4 posts shown.
Thomas Hernandez4 said:Dec 20th. Is romance officially dead?
The other day, Aljehin asked me on the chat what romance actually means to me. I’ll admit, I had to pause and really think before I could give an answer.
How do you all define romance? And when was the last time you actually did something romantic—or better yet, experienced it?
___________________________________
This topic was pulled from the 146th post of the topic of the day.
She’s lost in this era. It’s like nobody gives a damn about building actual, meaningful connections anymore. Social media just speeds up the decay, turning people into mindless robots and arrogant snobs who couldn't care less about anyone else. They measure their entire worth by follower counts and likes. It makes them self-important, sure, but it also makes them cold. People shut down, closing their hearts off just to feed their own massive egos. Is that really how we want to live? Of course, it doesn't apply to everyone, but looking at the state of things, I'd say it applies to a huge chunk of the population. These digital distractions are rotting people from the inside out, replacing real human values with nothing but vanity.
When was the last time I actually felt something romantic? Honestly, it’s been ages. Long story short: a lifetime ago.
Ethan Bennett16 said:Why would it be lost? It’s right where it has always been... tucked away in the intimacy between two people, found in those small, quiet gestures that bring a smile to someone's face and make the mundane parts of the day feel a little lighter.
Or am I missing the mark on what real romance is?
Maybe the opening question is referring to those grand, sweeping gestures—the kind where one person performs for an audience of mutual friends just to prove how serious and deep their connection is. If that's the case, I'm fairly certain that isn't romance; it's just a desperate craving to have everyone staring at their "epic" love story.
Spot on, Tiny.
Ethan Bennett16 said:Why would it be lost? It’s right where it has always been... tucked away in the intimacy between two people, found in those small, quiet gestures that bring a smile to someone's face and make the mundane parts of the day feel a little lighter.
Or am I missing the mark on what real romance is?
Maybe the opening question is referring to those grand, sweeping gestures—the kind where one person performs for an audience of mutual friends just to prove how serious and deep their connection is. If that's the case, I'm fairly certain that isn't romance; it's just a desperate craving to have everyone staring at their "epic" love story.
Spot on. Some people think putting on a big public display just to show off counts as romance. It doesn't. That’s just performance art. You nailed it.
Thomas Hernandez4 said:Nov 22 - Never say never
What about those "never" promises you made when you were younger, only to have life prove you wrong?
I see it all the time on here—people swearing they'd never do this, never accept that, or never end up in certain situations.
As the years go by, I've noticed a lot of those once-solid "nevers" just get crushed by reality.
Lately, I've stopped using that word myself. Life is too unpredictable. Honestly, I wouldn't bet a dime on my own future certainty. 🙂
Where do you guys stand on this?
_______________
This topic of the day was featured after 19 posts and pulled from topic of the day.
That's never actually happened to me. If I've studied the past correctly, I should be safe.
My take on this: Why did people choose division, conflict, and competition over unity, cooperation, and togetherness?
First off, I think the question itself is flawed. I don't even think "oneness" is a standard term we use in American English. We talk about unity, sure, but oneness? What does that even mean? Is it even a real concept?
As for my answer: people didn't "choose" division. That’s not how it works. Instead, all this stuff is forced upon us through various social and systemic structures. It makes it look like we're making a conscious choice to pull apart, but we aren't. Look at the internet and social media. Divorce rates are climbing, people are more transient than ever, and a single click is all it takes to cheat on a spouse. In that sense, yeah, people end up divided—but they aren't choosing it. The system makes it easy. If society hadn't evolved this way through technology and constant connectivity, would we actually be choosing this kind of instability in our relationships? Probably not. This is just what happens when you make progress in one area of society while everything else falls apart.
So, my conclusion? I disagree with the premise that "people chose division, struggle, and competition over unity, cooperation, and togetherness." Just because the author says it, doesn't make it true. Based on what I've laid out, that claim is flat-out wrong.
I’m looking for a woman who actually gets me—someone who’ll love me for who I am. I'm 37. Age isn't really an issue for me; whether she's younger or older doesn't matter, as long as she's an adult and we actually click. I need someone sensible. Down the road, I'd love to start a family, have kids, the whole nine yards.
I'm happy to start as friends. Maybe grab a bite or go for a hike up near Mount Rainier. Texting is fine to get things moving... we'll see where it leads. One thing, though: I'm not looking to date anyone with serious mental health issues. I don't mind if she's going through a rough patch, feeling down, or dealing with depression. I actually like being the one to cheer someone up. I'm a bit of a dreamer, honestly, and I just want to find someone who understands me and actually cares.