|
Why is love such a prevailing theme in EVERY MOVIE (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| allcentury18 |
| quote: | Originally posted by squirrelly
Every woman? Sorry, I'm a woman, and I don't think that. But, I don't think it doesn't exist. What's the point of going on a date if you're not doing it in hopes of eventually ending up with someone you can care for and love? Might as well just skip the date. You must be one miserable and lonely guy. Sucks to be you man. |
i'm not loney as much as i'm discouraged. i date, i'm doing fine w/ that part of my life. i just don't like the over infiltration of love in society.
think of it this way, social conditioning is so strong in our society that in order for a relationship to exist, a since of 'love' needs to be a part of it all.
when most people talk about love in relation to a significant sexual other... its actually attraction they mean. |
|
|
| allcentury18 |
| quote: | Originally posted by squirrelly
Held in different conexts it can mean several different things. You can say you like someone, and that you like your new car. Those are two different meanings towards the word like, is it not? It's a universal word, but the fine definition of it depends on the context that you happen to be using it in. There are several words in the English vocabulary that are universal and can be used in many different situations. So what are you suggesting? That we throw out the English language because you can't decipher the meanings behind the different contexts the word is used in? |
well thats just my problem. for 1... it's probably the most used theme in entertainment and literature. yet, no one can define it or even describe it w/ out using other verbs like attraction, chemistry, etc. |
|
|
| squirrelly |
| quote: | Originally posted by allcentury18
well thats just my problem. for 1... it's probably the most used theme in entertainment and literature. yet, no one can define it or even describe it w/ out using other verbs like attraction, chemistry, etc. |
The definition IS an explaination that contains the words attraction and chemistry and such. You cannot help the definition. Love IS a combination of all of those things. Love cannot be attained without an initial attraction and yes, infatuation. But as time progresses those inital reactions fade, and after the fading, the relationship either meets its fatal end, or it moves on to the next step which might, or might not be love. I will agree that a lot of people misuse the term "love", because they are too engulfed in the puppy-dog love/infation stage to realize that it is nothing other than that. But to go so far as to say that "love" doesn't exist at all...? I don't think so. |
|
|
| allcentury18 |
| quote: | Originally posted by squirrelly
The definition IS an explaination that contains the words attraction and chemistry and such. You cannot help the definition. Love IS a combination of all of those things. Love cannot be attained without an initial attraction and yes, infatuation. But as time progresses those inital reactions fade, and after the fading, the relationship either meets its fatal end, or it moves on to the next step which might, or might not be love. I will agree that a lot of people misuse the term "love", because they are too engulfed in the puppy-dog love/infation stage to realize that it is nothing other than that. But to go so far as to say that "love" doesn't exist at all...? I don't think so. |
please know i'm not actually arguing with you, i'm challenging your beliefs.
so by your definition if i was to say,
i love my little brother.
i at one point felt attraction for him. |
|
|
| LeopoldStotch |
you know what the problem is ..
eharmony and other e-dating websites, p0rn movies, and "speed dating" has ruined our outlook on the concept of dating ...
the examples above has taught you that it is ok to date multiple people in a short amount of time . it also teaches you that love is quick and random, so you don't need to "get stuck" with someone for two weeks .. just get with a girl, bang her, sleep with her, and then scadaddle ... i am sorry, but this is how the world is today ... you go in and you go out ... there is no such thing as committment anymore ..
:( ..
oh yeah ..
"you're everything in the world to me ... you're my fantasy ... "
-chicago |
|
|
| allcentury18 |
| quote: | Originally posted by LeopoldStotch
you know what the problem is ..
eharmony and other e-dating websites, p0rn movies, and "speed dating" has ruined our outlook on the concept of dating ...
the examples above has taught you that it is ok to date multiple people in a short amount of time . it also teaches you that love is quick and random, so you don't need to "get stuck" with someone for two weeks .. just get with a girl, bang her, sleep with her, and then scadaddle ... i am sorry, but this is how the world is today ... you go in and you go out ... there is no such thing as committment anymore ..
:( ..
oh yeah ..
"you're everything in the world to me ... you're my fantasy ... "
-chicago |
well this is an easy explanation,
| quote: |
Men and women have different biological roles in reproduction: women
produce a single egg each month, whereas men produce millions of sperm
every day.
This fact may not be news to you. However, this biological difference has
led to men and women to evolve different reproductive strategies… and so it
has a surprising influence on the sexual behavior of men and women.
Examining our differing reproductive roles explains the important reasons for
these behavioral differences.
A man has more sperm than he can get rid of and his goal from a
biological standpoint is just to replicate his genes as much as possible. It
would therefore make sense for him to impregnate every woman he could
because if any one child didn’t survive and didn’t go on to reproduce, it
hasn’t cost him very much energy at all. The lost energy is more than made
up for by the sheer volume he can achieve.
On the other hand, because women produce so few eggs (or
“reproductive units”), they end up investing a lot more of their time and
resources than that of the opposite sex. She must invest not only in the
production of one egg, but also in the long term: pregnancy, child-birth,
feeding, caring, etc. A woman has to value each egg very highly because of
how much energy she puts into it.
With so much at stake in each attempt at reproduction, a woman must
first choose her investment carefully. Secondly, she must also try to ensure
the success of every child she has.
Women have developed biological methods to maximize both the quality
of the men with whom she chooses to reproduce, and the odds that they will
help stick around and help protect her investment.
To make sure she gets the best “reproductive value” possible, women
have developed a number of barriers, twists, and turns designed to keep
“weak” sperm out.
Only the healthiest sperm will make it past her barbs, pitfalls, and
chemical blockades.
Though interesting, this is only one type of test women have developed
(a physical one). There are also the unconscious, psychological tests she
uses to determine your genetic value.
Women need two things.
They need great genes, and they need a mate who will stick around to
help raise the child. As we now know, these two goals aren’t always
achieved by the same man.
|
from sperm wars & david d |
|
|
| allcentury18 |
i should probably mention what i meant by the quote above was this...
w/ religon, school and parenting being less prevelant in everyones lives, the most natural and biological side of humans is coming about.
religon has sepressed common and natural tendancies for centuries... most anthropologists will agree w/ everything i have stated above. although our lives have come more simple, the basics behind mating have actually toned down |
|
|
| squirrelly |
| quote: | Originally posted by allcentury18
please know i'm not actually arguing with you, i'm challenging your beliefs.
so by your definition if i was to say,
i love my little brother.
i at one point felt attraction for him. |
Not at all. Again, when I'm talking about attraction and chemistry, I'm speaking of relationships. I was speaking about the word "love" when used in a relationship (dating) context.
When speaking of your little brother, you're using the word in a family context, completely different and seperate from the relationship context. When using the word "love" in regards to a family member, you're usually using it by definition of fondness, appreciation, admiration, and loyalty. ;) Which, all of those definitions can be used when speaking of love in a relationship context, but NOT vice versa. You're trying to prove your point by mixing contexts, and that's a no no. ;) |
|
|
| squirrelly |
| quote: | Originally posted by allcentury18
i should probably mention what i meant by the quote above was this...
w/ religon, school and parenting being less prevelant in everyones lives, the most natural and biological side of humans is coming about.
religon has sepressed common and natural tendancies for centuries... most anthropologists will agree w/ everything i have stated above. although our lives have come more simple, the basics behind mating have actually toned down |
I don't think religion is necessarily a good thing when talking about relationships. Many religions forbid "love" and "love-making" if it doesn't pertain to making children. |
|
|
| allcentury18 |
| quote: | Originally posted by squirrelly
I don't think religion is necessarily a good thing when talking about relationships. Many religions forbid "love" and "love-making" if it doesn't pertain to making children. |
i agree w/ you. those quotes were in regards to leopoldstotch |
|
|
| kr00t0n |
Ever been in love [relationship context] allcentury18?
Thought not :p |
|
|
| Arbiter |
I agree that it is overplayed. But given that the film industry is in the business of making money, and "love" has a great track record of doing exactly that, you shouldn't need to ask why most movies adhere to that paradigm.
But I really don't see why the diversity of meanings associated with the term is so difficult for you to handle. It is not uncommon in the English language that some amount of context may be required to resolve ambiguities that some words may be prone to.
If I were to tell you to "meet me at the bank" you might not be able to tell if you should head for a river or a financial institution unless there was sufficient context to draw a reasonable conclusion regarding my specific meaning. However, this doesn't seem to call into question the existence of banks. |
|
|
|
|
