What is Digg?Sponsored by Threadless
81 Comments
- maz2331, on 02/10/2009, -7/+59Yep.
Still in love here after 4 years of marriage. I actually got offended at the latest girl who came up and wanted to hook up with me a few weeks ago. (Yeah, "no" does mean "no" sometimes).
Once you are really involved in a good relationship, you won't want to leave it. - CVL4317, on 02/09/2009, -1/+41sounds like true love to me.
- thenave, on 02/09/2009, -0/+39In related news, it turns out Charlie Sheen has never been in love.
- MaryCait, on 02/10/2009, -0/+29the real question is "how to make love stay"
- wentwhere, on 02/10/2009, -4/+27Reading stuff like this makes me so happy, props to you
- xerocint, on 02/10/2009, -0/+21Being in love makes you blind?!?!?
- anchor, on 02/10/2009, -0/+17"women don't give a rat's ass about looks"
Tell that to the dateless wonders that abound here. - or3n, on 02/10/2009, -0/+13@xerocint: only if you're in love with your right hand.
- moothemagiccow, on 02/10/2009, -3/+15not when they're looking at porn
- Travelsonic, on 02/10/2009, -0/+11Troll,
What a buzzkill. - asgardshill, on 02/10/2009, -1/+12Handcuffs, rope, and duct tape work for me.
- tfosorcim, on 02/10/2009, -0/+10If you look at the ugly ones too, then it means you are a digger.
- neko6, on 02/10/2009, -0/+10Math doesn't exist. The logic you perceive is just internal neurological chain reactions caused by corresponding stimuli.
I can play this all day long :) - mixsense, on 02/10/2009, -0/+10Well it is a fact, but saying 'true love doesn't exist' is debatable. One may feel 'truely in love', the chemical process behind the feeling explains love physically which is not to say it is not true, but rather the opposite.
- doubleoh7, on 02/10/2009, -0/+10I'm well aware that I do this.
- m3arvk, on 02/10/2009, -2/+12Forwarding theory as if it were fact doesn't make it a fact.
- Rookbird, on 02/10/2009, -0/+10Dear god!!
- priegog, on 02/10/2009, -1/+10I'm gonna call bull on this.
I mean, sure, when you are in acommited relationship and you truly love the person, you don't have the "need" you usually do to recreate your eyes with a beautiful face; but having said that, if my gf catches me averting my eyes from another beautiful woman, I most certainly did it on purpose to make her happy. I DO NOT become insensitive/blind to beauty - gogog0, on 02/10/2009, -2/+9biologically the real answer is: have children. the extreme love feelings that couples have usually last only 2-4 years. After that couples usually stay together because they have an investment; a child. Of course this isn't true in all cases, but looking at statistics you can see a spike in divorce at the 2-4 year mark in marriage and the 25 year mark in marriage (after children are grown).
- ladygator, on 02/10/2009, -0/+6If that's the case then all of the boyfriends I have ever dated and men I have known are highly abnormal! ;)
- eazye123, on 02/10/2009, -0/+6lick the vag.
- karmaroks, on 02/10/2009, -3/+9hey don't you call my people over rated. *sob* Ugly people are so scary.
- LegomanArt, on 02/10/2009, -3/+8Seriously?
- m3arvk, on 02/10/2009, -0/+5Someone come up with something creative about how love and beer have the same effect and then wrap it in a cute, easily repeatable expression - good for dinner parties with amigos.
- m3arvk, on 02/10/2009, -0/+5If you are truly content why would you look elsewhere? Seems self-evident.
- highmeh, on 02/10/2009, -2/+7love like that is hard to find, man.
- XxpokemasterxX, on 02/10/2009, -1/+6the dude on the left looks like eric from that 70's show.
- davzie, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4Over analyzed....
- Wargasmic, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4Why do you assume he wasn't talking about a chemical reaction known as love?
- ancientdinko, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4I dugg you karmaroks , you good looking bastard, just to prove my point!
- opticwind, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4Relationships...
Aren't...
Simple. - m3arvk, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4Fair enough...
- ladygator, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4I agree, sadly.
I WISH love had that effect on committed partners, but I truly don't think it works that way either.
It's a nice thought at least. - inactive, on 02/10/2009, -1/+4hah ...my people...
- Paranor01, on 02/10/2009, -2/+5@gogog0: Actually, biology really has nothing to do with the "statistics" you stated, but more with Sociology.
If you where to take a pure biological stance, then there would not be any marriage, and the male would have several children from many different mothers. And "love" is just a tool to help facilitate the production of offspring.
It is society that after many years, have created an expected "standard of relationships". I'm not saying this is a bad thing. Humans on the whole are very social animals, and there is a tendency to "stick together" which has led to the idea of marriage.
However, to say that biology is the main reason for your statements, is a fallacy simply because there is more than just biology at work. Therefore your statistics are false because they lack data from the other sources that directly effect your statements. - LittleDas, on 02/10/2009, -0/+3go back to 4chan
- opticwind, on 02/10/2009, -0/+3Sounds iffy. "Think you are losing your interest in her? Well seal that deal with a kid or two and all your interpersonal problems with her will be gone gone."
I think his question was how to stay IN LOVE with someone. - whiskeythief, on 02/10/2009, -0/+2This injury is common and rarely fatal. For quick relief of symptoms, drink bourbon.
Safe and effective when used as directed. - inactive, on 02/10/2009, -1/+3you live in Southern California eh?
- Gankfest, on 02/10/2009, -1/+3true love is the greatest thing, in the world-except for a nice MLT - mutton, lettuce and tomato sandwich, where the mutton is nice and lean and the tomato is ripe.
- DiggzDE, on 02/10/2009, -1/+3Nice. Now I know my gf isn't being sarcastic when she tells me that.
Or is she? :( - whiskeythief, on 02/10/2009, -0/+2My research shows that I can look without my true love noticing.
I fooled the researchers too. I was looking away, honest. - Travelsonic, on 02/10/2009, -0/+2It smells like bacon. >_<
- m3arvk, on 02/10/2009, -1/+3@mixsense: It is not a fact. He is sloppily saying that love is merely a chemical chain reaction. It isn't. This is just psycho-babble disguised as fact.
It's the same line of logic that says depression is a chemical imbalance. There is factually no causal link between depression and a chemical balance, merely a correlative one.
Being in love generates the cascade of effects, not the other way around. It's just piss poor logic, that's all. - Paulish, on 02/10/2009, -0/+2I smell fear.
- psyonic1, on 02/10/2009, -1/+2Only when you're walking with the bitch...
- madamme, on 02/10/2009, -0/+1When I read the description of the article I was thinking that too. However, if you read the article in full you'd know that it's not just about checking people out. The subjects were asked to write down the feelings of love they have for their significant others then subjected to a quick test. They were less distracted by images of attractive people after thinking about how much they love their partner. If they were not asked to write down feelings of love they were more distracted by the attractive people.
- Paranor01, on 02/10/2009, -0/+1Good "Doug & The Slugs" song, "who knows how to make love stay".
I recommend. - whiskeythief, on 02/10/2009, -0/+1I have noticed that too. Women care about ass whether or not the guys are huge douches who generalize about all women.
-
Show 51 - 82 of 82 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is