|
g00ru
lit pants tit licker



Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
relationships are based inherently in insecurity 5
#14457217 - 05/15/11 04:08 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
-------------------- check out my music! drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss
|
learningtofly
Ancient Aliens



Registered: 05/21/07
Posts: 15,105
Loc: Out of this world
Last seen: 12 years, 5 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14457232 - 05/15/11 04:10 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I like saying im in a relationship because its a happy fact. Just like when i tell people i have a phat wad of cash in my pocket for my friend who has some sass for me. Its just a happy fact we like to iterate orally its not that we like showing off or feeling insecure about it, we just like expressing our present status.
--------------------
|
TYL3R


Registered: 11/19/04
Posts: 17,493
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru] 2
#14457234 - 05/15/11 04:10 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
That gives me thoughts.
|
rackem



Registered: 11/27/09
Posts: 14,024
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14457238 - 05/15/11 04:11 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
i like the labeless romances.
they can also be a burden of truth. because sometimes labels are hard to undo.
good theory.. i like it
|
AlmostAsCoolAs


Registered: 11/14/09
Posts: 7,215
Loc: California
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14457240 - 05/15/11 04:11 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Or maybe two people just want to make it known that they are with the person they love?
That being said, I have a girl but I'm not in a relationship.
--------------------
|
Anthony917
why dont we do it in the road



Registered: 05/14/09
Posts: 3,243
Loc: Earth
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14457242 - 05/15/11 04:11 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I think people put labels on their relationships because NOT having a label leaves it open to....anything really.
When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about. If you don't want to call someone you love & sleep with your girlfriend/wife/whatever....then I'd just say you're fuck buddies...
-------------------- Prisoner#1 said: I got my ass kicked by a 9yo when I was 17 Trippin? Click Me
What is life? I'm tired of life...
|
therapist
sheeeeeeeeeeeit...


Registered: 05/05/10
Posts: 278
Loc: USA
Last seen: 10 years, 5 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Anthony917] 2
#14457276 - 05/15/11 04:15 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
there are labels for relationships because all relationships ARE one of those things. you're either bf/gf, fuck buddies, married, engaged, friends, family, acquaintances, or etc. words describe ideas and states of being. they're not arbitrary, most of the time.
|
ShiVersblood
VAmPiRES HELLA ❤


Registered: 08/18/07
Posts: 115,620
Loc: United States of America
Last seen: 1 day, 3 hours
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Anthony917]
#14457280 - 05/15/11 04:16 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
If you dont put a label on it then people are going to assume she is single and hella try to sleep with her constantly.
|
g00ru
lit pants tit licker



Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Anthony917]
#14457283 - 05/15/11 04:16 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
yeah exactly...that's MY girlfriend OMG 
if you want other people to know i guess say its a relationship but people will find out anyways and it would be more chill in my hypothetical way of doin thangs
Basically, what it comes down to is I always thought more communication was a good thing for relationships...but in many cases, the less that's said, the better.
-------------------- check out my music! drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss
|
gerryjarcia
biophiliac



Registered: 05/29/10
Posts: 1,889
Loc: the woods
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14457321 - 05/15/11 04:24 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
i agree. but the reality is people are insecure and need the labels to get by in life
--------------------
"We are all intoxicated. We were born into an insane asylum, a world crazy-making. We believe what we see and hear. The real myth is the myth of sanity, of rationality: it's a disease that is eating away at the earth. All the poisons flow from our denial. We deny madness, we forget our crimes, we dismember the corpse, we imprison our children. We need poison to poison the poison, to remember the sacred nature of intoxication, the green body of the young god." ~ Dale Pendell
|
sirdonut
riding the cosmic giggle


Registered: 05/27/08
Posts: 801
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: gerryjarcia]
#14457448 - 05/15/11 04:49 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
yes, I feel pretty much the exact same way. You can't own another being and trying to is ugly and based in insecurity as you've said. Most relationships are void of any real love anyways. Two loving beings would be capable of being together without label as love always allows the other freedom.
-------------------- "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
|
g00ru
lit pants tit licker



Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: gerryjarcia]
#14458648 - 05/15/11 07:58 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
gerryjarcia said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
i agree. but the reality is people are insecure and need the labels to get by in life 
true, true, but it's always worth it to purge yourself of insecurity, and romance can be a good opportunity for that if you're detached enough
-------------------- check out my music! drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss
|
rodfarva
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=====-----=-=-=-=-I



Registered: 07/31/07
Posts: 4,982
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14459153 - 05/15/11 09:15 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Yea.. i had this for about 5 years. It was fun. She finally used the excuse that she didnt think we were "official" when i called her out on being with other guys. Theres a lot more to it, but after five years she begs the question, and my answer was a definitive "no we are not."
--------------------
|
gonzo422
Haunted

Registered: 10/14/10
Posts: 237
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: sirdonut]
#14459374 - 05/15/11 09:55 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sirdonut said: yes, I feel pretty much the exact same way. You can't own another being and trying to is ugly and based in insecurity as you've said. Most relationships are void of any real love anyways. Two loving beings would be capable of being together without label as love always allows the other freedom.
I totally agree - well stated.........
-------------------- When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
|
aNeway2sayHooray
Cresley Wusher




Registered: 07/07/05
Posts: 7,653
Loc: Orphic Trench
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: gerryjarcia]
#14459511 - 05/15/11 10:20 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
gerryjarcia said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
i agree. but the reality is people are insecure and need the labels to get by in life
-------------------- Mad_Larkin said: Death is just a thang.
MrJellineck said: Profits, prophets. That's all you jews think about. sheekle said: life is drugs... and music... and cat...
|
helix
Idealist Thinker Musician Lover


Registered: 09/13/10
Posts: 409
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Anthony917]
#14460091 - 05/16/11 12:25 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Anthony917 said: When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about.
I think this illustrates exactly why i agree so much with OP^ Relationships necessarily, as a part of the label itself, are about OWNERSHIP of another person. You can communicate that you want to be monogomous with the person in question without slapping that label on it. But someone could just as easily question monogomy which is another debate...
In any case, where someone is insecure i think it's more important to face those feelings head-on and deconstruct them, rather than depend on the definition of your relationship to someone to keep those feelings at bay
Edited by helix (05/16/11 12:26 AM)
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14460101 - 05/16/11 12:27 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
we base our actions from the promotion and fear of insecurity.
|
Muufokfok
aka BoxyBrown


Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 2,119
Loc: america's wang
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: helix]
#14460390 - 05/16/11 01:57 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
aronf13 said:
Quote:
Anthony917 said: When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about.
I think this illustrates exactly why i agree so much with OP^ Relationships necessarily, as a part of the label itself, are about OWNERSHIP of another person. You can communicate that you want to be monogomous with the person in question without slapping that label on it. But someone could just as easily question monogomy which is another debate...
In any case, where someone is insecure i think it's more important to face those feelings head-on and deconstruct them, rather than depend on the definition of your relationship to someone to keep those feelings at bay
i really like this, i might have to take it to show someone i know
-------------------- "I'm guessing the 'ancient lost drug' of india is psychedelic mushrooms. The correlation between sacred cows (in hinduism) and magic mushrooms growing on cow dung is too strong to ignore, if you ask me."
  As the ocean waves, the universe "peoples" ~Alan Watts~
|
Carl Sagan
Time Dilation Analyst


Registered: 04/19/11
Posts: 922
Loc: Myco-tek.org
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru] 1
#14460506 - 05/16/11 02:39 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
Quote:
What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity..
Climb down off the horse broheem. Your just as insecure as everyone else and that statement proves it. Figure it out...
-------------------- “Sacred cows make the best hamburger” Mark Twain Independant Research Foundation
|
pwnasaurus
Stranger



Registered: 07/16/08
Posts: 12,317
Loc: Canada
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Carl Sagan]
#14460999 - 05/16/11 07:52 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I love my girlfriend, and I'm not insecure as far as I can tell
|
Cyclohexylamine
Turn on, Tune in, Drop out



Registered: 09/08/10
Posts: 14,327
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Carl Sagan]
#14461022 - 05/16/11 08:02 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Carl Sagan said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
Quote:
What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity..
Climb down off the horse broheem. Your just as insecure as everyone else and that statement proves it. Figure it out...
Labels 
However sometimes labels can give a new dimension to the relationship. I don't agree with the concept of Ownership in a relationship - you don't own the other person.
YES is back!!!!!!
-------------------- Yes this is tymo - I just changed my name Have you ever had a dream that you were so sure was real? What if you were unable to awake from that dream? How would you know the difference between that dream world and the real world? There is NOTHING better than feeling that warm dissociative fuzz creeping up your body from IM K Something abut that anaesthetic rush... Qualitative Research Chemical Effects and Experiences The Wonderful World of Methoxetamine The 3-Meo-PCP Chapters, Part One
Edited by Cyclohexylamine (05/16/11 08:02 AM)
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14461030 - 05/16/11 08:04 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I don't agree. I married my wife because I loved her and wanted to wake up everyday next to her and to keep her all to myself. :P
I don't want to be with anyone else. I would find that potentially dangerous to my health.
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
Edited by Kada (05/16/11 08:21 AM)
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 20 hours, 10 minutes
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14461079 - 05/16/11 08:23 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
I agree that people get in relationships and need the label to counter the insecurity. Although, there is that constant nag of wanting to socialize and build somethng with someone else.
A relationship can be seen like a challenge, a mission. How much crap can you take before you bail out.
oh and also, that little chemical reaction in your brain called love.
--------------------
|
Olympus Mons
esprit de l'univers

Registered: 09/15/09
Posts: 5,777
Loc: ∞
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14461103 - 05/16/11 08:30 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Love without expectation-Ram Dass
--------------------
I close my eyes and seize it I clench my fists and beat it I light my torch and burn it I am the beast I worship....
|
gENERIX
/usr/bin/drinking?



Registered: 10/18/05
Posts: 5,697
Loc: Skyward Bound
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Olympus Mons]
#14461163 - 05/16/11 09:10 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I've never thought of it like that but I certainly like your way of thinking.
--------------------
|
gabbaganchi
version 4.3



Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 590
Loc: Great Plains
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: rodfarva]
#14461180 - 05/16/11 09:15 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
rodfarva said: Yea.. i had this for about 5 years. It was fun. She finally used the excuse that she didnt think we were "official" when i called her out on being with other guys. Theres a lot more to it, but after five years she begs the question, and my answer was a definitive "no we are not."
labels are pointless. a relationship between your friend or your uncle or your lover is always in flux anyway. you have a realtionship, working/playing in relation and intereaction to another person. they're just as much of a free spirit as anyone else thinks they are... i have sex with the same girl, and itellectual sex and we go hiking and shit. but i have no expectations.
my best friend could have a bigger dick than me.
|
g00ru
lit pants tit licker



Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Carl Sagan]
#14461328 - 05/16/11 10:14 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Carl Sagan said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
Quote:
What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity..
Climb down off the horse broheem. Your just as insecure as everyone else and that statement proves it. Figure it out...
no u are
-------------------- check out my music! drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru] 1
#14461383 - 05/16/11 10:35 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Labels put names to things. Your name is a label. You wear it and use it and it is useful to you and everyone around you. It's how you are identified.
Why are labeling things bad? I say it's down right useful. If this was labeled correctly people wouldn't be dead. Labels are useful as hell.
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/14449771/fpart/1/vc/1/nt/4
Without my wifes wedding ring as a label, other men would think she was available and she would get unwanted sexual advances. I'd say that that label is a good one. If someone says they are married it means ABSOLUTELY NOT AVAILABLE. Unless marriage doesn't mean shit to you and you cheat. Then you get unlabeled and get divorced when your infidelity is discovered.
I say labels define us. Not just names, but the things we wear, the way we talk, the cars we drive. Labels tell the world who we are just like a label on a bottle tells what it is.
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
Edited by Kada (05/16/11 10:43 AM)
|
yogabunny
fancy cat



Registered: 11/01/09
Posts: 11,281
Loc: Nasty Women Get Shit Done
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Anthony917]
#14461415 - 05/16/11 10:47 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Anthony917 said: I think people put labels on their relationships because NOT having a label leaves it open to....anything really.
When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about. If you don't want to call someone you love & sleep with your girlfriend/wife/whatever....then I'd just say you're fuck buddies...
uhhhh i think this mentality is incredibly dangerous. you cannot OWN a person, geez. when has putting a label on a relationship stopped us from going outside the relationship if we feel like doing so. i have SO many friends going through divorces right now due to cheating and affaires.
anyway i think the problem with labels is that we use them to form attachments, and create a false sense of happiness and security.......
The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao The name that can be named is not the eternal Name.
The unnamable is the eternally real. Naming is the origin of all particular things.
Free from desire, you realize the mystery. Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.
Yet mystery and manifestations arise from the same source. This source is called darkness.
Darkness within darkness. The gateway to all understanding.
--------------------
|
Carl Sagan
Time Dilation Analyst


Registered: 04/19/11
Posts: 922
Loc: Myco-tek.org
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14461419 - 05/16/11 10:48 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said:
Quote:
Carl Sagan said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
Quote:
What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity..
Climb down off the horse broheem. Your just as insecure as everyone else and that statement proves it. Figure it out...
no u are
Must I explain it to you?
-------------------- “Sacred cows make the best hamburger” Mark Twain Independant Research Foundation
|
Cyclohexylamine
Turn on, Tune in, Drop out


Registered: 09/08/10
Posts: 14,327
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: yogabunny]
#14461453 - 05/16/11 10:57 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
yogabunny said:
Quote:
Anthony917 said: I think people put labels on their relationships because NOT having a label leaves it open to....anything really.
When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about. If you don't want to call someone you love & sleep with your girlfriend/wife/whatever....then I'd just say you're fuck buddies...
uhhhh i think this mentality is incredibly dangerous. you cannot OWN a person, geez. when has putting a label on a relationship stopped us from going outside the relationship if we feel like doing so. i have SO many friends going through divorces right now due to cheating and affaires.
anyway i think the problem with labels is that we use them to form attachments, and create a false sense of happiness and security.......
-------------------- Yes this is tymo - I just changed my name Have you ever had a dream that you were so sure was real? What if you were unable to awake from that dream? How would you know the difference between that dream world and the real world? There is NOTHING better than feeling that warm dissociative fuzz creeping up your body from IM K Something abut that anaesthetic rush... Qualitative Research Chemical Effects and Experiences The Wonderful World of Methoxetamine The 3-Meo-PCP Chapters, Part One
Edited by Cyclohexylamine (05/16/11 10:59 AM)
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: yogabunny]
#14461461 - 05/16/11 10:58 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
yogabunny said:
Quote:
Anthony917 said: I think people put labels on their relationships because NOT having a label leaves it open to....anything really.
When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about. If you don't want to call someone you love & sleep with your girlfriend/wife/whatever....then I'd just say you're fuck buddies...
uhhhh i think this mentality is incredibly dangerous. you cannot OWN a person, geez. when has putting a label on a relationship stopped us from going outside the relationship if we feel like doing so. i have SO many friends going through divorces right now due to cheating and affaires.
anyway i think the problem with labels is that we use them to form attachments, and create a false sense of happiness and security.......
My wife didn't put a label on me when she married me and I didn't put one on her. We put it on ourselves to tell the world that we are one and we are not available. We vowed to be there for each other and it's us against the world. It's a stand we took together to make each others positions in each others lives more permanent. If that makes us feel more secure in the world then why is that bad? We ARE happy and our "label" tells everyone so. If we weren't then we would rid ourselves of it and go on our separate ways.
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
|
tyrannicalrex
Strange R



Registered: 04/24/03
Posts: 38,323
Loc: subtropics
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Patlal]
#14461488 - 05/16/11 11:05 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
I agree that people get in relationships and need the label to counter the insecurity. Although, there is that constant nag of wanting to socialize and build somethng with someone else.
A relationship can be seen like a challenge, a mission. How much crap can you take before you bail out.
oh and also, that little chemical reaction in your brain called love.
"Love" is just a trick of nature to get us to procreate, no?
|
Carl Sagan
Time Dilation Analyst


Registered: 04/19/11
Posts: 922
Loc: Myco-tek.org
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Carl Sagan]
#14461524 - 05/16/11 11:13 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
yogabunny said
Quote:
uhhhh i think this mentality is incredibly dangerous. you cannot OWN a person, geez. when has putting a label on a relationship stopped us from going outside the relationship if we feel like doing so. i have SO many friends going through divorces right now due to cheating and affaires.
anyway i think the problem with labels is that we use them to form attachments, and create a false sense of happiness and security.......
Quote:
uhhhh i think this mentality is incredibly dangerous. you cannot OWN a person, geez.
Do you really feel threatened by this persons use of a simile to describe boundries in a relationship?
Quote:
when has putting a label on a relationship stopped us from going outside the relationship if we feel like doing so
Yes people lie and cheat. Welcome to reality;)
Quote:
anyway i think the problem with labels is that we use them to form attachments, and create a false sense of happiness and security.......
The problem is your use of the word "label". The word in our society, and your use of it carries a negative connotation. You are using the word in its verb form and it is merely a way to distinguish, identify, and define something.
Quote:
we use them to form attachments, and create a false sense of happiness and security.......
Please remove the word we from your statement; as one can only define happiness and security for ones self. Wether these "feelings" are false or true is highly subjective.
-------------------- “Sacred cows make the best hamburger” Mark Twain Independant Research Foundation
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 20 hours, 10 minutes
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: tyrannicalrex]
#14461527 - 05/16/11 11:13 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
tyrannicalrex said:
Quote:
Patlal said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
I agree that people get in relationships and need the label to counter the insecurity. Although, there is that constant nag of wanting to socialize and build somethng with someone else.
A relationship can be seen like a challenge, a mission. How much crap can you take before you bail out.
oh and also, that little chemical reaction in your brain called love.
"Love" is just a trick of nature to get us to procreate, no?
Meh, I think sex drive is natures trick to procreate. Love is womens trick to guilt us into not having sex with other women
--------------------
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: tyrannicalrex]
#14461534 - 05/16/11 11:15 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
tyrannicalrex said:
Quote:
Patlal said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
I agree that people get in relationships and need the label to counter the insecurity. Although, there is that constant nag of wanting to socialize and build somethng with someone else.
A relationship can be seen like a challenge, a mission. How much crap can you take before you bail out.
oh and also, that little chemical reaction in your brain called love.
"Love" is just a trick of nature to get us to procreate, no?
No.
You might learn what it means some day. Experience and time brings understanding and enlightenment if you know where to look and how to listen.
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
|
yogabunny
fancy cat



Registered: 11/01/09
Posts: 11,281
Loc: Nasty Women Get Shit Done
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Kada]
#14461567 - 05/16/11 11:23 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kada said:
My wife didn't put a label on me when she married me and I didn't put one on her. We put it on ourselves to tell the world that we are one and we are not available. We vowed to be there for each other and it's us against the world. It's a stand we took together to make each others positions in each others lives more permanent. If that makes us feel more secure in the world then why is that bad? We ARE happy and our "label" tells everyone so. If we weren't then we would rid ourselves of it and go on our separate ways.
you're getting mighty defensive. and cool, whatever works for you and yours. for me, i find the confines of traditional relationships to be tiresome, restrictive and unnecessary. i don't even like the idea of saying "my" boyfriend or "my" girlfriend. it implies ownership and i think that's weird.
i think it's funny that people are so protective of their naming and labeling. "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
you relationship to a person does not change if you decide tomorrow to call the person a shoe instead of your best friend.
--------------------
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: yogabunny]
#14461612 - 05/16/11 11:34 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Not to me it wouldn't change. It would just confuse everyone else.
I wasn't trying to get defensive at all. I think most people are just ignorant about some things and they have no idea what they are talking about sometimes. Excuse me if my marriage is precious to me and I say so when everyone else is saying it's worthless. Well it's not at all to people who find out what it can really be and hold it in high regard. I would take slams against marriage as an insult if I thought people that were debating against it had any idea of what they were even talking about.
I respectively bow out of this conversation because I don't think anyone speaking against love or marriage has a single idea of what they are talking about and it's useless to remain in such a conversation. It makes me feel REALLY lucky to have met my wife.
Hey, were all allowed to have our own perspectives on things, and we won't all agree with each other. I just don't agree with 99% of the things in this thread.
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
|
tyrannicalrex
Strange R



Registered: 04/24/03
Posts: 38,323
Loc: subtropics
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: yogabunny]
#14461623 - 05/16/11 11:37 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I was with someone for 14 years that claimed to "love" me. The way they treated me and the way things turned out was not very loving at all. There were moments that will be forever remembered as very succinct in the way I felt connected to this person. I would call that love. I just wonder if I will ever meet anyone that I will feel that way all the time, or at least most of it.
I still don't believe in total monogamy for myself. I just can't explain that. Maybe that is part of the way things go for me. The perfect relationship to me would be one that would allow each other the freedom to have fun with whoever they wanted while having the strongest mental bond with me.
I agree with the yogabunny.
Quote:
yogabunny said:
Quote:
Kada said:
My wife didn't put a label on me when she married me and I didn't put one on her. We put it on ourselves to tell the world that we are one and we are not available. We vowed to be there for each other and it's us against the world. It's a stand we took together to make each others positions in each others lives more permanent. If that makes us feel more secure in the world then why is that bad? We ARE happy and our "label" tells everyone so. If we weren't then we would rid ourselves of it and go on our separate ways.
you're getting mighty defensive. and cool, whatever works for you and yours. for me, i find the confines of traditional relationships to be tiresome, restrictive and unnecessary. i don't even like the idea of saying "my" boyfriend or "my" girlfriend. it implies ownership and i think that's weird.
i think it's funny that people are so protective of their naming and labeling. "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
you relationship to a person does not change if you decide tomorrow to call the person a shoe instead of your best friend.

|
tyrannicalrex
Strange R



Registered: 04/24/03
Posts: 38,323
Loc: subtropics
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Kada]
#14461638 - 05/16/11 11:40 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kada said: Not to me it wouldn't change. It would just confuse everyone else.
I wasn't trying to get defensive at all. I think most people are just ignorant about some things and they have no idea what they are talking about sometimes. Excuse me if my marriage is precious to me and I say so when everyone else is saying it's worthless. Well it's not at all to people who find out what it can really be and hold it in high regard. I would take slams against marriage as an insult if I thought people that were debating against it had any idea of what they were even talking about.
I respectively bow out of this conversation because I don't think anyone speaking against love or marriage has a single idea of what they are talking about and it's useless to remain in such a conversation. It makes me feel REALLY lucky to have met my wife.
Hey, were all allowed to have our own perspectives on things, and we won't all agree with each other. I just don't agree with 99% of the things in this thread.
I know exactly what you are saying. You are very lucky to have met and married the person you have. I am happy for you. I hope I can feel that way with someone one day.
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: tyrannicalrex]
#14461640 - 05/16/11 11:40 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I bet I will have a different point of view if my wife cheats on me and takes my kids.
It's all perspective. I'm glad I have the one I have right now. It defines me and makes me the person I am. I didn't mean to take insult to anything here, it just feels insulting because I am on the other side of game board atm. Hopefully I will stay there because I am happier for it.
Thanks man. I hope you do find someone that you can be with forever. Right now it feels great and I hope it stays that way. I wish everyone was as lucky as I feel on the subject.
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
|
g00ru
lit pants tit licker



Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: yogabunny]
#14461680 - 05/16/11 11:51 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
yogabunny said:
Quote:
Anthony917 said: I think people put labels on their relationships because NOT having a label leaves it open to....anything really.
When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about. If you don't want to call someone you love & sleep with your girlfriend/wife/whatever....then I'd just say you're fuck buddies...
uhhhh i think this mentality is incredibly dangerous. you cannot OWN a person, geez. when has putting a label on a relationship stopped us from going outside the relationship if we feel like doing so. i have SO many friends going through divorces right now due to cheating and affaires.
anyway i think the problem with labels is that we use them to form attachments, and create a false sense of happiness and security.......
The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao The name that can be named is not the eternal Name.
The unnamable is the eternally real. Naming is the origin of all particular things.
Free from desire, you realize the mystery. Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.
Yet mystery and manifestations arise from the same source. This source is called darkness.
Darkness within darkness. The gateway to all understanding.
right on sista
-------------------- check out my music! drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14461687 - 05/16/11 11:52 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I'm all about Taoism and Buddhism, but I didn't find this had any relevance to marriage or love.
“Marriage is three parts love and seven parts forgiveness of sins.”
“Love is of all passions the strongest, for it attacks simultaneously the head, the heart and the senses.”
-Lao Tzu
The man himself had a few things to say about it.
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
Edited by Kada (05/16/11 11:59 AM)
|
g00ru
lit pants tit licker



Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Kada]
#14461711 - 05/16/11 11:58 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Well, when it comes down to it, even our ego is just a label. Our name, our identity, that's just a label we create with thought, a label that we associate with our being. And the ego is, of course, the source of insecurity ("me"). So it would just be a more evolved situation for two people to be free enough of their individual egos to just trust their heart connection and not need to make things "official." Of course marriage has legal benefits so I wouldn't look down on anybody for gettin hitched, but still, I'm speaking from a perspective of what I think would be a better world.
-------------------- check out my music! drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss
|
yogabunny
fancy cat



Registered: 11/01/09
Posts: 11,281
Loc: Nasty Women Get Shit Done
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Kada]
#14461732 - 05/16/11 12:03 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kada said: Not to me it wouldn't change. It would just confuse everyone else.
I wasn't trying to get defensive at all. I think most people are just ignorant about some things and they have no idea what they are talking about sometimes. Excuse me if my marriage is precious to me and I say so when everyone else is saying it's worthless. Well it's not at all to people who find out what it can really be and hold it in high regard. I would take slams against marriage as an insult if I thought people that were debating against it had any idea of what they were even talking about.
I respectively bow out of this conversation because I don't think anyone speaking against love or marriage has a single idea of what they are talking about and it's useless to remain in such a conversation. It makes me feel REALLY lucky to have met my wife.
Hey, were all allowed to have our own perspectives on things, and we won't all agree with each other. I just don't agree with 99% of the things in this thread.
i have every idea of what i am talking about. i am divorced. two of my best friends are going through divorces right now. my parents are getting divorced after 24 years of marriage.
no one is saying your marriage is worthless, and no one is slamming marriage. people are merely stating their opinion that there might be a different way to practice living and being in love than the socially accepted versions....
--------------------
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14461769 - 05/16/11 12:09 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
When two people let go of ego and want to be together, then they can start to know what it means to love. Marriage to me is the essence of that. It's a vow to each other to be one and not separate and always to be together in their struggles. Some people hold that in the highest regard and it's what I live by. To me it's a vow to be faithful and a vow to always think of the other person before your own self. If my wife broke that I would be devastated like I have never been in my life. So far for almost 10 years we have both lived by that and with respect to each other without falter.
That's why I respect marriage so much. It's the foundation of my life that I build everything I am upon.
THAT is true marriage and love imo. It's a very serious subject to me because I hold it so close to my heart.
Sorry if I rubbed anyone the wrong way. I can see how someones point of view could drastically change when their parter breaks their vows or their marriage dissolves. It isn't Marriage that failed tho, it was the person or both persons involved.
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
Edited by Kada (05/16/11 12:14 PM)
|
nglsnv
Becoming



Registered: 08/31/10
Posts: 782
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14461915 - 05/16/11 12:41 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
i agree that relationships would probably turn out better if people were less concerned about defining them.
i feel a lot of people do this because they are worried (insecure) that maybe their relationship won't be as concrete unless they have something to show for it, like a wedding ring, or a bf/gf status on facebook or something. the point they are missing is that the name, or any definition they will come up with is meaningless compared to the relationship itself. i think labels are mainly distractions, and although they are useful for communication, they generally are misleading due to the skewed perceptions people have of a 'typical' relationship through movies and gossip and such.
i'm really bad with names because i don't find them significant.
from my limited relationship experience i've noticed that people looking for a relationship are basically looking for a crutch to lean on when things get too heavy. crutches come in pairs so this works for a lot of people.
Kada, i personally view marriage as a waste of time. of course i don't know anything about legal benefits and serious things like that, all i know is that most marriages seem to stem from materialistic obsessions over things already discussed like labels, rings, ceremonies, etc and subsequently they dissolve because of these obsessions as well. the question i ask about marriage is if two people are in love, why do they need to prove this to other people and themselves? from reading your posts it sounds like you have a healthy marriage because both you and your partner realize the redundancy of labeling your relationship but still realize that the labels can be used to make your life easier and i think thats cool.
|
Kada
Asha'man


Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 12,394
Loc: Buckeye
Last seen: 2 months, 22 days
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: nglsnv]
#14461942 - 05/16/11 12:47 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- ~The Cultivators Motherload~ "I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." -Robert A. Heinlein "There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness."-Dalai Lama Live long and prosper.
|
Deekay



Registered: 09/07/08
Posts: 3,220
Loc:
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Kada]
#14462018 - 05/16/11 01:03 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kada said: It's all perspective. I'm glad I have the one I have right now.
|
Carl Sagan
Time Dilation Analyst


Registered: 04/19/11
Posts: 922
Loc: Myco-tek.org
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14462152 - 05/16/11 01:34 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said: Well, when it comes down to it, even our ego is just a label. Our name, our identity, that's just a label we create with thought, a label that we associate with our being. And the ego is, of course, the source of insecurity ("me"). So it would just be a more evolved situation for two people to be free enough of their individual egos to just trust their heart connection and not need to make things "official." Of course marriage has legal benefits so I wouldn't look down on anybody for gettin hitched, but still, I'm speaking from a perspective of what I think would be a better world.
NO NO NO don't take the discussion some where else. This all started with your statement that "People feel the need to label relationships because they are insecure"
Which to my rebuttal was, and still is "your just as insecure as everyone else, and your statement above confirms that". Your inability to define a relationship you have with someone is in and of itself an insecurity about being in a committed relationship. And that is fine. No one is judging you on that. But you cannot call one who wishes to define a relationship insecure. That is where im calling you out 
Quote:
So it would just be a more evolved situation for two people to be free enough of their individual egos to just trust their heart connection and not need to make things "official."
Wow, I would love to know what country you live in? Where I live in the U.S. EVERYTHING is egotistically driven. Just turn on the TV. This is not all bad. Being driven by ones ego has given science great contributions. Its the underlying reasons why we desire to accomplish tasks or further our agenda. This type of understanding only comes with serious self awareness and examination. On the contrary I do not judge people who chose to live a vapid existence. But in my opinion to many people living like this is not a healthy society.
To start your statement with "So it would just be a more evolved situation" is very arrogant and pompous of you. You are essentially saying that your idea's are of greater intellectual or societal importance.
-------------------- “Sacred cows make the best hamburger” Mark Twain Independant Research Foundation
Edited by Carl Sagan (05/16/11 02:17 PM)
|
Carl Sagan
Time Dilation Analyst


Registered: 04/19/11
Posts: 922
Loc: Myco-tek.org
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: yogabunny]
#14462197 - 05/16/11 01:45 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
yogabunny said:
Quote:
Kada said: Not to me it wouldn't change. It would just confuse everyone else.
I wasn't trying to get defensive at all. I think most people are just ignorant about some things and they have no idea what they are talking about sometimes. Excuse me if my marriage is precious to me and I say so when everyone else is saying it's worthless. Well it's not at all to people who find out what it can really be and hold it in high regard. I would take slams against marriage as an insult if I thought people that were debating against it had any idea of what they were even talking about.
I respectively bow out of this conversation because I don't think anyone speaking against love or marriage has a single idea of what they are talking about and it's useless to remain in such a conversation. It makes me feel REALLY lucky to have met my wife.
Hey, were all allowed to have our own perspectives on things, and we won't all agree with each other. I just don't agree with 99% of the things in this thread.
i have every idea of what i am talking about. i am divorced. two of my best friends are going through divorces right now. my parents are getting divorced after 24 years of marriage.
no one is saying your marriage is worthless, and no one is slamming marriage. people are merely stating their opinion that there might be a different way to practice living and being in love than the socially accepted versions....
Wow you guys/girls need to keep the discussion on the subject of "relationships are based inherently in insecurity" You're going all over the place here. The areas of Love and Society are highly subjective. While we can define the "what" of love in neuroscience the "how" and "why" are up for much debate.
-------------------- “Sacred cows make the best hamburger” Mark Twain Independant Research Foundation
|
Carl Sagan
Time Dilation Analyst


Registered: 04/19/11
Posts: 922
Loc: Myco-tek.org
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: nglsnv]
#14462242 - 05/16/11 02:00 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Professor Tibbs said:
Quote:
guruu said: In a more awesome world, we'd all be so cool that we'd never have to say "we're in a relationship," it would just work out that way and you'd be with one other person a bunch and have sex with them but you'd both be chill enough never to slap a label on it. What good does the label do? It's just to compensate for insecurity...if two people really are self sufficient in their own lives, then who needs a "relationship" anyways...let things happen according to your natural feelings. I feel like doin shit this way has the potential to create romance that is much more rewarding, because events will work out in a more effortless way without people trying too hard to make the situation what they think it should be.
thoughts?
i agree that relationships would probably turn out better if people were less concerned about defining them.
i feel a lot of people do this because they are worried (insecure) that maybe their relationship won't be as concrete unless they have something to show for it, like a wedding ring, or a bf/gf status on facebook or something. the point they are missing is that the name, or any definition they will come up with is meaningless compared to the relationship itself. i think labels are mainly distractions, and although they are useful for communication, they generally are misleading due to the skewed perceptions people have of a 'typical' relationship through movies and gossip and such.
i'm really bad with names because i don't find them significant.
from my limited relationship experience i've noticed that people looking for a relationship are basically looking for a crutch to lean on when things get too heavy. crutches come in pairs so this works for a lot of people.
Kada, i personally view marriage as a waste of time. of course i don't know anything about legal benefits and serious things like that, all i know is that most marriages seem to stem from materialistic obsessions over things already discussed like labels, rings, ceremonies, etc and subsequently they dissolve because of these obsessions as well. the question i ask about marriage is if two people are in love, why do they need to prove this to other people and themselves? from reading your posts it sounds like you have a healthy marriage because both you and your partner realize the redundancy of labeling your relationship but still realize that the labels can be used to make your life easier and i think thats cool.
Good post from an observant, and personal perspective. But to make statements like
this: "from my limited relationship experience i've noticed that people looking for a
relationship are basically looking for a crutch to lean on when things get too heavy.
crutches come in pairs so this works for a lot of people." The whole proplem with
making a statement like that, is you do not have enough data to support it. The statment
started with "from my limited experience" Experience is the best teacher my friend,
and the more you gain the wider your perspective will become.
-------------------- “Sacred cows make the best hamburger” Mark Twain Independant Research Foundation
Edited by Carl Sagan (05/16/11 02:34 PM)
|
Mr. Gal
Stranger

Registered: 03/29/11
Posts: 10
Loc: In between
Last seen: 12 years, 6 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Carl Sagan] 1
#14462350 - 05/16/11 02:18 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Labels are way to communicate. When I first met my boyfriend, we were just hanging out and having sex. After a month or so, we decided that we were going to be "exclusive". A bit later, we decided that we love one another. Now, we are boyfriends because we decided that we want to call each other that. It doesn't imply ownership that he's my boyfriend, it tells one another that we care enough about each other to forsake physical relationships with other people. Our mutual love is what made our relationship, we didn't just decide to be in a relationship and then start pretending to love each other.
Of course, I do completely agree that some people are completely off base and confused when pursuing relationships. I just don't think relationships are simple enough to call them all just "labels".
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin



Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14462379 - 05/16/11 02:24 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Very interesting theory.
--------------------
|
nglsnv
Becoming



Registered: 08/31/10
Posts: 782
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Carl Sagan]
#14462409 - 05/16/11 02:30 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Carl Sagan said: Experience is the best teacher my friend,
and the more you gain the wider your perspective will become. 
|
Carl Sagan
Time Dilation Analyst


Registered: 04/19/11
Posts: 922
Loc: Myco-tek.org
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Mr. Gal]
#14462420 - 05/16/11 02:32 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Gal said: Labels are way to communicate. When I first met my boyfriend, we were just hanging out and having sex. After a month or so, we decided that we were going to be "exclusive". A bit later, we decided that we love one another. Now, we are boyfriends because we decided that we want to call each other that. It doesn't imply ownership that he's my boyfriend, it tells one another that we care enough about each other to forsake physical relationships with other people. Our mutual love is what made our relationship, we didn't just decide to be in a relationship and then start pretending to love each other.
Of course, I do completely agree that some people are completely off base and confused when pursuing relationships. I just don't think relationships are simple enough to call them all just "labels".
Thank You, labels are nothing more than human's using language to define the world around us. While I will concede that language is not the all encompassing form of communication it's the best thing we have going, and has been serving us well for thousands of years. If someone defining their environment with language makes you feel insecure about your understanding of your environment... well I can't help you there.
-------------------- “Sacred cows make the best hamburger” Mark Twain Independant Research Foundation
|
Mr. Gal
Stranger

Registered: 03/29/11
Posts: 10
Loc: In between
Last seen: 12 years, 6 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: nglsnv]
#14462429 - 05/16/11 02:33 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Professor Tibbs said:
Quote:
Carl Sagan said: Experience is the best teacher my friend,
and the more you gain the wider your perspective will become. 

Totally this. People don't really share with others what makes their romantic relationships so special to them, because it's so complicated. Live and love with an open mind, hopefully it will all make sense some day.
|
Anthony917
why dont we do it in the road



Registered: 05/14/09
Posts: 3,243
Loc: Earth
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: yogabunny]
#14464733 - 05/16/11 09:00 PM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
yogabunny said:
Quote:
Anthony917 said: I think people put labels on their relationships because NOT having a label leaves it open to....anything really.
When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about. If you don't want to call someone you love & sleep with your girlfriend/wife/whatever....then I'd just say you're fuck buddies...
uhhhh i think this mentality is incredibly dangerous. you cannot OWN a person, geez. when has putting a label on a relationship stopped us from going outside the relationship if we feel like doing so. i have SO many friends going through divorces right now due to cheating and affaires.
anyway i think the problem with labels is that we use them to form attachments, and create a false sense of happiness and security.......
The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao The name that can be named is not the eternal Name.
The unnamable is the eternally real. Naming is the origin of all particular things.
Free from desire, you realize the mystery. Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.
Yet mystery and manifestations arise from the same source. This source is called darkness.
Darkness within darkness. The gateway to all understanding.
hey, I didn't mean that I feel a sense of ownership, but that people in general do. That way, they can designate..this is MY girlfriend. As in, she is off limits to YOU because she is currently MINE. Except, it doesn't actually work like that and I know that no one can be owned...I was just tryna make a point. I agree, it is dangerous thinking, and probably a lot of the reason why people DO cheat...because they feel like they have less freedom while in a relationship.
-------------------- Prisoner#1 said: I got my ass kicked by a 9yo when I was 17 Trippin? Click Me
What is life? I'm tired of life...
|
faceyneck
Legitimate Philosopher



Registered: 06/14/06
Posts: 2,421
Loc: upper body area
Last seen: 8 years, 8 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Carl Sagan]
#14466029 - 05/17/11 01:52 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
It seems this thread has moved past the petty stuff by now, but I'm not 100% on that. As such, I'll try to make explicit what I think the real issue it here, though it may not have been made clear earlier.
Several posts in here (which shall remain nameless; without 'label' ) suggest to me people have been talking past each other, because the term 'label' has more than one connotation, and also more than one denotation.
The two that seem to be used interchangeably without being fungible here I think are:
1. a descriptive or identifying word or phrase.
2. An adhesive stamp. (...do keep in mind things can be adhered to via concept and opinion, not simply as paper and glue.)
Definition 1 is using a label to describe the world around you. Definition 2 is using a label to define the world around you. You'll see where I'm going with this soon.
The connotations for 2 are that the label is being used to compensate for something; "He is important to me because he is my boyfriend." In that sentence, we see the label being used to define the relationship, calling into question whether or not this hypothetical person has real justifications for his or her love, as presented. I think this is a very inconspicuous example of what the original poster's qualm was.
In definition 1, an unfortunate effect of language is its inherent alienation; we cannot describe things out in the world without labels, which tacitly separate us from the world, at least in the realm of concepts. Here we see an explication of another issue the original poster has with labeling, using a different denotation of the term 'label.' I think this should not need further explaining, but let me know it it's unclear - I assume we're not all philosophers, and that's okay. 
I think we can agree here; the real rub is in the reificating use of the term 'label.' In other words; when we use labels both to describe and define something simultaneously.
-------------------- Anything posted here, is total bullshit. My Meyers-Briggs Personality: INTJ New growers, or anyone else just needing help; I'm always glad to help right here.
We give cultivation advice here. AMU Q & A - We're glad to help My Doggy Door Greenhouse! First Ever Shmuvbox Tek! Do Manure Right!
|
pouihi
Mary Jane Doe



Registered: 01/04/11
Posts: 2,384
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: Anthony917]
#14466309 - 05/17/11 05:02 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Anthony917 said: When you say "this is my girlfriend" it's almost like a sense of ownership, where she is exclusive to you...which is what a relationship is about.
So when you refer to someone as your buddy, relative, co-worker or whatever relationship you have you them that implies ownership??
My bf and I started hanging out, getting to know each other, no one ever asked each other if you wanted to be bf/gf, and we actually never spoke about it, we just let things roll naturally, we've been together for almost two years now and of course if he is referring to me with someone who doesn't know me or vice versa we say my gf/bf because eventually it's what our relationship has evolved to. Just as we don't go saying "I love you"s, it's just not our thing, and relationships can be more about demonstrating that saying. I had relationships with people who probably said that everyday and it didn't mean anything (for what they ended up showing).
I don't own him nor he owns me that's stupid.
If you don't feel comfortable with being with someone and calling them gf you shouldn't do that. But it's also stupid to criticize people just because they fell comfortable enough doing it, that in itself is labeling.
--------------------
"If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite."
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: pouihi]
#14466313 - 05/17/11 05:03 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
sub-consciously, yes.
|
linkamathingy
Aspiring Mycologist


Registered: 10/27/10
Posts: 1,235
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: g00ru]
#14466345 - 05/17/11 05:25 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
if you're not good alone you aren't ready to be with another. you come into this world alone and you leave it alone, like a dog crawling under the porch to die by itself. it's a comforting thought to feel connected. marriage license: legally you have to stay with me until i die because i'm lonely
-------------------- SCIENCE!!! If NIST didn't even investigate whether explosives were used, how can we trust their investigation? It's a rule whenever explosions are heard. Though I Laugh EyegasmArt.com anonymous: without name Anonymous: a group with a name don't be fooled, have a revolution on your own terms.
|
pouihi
Mary Jane Doe



Registered: 01/04/11
Posts: 2,384
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: linkamathingy]
#14466375 - 05/17/11 05:41 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
of course you shouldn't be with someone if you don't know how to be by yourself, as you shouldn't be making friends if you don't know how to live without them or relatives. I was a kid when my parents died and every other kid was like "If it were me I would kill myself", what the fuck?? Life goes on, I'm not the one who died.
I'm not fond of marriages, I think they're unnecessary contracts for me, but I don't go criticizing people who do it. If that makes them happy then do it, none of my business. I also don't wanna have kids, and although I think they're unnecessary I don't go criticizing people who do it.
Live and let live man.
Also you're not born alone and you may not die alone. Going through your life all alone is also a choice I would never criticize, but I am yet to know of someone who hasn't even had a relative, friend or partner for his entire life. This is what people do, they get along, a relationship with a lover is just as building one with anyone else don't make such a great fuss about it.
--------------------
"If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite."
|
linkamathingy
Aspiring Mycologist


Registered: 10/27/10
Posts: 1,235
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: pouihi]
#14466379 - 05/17/11 05:42 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
i was just reacting not judging anyone in particular. just my views.
-------------------- SCIENCE!!! If NIST didn't even investigate whether explosives were used, how can we trust their investigation? It's a rule whenever explosions are heard. Though I Laugh EyegasmArt.com anonymous: without name Anonymous: a group with a name don't be fooled, have a revolution on your own terms.
|
faceyneck
Legitimate Philosopher



Registered: 06/14/06
Posts: 2,421
Loc: upper body area
Last seen: 8 years, 8 months
|
Re: relationships are based inherently in insecurity [Re: linkamathingy]
#14471475 - 05/18/11 02:10 AM (12 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
marriage license: legally you have to stay with me until i die because i'm lonely
-------------------- Anything posted here, is total bullshit. My Meyers-Briggs Personality: INTJ New growers, or anyone else just needing help; I'm always glad to help right here.
We give cultivation advice here. AMU Q & A - We're glad to help My Doggy Door Greenhouse! First Ever Shmuvbox Tek! Do Manure Right!
|
|