RE: Love within Authority Dynamics

RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

kyraofMists -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:13:39 PM)
You know what kevin, I think most of us get that you think romantic love is obsessive, compulsive, unhealthy, short lived, and can lead someone to commit felonies. But guess what... that isn't how everyone defines romantic love. In fact, I say that has little to do with loving someone else and a lot to do with just getting a fix however you can. I can say this because in my past I have felt this obsession and I know what I feel now. What I felt in the past wasn't love; it was lust and a crave to get a fix. What I have now is love. It is clear that you don't get the kind of love that the three of us share. Hopefully one day in your life you will experience it and realize that what you are calling love doesn't even come close. Knight's Kyra

wwwkevinww -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:16:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lapresence quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww okay, I typed in "case study romantic love" into yahoo, the 4th one down came to this http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/31/health/psychology/31love.html?ex=1275192000&en=9db08ac71c58c4c3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss and relates specfically to support what I have said...... Watching New Love as It Sears the Brain Thanks for the article. Although it still didn't discuss the facts you claimed earlier. An interesting read, to say the least. However, now I'm going to pick it apart from someone who has a background in the social sciences. I have a degree in anthropology and had to take social research methods for that degree. The authors of my text were psychologists. 1) That article is not a case study at all. 2) 17 as a sample size is way too small to have any real bearing on anything. The experiment is not statistically significant. The idea is to repeat the same experiment (not a similar one) over and over in an effort to disprove those findings. Note, I'm not saying that the results are invalid, but they need to be tested again and again with larger sample sizes to make it anything resembling a fact. You still haven't convinced me that what you said were facts were so. And I illustrated a case that I have witnessed that still resembles the infatuated, romantic love that you spoke of. There is an article on WebMD that says men can't be bisexual. I know bisexual men. That article also lacked a large enough sample size, and I found their methodology lacking in proving their case. Thanks again. I think it was a bunch of case studies. Your trying to say that only statistics or a large enough sample sides makes things facts? the point of bringing up that article was that it defined what I was trying to say is romantic love... If your with a person beyond new love, it moves into another type of love.... obviously I hadn't really realized what irked me so much about what he was saying, until later... he's just bullshitting and people are buying it......

lapresence -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:24:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww "When you're in the throes of this romantic love it's overwhelming, you're out of control, you're irrational, you're going to the gym at 6 a.m. every day - why? Because she's there," said Dr. Helen Fisher, an anthropologist at Rutgers University and the co-author of the analysis. "And when rejected, some people contemplate stalking, homicide, suicide. This drive for romantic love can be stronger than the will to live." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/31/health/psychology/31love.html?ex=1275192000&en=9db08ac71c58c4c3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss - source What I was saying was this type of new love, which they also refer to as romantic love, cannot last forever, its not healthy, and has a time limit of 18 months.... That article didn't mention 18 months. I read it. Also, people have died and killed over love. And generally that is from people who have been together longer than that. Your logic doesn't follow.

MadRabbit -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:33:49 PM)
1. Either you are incapable of using the English language to communicate since you chose to make a declaration about yourself then try and turn it into a conditional in the next breath. (Edited to add :) We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite. What would you say if I said... "Your an idiot. Now if I choose to call you an idiot.." or 2. You are trying to exploit a hole created by your own horribly, erroneous grammar skills. As for the rest of your post... I dont think I need to say anything.

wwwkevinww -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:38:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kyraofMists You know what kevin, I think most of us get that you think romantic love is obsessive, compulsive, unhealthy, short lived, and can lead someone to commit felonies. But guess what... that isn't how everyone defines romantic love. In fact, I say that has little to do with loving someone else and a lot to do with just getting a fix however you can. I can say this because in my past I have felt this obsession and I know what I feel now. What I felt in the past wasn't love; it was lust and a crave to get a fix. What I have now is love. It is clear that you don't get the kind of love that the three of us share. Hopefully one day in your life you will experience it and realize that what you are calling love doesn't even come close. Knight's Kyra I'm not disputing that you have love, , just that its not obsessive and its not as high of quality as if it was a monogomous relationship....its not the only type of love...and if you believe your in love, fine..... There are different ways to express your love, and one of them is keeping someone in your thoughts.... its hard, to love more than one because like I have said before, your timesharing.... theoretically imagine if you were sharing your man with 48 other women, how much do you think you would be in his thoughts? obviously your bisexual and enjoy the dynamic your in, and don't mind lessening the love with one to experience some from another..... how often does he spout his thoughts about water and bullshit to you and do you know which book(s) he is plagarizing it from?

sublimelysensual -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:43:22 PM)
For some reason I hadn't opened this thread until today..and after making my way through the entire thing..I have only one thing to say... -Pssst..turn off the lights and hide the beer and the party mix and maybe he'll leave- -a ..who doesn't feed the animals if she doesn't want them to visit....

KatyLied -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:45:25 PM)
He already took his leave of this thread, we thought it was safe, but they rarely stay away . . .

MadRabbit -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:50:36 PM)
Are you kidding me? Where else can you get this kind of "Jackass" quality entertainment without paying for it?

wwwkevinww -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:50:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lapresence quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww "When you're in the throes of this romantic love it's overwhelming, you're out of control, you're irrational, you're going to the gym at 6 a.m. every day - why? Because she's there," said Dr. Helen Fisher, an anthropologist at Rutgers University and the co-author of the analysis. "And when rejected, some people contemplate stalking, homicide, suicide. This drive for romantic love can be stronger than the will to live." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/31/health/psychology/31love.html?ex=1275192000&en=9db08ac71c58c4c3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss - source What I was saying was this type of new love, which they also refer to as romantic love, cannot last forever, its not healthy, and has a time limit of 18 months.... That article didn't mention 18 months. I read it. Also, people have died and killed over love. And generally that is from people who have been together longer than that. Your logic doesn't follow. the point was defining new romantic love.....no the article doesn't mention 18 months, I am mentioning that from another article from memory..... Often people who have been married for decades and decades lose their will to live and die shortly after their spouse.... you need to realize that statistics are often misrepresented. Statistics that your trying to bring into this conversation is irrelevant.... there are different types of love. obviously I'm not going to dispute that its possible to love someone for longer than 18 months, and find it idiotic so many people think I really believe you cannot love someone beyond 18 months.....

lapresence -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 5:59:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww quote: ORIGINAL: lapresence quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww okay, I typed in "case study romantic love" into yahoo, the 4th one down came to this http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/31/health/psychology/31love.html?ex=1275192000&en=9db08ac71c58c4c3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss and relates specfically to support what I have said...... Watching New Love as It Sears the Brain Thanks for the article. Although it still didn't discuss the facts you claimed earlier. An interesting read, to say the least. However, now I'm going to pick it apart from someone who has a background in the social sciences. I have a degree in anthropology and had to take social research methods for that degree. The authors of my text were psychologists. 1) That article is not a case study at all. 2) 17 as a sample size is way too small to have any real bearing on anything. The experiment is not statistically significant. The idea is to repeat the same experiment (not a similar one) over and over in an effort to disprove those findings. Note, I'm not saying that the results are invalid, but they need to be tested again and again with larger sample sizes to make it anything resembling a fact. You still haven't convinced me that what you said were facts were so. And I illustrated a case that I have witnessed that still resembles the infatuated, romantic love that you spoke of. There is an article on WebMD that says men can't be bisexual. I know bisexual men. That article also lacked a large enough sample size, and I found their methodology lacking in proving their case. Thanks again. I think it was a bunch of case studies. Your trying to say that only statistics or a large enough sample sides makes things facts? the point of bringing up that article was that it defined what I was trying to say is romantic love... If your with a person beyond new love, it moves into another type of love.... obviously I hadn't really realized what irked me so much about what he was saying, until later... he's just bullshitting and people are buying it...... Well, yeah. Or I wouldn't have said it. The sample (17 people) is supposed to represent humanity? That's over 6 Billion people, bud. If you care to learn a lot about research and facts, understand how they become facts. Chapter 8 of the Fourth Edition of Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches talks all about sampling. W. Lawerence Neuman is the author. It was a series of studies. Not a series of case studies. Mr. Psychology should know the difference. A case study is only one illustration. It is a random event that can be examined but can't necessarily be repeated. For instance, scientists have suspected that contrails impact climate. The case study (one incident), when planes were grounded following 9/11. We can't know it for sure, but the evidence points to it. But we don't really want to duplicate the incident. It would be way too costly. http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20020511/fob1.asp You can think it's bullshit, but you don't have facts to back it up. Love is too intangible, deal with it and move on.

wwwkevinww -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 6:00:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit 1. Either you are incapable of using the English language to communicate since you chose to make a declaration about yourself then try and turn it into a conditional in the next breath. (Edited to add :) We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite. What would you say if I said... "Your an idiot. Now if I choose to call you an idiot.." or 2. You are trying to exploit a hole created by your own horribly, erroneous grammar skills. As for the rest of your post... I dont think I need to say anything. My grammar skills are horrible? lol what I said is simliar to your doctor telling you your going to die, then when you look shocked, he says NOT....you really think your going to die still? your entire 1. idea has too many faults....we have sentences so we say something and cannot refute it....like what I just said with the doctor above? "We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite." I think its pretty obvious my language skills are better than yours....I have a dislike for ignorance....

KMsAngel -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 6:07:50 PM)
dude, just get over it. if you haven't actually OBSERVED KoM and his lady loves, what the hell right do you have to say its pathetic, its false and he's living a delusion? for heaven's sake, grow up and find something else - something more important - to get so passionate about! Does it really matter if they believe themselves to be in love? How is it hurting you? how is it hurting me? how is that corrupting the populace of the board much less North America??? and yes, larger studies, repeated many times do make the facts more believable. if you want the "truth of the matter", on a professional level anyways, you go to peer reviewed literature and you cite and you quote. you don't pull the info from popular literature and say, cause Paris said so!

lapresence -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 6:13:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww you need to realize that statistics are often misrepresented. Statistics that your trying to bring into this conversation is irrelevant.... there are different types of love. obviously I'm not going to dispute that its possible to love someone for longer than 18 months, and find it idiotic so many people think I really believe you cannot love someone beyond 18 months..... I'm the one that took both stats and research methods, I don't need a lesson from you, I assure you. Kind of the point of several people, hasn't it been? Where you came up with 18 months, that you want to stick to it like the plague. So if it's so popular a stat, you should easily be able to cite and verify its existence. But it's irrelevant..... except when you cite it. ROFLMAO, this is actually fun in a perverse way. [sm=argue.gif] (I'm taking it as debating that they are doing)

MadRabbit -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 6:14:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit 1. Either you are incapable of using the English language to communicate since you chose to make a declaration about yourself then try and turn it into a conditional in the next breath. (Edited to add :) We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite. What would you say if I said... "Your an idiot. Now if I choose to call you an idiot.." or 2. You are trying to exploit a hole created by your own horribly, erroneous grammar skills. As for the rest of your post... I dont think I need to say anything. My grammar skills are horrible? lol what I said is simliar to your doctor telling you your going to die, then when you look shocked, he says NOT....you really think your going to die still? your entire 1. idea has too many faults....we have sentences so we say something and cannot refute it....like what I just said with the doctor above? "We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite." I think its pretty obvious my language skills are better than yours....I have a dislike for ignorance.... quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww My grammar skills are horrible? Lol What I said is similiar to your doctor telling you that your going to die, then when you look shocked, he says, "NOT." Do you really think that your still going to die? Your entire first idea has too many faults. We have sentences so we say something, but cannot refute it. However, what I just said above with the doctor disproves that. "We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite." I think, its pretty obvious my language skills are better than yours. I have a dislike for ignorance....

lapresence -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 6:20:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit 1. Either you are incapable of using the English language to communicate since you chose to make a declaration about yourself then try and turn it into a conditional in the next breath. (Edited to add :) We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite. What would you say if I said... "Your an idiot. Now if I choose to call you an idiot.." or 2. You are trying to exploit a hole created by your own horribly, erroneous grammar skills. As for the rest of your post... I dont think I need to say anything. My grammar skills are horrible? lol what I said is simliar to your doctor telling you your going to die, then when you look shocked, he says NOT....you really think your going to die still? your entire 1. idea has too many faults....we have sentences so we say something and cannot refute it....like what I just said with the doctor above? "We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite." I think its pretty obvious my language skills are better than yours....I have a dislike for ignorance.... quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww My grammar skills are horrible? Lol What I said is similiar to your doctor telling you that your going to die, then when you look shocked, he says, "NOT." Do you really think that your still going to die? Your entire first idea has too many faults. We have sentences so we say something, but cannot refute it. However, what I just said above with the doctor disproves that. "We have sentences in the English language so we can express a single train of thought completely, not so we can express one thing and then in the sentence, express the complete opposite." I think, its pretty obvious my language skills are better than yours. I have a dislike for ignorance.... Not to mention the aggravating misuse of the word your. It's you're; a contraction of you are, not a possessive. [;)]

MadRabbit -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 6:22:26 PM)
Thanks, I missed that. And if my doctor said "You are going to die. If you were going to die..", I would be rather confused.

KnightofMists -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 7:09:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww ....I have a dislike for ignorance.... Well the dislike for yourself is rather obvious in my opinion... and now I know why., editted to add... I see that my last post hit some buttons.... I suppose getting to close to your truth....

kyraofMists -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 7:11:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinwwI'm not disputing that you have love, , just that its not obsessive You are right, it is not obsessive.... but we did not claim that we were obsessive about each other nor was it called "romantic love". You also seem to have reversed your position from your first post on this thread where you said: quote: I think your kidding yourself when you talk about love, and are instead compassionate......this is to the OP I think this statement from you clearly indicates that you are disputing that we love each other. quote: ...and its not as high of quality as if it was a monogomous relationship....its not the only type of love...and if you believe your in love, fine..... I will leave the "quality" statement for now and just say how gracious of you to allow me to have my beliefs about the life that I live. quote: There are different ways to express your love, and one of them is keeping someone in your thoughts.... How often someone is in my thoughts is not a measure of how much I do or do not love them. I express love by accepting them for who they are and wanting them to be happy. quote: its hard, to love more than one because like I have said before, your timesharing....theoretically imagine if you were sharing your man with 48 other women, how much do you think you would be in his thoughts? obviously your bisexual and enjoy the dynamic your in, and don't mind lessening the love with one to experience some from another..... What I get from this is that you think how much you love someone is measured by how much you think about them, and the less you think about them the less you love them. I guess work causes people to love each other less. Not unless you sit at work all day and think about your partner. I imagine some people might be able to get away with that but many would be fired for doing a crappy job. I guess school causes people to love each other less. Hard to think about your partner when you are studying or at least trying to. I guess there are a lot of activities that make people love their partner less because they engage in those activities and are not always thinking about their partner. Seems like a really bad measurement of love. It may be a good measurement of obsession, but obsession is not love. If this is your measurement and basis for your argument that monogamy has a higher quality of love than poly, then it seems pretty weak. Knight's Kyra *edited to fix spacing issues

KnightofMists -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 7:19:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lapresence Well, yeah. Or I wouldn't have said it. The sample (17 people) is supposed to represent humanity? 17 uh???? mmmmmmm I think if I did a poll based on what has been said in this thread... I could have a creditible study on the ignorance of some poeple. I am would be will do to the poll over and over and over again... just to gain even more creditibility.... Oh.. question.... can I poll the same 17 people??? w editted for a damn typo

KnightofMists -> RE: Love within Authority Dynamics (7/10/2007 7:24:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lapresence ROFLMAO, this is actually fun in a perverse way. [sm=argue.gif] (I'm taking it as debating that they are doing) yeah.. His buttons are very easy to push and very predictable. I guess it's the sadist in me to push the buttons... I just have to see how dumb a person will get when pushed... some just amaze me.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875