see it, then that's your prerogative. For me, though, I define things a bit differently, for better or for worse.

I’ve trimmed this down a bit—don't want us getting too far off track...

Sean Cruz said:You experience love as something mystical because you feel its weight, yet finding the right words to describe it feels almost impossible. It’s one of those things that defies explanation. Ernest Hemingway once captured this perfectly when he described love and friendship as simply "that which happens," leaving us to wonder exactly why.
To me, love is best defined through concepts. Closeness. i Commitment. It’s that moment when all the masks finally slip, leaving you completely exposed before the person you love. That is the closest definition I can find. I agree with you—it's much better to find different ways to express it. Honestly, the most nonsensical phrase of all is "I love you." It sounds so hollow to me that the moment someone actually says it, that's exactly when I start doubting if they even mean it. 🤣
It just occurred to me: if you view the concept of love through a "mystical" lens, can you honestly still call yourself an atheist? 😬

It’s even easier to spot in those places. As I’ve said before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you might lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone acts selfishly toward their partner, they're essentially driven by that fear—the dread that they might lose what they currently believe belongs to them.

That borders on being possessive. Actually, now that I think about it, there’s a razor-thin line between possession and jealousy. The ultimate act of love would be to "let go" to ensure the person we love finds happiness—even if that happiness doesn't include us. However, I suspect that perspective feels devastatingly hollow to the one being left behind. It is simply human nature to feel pain when losing someone you care about, and frankly, to feel jealous if that person finds bliss in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying this or labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder." 🤷

It’s essentially that old adage: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who is infinitely "better" suited for any given role, or some grander opportunity waiting just around the corner. But honestly, why would you let go of what you actually have right now just to chase a shadow? 🤣 If you were going out to hunt pigeons—assuming you even managed to catch one—which kind would you go after?

Hunting for the right pigeon would be quite the challenge, but how can you ever be sure it’s actually the one you’re looking for?

It’s not about gaining insight; it’s just how you comfort yourself. But hey, that’s fine—everyone needs a little solace now and then.

I wouldn't call this comfort; it's more like an acceptance of reality. You can't actually "prevent" anyone from doing what they set their mind to if that’s what they truly want to do. And honestly, why bother beating yourself up over it? You can't stop bullshit from happening—you can only be aware that it is.

Excessive jealousy is a fast track to self-destruction, especially when the relationship is one-sided. When one partner is obsessively jealous, it’s usually because they’re clinging to someone who isn't actually invested in them. It boils down to that bleak principle: "anything is better than nothing." 😠
Look, I'm sticking with you because, frankly, there isn't anything better on the horizon right now... though that doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay sharp. If you aren't paying attention, you might just let a massive opportunity slip through your fingers, wasting your life by failing to make the most of the options actually sitting in front of you. 😬

In relationships, that dynamic is almost always asymmetrical. One person inevitably cares more than the other. I suspect truly symmetrical connections are incredibly rare—if they even exist at all.

It’s a completely different matter how people actually tolerate one another when they both know, fundamentally, that these kinds of mental processes are happening on both sides. To me, honestly, it's a total mystery.

To would be my definition of an "ideal relationship." Is there anything more beautiful than complete, unvarnished honesty?

To have a discussion with Drew Morgan, LOL.

I can't think of anything. 🤣

Is it a genuine feeling, or am I just chasing an illusion... xexexe Quote

Sean Cruz said:You experience love as something mystical because you feel its weight, yet finding the right words to describe it feels almost impossible. It’s one of those things that defies explanation. Ernest Hemingway once captured this perfectly when he described love and friendship as simply "that which happens," leaving us to wonder exactly why.
To me, love is best defined through concepts. Closeness. i Commitment. It’s that moment when all the masks finally slip, leaving you completely exposed before the person you love. That is the closest definition I can find. I agree with you—it's much better to find different ways to express it. Honestly, the most nonsensical phrase of all is "I love you." It sounds so hollow to me that the moment someone actually says it, that's exactly when I start doubting if they even mean it. 🤣
It just occurred to me: if you view the concept of love through a "mystical" lens, can you honestly still call yourself an atheist? 😬

It’s even easier to spot in those places. As I’ve said before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you might lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone acts selfishly toward their partner, they're essentially driven by that fear—the dread that they might lose what they currently believe belongs to them.

That borders on being possessive. Actually, now that I think about it, there’s a razor-thin line between possession and jealousy. The ultimate act of love would be to "let go" to ensure the person we love finds happiness—even if that happiness doesn't include us. However, I suspect that perspective feels devastatingly hollow to the one being left behind. It is simply human nature to feel pain when losing someone you care about, and frankly, to feel jealous if that person finds bliss in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying this or labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder." 🤷

It’s essentially that old adage: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who is infinitely "better" suited for any given role, or some grander opportunity waiting just around the corner. But honestly, why would you let go of what you actually have right now just to chase a shadow? 🤣 If you were going out to hunt pigeons—assuming you even managed to catch one—which kind would you go after?

Hunting for the right pigeon would be quite the challenge, but how can you ever be sure it’s actually the one you’re looking for?

It’s not about gaining insight; it’s just how you comfort yourself. But hey, that’s fine—everyone needs a little solace now and then.

I wouldn't call this comfort; it's more like an acceptance of reality. You can't actually "prevent" anyone from doing what they set their mind to if that’s what they truly want to do. And honestly, why bother beating yourself up over it? You can't stop bullshit from happening—you can only be aware that it is.

Excessive jealousy is a fast track to self-destruction, especially when the relationship is one-sided. When one partner is obsessively jealous, it’s usually because they’re clinging to someone who isn't actually invested in them. It boils down to that bleak principle: "anything is better than nothing." 😠
Look, I'm sticking with you because, frankly, there isn't anything better on the horizon right now... though that doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay sharp. If you aren't paying attention, you might just let a massive opportunity slip through your fingers, wasting your life by failing to make the most of the options actually sitting in front of you. 😬

In relationships, that dynamic is almost always asymmetrical. One person inevitably cares more than the other. I suspect truly symmetrical connections are incredibly rare—if they even exist at all.

It’s a completely different matter how people actually tolerate one another when they both know, fundamentally, that these kinds of mental processes are happening on both sides. To me, honestly, it's a total mystery.

To would be my definition of an "ideal relationship." Is there anything more beautiful than complete, unvarnished honesty?

To have a discussion with Drew Morgan, LOL.

I can't think of anything. 🤣

That’s one (well, two) ingredients in the messy cocktail we call 'love,' but it isn't the only one.

Sean Cruz said:You experience love as something mystical because you feel its weight, yet finding the right words to describe it feels almost impossible. It’s one of those things that defies explanation. Ernest Hemingway once captured this perfectly when he described love and friendship as simply "that which happens," leaving us to wonder exactly why.
To me, love is best defined through concepts. Closeness. i Commitment. It’s that moment when all the masks finally slip, leaving you completely exposed before the person you love. That is the closest definition I can find. I agree with you—it's much better to find different ways to express it. Honestly, the most nonsensical phrase of all is "I love you." It sounds so hollow to me that the moment someone actually says it, that's exactly when I start doubting if they even mean it. 🤣
It just occurred to me: if you view the concept of love through a "mystical" lens, can you honestly still call yourself an atheist? 😬

It’s even easier to spot in those places. As I’ve said before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you might lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone acts selfishly toward their partner, they're essentially driven by that fear—the dread that they might lose what they currently believe belongs to them.

That borders on being possessive. Actually, now that I think about it, there’s a razor-thin line between possession and jealousy. The ultimate act of love would be to "let go" to ensure the person we love finds happiness—even if that happiness doesn't include us. However, I suspect that perspective feels devastatingly hollow to the one being left behind. It is simply human nature to feel pain when losing someone you care about, and frankly, to feel jealous if that person finds bliss in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying this or labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder." 🤷

It’s essentially that old adage: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who is infinitely "better" suited for any given role, or some grander opportunity waiting just around the corner. But honestly, why would you let go of what you actually have right now just to chase a shadow? 🤣 If you were going out to hunt pigeons—assuming you even managed to catch one—which kind would you go after?

Hunting for the right pigeon would be quite the challenge, but how can you ever be sure it’s actually the one you’re looking for?

It’s not about gaining insight; it’s just how you comfort yourself. But hey, that’s fine—everyone needs a little solace now and then.

I wouldn't call this comfort; it's more like an acceptance of reality. You can't actually "prevent" anyone from doing what they set their mind to if that’s what they truly want to do. And honestly, why bother beating yourself up over it? You can't stop bullshit from happening—you can only be aware that it is.

Excessive jealousy is a fast track to self-destruction, especially when the relationship is one-sided. When one partner is obsessively jealous, it’s usually because they’re clinging to someone who isn't actually invested in them. It boils down to that bleak principle: "anything is better than nothing." 😠
Look, I'm sticking with you because, frankly, there isn't anything better on the horizon right now... though that doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay sharp. If you aren't paying attention, you might just let a massive opportunity slip through your fingers, wasting your life by failing to make the most of the options actually sitting in front of you. 😬

In relationships, that dynamic is almost always asymmetrical. One person inevitably cares more than the other. I suspect truly symmetrical connections are incredibly rare—if they even exist at all.

It’s a completely different matter how people actually tolerate one another when they both know, fundamentally, that these kinds of mental processes are happening on both sides. To me, honestly, it's a total mystery.

To would be my definition of an "ideal relationship." Is there anything more beautiful than complete, unvarnished honesty?

To have a discussion with Drew Morgan, LOL.

I can't think of anything. 🤣

An agnostic, 98% atheist LOL.

Sean Cruz said:You experience love as something mystical because you feel its weight, yet finding the right words to describe it feels almost impossible. It’s one of those things that defies explanation. Ernest Hemingway once captured this perfectly when he described love and friendship as simply "that which happens," leaving us to wonder exactly why.
To me, love is best defined through concepts. Closeness. i Commitment. It’s that moment when all the masks finally slip, leaving you completely exposed before the person you love. That is the closest definition I can find. I agree with you—it's much better to find different ways to express it. Honestly, the most nonsensical phrase of all is "I love you." It sounds so hollow to me that the moment someone actually says it, that's exactly when I start doubting if they even mean it. 🤣
It just occurred to me: if you view the concept of love through a "mystical" lens, can you honestly still call yourself an atheist? 😬

It’s even easier to spot in those places. As I’ve said before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you might lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone acts selfishly toward their partner, they're essentially driven by that fear—the dread that they might lose what they currently believe belongs to them.

That borders on being possessive. Actually, now that I think about it, there’s a razor-thin line between possession and jealousy. The ultimate act of love would be to "let go" to ensure the person we love finds happiness—even if that happiness doesn't include us. However, I suspect that perspective feels devastatingly hollow to the one being left behind. It is simply human nature to feel pain when losing someone you care about, and frankly, to feel jealous if that person finds bliss in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying this or labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder." 🤷

It’s essentially that old adage: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who is infinitely "better" suited for any given role, or some grander opportunity waiting just around the corner. But honestly, why would you let go of what you actually have right now just to chase a shadow? 🤣 If you were going out to hunt pigeons—assuming you even managed to catch one—which kind would you go after?

Hunting for the right pigeon would be quite the challenge, but how can you ever be sure it’s actually the one you’re looking for?

It’s not about gaining insight; it’s just how you comfort yourself. But hey, that’s fine—everyone needs a little solace now and then.

I wouldn't call this comfort; it's more like an acceptance of reality. You can't actually "prevent" anyone from doing what they set their mind to if that’s what they truly want to do. And honestly, why bother beating yourself up over it? You can't stop bullshit from happening—you can only be aware that it is.

Excessive jealousy is a fast track to self-destruction, especially when the relationship is one-sided. When one partner is obsessively jealous, it’s usually because they’re clinging to someone who isn't actually invested in them. It boils down to that bleak principle: "anything is better than nothing." 😠
Look, I'm sticking with you because, frankly, there isn't anything better on the horizon right now... though that doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay sharp. If you aren't paying attention, you might just let a massive opportunity slip through your fingers, wasting your life by failing to make the most of the options actually sitting in front of you. 😬

In relationships, that dynamic is almost always asymmetrical. One person inevitably cares more than the other. I suspect truly symmetrical connections are incredibly rare—if they even exist at all.

It’s a completely different matter how people actually tolerate one another when they both know, fundamentally, that these kinds of mental processes are happening on both sides. To me, honestly, it's a total mystery.

To would be my definition of an "ideal relationship." Is there anything more beautiful than complete, unvarnished honesty?

To have a discussion with Drew Morgan, LOL.

I can't think of anything. 🤣

Exactly. That's what I mean. You know how it goes: he says, "I'd do anything for you," and she replies, "Then let me go," and he starts stammering, "But... I mean..." 'Anything' my foot, LOL.
So, in those circumstances, truly "letting go" would indeed be the greatest act of love. But if someone thinks they wouldn't feel even a hint of jealousy in that situation, they're basically claiming to be a saint.

Sean Cruz
It’s just human nature to feel pain when you lose someone you love. Heck, we even feel jealousy if that person finds happiness in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying that and labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder."

I find myself wondering the same thing. 🤷 Judging by some folks here (cough), you're supposed to just "understand" that it's all in your head, under your control, your responsibility... and so on. 😬 — and apparently, that should magically make the feeling vanish. Well, maybe it would, but you could also make it disappear with a lobotomy or by getting high. 🤷

Sean Cruz said:You experience love as something mystical because you feel its weight, yet finding the right words to describe it feels almost impossible. It’s one of those things that defies explanation. Ernest Hemingway once captured this perfectly when he described love and friendship as simply "that which happens," leaving us to wonder exactly why.
To me, love is best defined through concepts. Closeness. i Commitment. It’s that moment when all the masks finally slip, leaving you completely exposed before the person you love. That is the closest definition I can find. I agree with you—it's much better to find different ways to express it. Honestly, the most nonsensical phrase of all is "I love you." It sounds so hollow to me that the moment someone actually says it, that's exactly when I start doubting if they even mean it. 🤣
It just occurred to me: if you view the concept of love through a "mystical" lens, can you honestly still call yourself an atheist? 😬

It’s even easier to spot in those places. As I’ve said before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you might lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone acts selfishly toward their partner, they're essentially driven by that fear—the dread that they might lose what they currently believe belongs to them.

That borders on being possessive. Actually, now that I think about it, there’s a razor-thin line between possession and jealousy. The ultimate act of love would be to "let go" to ensure the person we love finds happiness—even if that happiness doesn't include us. However, I suspect that perspective feels devastatingly hollow to the one being left behind. It is simply human nature to feel pain when losing someone you care about, and frankly, to feel jealous if that person finds bliss in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying this or labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder." 🤷

It’s essentially that old adage: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who is infinitely "better" suited for any given role, or some grander opportunity waiting just around the corner. But honestly, why would you let go of what you actually have right now just to chase a shadow? 🤣 If you were going out to hunt pigeons—assuming you even managed to catch one—which kind would you go after?

Hunting for the right pigeon would be quite the challenge, but how can you ever be sure it’s actually the one you’re looking for?

It’s not about gaining insight; it’s just how you comfort yourself. But hey, that’s fine—everyone needs a little solace now and then.

I wouldn't call this comfort; it's more like an acceptance of reality. You can't actually "prevent" anyone from doing what they set their mind to if that’s what they truly want to do. And honestly, why bother beating yourself up over it? You can't stop bullshit from happening—you can only be aware that it is.

Excessive jealousy is a fast track to self-destruction, especially when the relationship is one-sided. When one partner is obsessively jealous, it’s usually because they’re clinging to someone who isn't actually invested in them. It boils down to that bleak principle: "anything is better than nothing." 😠
Look, I'm sticking with you because, frankly, there isn't anything better on the horizon right now... though that doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay sharp. If you aren't paying attention, you might just let a massive opportunity slip through your fingers, wasting your life by failing to make the most of the options actually sitting in front of you. 😬

In relationships, that dynamic is almost always asymmetrical. One person inevitably cares more than the other. I suspect truly symmetrical connections are incredibly rare—if they even exist at all.

It’s a completely different matter how people actually tolerate one another when they both know, fundamentally, that these kinds of mental processes are happening on both sides. To me, honestly, it's a total mystery.

To would be my definition of an "ideal relationship." Is there anything more beautiful than complete, unvarnished honesty?

To have a discussion with Drew Morgan, LOL.

I can't think of anything. 🤣

You won't. But that's a whole different conversation.

Sean Cruz said:You experience love as something mystical because you feel its weight, yet finding the right words to describe it feels almost impossible. It’s one of those things that defies explanation. Ernest Hemingway once captured this perfectly when he described love and friendship as simply "that which happens," leaving us to wonder exactly why.
To me, love is best defined through concepts. Closeness. i Commitment. It’s that moment when all the masks finally slip, leaving you completely exposed before the person you love. That is the closest definition I can find. I agree with you—it's much better to find different ways to express it. Honestly, the most nonsensical phrase of all is "I love you." It sounds so hollow to me that the moment someone actually says it, that's exactly when I start doubting if they even mean it. 🤣
It just occurred to me: if you view the concept of love through a "mystical" lens, can you honestly still call yourself an atheist? 😬

It’s even easier to spot in those places. As I’ve said before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you might lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone acts selfishly toward their partner, they're essentially driven by that fear—the dread that they might lose what they currently believe belongs to them.

That borders on being possessive. Actually, now that I think about it, there’s a razor-thin line between possession and jealousy. The ultimate act of love would be to "let go" to ensure the person we love finds happiness—even if that happiness doesn't include us. However, I suspect that perspective feels devastatingly hollow to the one being left behind. It is simply human nature to feel pain when losing someone you care about, and frankly, to feel jealous if that person finds bliss in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying this or labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder." 🤷

It’s essentially that old adage: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who is infinitely "better" suited for any given role, or some grander opportunity waiting just around the corner. But honestly, why would you let go of what you actually have right now just to chase a shadow? 🤣 If you were going out to hunt pigeons—assuming you even managed to catch one—which kind would you go after?

Hunting for the right pigeon would be quite the challenge, but how can you ever be sure it’s actually the one you’re looking for?

It’s not about gaining insight; it’s just how you comfort yourself. But hey, that’s fine—everyone needs a little solace now and then.

I wouldn't call this comfort; it's more like an acceptance of reality. You can't actually "prevent" anyone from doing what they set their mind to if that’s what they truly want to do. And honestly, why bother beating yourself up over it? You can't stop bullshit from happening—you can only be aware that it is.

Excessive jealousy is a fast track to self-destruction, especially when the relationship is one-sided. When one partner is obsessively jealous, it’s usually because they’re clinging to someone who isn't actually invested in them. It boils down to that bleak principle: "anything is better than nothing." 😠
Look, I'm sticking with you because, frankly, there isn't anything better on the horizon right now... though that doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay sharp. If you aren't paying attention, you might just let a massive opportunity slip through your fingers, wasting your life by failing to make the most of the options actually sitting in front of you. 😬

In relationships, that dynamic is almost always asymmetrical. One person inevitably cares more than the other. I suspect truly symmetrical connections are incredibly rare—if they even exist at all.

It’s a completely different matter how people actually tolerate one another when they both know, fundamentally, that these kinds of mental processes are happening on both sides. To me, honestly, it's a total mystery.

To would be my definition of an "ideal relationship." Is there anything more beautiful than complete, unvarnished honesty?

To have a discussion with Drew Morgan, LOL.

I can't think of anything. 🤣

😬 Well, now you're doing exactly what you were questioning two paragraphs ago, haha. Realizing the facts doesn't necessarily kill the nasty feeling. You still need comfort.

Sean Cruz said:You experience love as something mystical because you feel its weight, yet finding the right words to describe it feels almost impossible. It’s one of those things that defies explanation. Ernest Hemingway once captured this perfectly when he described love and friendship as simply "that which happens," leaving us to wonder exactly why.
To me, love is best defined through concepts. Closeness. i Commitment. It’s that moment when all the masks finally slip, leaving you completely exposed before the person you love. That is the closest definition I can find. I agree with you—it's much better to find different ways to express it. Honestly, the most nonsensical phrase of all is "I love you." It sounds so hollow to me that the moment someone actually says it, that's exactly when I start doubting if they even mean it. 🤣
It just occurred to me: if you view the concept of love through a "mystical" lens, can you honestly still call yourself an atheist? 😬

It’s even easier to spot in those places. As I’ve said before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you might lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone acts selfishly toward their partner, they're essentially driven by that fear—the dread that they might lose what they currently believe belongs to them.

That borders on being possessive. Actually, now that I think about it, there’s a razor-thin line between possession and jealousy. The ultimate act of love would be to "let go" to ensure the person we love finds happiness—even if that happiness doesn't include us. However, I suspect that perspective feels devastatingly hollow to the one being left behind. It is simply human nature to feel pain when losing someone you care about, and frankly, to feel jealous if that person finds bliss in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying this or labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder." 🤷

It’s essentially that old adage: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who is infinitely "better" suited for any given role, or some grander opportunity waiting just around the corner. But honestly, why would you let go of what you actually have right now just to chase a shadow? 🤣 If you were going out to hunt pigeons—assuming you even managed to catch one—which kind would you go after?

Hunting for the right pigeon would be quite the challenge, but how can you ever be sure it’s actually the one you’re looking for?

It’s not about gaining insight; it’s just how you comfort yourself. But hey, that’s fine—everyone needs a little solace now and then.

I wouldn't call this comfort; it's more like an acceptance of reality. You can't actually "prevent" anyone from doing what they set their mind to if that’s what they truly want to do. And honestly, why bother beating yourself up over it? You can't stop bullshit from happening—you can only be aware that it is.

Excessive jealousy is a fast track to self-destruction, especially when the relationship is one-sided. When one partner is obsessively jealous, it’s usually because they’re clinging to someone who isn't actually invested in them. It boils down to that bleak principle: "anything is better than nothing." 😠
Look, I'm sticking with you because, frankly, there isn't anything better on the horizon right now... though that doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay sharp. If you aren't paying attention, you might just let a massive opportunity slip through your fingers, wasting your life by failing to make the most of the options actually sitting in front of you. 😬

In relationships, that dynamic is almost always asymmetrical. One person inevitably cares more than the other. I suspect truly symmetrical connections are incredibly rare—if they even exist at all.

It’s a completely different matter how people actually tolerate one another when they both know, fundamentally, that these kinds of mental processes are happening on both sides. To me, honestly, it's a total mystery.

To would be my definition of an "ideal relationship." Is there anything more beautiful than complete, unvarnished honesty?

To have a discussion with Drew Morgan, LOL.

I can't think of anything. 🤣

🤷 That all comes back to the idea of "something is better than nothing"... which is why I say relationships are mostly logically nonsensical, and perhaps even in every single case. 😈

Sean Cruz said:You experience love as something mystical because you feel its weight, yet finding the right words to describe it feels almost impossible. It’s one of those things that defies explanation. Ernest Hemingway once captured this perfectly when he described love and friendship as simply "that which happens," leaving us to wonder exactly why.
To me, love is best defined through concepts. Closeness. i Commitment. It’s that moment when all the masks finally slip, leaving you completely exposed before the person you love. That is the closest definition I can find. I agree with you—it's much better to find different ways to express it. Honestly, the most nonsensical phrase of all is "I love you." It sounds so hollow to me that the moment someone actually says it, that's exactly when I start doubting if they even mean it. 🤣
It just occurred to me: if you view the concept of love through a "mystical" lens, can you honestly still call yourself an atheist? 😬

It’s even easier to spot in those places. As I’ve said before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you might lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone acts selfishly toward their partner, they're essentially driven by that fear—the dread that they might lose what they currently believe belongs to them.

That borders on being possessive. Actually, now that I think about it, there’s a razor-thin line between possession and jealousy. The ultimate act of love would be to "let go" to ensure the person we love finds happiness—even if that happiness doesn't include us. However, I suspect that perspective feels devastatingly hollow to the one being left behind. It is simply human nature to feel pain when losing someone you care about, and frankly, to feel jealous if that person finds bliss in someone else's arms. I don't understand why people insist on denying this or labeling the feeling as some kind of "disorder." 🤷

It’s essentially that old adage: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who is infinitely "better" suited for any given role, or some grander opportunity waiting just around the corner. But honestly, why would you let go of what you actually have right now just to chase a shadow? 🤣 If you were going out to hunt pigeons—assuming you even managed to catch one—which kind would you go after?

Hunting for the right pigeon would be quite the challenge, but how can you ever be sure it’s actually the one you’re looking for?

It’s not about gaining insight; it’s just how you comfort yourself. But hey, that’s fine—everyone needs a little solace now and then.

I wouldn't call this comfort; it's more like an acceptance of reality. You can't actually "prevent" anyone from doing what they set their mind to if that’s what they truly want to do. And honestly, why bother beating yourself up over it? You can't stop bullshit from happening—you can only be aware that it is.

Excessive jealousy is a fast track to self-destruction, especially when the relationship is one-sided. When one partner is obsessively jealous, it’s usually because they’re clinging to someone who isn't actually invested in them. It boils down to that bleak principle: "anything is better than nothing." 😠
Look, I'm sticking with you because, frankly, there isn't anything better on the horizon right now... though that doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay sharp. If you aren't paying attention, you might just let a massive opportunity slip through your fingers, wasting your life by failing to make the most of the options actually sitting in front of you. 😬

In relationships, that dynamic is almost always asymmetrical. One person inevitably cares more than the other. I suspect truly symmetrical connections are incredibly rare—if they even exist at all.

It’s a completely different matter how people actually tolerate one another when they both know, fundamentally, that these kinds of mental processes are happening on both sides. To me, honestly, it's a total mystery.

To would be my definition of an "ideal relationship." Is there anything more beautiful than complete, unvarnished honesty?

To have a discussion with Drew Morgan, LOL.

I can't think of anything. 🤣

😬 Honesty alone isn't enough. Not even close. If you tell someone straight to their face that you absolutely despise them, should they be happy because you were being so "honest"? LOL.

I mean, obviously lying isn't "better"—and I definitely prefer being truthful. But that specific kind of "honesty"—the "let's stay together until someone better comes along" variety😬 doesn't exactly strike me as an attractive foundation for a real relationship.

Because if that’s actually how things stand, you have to wonder why you'd even bother "formalizing" the arrangement or calling it a "relationship" in the first place. 🤷 In a situation like that, "friends with benefits" is probably a much more accurate description, LOL.

Sean Cruz said:You’re exaggerating by claiming "love" doesn't exist. 😁 It’s obvious there is something we call "love"; the real question is how each of us experiences it—essentially, what we choose to believe love actually is. 🤣
Quincy:

If love is just a hormonal imbalance, then it’s perfectly logical to fear that this imbalance will eventually "level out" for you, only to be triggered again by some other woman. (And vice versa, of course. 😬). Furthermore, it’s a reasonable fear that this has already happened, and that the "relationship" is being sustained solely by inertia on the other person's part.

I agree with that, though when you accept that nothing lasts forever—not even love—then jealousy becomes less intense. In fact, it seems inversely proportional to the number of years spent in a relationship. 🤣

Quincy:

Since jealousy is essentially the "fear of losing something perceived as valuable," it follows that feeling jealous in these circumstances is entirely logical. It would be irrational *not* to feel it, or to blindly "believe" in a love that is merely a hormonal fluke. Therefore, anyone who doesn't feel jealousy doesn't even love in that hormonal sense, let alone any other way.

I agree that jealousy belongs in romantic relationships, but how can there be jealousy where people don't even believe in love?
Do you really think people realize that "love" is an illusion, yet they still care enough about their partner that they fear losing them to someone they know is objectively better? 🤔
Quincy:

Or perhaps his faith is incredibly intense... though even then, I find myself wondering what the actual foundation of that "faith" is.

There is no "faith" involved—at least not in my case. I am fully aware that nothing lasts forever, and I refuse to waste my energy worrying about whether my partner might cheat on me instead of, say, peacefully scrolling through Reddit. 🤣

Quincy:

I won't even get started on what I think of the advice being given here... 😬😈

Dismissing mental health concerns is just ridiculous, but let's be real: excessive jealousy is a relationship killer. It can drive your partner straight into the arms of someone who isn't even an upgrade—someone arguably worse than you—just because they offer a sense of peace you couldn't provide. 😁
Quincy:

So, I’d say it’s fair to assume everyone feels at least a little bit of jealousy. Some people deal with a tiny amount, while others struggle with it constantly.

I'm on board with that. You can't have true love without a hint of jealousy; if there's absolutely none, then what you're feeling probably isn't actually love.

I don't quite follow that logic... It’s like you're claiming "X" definitely exists, but we're all just using different definitions for it. For one person, "X" might be nothing more than lounging on the sofa watching Netflix, while for someone else, it could be anything from skydiving to bungee jumping. 🤣
The core issue is that whenever someone uses the word "love," they’re usually just using a vague placeholder. In almost every instance, you could find a much more precise term—or a specific combination of terms—that actually describes what that person is feeling. That’s why I don't really see the utility in such a broad label; more often than not, it just leads to unnecessary misunderstandings.

I tend to view the concept of "love" through a mystical lens. But since I’m a general atheist, that creates a bit of a paradox: if I don't believe in the mystical, I struggle to believe in "love" as such a lofty, ethereal thing. It’s a bit of a catch-22, isn't it? Instead, I prefer using more grounded terms. To me, what people call love is really just a specific blend of attraction, affinity, benevolence, loyalty, and trust. Don't you think those terms provide much more clarity? 🤷

Sean Cruz said:You’re exaggerating by claiming "love" doesn't exist. 😁 It’s obvious there is something we call "love"; the real question is how each of us experiences it—essentially, what we choose to believe love actually is. 🤣
Quincy:

If love is just a hormonal imbalance, then it’s perfectly logical to fear that this imbalance will eventually "level out" for you, only to be triggered again by some other woman. (And vice versa, of course. 😬). Furthermore, it’s a reasonable fear that this has already happened, and that the "relationship" is being sustained solely by inertia on the other person's part.

I agree with that, though when you accept that nothing lasts forever—not even love—then jealousy becomes less intense. In fact, it seems inversely proportional to the number of years spent in a relationship. 🤣

Quincy:

Since jealousy is essentially the "fear of losing something perceived as valuable," it follows that feeling jealous in these circumstances is entirely logical. It would be irrational *not* to feel it, or to blindly "believe" in a love that is merely a hormonal fluke. Therefore, anyone who doesn't feel jealousy doesn't even love in that hormonal sense, let alone any other way.

I agree that jealousy belongs in romantic relationships, but how can there be jealousy where people don't even believe in love?
Do you really think people realize that "love" is an illusion, yet they still care enough about their partner that they fear losing them to someone they know is objectively better? 🤔
Quincy:

Or perhaps his faith is incredibly intense... though even then, I find myself wondering what the actual foundation of that "faith" is.

There is no "faith" involved—at least not in my case. I am fully aware that nothing lasts forever, and I refuse to waste my energy worrying about whether my partner might cheat on me instead of, say, peacefully scrolling through Reddit. 🤣

Quincy:

I won't even get started on what I think of the advice being given here... 😬😈

Dismissing mental health concerns is just ridiculous, but let's be real: excessive jealousy is a relationship killer. It can drive your partner straight into the arms of someone who isn't even an upgrade—someone arguably worse than you—just because they offer a sense of peace you couldn't provide. 😁
Quincy:

So, I’d say it’s fair to assume everyone feels at least a little bit of jealousy. Some people deal with a tiny amount, while others struggle with it constantly.

I'm on board with that. You can't have true love without a hint of jealousy; if there's absolutely none, then what you're feeling probably isn't actually love.

It’s even more straightforward than people realize. Like I mentioned before, jealousy is really just a byproduct of fearing you'll lose something you perceive as valuable. So, when someone is being selfish toward their partner, that jealousy is bound to show up—it's essentially just the fear of losing what they think they currently possess.

Sean Cruz said:You’re exaggerating by claiming "love" doesn't exist. 😁 It’s obvious there is something we call "love"; the real question is how each of us experiences it—essentially, what we choose to believe love actually is. 🤣
Quincy:

If love is just a hormonal imbalance, then it’s perfectly logical to fear that this imbalance will eventually "level out" for you, only to be triggered again by some other woman. (And vice versa, of course. 😬). Furthermore, it’s a reasonable fear that this has already happened, and that the "relationship" is being sustained solely by inertia on the other person's part.

I agree with that, though when you accept that nothing lasts forever—not even love—then jealousy becomes less intense. In fact, it seems inversely proportional to the number of years spent in a relationship. 🤣

Quincy:

Since jealousy is essentially the "fear of losing something perceived as valuable," it follows that feeling jealous in these circumstances is entirely logical. It would be irrational *not* to feel it, or to blindly "believe" in a love that is merely a hormonal fluke. Therefore, anyone who doesn't feel jealousy doesn't even love in that hormonal sense, let alone any other way.

I agree that jealousy belongs in romantic relationships, but how can there be jealousy where people don't even believe in love?
Do you really think people realize that "love" is an illusion, yet they still care enough about their partner that they fear losing them to someone they know is objectively better? 🤔
Quincy:

Or perhaps his faith is incredibly intense... though even then, I find myself wondering what the actual foundation of that "faith" is.

There is no "faith" involved—at least not in my case. I am fully aware that nothing lasts forever, and I refuse to waste my energy worrying about whether my partner might cheat on me instead of, say, peacefully scrolling through Reddit. 🤣

Quincy:

I won't even get started on what I think of the advice being given here... 😬😈

Dismissing mental health concerns is just ridiculous, but let's be real: excessive jealousy is a relationship killer. It can drive your partner straight into the arms of someone who isn't even an upgrade—someone arguably worse than you—just because they offer a sense of peace you couldn't provide. 😁
Quincy:

So, I’d say it’s fair to assume everyone feels at least a little bit of jealousy. Some people deal with a tiny amount, while others struggle with it constantly.

I'm on board with that. You can't have true love without a hint of jealousy; if there's absolutely none, then what you're feeling probably isn't actually love.

Exactly. Isn't that just old-school wisdom? "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Sure, there’s always someone out there who seems much, much "better" for anyone. But why would you let go of the bird you're actually holding 🤣 just to chase after a pigeon you might never even catch?

Sean Cruz said:You’re exaggerating by claiming "love" doesn't exist. 😁 It’s obvious there is something we call "love"; the real question is how each of us experiences it—essentially, what we choose to believe love actually is. 🤣
Quincy:

If love is just a hormonal imbalance, then it’s perfectly logical to fear that this imbalance will eventually "level out" for you, only to be triggered again by some other woman. (And vice versa, of course. 😬). Furthermore, it’s a reasonable fear that this has already happened, and that the "relationship" is being sustained solely by inertia on the other person's part.

I agree with that, though when you accept that nothing lasts forever—not even love—then jealousy becomes less intense. In fact, it seems inversely proportional to the number of years spent in a relationship. 🤣

Quincy:

Since jealousy is essentially the "fear of losing something perceived as valuable," it follows that feeling jealous in these circumstances is entirely logical. It would be irrational *not* to feel it, or to blindly "believe" in a love that is merely a hormonal fluke. Therefore, anyone who doesn't feel jealousy doesn't even love in that hormonal sense, let alone any other way.

I agree that jealousy belongs in romantic relationships, but how can there be jealousy where people don't even believe in love?
Do you really think people realize that "love" is an illusion, yet they still care enough about their partner that they fear losing them to someone they know is objectively better? 🤔
Quincy:

Or perhaps his faith is incredibly intense... though even then, I find myself wondering what the actual foundation of that "faith" is.

There is no "faith" involved—at least not in my case. I am fully aware that nothing lasts forever, and I refuse to waste my energy worrying about whether my partner might cheat on me instead of, say, peacefully scrolling through Reddit. 🤣

Quincy:

I won't even get started on what I think of the advice being given here... 😬😈

Dismissing mental health concerns is just ridiculous, but let's be real: excessive jealousy is a relationship killer. It can drive your partner straight into the arms of someone who isn't even an upgrade—someone arguably worse than you—just because they offer a sense of peace you couldn't provide. 😁
Quincy:

So, I’d say it’s fair to assume everyone feels at least a little bit of jealousy. Some people deal with a tiny amount, while others struggle with it constantly.

I'm on board with that. You can't have true love without a hint of jealousy; if there's absolutely none, then what you're feeling probably isn't actually love.

That's not really an epiphany; it's more like self-consolation. But hey, that's fine. Everyone needs a little comfort now and then...

Sean Cruz said:You’re exaggerating by claiming "love" doesn't exist. 😁 It’s obvious there is something we call "love"; the real question is how each of us experiences it—essentially, what we choose to believe love actually is. 🤣
Quincy:

If love is just a hormonal imbalance, then it’s perfectly logical to fear that this imbalance will eventually "level out" for you, only to be triggered again by some other woman. (And vice versa, of course. 😬). Furthermore, it’s a reasonable fear that this has already happened, and that the "relationship" is being sustained solely by inertia on the other person's part.

I agree with that, though when you accept that nothing lasts forever—not even love—then jealousy becomes less intense. In fact, it seems inversely proportional to the number of years spent in a relationship. 🤣

Quincy:

Since jealousy is essentially the "fear of losing something perceived as valuable," it follows that feeling jealous in these circumstances is entirely logical. It would be irrational *not* to feel it, or to blindly "believe" in a love that is merely a hormonal fluke. Therefore, anyone who doesn't feel jealousy doesn't even love in that hormonal sense, let alone any other way.

I agree that jealousy belongs in romantic relationships, but how can there be jealousy where people don't even believe in love?
Do you really think people realize that "love" is an illusion, yet they still care enough about their partner that they fear losing them to someone they know is objectively better? 🤔
Quincy:

Or perhaps his faith is incredibly intense... though even then, I find myself wondering what the actual foundation of that "faith" is.

There is no "faith" involved—at least not in my case. I am fully aware that nothing lasts forever, and I refuse to waste my energy worrying about whether my partner might cheat on me instead of, say, peacefully scrolling through Reddit. 🤣

Quincy:

I won't even get started on what I think of the advice being given here... 😬😈

Dismissing mental health concerns is just ridiculous, but let's be real: excessive jealousy is a relationship killer. It can drive your partner straight into the arms of someone who isn't even an upgrade—someone arguably worse than you—just because they offer a sense of peace you couldn't provide. 😁
Quincy:

So, I’d say it’s fair to assume everyone feels at least a little bit of jealousy. Some people deal with a tiny amount, while others struggle with it constantly.

I'm on board with that. You can't have true love without a hint of jealousy; if there's absolutely none, then what you're feeling probably isn't actually love.

Excessive jealousy leads to destruction, provided the relationship is asymmetrical. In other words, the "overly jealous" person is deeply attached, while the other party isn't quite feeling it. It goes back to what I mentioned earlier: the idea of settling for "anything rather than nothing." 😠
Or, they're with you because there's nothing better on the horizon right now... which doesn't mean something won't pop up tomorrow. You have to stay "on guard," don't you? Otherwise, you might miss a better opportunity and spend your whole life without ever seeing what else is out there. 😬

The other question is how people tolerate one another if they both secretly go through these kinds of mental gymnastics. To me, that's a total mystery.

Sean Cruz said:You’re exaggerating by claiming "love" doesn't exist. 😁 It’s obvious there is something we call "love"; the real question is how each of us experiences it—essentially, what we choose to believe love actually is. 🤣
Quincy:

If love is just a hormonal imbalance, then it’s perfectly logical to fear that this imbalance will eventually "level out" for you, only to be triggered again by some other woman. (And vice versa, of course. 😬). Furthermore, it’s a reasonable fear that this has already happened, and that the "relationship" is being sustained solely by inertia on the other person's part.

I agree with that, though when you accept that nothing lasts forever—not even love—then jealousy becomes less intense. In fact, it seems inversely proportional to the number of years spent in a relationship. 🤣

Quincy:

Since jealousy is essentially the "fear of losing something perceived as valuable," it follows that feeling jealous in these circumstances is entirely logical. It would be irrational *not* to feel it, or to blindly "believe" in a love that is merely a hormonal fluke. Therefore, anyone who doesn't feel jealousy doesn't even love in that hormonal sense, let alone any other way.

I agree that jealousy belongs in romantic relationships, but how can there be jealousy where people don't even believe in love?
Do you really think people realize that "love" is an illusion, yet they still care enough about their partner that they fear losing them to someone they know is objectively better? 🤔
Quincy:

Or perhaps his faith is incredibly intense... though even then, I find myself wondering what the actual foundation of that "faith" is.

There is no "faith" involved—at least not in my case. I am fully aware that nothing lasts forever, and I refuse to waste my energy worrying about whether my partner might cheat on me instead of, say, peacefully scrolling through Reddit. 🤣

Quincy:

I won't even get started on what I think of the advice being given here... 😬😈

Dismissing mental health concerns is just ridiculous, but let's be real: excessive jealousy is a relationship killer. It can drive your partner straight into the arms of someone who isn't even an upgrade—someone arguably worse than you—just because they offer a sense of peace you couldn't provide. 😁
Quincy:

So, I’d say it’s fair to assume everyone feels at least a little bit of jealousy. Some people deal with a tiny amount, while others struggle with it constantly.

I'm on board with that. You can't have true love without a hint of jealousy; if there's absolutely none, then what you're feeling probably isn't actually love.

Now that's a debate for Drew Morgan, LOL.

Drew Morgan said:But someone who truly LOVES, rather than just claims to, how could they ever feel jealousy? Love isn't about attachment or being possessive; it’s the polar opposite. It simply excludes jealousy entirely.

That sounds more like saintly or even divine love.

Needing someone doesn't automatically equal being possessive. You're leaning toward extremes here... is it either divine love or toxic obsession? There's no middle ground? 😬

Most people fall somewhere in between those two poles. Some lean one way, some the other. Because of that, I think it's fair to say everyone experiences at least a little bit of jealousy. For some, it's minimal; for others, it's intense. It’s a spectrum, not a binary "yes or no" situation.

Sean Cruz said:I think you're overstating things here. Love is really just a hormonal imbalance; even at its absolute peak, there's always a chance you'll find a way to recover from it. 😁

How am I exaggerating? If love really is just a hormonal imbalance, then it’s perfectly logical to worry that those levels will eventually "level out" for you while spiking all over again for someone else. (And vice versa, of course. 😬). In fact, it's just as reasonable to fear that this has already happened and the relationship is being kept alive solely by inertia on the other person's part.

Since jealousy is essentially the "fear of losing something perceived as valuable," it stands to reason that feeling jealous in these circumstances makes total sense. It would actually be more illogical *not* to feel it, or to blindly "trust" a love that is nothing more than a chemical fluctuation. Therefore, if someone doesn't feel jealousy, they aren't even experiencing that hormonal version of love, let alone anything deeper.

Or perhaps his level of faith is just incredibly intense... but even then, I have to wonder what kind of foundation that "faith" is built on. I won't even get into my thoughts on the advice being handed out here... 😬 😈

It starts with desire...
Then comes passion!
Then... doubt creeps in.
Jealousy! Anger! Betrayal!
When love is just a commodity for the highest bidder,
Trust becomes impossible.
And without trust,
Love simply doesn't exist!
Jealousy.
Oh, jealousy...
It will drive you straight—

INSANE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHO5KWIMZUo

As you put it, you're worried he might run into someone with a "better offer"... and that your boyfriend won't be able to, or won't see any reason to, pass up that "better opportunity."

Looking at this rationally, that fear is actually quite logical. There’s really no reason to assume you are definitively the "best" out of the thousands upon thousands of women he’ll encounter (including those he just catches a passing glance of).

On the flip side, there isn't much reason to be that afraid either... because he isn't necessarily the "best" choice among the thousands upon thousands of men you'll meet.

So, strictly from a logical standpoint, relationships don't make any sense. 😬 😈 🤣 😢 🙂

At least, not from an atheist-nihilist perspective. You almost have to be a believer to truly believe in some kind of "love," whatever that may be.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Actually, you can't! I ran a little experiment earlier this year and proved that there’s no way to distinguish between people who are just trolling and those who are truly pouring their hearts out.

Sorry, but legal tips or stuff like "use Tide for your laundry" don't really count as the kind of deep intimacy involved in this whole messy topic—including the US subforum.🤷

Was that some sort of private study, or is there a paper trail on the forum somewhere? I'd love to look into this...

I tend to agree, though. This whole trend of oversharing feels wrong to me. Even with the "anonymity" factor, whenever I feel like someone is dumping raw, intimate details right in my face, I just end up feeling deeply saddened by it.

Couldn't they at least abstract those feelings? You know, speak in generalities or hypothetical scenarios instead of being so blunt and lacking any subtlety... it's about as subtle as a sledgehammer.

Gary James88 said:I think you're referring to the American Psychiatric Association back in '74—they were the ones making the call, not the psychoanalytic group. Both use the acronym APA, which gets confusing. Honestly, though, it’s not that deep. Defining a single psychological disorder isn't exactly a purely scientific process, and deciding whether homosexuality should even be classified as a disorder wasn't strictly based on science either.

Look, you have to remember that defining a disorder via the DSM comes down to specific criteria—something we've already touched on. Those standards aren't universal truths, and the DSM itself gets dragged constantly, but they are the benchmarks the medical community uses to decide what counts as a disorder. By those rules, homosexuality simply isn't categorized as one. It’s actually pretty telling when Spitzer, one of the top experts behind the DSM, noted: "A major reason certain diagnoses haven't been removed from the DSM is that doing so would be a public relations catastrophe for psychiatry." That says a lot.

Exactly. That wasn't a scientific move either... anyway, I'm rambling again. Better stop before I get carried away...

Gary James88 said:That might have been true fifty years ago, but today the American Psychoanalytic Association doesn't view homosexuality as a disorder. They even include openly gay individuals in their training programs and support the fight for civil rights, including marriage equality.

http://hem.passagen.se/nicb/psychoanalysis.htm

Maybe those powerful lobbies managed to turn them around in the meantime... 🙄

You forgot to mention what "doesn't classify" actually looked like in practice back in '74: 58% of APA members voted to strip it from the DSM. That means 42% were still against it. Have those remaining 42% suddenly gained wisdom or stumbled upon groundbreaking new scientific data over the last 35 years? I highly doubt it. Personally, I suspect this isn't about science, xexexe—it's more about politics and ideology.

Gary James88 said:That might have been true fifty years ago, but today the American Psychoanalytic Association doesn't view homosexuality as a disorder. They even include openly gay individuals in their training programs and support the fight for civil rights, including marriage equality.

http://hem.passagen.se/nicb/psychoanalysis.htm

Maybe those powerful lobbies managed to turn them around in the meantime... 🙄

True enough. 🤷 Essentially, any rational person realizes there is no logical reason to fight against gay lobbies (the whole "live and let live" principle). The only ones standing in their way are the intensely religious types—people whose faith dictates how they behave within a multicultural society (something many liberal-minded believers refuse to do). Everyone else, even if they disagree, simply lacks the will or the desire to draw unnecessary attention to themselves and risk their careers. Except, of course, for the less bright minds, like Gruden. 😬 (And people like him... there are plenty, mostly found in the religiously charged halls of NARTH)

redharbor9 said:Yeah, it happens. I've seen it plenty of times. Usually with women in their 30s or 40s. They just suddenly realize they're attracted to women, even if they already have a husband and kids. It almost always ends the same way—divorce and leaving the guy (and the kids) behind..

Don't ask me about the "why" or whatever. I don't dig into the past like that; I just deal with what's happening right now. But yeah, it's possible and it definitely happens..

So, what you're saying is it's possible for someone to think they're straight, only to realize later—maybe after 30—that they're actually gay. But the reverse isn't possible? That someone thinks they're gay, only to find out later they're actually straight? 😬

That's a pretty interesting asymmetry, I have to admit...

redharbor9 said:I know exactly what Spitzer claims because I actually follow his debates. And trust me, other big-name experts say something totally different. They don't take him seriously and they definitely don't think he's right.

You can't just cling to one guy just because his opinion fits your narrative.

Quentin:

That's a total non-sequitur, LOL. What, is he gonna be 'ashamed' of his role back in '73? Please. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about in 30 years? (Or me, probably.)

It was said in terms of being wrong and flawed... just like his own views, for that matter.

Quentin:

Sure you can. You can claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny you have one. We all do.

Yeah, sure. You'll call me biased because I'm gay, and I'll call you biased because your prejudices make it impossible for you to use logic since everything is driven by emotion... and then we just end the debate because nobody is objective? Yeah, I'm not playing that game.😍

Quentin:

That's not a fact, it's just a political postulate. For that to be a 'fact,' you'd need a study tracking, say, 200 people over 10 years that proves exactly what you're saying. Got a citation for a study like that? As far as I know, those aren't even done; what you're doing is just an 'educated guess.'

A study like that is impossible to pull off, but it's based on case study facts. Sure, there are gaps, but there are statistical methods to account for all those variables. I don't know if anyone's specifically done it that way, but my stance is backed by experts way more qualified than me or anyone else in this thread.

Quentin:

Yeah, it's a bit rigid, a bit fluid—depends on how you need it to be for whatever argument you're making... 😈

Actually, it depends on what we're talking about. To me, it's like sex. Your sex is set at birth and you can't just change it later to be something else. Even the behaviorists admitted they were lost on that one.

Quentin:

Exactly. You can't just claim something is impossible without proof. If you're gonna insist it's a dead end, show me the actual reference proving it’s literally impossible. Honestly, I don't even see how you'd "prove" that—it's like trying to prove every single swan in existence is white.

Look, in science—which is what you're leaning on here—not everything is strictly proven through empirical data (some stuff just can't be, and some shouldn't be), but that's why we build theories and draw conclusions based on probability and availability. It's way more solid than just holding onto implicit biases... though there are people on this forum who could give you a much better lecture on actual science and the scientific method.

You just don't get it.

You said "that's impossible." You didn't even bring up Spitzer or the ongoing debates and disagreements surrounding this. Instead, you just went straight to—"it's impossible." Who are you trying to single out there? To me, that’s hardly scientific. As long as there is a meaningful disagreement, there is a conflict; you can't just pretend "everything is settled" when it clearly isn't. It isn't scientific to dismiss opposing views just because they aren't politically correct.

And honestly, his stance doesn't "bother" me at all. I don't have any personal skin in this game.

redharbor9 said:I know exactly what Spitzer claims because I actually follow his debates. And trust me, other big-name experts say something totally different. They don't take him seriously and they definitely don't think he's right.

You can't just cling to one guy just because his opinion fits your narrative.

Quentin:

That's a total non-sequitur, LOL. What, is he gonna be 'ashamed' of his role back in '73? Please. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about in 30 years? (Or me, probably.)

It was said in terms of being wrong and flawed... just like his own views, for that matter.

Quentin:

Sure you can. You can claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny you have one. We all do.

Yeah, sure. You'll call me biased because I'm gay, and I'll call you biased because your prejudices make it impossible for you to use logic since everything is driven by emotion... and then we just end the debate because nobody is objective? Yeah, I'm not playing that game.😍

Quentin:

That's not a fact, it's just a political postulate. For that to be a 'fact,' you'd need a study tracking, say, 200 people over 10 years that proves exactly what you're saying. Got a citation for a study like that? As far as I know, those aren't even done; what you're doing is just an 'educated guess.'

A study like that is impossible to pull off, but it's based on case study facts. Sure, there are gaps, but there are statistical methods to account for all those variables. I don't know if anyone's specifically done it that way, but my stance is backed by experts way more qualified than me or anyone else in this thread.

Quentin:

Yeah, it's a bit rigid, a bit fluid—depends on how you need it to be for whatever argument you're making... 😈

Actually, it depends on what we're talking about. To me, it's like sex. Your sex is set at birth and you can't just change it later to be something else. Even the behaviorists admitted they were lost on that one.

Quentin:

Exactly. You can't just claim something is impossible without proof. If you're gonna insist it's a dead end, show me the actual reference proving it’s literally impossible. Honestly, I don't even see how you'd "prove" that—it's like trying to prove every single swan in existence is white.

Look, in science—which is what you're leaning on here—not everything is strictly proven through empirical data (some stuff just can't be, and some shouldn't be), but that's why we build theories and draw conclusions based on probability and availability. It's way more solid than just holding onto implicit biases... though there are people on this forum who could give you a much better lecture on actual science and the scientific method.

And yours, I hope?

redharbor9 said:I know exactly what Spitzer claims because I actually follow his debates. And trust me, other big-name experts say something totally different. They don't take him seriously and they definitely don't think he's right.

You can't just cling to one guy just because his opinion fits your narrative.

Quentin:

That's a total non-sequitur, LOL. What, is he gonna be 'ashamed' of his role back in '73? Please. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about in 30 years? (Or me, probably.)

It was said in terms of being wrong and flawed... just like his own views, for that matter.

Quentin:

Sure you can. You can claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny you have one. We all do.

Yeah, sure. You'll call me biased because I'm gay, and I'll call you biased because your prejudices make it impossible for you to use logic since everything is driven by emotion... and then we just end the debate because nobody is objective? Yeah, I'm not playing that game.😍

Quentin:

That's not a fact, it's just a political postulate. For that to be a 'fact,' you'd need a study tracking, say, 200 people over 10 years that proves exactly what you're saying. Got a citation for a study like that? As far as I know, those aren't even done; what you're doing is just an 'educated guess.'

A study like that is impossible to pull off, but it's based on case study facts. Sure, there are gaps, but there are statistical methods to account for all those variables. I don't know if anyone's specifically done it that way, but my stance is backed by experts way more qualified than me or anyone else in this thread.

Quentin:

Yeah, it's a bit rigid, a bit fluid—depends on how you need it to be for whatever argument you're making... 😈

Actually, it depends on what we're talking about. To me, it's like sex. Your sex is set at birth and you can't just change it later to be something else. Even the behaviorists admitted they were lost on that one.

Quentin:

Exactly. You can't just claim something is impossible without proof. If you're gonna insist it's a dead end, show me the actual reference proving it’s literally impossible. Honestly, I don't even see how you'd "prove" that—it's like trying to prove every single swan in existence is white.

Look, in science—which is what you're leaning on here—not everything is strictly proven through empirical data (some stuff just can't be, and some shouldn't be), but that's why we build theories and draw conclusions based on probability and availability. It's way more solid than just holding onto implicit biases... though there are people on this forum who could give you a much better lecture on actual science and the scientific method.

Look, there’s no point in pretending. You truly believe I'm being biased—but honestly? I think you are. That doesn't mean we can't have a decent debate, but we aren't going to "overcome" bias just by acting like it doesn't exist. It's clearly right there, which is exactly what your last paragraph proves. 🙂

redharbor9 said:I know exactly what Spitzer claims because I actually follow his debates. And trust me, other big-name experts say something totally different. They don't take him seriously and they definitely don't think he's right.

You can't just cling to one guy just because his opinion fits your narrative.

Quentin:

That's a total non-sequitur, LOL. What, is he gonna be 'ashamed' of his role back in '73? Please. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about in 30 years? (Or me, probably.)

It was said in terms of being wrong and flawed... just like his own views, for that matter.

Quentin:

Sure you can. You can claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny you have one. We all do.

Yeah, sure. You'll call me biased because I'm gay, and I'll call you biased because your prejudices make it impossible for you to use logic since everything is driven by emotion... and then we just end the debate because nobody is objective? Yeah, I'm not playing that game.😍

Quentin:

That's not a fact, it's just a political postulate. For that to be a 'fact,' you'd need a study tracking, say, 200 people over 10 years that proves exactly what you're saying. Got a citation for a study like that? As far as I know, those aren't even done; what you're doing is just an 'educated guess.'

A study like that is impossible to pull off, but it's based on case study facts. Sure, there are gaps, but there are statistical methods to account for all those variables. I don't know if anyone's specifically done it that way, but my stance is backed by experts way more qualified than me or anyone else in this thread.

Quentin:

Yeah, it's a bit rigid, a bit fluid—depends on how you need it to be for whatever argument you're making... 😈

Actually, it depends on what we're talking about. To me, it's like sex. Your sex is set at birth and you can't just change it later to be something else. Even the behaviorists admitted they were lost on that one.

Quentin:

Exactly. You can't just claim something is impossible without proof. If you're gonna insist it's a dead end, show me the actual reference proving it’s literally impossible. Honestly, I don't even see how you'd "prove" that—it's like trying to prove every single swan in existence is white.

Look, in science—which is what you're leaning on here—not everything is strictly proven through empirical data (some stuff just can't be, and some shouldn't be), but that's why we build theories and draw conclusions based on probability and availability. It's way more solid than just holding onto implicit biases... though there are people on this forum who could give you a much better lecture on actual science and the scientific method.

Let me restate: where exactly does the claim that this is *impossible* come from?

I can get behind arguments like "it's incredibly difficult," "it might be impossible," "it isn't worth the effort," or even "the ethics are questionable." But I simply won't accept the blanket statement that it's "impossible." From my perspective, that isn't a scientific claim at all—it’s more like an arbitrary postulate.

redharbor9 said:I know exactly what Spitzer claims because I actually follow his debates. And trust me, other big-name experts say something totally different. They don't take him seriously and they definitely don't think he's right.

You can't just cling to one guy just because his opinion fits your narrative.

Quentin:

That's a total non-sequitur, LOL. What, is he gonna be 'ashamed' of his role back in '73? Please. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about in 30 years? (Or me, probably.)

It was said in terms of being wrong and flawed... just like his own views, for that matter.

Quentin:

Sure you can. You can claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny you have one. We all do.

Yeah, sure. You'll call me biased because I'm gay, and I'll call you biased because your prejudices make it impossible for you to use logic since everything is driven by emotion... and then we just end the debate because nobody is objective? Yeah, I'm not playing that game.😍

Quentin:

That's not a fact, it's just a political postulate. For that to be a 'fact,' you'd need a study tracking, say, 200 people over 10 years that proves exactly what you're saying. Got a citation for a study like that? As far as I know, those aren't even done; what you're doing is just an 'educated guess.'

A study like that is impossible to pull off, but it's based on case study facts. Sure, there are gaps, but there are statistical methods to account for all those variables. I don't know if anyone's specifically done it that way, but my stance is backed by experts way more qualified than me or anyone else in this thread.

Quentin:

Yeah, it's a bit rigid, a bit fluid—depends on how you need it to be for whatever argument you're making... 😈

Actually, it depends on what we're talking about. To me, it's like sex. Your sex is set at birth and you can't just change it later to be something else. Even the behaviorists admitted they were lost on that one.

Quentin:

Exactly. You can't just claim something is impossible without proof. If you're gonna insist it's a dead end, show me the actual reference proving it’s literally impossible. Honestly, I don't even see how you'd "prove" that—it's like trying to prove every single swan in existence is white.

Look, in science—which is what you're leaning on here—not everything is strictly proven through empirical data (some stuff just can't be, and some shouldn't be), but that's why we build theories and draw conclusions based on probability and availability. It's way more solid than just holding onto implicit biases... though there are people on this forum who could give you a much better lecture on actual science and the scientific method.

Well, you see it as being like sex, but I don't.

(Besides, people are changing their gender nowadays, LOL.)

redharbor9 said:I know exactly what Spitzer claims because I actually follow his debates. And trust me, other big-name experts say something totally different. They don't take him seriously and they definitely don't think he's right.

You can't just cling to one guy just because his opinion fits your narrative.

Quentin:

That's a total non-sequitur, LOL. What, is he gonna be 'ashamed' of his role back in '73? Please. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about in 30 years? (Or me, probably.)

It was said in terms of being wrong and flawed... just like his own views, for that matter.

Quentin:

Sure you can. You can claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny you have one. We all do.

Yeah, sure. You'll call me biased because I'm gay, and I'll call you biased because your prejudices make it impossible for you to use logic since everything is driven by emotion... and then we just end the debate because nobody is objective? Yeah, I'm not playing that game.😍

Quentin:

That's not a fact, it's just a political postulate. For that to be a 'fact,' you'd need a study tracking, say, 200 people over 10 years that proves exactly what you're saying. Got a citation for a study like that? As far as I know, those aren't even done; what you're doing is just an 'educated guess.'

A study like that is impossible to pull off, but it's based on case study facts. Sure, there are gaps, but there are statistical methods to account for all those variables. I don't know if anyone's specifically done it that way, but my stance is backed by experts way more qualified than me or anyone else in this thread.

Quentin:

Yeah, it's a bit rigid, a bit fluid—depends on how you need it to be for whatever argument you're making... 😈

Actually, it depends on what we're talking about. To me, it's like sex. Your sex is set at birth and you can't just change it later to be something else. Even the behaviorists admitted they were lost on that one.

Quentin:

Exactly. You can't just claim something is impossible without proof. If you're gonna insist it's a dead end, show me the actual reference proving it’s literally impossible. Honestly, I don't even see how you'd "prove" that—it's like trying to prove every single swan in existence is white.

Look, in science—which is what you're leaning on here—not everything is strictly proven through empirical data (some stuff just can't be, and some shouldn't be), but that's why we build theories and draw conclusions based on probability and availability. It's way more solid than just holding onto implicit biases... though there are people on this forum who could give you a much better lecture on actual science and the scientific method.

Exactly, and that is precisely why scientists generally avoid making claims like "this is impossible." It doesn't mean, however, that there aren't scientists out there prone to making those kinds of assertions.

redharbor9 said:Except they've been doing them for decades, and they're still doing them today. There are therapists "curing" people right now, and there are even church-run camps trying to force the "right path" and all that.

The success rate of all those old attempts, and even the current ones, shows just one thing: total failure.

I think you've easily taken the opinion of a *scientist* (and a respected one at that) as common 'belief' (it's actually an 'expert opinion')—while treating your own stance as some kind of 'fact.'

Fine, we can debate Spitzer if you want.. should we start with him saying he's ashamed he once pushed for masturbation to be in the DSM? Maybe he'll say he's ashamed of that too next time..

You wanna start quoting Paul Cameron too (since someone mentioned Bruna, so why not..)?

And on top of that, you're biased. 😍

I'm not.

That's a standard, baseless objection. We don't have a mind-reader yet; how are you supposed to judge if it's just a change in behavior or a change in 'orientation'? Just because it seems that way to you?

No.. there are ways to assess a person, to track them over time.. and the fact is, the "cured" always end up back where they started...

And if a person claims they changed their orientation, they're obviously lying, right. 😬 Well, Spitzer believed them; I don't see why I should consider your opinion more relevant than his.

The question is whether you want to develop an objective opinion or just find evidence to support your existing bias. 🙂

Emotional makeup isn't written in the stars, nor is it set in stone. People can change. Sometimes drastically.

But sexuality is pretty much set in stone...

Just because you've heard a bunch of stories doesn't mean that's how it works every single time. As a scientist, you should know better than to assume that. Honestly, I'm pretty sure you actually do know. 😬

And look, in my career as a scientist, I’ve never come across a single "treatment" case that proves otherwise. Neither have any other researchers in this field. Until science proves something else, we stick to what's been proven. You should realize that when you're constantly throwing the word "science" around... there's zero room for blind faith in this business.

Look, I’m no expert here. It’s entirely possible you’re right; I have no way to verify that objectively. The point is, Spitzer claims it’s still possible (if I may add, he also mentions it's "extremely difficult" and "not worth the effort"); I’m simply reacting to your absolute assertion that it’s "impossible."

redharbor9 said:Except they've been doing them for decades, and they're still doing them today. There are therapists "curing" people right now, and there are even church-run camps trying to force the "right path" and all that.

The success rate of all those old attempts, and even the current ones, shows just one thing: total failure.

I think you've easily taken the opinion of a *scientist* (and a respected one at that) as common 'belief' (it's actually an 'expert opinion')—while treating your own stance as some kind of 'fact.'

Fine, we can debate Spitzer if you want.. should we start with him saying he's ashamed he once pushed for masturbation to be in the DSM? Maybe he'll say he's ashamed of that too next time..

You wanna start quoting Paul Cameron too (since someone mentioned Bruna, so why not..)?

And on top of that, you're biased. 😍

I'm not.

That's a standard, baseless objection. We don't have a mind-reader yet; how are you supposed to judge if it's just a change in behavior or a change in 'orientation'? Just because it seems that way to you?

No.. there are ways to assess a person, to track them over time.. and the fact is, the "cured" always end up back where they started...

And if a person claims they changed their orientation, they're obviously lying, right. 😬 Well, Spitzer believed them; I don't see why I should consider your opinion more relevant than his.

The question is whether you want to develop an objective opinion or just find evidence to support your existing bias. 🙂

Emotional makeup isn't written in the stars, nor is it set in stone. People can change. Sometimes drastically.

But sexuality is pretty much set in stone...

Just because you've heard a bunch of stories doesn't mean that's how it works every single time. As a scientist, you should know better than to assume that. Honestly, I'm pretty sure you actually do know. 😬

And look, in my career as a scientist, I’ve never come across a single "treatment" case that proves otherwise. Neither have any other researchers in this field. Until science proves something else, we stick to what's been proven. You should realize that when you're constantly throwing the word "science" around... there's zero room for blind faith in this business.

Honestly, that's a weak argument, LOL. Maybe he'll feel "ashamed" about his role back in '73, too? It's pointless. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about 30 years from now? (Or me, for that matter.)

redharbor9 said:Except they've been doing them for decades, and they're still doing them today. There are therapists "curing" people right now, and there are even church-run camps trying to force the "right path" and all that.

The success rate of all those old attempts, and even the current ones, shows just one thing: total failure.

I think you've easily taken the opinion of a *scientist* (and a respected one at that) as common 'belief' (it's actually an 'expert opinion')—while treating your own stance as some kind of 'fact.'

Fine, we can debate Spitzer if you want.. should we start with him saying he's ashamed he once pushed for masturbation to be in the DSM? Maybe he'll say he's ashamed of that too next time..

You wanna start quoting Paul Cameron too (since someone mentioned Bruna, so why not..)?

And on top of that, you're biased. 😍

I'm not.

That's a standard, baseless objection. We don't have a mind-reader yet; how are you supposed to judge if it's just a change in behavior or a change in 'orientation'? Just because it seems that way to you?

No.. there are ways to assess a person, to track them over time.. and the fact is, the "cured" always end up back where they started...

And if a person claims they changed their orientation, they're obviously lying, right. 😬 Well, Spitzer believed them; I don't see why I should consider your opinion more relevant than his.

The question is whether you want to develop an objective opinion or just find evidence to support your existing bias. 🙂

Emotional makeup isn't written in the stars, nor is it set in stone. People can change. Sometimes drastically.

But sexuality is pretty much set in stone...

Just because you've heard a bunch of stories doesn't mean that's how it works every single time. As a scientist, you should know better than to assume that. Honestly, I'm pretty sure you actually do know. 😬

And look, in my career as a scientist, I’ve never come across a single "treatment" case that proves otherwise. Neither have any other researchers in this field. Until science proves something else, we stick to what's been proven. You should realize that when you're constantly throwing the word "science" around... there's zero room for blind faith in this business.

Yes, you are. You might claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny that you have one. Besides, I have one too.

redharbor9 said:Except they've been doing them for decades, and they're still doing them today. There are therapists "curing" people right now, and there are even church-run camps trying to force the "right path" and all that.

The success rate of all those old attempts, and even the current ones, shows just one thing: total failure.

I think you've easily taken the opinion of a *scientist* (and a respected one at that) as common 'belief' (it's actually an 'expert opinion')—while treating your own stance as some kind of 'fact.'

Fine, we can debate Spitzer if you want.. should we start with him saying he's ashamed he once pushed for masturbation to be in the DSM? Maybe he'll say he's ashamed of that too next time..

You wanna start quoting Paul Cameron too (since someone mentioned Bruna, so why not..)?

And on top of that, you're biased. 😍

I'm not.

That's a standard, baseless objection. We don't have a mind-reader yet; how are you supposed to judge if it's just a change in behavior or a change in 'orientation'? Just because it seems that way to you?

No.. there are ways to assess a person, to track them over time.. and the fact is, the "cured" always end up back where they started...

And if a person claims they changed their orientation, they're obviously lying, right. 😬 Well, Spitzer believed them; I don't see why I should consider your opinion more relevant than his.

The question is whether you want to develop an objective opinion or just find evidence to support your existing bias. 🙂

Emotional makeup isn't written in the stars, nor is it set in stone. People can change. Sometimes drastically.

But sexuality is pretty much set in stone...

Just because you've heard a bunch of stories doesn't mean that's how it works every single time. As a scientist, you should know better than to assume that. Honestly, I'm pretty sure you actually do know. 😬

And look, in my career as a scientist, I’ve never come across a single "treatment" case that proves otherwise. Neither have any other researchers in this field. Until science proves something else, we stick to what's been proven. You should realize that when you're constantly throwing the word "science" around... there's zero room for blind faith in this business.

That isn't a fact; it's just a politically correct postulate. For that to be a "fact," you'd need a study that tracks, say, 200 random people over a 10-year period and shows exactly what you're claiming in every single case. Do you have a reference to a study like that or anything similar? As far as I know, those kinds of studies aren't even conducted; what you're describing is just an "educated guess."

redharbor9 said:Except they've been doing them for decades, and they're still doing them today. There are therapists "curing" people right now, and there are even church-run camps trying to force the "right path" and all that.

The success rate of all those old attempts, and even the current ones, shows just one thing: total failure.

I think you've easily taken the opinion of a *scientist* (and a respected one at that) as common 'belief' (it's actually an 'expert opinion')—while treating your own stance as some kind of 'fact.'

Fine, we can debate Spitzer if you want.. should we start with him saying he's ashamed he once pushed for masturbation to be in the DSM? Maybe he'll say he's ashamed of that too next time..

You wanna start quoting Paul Cameron too (since someone mentioned Bruna, so why not..)?

And on top of that, you're biased. 😍

I'm not.

That's a standard, baseless objection. We don't have a mind-reader yet; how are you supposed to judge if it's just a change in behavior or a change in 'orientation'? Just because it seems that way to you?

No.. there are ways to assess a person, to track them over time.. and the fact is, the "cured" always end up back where they started...

And if a person claims they changed their orientation, they're obviously lying, right. 😬 Well, Spitzer believed them; I don't see why I should consider your opinion more relevant than his.

The question is whether you want to develop an objective opinion or just find evidence to support your existing bias. 🙂

Emotional makeup isn't written in the stars, nor is it set in stone. People can change. Sometimes drastically.

But sexuality is pretty much set in stone...

Just because you've heard a bunch of stories doesn't mean that's how it works every single time. As a scientist, you should know better than to assume that. Honestly, I'm pretty sure you actually do know. 😬

And look, in my career as a scientist, I’ve never come across a single "treatment" case that proves otherwise. Neither have any other researchers in this field. Until science proves something else, we stick to what's been proven. You should realize that when you're constantly throwing the word "science" around... there's zero room for blind faith in this business.

Does the reverse apply too? 😍

redharbor9 said:Except they've been doing them for decades, and they're still doing them today. There are therapists "curing" people right now, and there are even church-run camps trying to force the "right path" and all that.

The success rate of all those old attempts, and even the current ones, shows just one thing: total failure.

I think you've easily taken the opinion of a *scientist* (and a respected one at that) as common 'belief' (it's actually an 'expert opinion')—while treating your own stance as some kind of 'fact.'

Fine, we can debate Spitzer if you want.. should we start with him saying he's ashamed he once pushed for masturbation to be in the DSM? Maybe he'll say he's ashamed of that too next time..

You wanna start quoting Paul Cameron too (since someone mentioned Bruna, so why not..)?

And on top of that, you're biased. 😍

I'm not.

That's a standard, baseless objection. We don't have a mind-reader yet; how are you supposed to judge if it's just a change in behavior or a change in 'orientation'? Just because it seems that way to you?

No.. there are ways to assess a person, to track them over time.. and the fact is, the "cured" always end up back where they started...

And if a person claims they changed their orientation, they're obviously lying, right. 😬 Well, Spitzer believed them; I don't see why I should consider your opinion more relevant than his.

The question is whether you want to develop an objective opinion or just find evidence to support your existing bias. 🙂

Emotional makeup isn't written in the stars, nor is it set in stone. People can change. Sometimes drastically.

But sexuality is pretty much set in stone...

Just because you've heard a bunch of stories doesn't mean that's how it works every single time. As a scientist, you should know better than to assume that. Honestly, I'm pretty sure you actually do know. 😬

And look, in my career as a scientist, I’ve never come across a single "treatment" case that proves otherwise. Neither have any other researchers in this field. Until science proves something else, we stick to what's been proven. You should realize that when you're constantly throwing the word "science" around... there's zero room for blind faith in this business.

True, it’s a bit set in stone and a bit fluid—it really depends on the context of the debate we're having. 😈

redharbor9 said:Except they've been doing them for decades, and they're still doing them today. There are therapists "curing" people right now, and there are even church-run camps trying to force the "right path" and all that.

The success rate of all those old attempts, and even the current ones, shows just one thing: total failure.

I think you've easily taken the opinion of a *scientist* (and a respected one at that) as common 'belief' (it's actually an 'expert opinion')—while treating your own stance as some kind of 'fact.'

Fine, we can debate Spitzer if you want.. should we start with him saying he's ashamed he once pushed for masturbation to be in the DSM? Maybe he'll say he's ashamed of that too next time..

You wanna start quoting Paul Cameron too (since someone mentioned Bruna, so why not..)?

And on top of that, you're biased. 😍

I'm not.

That's a standard, baseless objection. We don't have a mind-reader yet; how are you supposed to judge if it's just a change in behavior or a change in 'orientation'? Just because it seems that way to you?

No.. there are ways to assess a person, to track them over time.. and the fact is, the "cured" always end up back where they started...

And if a person claims they changed their orientation, they're obviously lying, right. 😬 Well, Spitzer believed them; I don't see why I should consider your opinion more relevant than his.

The question is whether you want to develop an objective opinion or just find evidence to support your existing bias. 🙂

Emotional makeup isn't written in the stars, nor is it set in stone. People can change. Sometimes drastically.

But sexuality is pretty much set in stone...

Just because you've heard a bunch of stories doesn't mean that's how it works every single time. As a scientist, you should know better than to assume that. Honestly, I'm pretty sure you actually do know. 😬

And look, in my career as a scientist, I’ve never come across a single "treatment" case that proves otherwise. Neither have any other researchers in this field. Until science proves something else, we stick to what's been proven. You should realize that when you're constantly throwing the word "science" around... there's zero room for blind faith in this business.

Exactly. There’s no room for believing something is impossible just because it hasn't been proven impossible yet. If you claim it can't be done, I’d love to see a reference "proving" that it is literally impossible. Honestly, I don't see how you'd even go about proving that—it reminds me of trying to prove that all swans are white.

slyraven9 said:First off, let me just say—I am 100% not trolling here. This isn't some joke. It’s a situation that’s been eating at me for a while now, and honestly, I haven't felt comfortable opening up to anyone because... well, people can be judgmental. (Kind of like how flexxx acts).

Anyway, I'm 19.

Also, I really do fall for girls. In fact, there's a huge chance that once I'm actually in a relationship and totally head-over-heels for someone, this whole issue might just vanish. I've had girlfriends before.

Fourthly—and maybe I didn't phrase this right earlier—but I don't just "believe" things have changed, I *know* it. I can feel the difference in myself. I used to be this super quiet, withdrawn kid, but now I'm finally coming out of my shell.

Fifthly... well, back when I hit puberty, I was mostly attracted to girls. But over the years, something feels like it shifted, like a glitch occurred, and suddenly I started finding guys attractive too. Now that I'm trying to work through it, everything feels totally muddled and I'm just lost on what to do next.

No offense intended, but this still sounds a bit suspicious to me. 🤷

Think about it: there’s no logic in being offended. If you're just trolling, then there's clearly nothing to take personally; and if you aren't, then I'm obviously mistaken, which means there's still no reason to get upset over someone else's wrong assumption. 😬 🤷

redharbor9 said:I think that word "believes" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. Here's the reality: every single attempt at this has flopped. Anything that actually "works" is just someone masking their behavior, not changing who they are deep down. Eventually, they snap, and things get even uglier.

Look, logically speaking, I don't see why anyone's calling this "impossible." Sure, it’s probably a massive uphill battle, but there isn't some law of physics out there making it a literal impossibility. I wouldn't be throwing around those kinds of absolute statements if I were you. 😬

It depends on how you look at the logic. Changing sexual orientation is one thing, but changing behavior is another. Orientation involves the emotional side of things, whereas behavior is just about the sex.

Of course you can force someone to act straight, marry, and have kids. But eventually, everything just snaps. And when it does? You're screwed. I've heard countless stories like this, and they always end the exact same way: years of intensive therapy and psychiatric care. Not to mention the absolute wreckage it leaves behind for the rest of the family. It’s a disaster.

The issue is your use of the word "fact." That isn't actually a fact, because those kinds of studies aren't even conducted anymore—they're considered totally unethical.

It seems to me you’ve taken the opinion of a *scientist* (and a highly respected one at that) and dismissed it as mere "belief"—even though it's actually expert opinion—while treating your own stance as an absolute "fact."

Plus, you're being biased. 😍

redharbor9 said:I think that word "believes" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. Here's the reality: every single attempt at this has flopped. Anything that actually "works" is just someone masking their behavior, not changing who they are deep down. Eventually, they snap, and things get even uglier.

Look, logically speaking, I don't see why anyone's calling this "impossible." Sure, it’s probably a massive uphill battle, but there isn't some law of physics out there making it a literal impossibility. I wouldn't be throwing around those kinds of absolute statements if I were you. 😬

It depends on how you look at the logic. Changing sexual orientation is one thing, but changing behavior is another. Orientation involves the emotional side of things, whereas behavior is just about the sex.

Of course you can force someone to act straight, marry, and have kids. But eventually, everything just snaps. And when it does? You're screwed. I've heard countless stories like this, and they always end the exact same way: years of intensive therapy and psychiatric care. Not to mention the absolute wreckage it leaves behind for the rest of the family. It’s a disaster.

That's a common, unfounded objection. We don't have a way to read minds yet; how are you supposed to judge whether a change is just in behavior or also in "orientation"? Just because it feels that way to you? If someone claims they've changed their orientation, they're obviously lying, right? 😬 Look, Spitzer believed him; I don't see why I should find your opinion more relevant than his.

Emotional makeup isn't written in the stars, nor is it set in stone. People can change. Sometimes, quite drastically.

redharbor9 said:I think that word "believes" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. Here's the reality: every single attempt at this has flopped. Anything that actually "works" is just someone masking their behavior, not changing who they are deep down. Eventually, they snap, and things get even uglier.

Look, logically speaking, I don't see why anyone's calling this "impossible." Sure, it’s probably a massive uphill battle, but there isn't some law of physics out there making it a literal impossibility. I wouldn't be throwing around those kinds of absolute statements if I were you. 😬

It depends on how you look at the logic. Changing sexual orientation is one thing, but changing behavior is another. Orientation involves the emotional side of things, whereas behavior is just about the sex.

Of course you can force someone to act straight, marry, and have kids. But eventually, everything just snaps. And when it does? You're screwed. I've heard countless stories like this, and they always end the exact same way: years of intensive therapy and psychiatric care. Not to mention the absolute wreckage it leaves behind for the rest of the family. It’s a disaster.

Just because you know many such stories doesn't prove that this is how it works in every single case. Something a scientist would surely know. Actually, I'm confident you do know. 😬

James Ramirez10 said:So, maybe what we really need is a straight volunteer willing to try being gay for the sake of research. If they succeed, we could assume the reverse is also true, right? Problem solved. 😬

🤷 If you can actually find enough volunteers for that, then it’s a brilliant idea. You might even become famous. Personally, I wouldn't mind participating, and I won't jump to conclusions about what the results might show. 😬

(Though, if you're asking, I probably wouldn't step up as a volunteer myself. 😈)

Drew Bennett2 said:Forget those principles for a second; the guy is facing a real, tangible problem. Whether you make waves or not, that isn't going to fix itself.

Maybe the guy is dealing with something genuine, or maybe he’s just a troll looking for a reaction. How am I supposed to know? If this is a legitimate struggle, I can't really offer much help because I don't know if orientation is something that can actually change. redharbor9 and you both claim it isn't, which seems to be the consensus among most people who speak out about this; meanwhile, Spitzer believes it might be possible, even if it's an uphill battle. Personally, looking at it from a purely logical standpoint, I don't see why it would be "impossible." It's likely incredibly difficult, sure, but there isn't some law of physics preventing it. I'm not one to make such absolute, categorical statements. 😬