Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply US-PHARMACIES UGL OZ
Raptor Labs UGFREAK OxygenPharm
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplyUS-PHARMACIES UGL OZUGFREAKRaptor LabsOxygenPharm

Do you believe in

I do. It happened to me in high school.....took me 8 years to come to terms with the whole thing.
 
yes.
i didn't before it happened.
 
TRUE Love?...no.

Lust?...obviously.

However, even lust @ first sight seldom made it past the first few minutes of conversation.

I can't begin to count the # of outwardly beautiful women I've met who totally destroyed their outer beauty with inner ugliness within 3 minutes of opening their chewhole.

Sad. Predictable, but still sad.
 
how did i know that was coming

i was hoping for "ghosts" or "economic policy reforms for emerging third world nations"

love = most attractive woman you can get, i think if you thought you were in love with some broad, then some hotter broad came along and was all like "we'll have a good future, plus my dad is rich", you'd dump your current broad for this new broad
 
lust, yes.

i dont believe how blinded I've been by this before. I've had crushes on some girls, and said to myself stuff like "wow, maybe they are the one"

all in all though, all it is, is just a major attraction you have to that person.
 
I think love at first site has a lot to do with physical attraction and pheromones, which are powerful little fuckers. The pheromone thing will always work for ya if you like the way a certain person smells I think, so you will always feel the same thing when their scent is near.

When I fiurst read the title to this thread, I thought you were going to ask me if I believed in gnomes or pixies or something like that. The answer, by the way, is you bet.
 
No. If you say yes, you're just shallow. You can't fall in love with someone from looks alone, unless that's all you care about. I'd need to get to know somebody, their hobbies, what they like to do, the way I can communicate with them, how intellectual they are...

I'm just weird, I guess.
 
People are sensitive to the same pheromones for about 4 years, which explain why most divorces occur at year 4 or after. It also explains why men are most attracted to women at ovulation, a fuckload of pheromones are released. Long term love (decade(s)) stems from oxytocin, a completely different hormone. There's no such thing as love, just hormones and sensitivity to those hormones.

In my experience every girl I was attracted to caused the exact same emotions...the magnitude did not really differ, they always felt like 'the one' as Mr. Foxygel has mentioned.
 
Love at first site.
I would say no.

I would say lust at first site. Or I love how that person looks. :D

I would have to get to know someone to fall in love.
I love someone for who they are not for how they look.
 
In my case looks had very little to do with it. I hardly ever thought of her in a sexual way...it was never about that at all.
 
Under very rare accations I have seen people so beautiful that they litterly take my breath away, but the real deep feeling of love takes time to develop.
 
Dial_tone said:
In my case looks had very little to do with it. I hardly ever thought of her in a sexual way...it was never about that at all.

Dial is that really YOU?



j/k! lol! :rose:
 
lust yes, love no, love is something that has to grow over a period of time, getting to know someone, sharing their feelings, love is built on trust, not looks alone.
 
Pamela said:
Dial is that really YOU?



j/k! lol! :rose:


and she wasn't even a thick chick. 5'4", 110'ish with a chest as flat as the walls of this room....ahh, God's greatest work ever. :)
 
i don't really believe that you could fall in love at first sight. love is something that occurs over time as you get to know someone, share interests, and build that personal connection.
 
SSS si the only one who strikes me as actually understanding what constitutes "love."

Love is something you do, it is a choice. It represents an emptying of oneself, to varying degrees, for ther benefit of another or others. It is confused with the feelings of attaraction two human beings may or may not feel for each other. It isn't necessary to feel "love" in order to love. We can't always control how we feel, but one can control how well they love someone.
 
Someone I once knew (and to this day consider to be one of the wisest people I've ever known) explained "love" to me as follows:

"Love is patient.

Love is kind.

Love does not envy.

Love does not boast.

Love is not proud.

Love is not rude.

Love is not self-seeking.

Love is not easily angered.

Love keeps no record of wrongs.

Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices in the truth.

Love always protects.

Love always trusts.

Love always hopes.

Love always perseveres.

When you can replace the word "Love" in the above sentences with your name, then you'll understand what true love is."


I have yet to fully accomplish this myself...and doubt I ever will.

Given the multitude of definitions for the word "love" ("I love my parents", "I love my car", "I love my job", I love my spouse", etc.), I'd say "love at first sight" is pretty much impossible.

The only "love at first sight" situation I can envision this to be applicable to is when a parent sees their child for the first time. It would seem to pretty much rule out "romantic" love.

FWIW
 
If anyone can replace love with their names in even half of those things, that sickens me. Some of them especially. "Always trusts". Hah! You're looking to get bit in the ass. That shit is in the bible, I believe. My friend showed me that, or something remarkably similar once before.

It's a bunch of bullshit. Love is just like reality...perception. It's what you make of it. Love doesn't have to be someone who rejoices in truth. Fuck. Ignorance is bliss as far as I'm concerned. And always hopes? Too much optimism, nuh-uh.

Too idealistic, not enough realism there.
 
Tom Treutlein said:
If anyone can replace love with their names in even half of those things, that sickens me. Some of them especially. "Always trusts". Hah! You're looking to get bit in the ass. That shit is in the bible, I believe. My friend showed me that, or something remarkably similar once before.

It's a bunch of bullshit. Love is just like reality...perception. It's what you make of it. Love doesn't have to be someone who rejoices in truth. Fuck. Ignorance is bliss as far as I'm concerned. And always hopes? Too much optimism, nuh-uh.

Too idealistic, not enough realism there.

Why the fuck people feel like they need to define or explain love in the first place is beyond me. As long as you know it when you feel it nothing else really matters. I don't give a rat's ass what it says in the damn dictionary. Some of you are talking about love like it's something you go out and create. I don't create love or manufacture feelings....they happen to me and I deal with them as best I know how.
 
Robert Jan said:
You´d first have to like, believe in love

you will believe in love the second you feel it.
it'll be the second your analytical mind stops telling your heart how to feel.
that'll be when you realize you don't know all the answers and you won't care.
:)
 
Sugarplum said:
you will believe in love the second you feel it.
it'll be the second your analytical mind stops telling your heart how to feel.
that'll be when you realize you don't know all the answers and you won't care.
:)

that´s all happened before

I just see it as a feeling and that´s all. can´t really explain
 
My beau married his ex-wife after three weeks and their total time together was 15 months. (1st date to finalized divorce).

I think it's one of those YMMV situations.


I also know that hell will freeze over before he'll get married again, so because of his/her lust at first site, I'll never marry this guy. YAY me. :rolleyes:

(Oddly enough I had the same problem with the ex beau...)
 
Sugarplum said:
you will believe in love the second you feel it.
it'll be the second your analytical mind stops telling your heart how to feel.
that'll be when you realize you don't know all the answers and you won't care.
:)


It's a temporary feeling, all emotion sadness, anger, happiness come in waves.

Love is often confused with compassion and caring that are both actions not emotions.
 
Nope.

You can have lust at first sight, but not love. Being in love takes a time, knowledge, and intimacy that only comes with time.
 
velvett said:
I also know that hell will freeze over before he'll get married again, so because of his/her lust at first site, I'll never marry this guy. YAY me. :rolleyes:

(Oddly enough I had the same problem with the ex beau...)

So, we're still on for San Gennaro? :D
 
velvett said:
It's coming quick!

What day is it starting this year?

I think Sept 16th is Opening Day and the 18th begins feast day.

Damn, that's Mom's 60th birthday party. I'll be in Florida. we can always do sushi afterwards.
 
velvett said:
What did you know after one week?

Well I have dated more then my fair share of women and have known for years what a woman must have for me to want to be with her the rest of my life and I have always been very good at reading what someone has been like right away.

After the first week I said to myself this is the women I am going to marry. Might sound crazy, it would even sound more crazy if you knew me and my history with women LOL.

She is utterly amazing, to me she is everything I wanted in one great package.

She is the most compassionate, caring, giving, funny and BEAUTIFUL women I have ever met. Her sense of family and friends is second to none. She is so full of passion it equals mine. She is loyal and honest and has a great inner strength I admire. She believes in herself and it shows in her confidence.

I couldn't imagine not having her in my life to share things now.

I could go on and on but I think you get the idea. ;)
 
Dawgmo said:
Well I have dated more then my fair share of women and have known for years what a woman must have for me to want to be with her the rest of my life and I have always been very good at reading what someone has been like right away.

After the first week I said to myself this is the women I am going to marry. Might sound crazy, it would even sound more crazy if you knew me and my history with women LOL.

She is utterly amazing, to me she is everything I wanted in one great package.

She is the most compassionate, caring, giving, funny and BEAUTIFUL women I have ever met. Her sense of family and friends is second to none. She is so full of passion it equals mine. She is loyal and honest and has a great inner strength I admire. She believes in herself and it shows in her confidence.

I could go on and on but I think you get the idea. ;)


I'm not going to rain on your parade so Good Luck with that.

...even though that is a whole lot to get know about anyone in one week
 
It is impossible to love someone you have just seen for the first time. Sure, you might want to screw their brains out, but love can only be built over the time you get to know each other.

To me, the word love doesn't mean shit if you're not backing it up by 99.99999% action.


























Actually, make that 100%.
 
velvett said:
I'm not going to rain on your parade so Good Luck with that.

...even though that is a whole lot to get know about anyone in one week

Up until I met her I would have agreed with you 110%
 
omg you fished me and I wasn't even being a pervert..... I'll just have to Take that fish and shove it up........
 
The Red Dragon said:
People are sensitive to the same pheromones for about 4 years, which explain why most divorces occur at year 4 or after. It also explains why men are most attracted to women at ovulation, a fuckload of pheromones are released. Long term love (decade(s)) stems from oxytocin, a completely different hormone. There's no such thing as love, just hormones and sensitivity to those hormones.

In my experience every girl I was attracted to caused the exact same emotions...the magnitude did not really differ, they always felt like 'the one' as Mr. Foxygel has mentioned.

yup a completely different set of brain chemicals (always thought they were endorphins but it probably a comlpex cascade of many reactions) gets activated when its long term. it stops being about attraction/fucking and more about companionship. Explains why swingers feel the need to fuck around yet still love their spouses

Still even with all the science saying this I wouldnt say there is no such thing as love...probably because I'm a sap :D but also because I'm a firm believer in a soul/inner personality that brain chemistry cannot define. just because your brain uses certain chemicals to communicate with each other it doesnt mean it didnt have to somehow decide to fall in love. Like how electrical impulses down a phone wire dont mean thats the reason someone made a telephone call, there had to be a person on one end who needed to call someone for a specific reason. Neurology yet doesnt know why the brain can determine the reason, just the reigon of the brain responsible for wanting to call.
 
danielson said:
yup a completely different set of brain chemicals (always thought they were endorphins but it probably a comlpex cascade of many reactions) gets activated when its long term. it stops being about attraction/fucking and more about companionship. Explains why swingers feel the need to fuck around yet still love their spouses

Still even with all the science saying this I wouldnt say there is no such thing as love...probably because I'm a sap :D but also because I'm a firm believer in a soul/inner personality that brain chemistry cannot define. just because your brain uses certain chemicals to communicate with each other it doesnt mean it didnt have to somehow decide to fall in love. Like how electrical impulses down a phone wire dont mean thats the reason someone made a telephone call, there had to be a person on one end who needed to call someone for a specific reason. Neurology yet doesnt know why the brain can determine the reason, just the reigon of the brain responsible for wanting to call.


Good post. I think the word love is just an easy way to describe these chemical reactions. You don't want to start laying all the scientific terms down when you can just say the word love instead.

And it's interesting about the chemicals and how they react for different situations.

I've also heard that men and women were never biologically meant to be together for an extended period of time. Might have something to do with the honeymooning period, after which the attraction has run it's course, and then it's up to the couple to decide if they still at least want that companionship.
 
sigweed said:
how did i know that was coming

i was hoping for "ghosts" or "economic policy reforms for emerging third world nations"

love = most attractive woman you can get, i think if you thought you were in love with some broad, then some hotter broad came along and was all like "we'll have a good future, plus my dad is rich", you'd dump your current broad for this new broad

Wow......that's pretty sad bro.

Obviously you're pretty much unqualified to respond to this thread.

I wouldn't trade my wife for anything in this world. She's my best friend, and so much more.

As for love at first sight.....well now that's an entirely different story. When I first saw my wife, I wanted to knock the back side outta that ass. :p

Then we spoke, and I wanted to strangle her (way too much alike).

Now she, along with our girls are my very reason for living.
 
hanselthecaretaker said:
Good post. I think the word love is just an easy way to describe these chemical reactions. You don't want to start laying all the scientific terms down when you can just say the word love instead.

And it's interesting about the chemicals and how they react for different situations.

I've also heard that men and women were never biologically meant to be together for an extended period of time. Might have something to do with the honeymooning period, after which the attraction has run it's course, and then it's up to the couple to decide if they still at least want that companionship.

yeah I agree, from a biological standpoint men are underperforming if they only have one partner and so are women. Men and male animals try to keep one mate as its a sure fire way of making sure that his DNA lives on (hence many societies mores being towards the subjugation of women), and women want more partners as they want a wide host of DNA to ensure they have offspring who are varied and wont all get wiped out by one disease etc. explains why the male lion will have a pride but have different females in it and why they (male lions) roam to try and take over other prides, and why female lions dont stop them

but once the offspring are made and reproduction with the one mate becomes fruitless it is pointless for them to be together and live their lives as well as being faithful to one another. So something must have happened to make them decide to fall in love, and I can't think of a biological reason :)
 
superqt4u2nv said:
Do you believe in love at first sight?
Someone asked me this a few months ago I can't seem to get the question or the person that asked the question out of my mind.
 
superqt4u2nv said:
Someone asked me this a few months ago I can't seem to get the question or the person that asked the question out of my mind.
Did he use that tacky line:

"Do you believe in love at first sight or would you like me to walk by again?"
 
danielson said:
yeah I agree, from a biological standpoint men are underperforming if they only have one partner and so are women. Men and male animals try to keep one mate as its a sure fire way of making sure that his DNA lives on (hence many societies mores being towards the subjugation of women), and women want more partners as they want a wide host of DNA to ensure they have offspring who are varied and wont all get wiped out by one disease etc. explains why the male lion will have a pride but have different females in it and why they (male lions) roam to try and take over other prides, and why female lions dont stop them

but once the offspring are made and reproduction with the one mate becomes fruitless it is pointless for them to be together and live their lives as well as being faithful to one another. So something must have happened to make them decide to fall in love, and I can't think of a biological reason :)


Human beings have the ability to use reasoning, and this might be part of it. Our decisions are always affected by our way of reasoning, sometimes moreso than instinct, and that can be an advantage or a disadvantage over less advanced species.

I've also read that women are monogamous by nature, although I question this statement's accuracy.
 
IvanOffelitch said:
Someone I once knew (and to this day consider to be one of the wisest people I've ever known) explained "love" to me as follows:

"Love is patient.
Love is kind.
Love does not envy.
Love does not boast.
Love is not proud.
Love is not rude.
Love is not self-seeking.
Love is not easily angered.
Love keeps no record of wrongs.
Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices in the truth.
Love always protects.
Love always trusts.
Love always hopes.
Love always perseveres."



They are written in a book you know. The bible. 1 Corinthians 12.
 
strongsmartsexy said:
Did he use that tacky line:

"Do you believe in love at first sight or would you like me to walk by again?"
:lmao: I hope you don't think I am dumb enough to fall for that!
 
hanselthecaretaker said:
Human beings have the ability to use reasoning, and this might be part of it. Our decisions are always affected by our way of reasoning, sometimes moreso than instinct, and that can be an advantage or a disadvantage over less advanced species.

I've also read that women are monogamous by nature, although I question this statement's accuracy.

I question it as well. probably a feminist that wrote it :)
 
Its always lust at first sight. And its that lust that develops into love, its that touch of lust that makes your love perfect. I fell in love on first sight of her, maybe it was just lust, i wouldn't be too bothered if it was. But i still love her and forever will.
 
I believe in the soul, the cock, the pussy, the small of a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days.
 
Taps said:
I believe in the soul, the cock, the pussy, the small of a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days.

There u go....
 
Taps said:
I believe in the soul, the cock, the pussy, the small of a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days.

Was this from the porno version of Bull Durham?
 
Top Bottom