Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
Blogs > > My Blog |
Member Deleted Post
Member Deleted Post This post has been deleted by |
|||
|
WOW, great stuff - thanks! Why You Should Title the Photos in Your Albums Who is Up for Some Roll Play An ABC Lesson, on HNW [post 3312759] My Private Blog - Tell Me ALL Your Secrets
| ||
|
this took me a very long time to know. but once you know it, it's something so intrinsic, you can live it so easily. You cannot conceive the many without the one.
| ||
|
Visit my Blog Older but no Wiser and find out more
| ||
|
Great post! Love is limitless and does not demand anything in return. I think I love you too!
| ||
|
I am glad your world is becoming rosy again, as the world always should be for us,,but with reality comes "trials and tribulations" which gives us wisdom. I agree totally with your description of what love is. I don't agree that loving one's self is necessary to love someone. Typos be damned,,,only those high and mighty folk see the typos and remark. There is a meme out there in cyber land that has a long read but only the first and last letters of a word are correct and most folks can read it the whole meme.
| ||
|
Joley, I love you!!! Because I want you to be happy! I wish the best for you! Hope to meet you someday!!! Sooner than later?!? Desire
| ||
|
I'm often fascinated by the ever-evolving definition/perception of love. Until 200 years ago or so, love, in Western society anyway, was considered a fleeting thing that really didn't have anything to do with marriage. A vice of the young and impetuous. Way back in Rome, a Senator was either censured or even removed from office (I can't remember the details, only the bit that it was verboten) for kissing his wife in public. You just weren't supposed to feel that way about your wife, and you especially weren't supposed to show it in public. Makes me wonder how much of this is the hubris of our species, that we can rationalize another definition for something that is, after all, only instinct. Just more of the struggle to keep ourselves superior to the rest of the fauna on the planet, even if it is all in our own head. Smart as a horse and hung like Einstein.
| ||
|
You've made a false assertion, that I wish to live by the standards of a bygone era. I'm no anachronism. Your point about gay relationships, most notably in Greek military tradition, is true and no contradiction of what I wrote. I'm interested in how we've evolved, in very very short order even by human standards, from one thing to another. From some articles I've read, monogamy is also a construct of modernity. Going back to hunter/gatherer tribes, before massive settlements when most of the few humans were nomadic, every adult was a parent to every child. Take the idea of some vegetarians; that humans were never meant to eat meat. Oh, I'm certain we are not meant to eat it as often as we do, but the concept has the assumption that at some point in our progress, we decided to go completely against what we were and start eating meat. It also ignores the fact that many, if not most or all, primates eat meat. To have done that would have made primitive vegetarian man ill, and the concept would have died right there. Plus, it took huge amounts of raw protein to develop the big brains we have, and you just can't get that much protein through only eating vegetables in one region. Yet, many vegetarians persist with this nonsensical conclusion. So why is love, marriage, fidelity, and all the rest, any different? Even the past conept of love and marriage I spoke of is a human construct, as I see it. Smart as a horse and hung like Einstein.
| ||
|
Or maybe this is my way of saying I want to club you on the noggin and drag you back to my cave. Smart as a horse and hung like Einstein.
| ||
|
This is where internet communications fall short. We are omnivores. Not strictly carnivores, or herbivores. I don't know where the transition occurred, but it had to be somewhere between half and a million years ago, but it was definitely before humans, or any related species, developed tools and language. You don't need to look at dinosaurs, though. You can compare the jaws of tigers vs. cows and see the difference. I don't think scientists have a clue what species from 65 million years ago led to homo sapiens. Probably something like a tiny rodent. Maybe a lemur-like animal. You are correct. Science changes, and everything in science is just theory. That in my opinion, is what makes science so powerful as theories change or are eliminated to fit new facts. Belief is not so flexible. I'd like to think that intelligence has brought humanity something that needs to be explained. I just don't think we're that special. We're overdue for extinction, and we can't even save ourselves from ourselves, let alone things beyond our control. I just can not buy the ego that puts us, and our relationships and emotions, on an elevated plane. We aren't the center of anything. We aren't the origins of such things. Humans just think that language has qualified us to be the arbiters of unseen truths. As a species, we're full of ourselves. And full of shit. And that's my opinion. It's not better than yours, or worse. than yours and is not a refutation. I'm certain of mine being pretty worthless, here, to you, and to the universe. I'm good with that. Smart as a horse and hung like Einstein.
|
Become a member to create a blog