I heard someone recently say:
"Guys will always lust after what they don't respect, and mock what they would give anything to have."
Agree? Disagree?
:beret:
I agree with the first part. I once had a boyfriend who told me that if he ever had "those" feelings about me, then that meant that he didn't respect me.
As for the second part, I really don't agree with that. Well, I guess some guys would, but I kinda hope that if someone likes me, they will treat me well and then I'll notice.
Hmmmmmmm.....I don't have any comments right now. I'm kind of anxious to hear what others have to say on this.
I guess I don't understand what "mock what they would give anything to have."
I think it goes along with the old familiar saying. If a guy picks on a girl, torturing and picking on her, then he proably likes her.
:addnothing:
sometimes a guy will respect a girl quite a bit.....but if it is someone they can't have, then there is always the possiblity they will lust to possess her at all costs.
I have heard it said on more than one occasion, when talking about marital relationships, that nearly every relationship that ended up in love started with lust at some level.
There was something about the woman that attracted her to the man before he had a chance to know "who" she was. Most usually that is looks.
Remember, men are more physically driven than women.
And, would you really be happy in marrying someone who is only attracted to you emotionally and mentally, and has no interest in you physically?
Quote from: World Traveler on February 09, 2008, 08:43:42 AM
And, would you really be happy in marrying someone who is only attracted to you emotionally and mentally, and has no interest in you physically?
Well now that wouldn't be any fun. :o oops :ignore:
Quote from: teacheroftheLord on February 09, 2008, 09:10:19 AM
Quote from: World Traveler on February 09, 2008, 08:43:42 AM
And, would you really be happy in marrying someone who is only attracted to you emotionally and mentally, and has no interest in you physically?
Well now that wouldn't be any fun. :o oops :ignore:
:laughat:
Quote from: Mz. Ethyl on February 09, 2008, 09:12:57 AM
Quote from: teacheroftheLord on February 09, 2008, 09:10:19 AM
Quote from: World Traveler on February 09, 2008, 08:43:42 AM
And, would you really be happy in marrying someone who is only attracted to you emotionally and mentally, and has no interest in you physically?
Well now that wouldn't be any fun. :o oops :ignore:
:laughat:
:laughhard:
QuoteI heard someone recently say:
"Guys will always lust after what they don't respect, and mock what they would give anything to have."
Agree? Disagree?
In reference to relationships:
I would say that this would hold true for guys who place no value in having a goal oriented relationship with a woman. The ones who live for the moment without care for future consequences. It is not that they lust for things they do not respect, but that they are drawn to ( or lust after ) the things that do not require personal dedication. They persue what appears to be "easy".
They mock what they would give anything to have because they are not motivated to do what it takes to actually attain what they might want. It is out o f a sense of self defeat that thy mock such things, an attempt (IMHO) to convince themselves that such things aren't really that desirable.
On the other hand there are guys who are goal oriented and do place value on having a meaningful relationship with a good woman. These are the ones who are not drawn to qualities that they do not respect. They are however, completely entranced by a lady who may adhere to the same qualities that he has established as honorable or "respectable" criteria. He sees what he respects and dedicates himself to the persuit of what he most desires.
He will not mock the things he would give anything for because these things are of a tremendous value to him. Mocking them would be an insult to his own moral fiber.
q-tip, that is a fabulous answer. very well spoken.
Quote from: SippinTea on February 09, 2008, 03:22:36 AM
I heard someone recently say:
"Guys will always lust after what they don't respect, and mock what they would give anything to have."
Agree? Disagree?
:beret:
I disagree with the first part and agree with the second.
Lust is temptation that becomes an obsession. It is normal for a guy or a gal to be sexually tempted, that is not a sin. However when you take that temptation and dwell on it, constantly, think on it and then seek ways to act on it, THAT becomes lust.
You can lust after a co worker, a member of your church, your sisters husband, your cousins wife, your brothers wife, your neighbor or even some movie or media star. Respect really doesn't have anything to do with it.
HOWEVER: there are men who will commit sexual immorality with females that they do no like, do not love and may never like or love, simply because of the act.
I dunno, doesn't really ring for me. I think the person may have been referring to physical relationships in the first, and marriage in the second. In which case, I do agree that there are some PEOPLE who do this, and in my experience, it doesn't matter if the person is male or female - that type of behavior is usually practiced by a certain type of personality, or just indicative of mental immaturity.
Quote from: World Traveler on February 09, 2008, 08:43:42 AM
I have heard it said on more than one occasion, when talking about marital relationships, that nearly every relationship that ended up in love started with lust at some level.
There was something about the woman that attracted her to the man before he had a chance to know "who" she was. Most usually that is looks.
Remember, men are more physically driven than women.
And, would you really be happy in marrying someone who is only attracted to you emotionally and mentally, and has no interest in you physically?
If you're married, it's not lust.
If you're talking physical attraction it's not lust.
Thomas Aquinas said of Lust:
...wherever there occurs a special kind of deformity whereby the venereal act is rendered unbecoming, there is a determinate species of lust.
This may occur in two ways: First, through
being contrary to right reason, and this is common to all lustful vices; secondly, because, in addition,
it is contrary to the natural order of the venereal act as becoming to the human race: and this is called "the unnatural vice."
This may happen in several ways. First, by procuring pollution, without any copulation, for the sake of venereal pleasure: this pertains to the sin of "uncleanness" which some call "effeminacy." Secondly, by copulation with a thing of undue species, and this is called "bestiality." Thirdly, by copulation with an undue sex, male with male, or female with female, as the Apostle states (Rm. 1:27): and this is called the "vice of sodomy." Fourthly, by not observing the natural manner of copulation, either as to undue means, or as to other monstrous and bestial manners
:eyebrow: I detest blanket statements.
B
From Sis's post:
Thomas Aquinas said of Lust:
...wherever there occurs a special kind of deformity whereby the venereal act is rendered unbecoming, there is a determinate species of lust
Wow! And people say the King James Version is hard to understand. KJV is fun with phonics compared to that!!!!
Quote from: GlassDarkly on February 09, 2008, 08:56:19 PM
:eyebrow: I detest blanket statements.
B
So do I. That's why I started this feud. *grin*
:beret:
lol Nice.
B
Hey, I figured I hadn't started a riot in a while.... and I was overdue for one. :P
:beret:
B! Is that your new saying? You've been saying nothing but "Nice" lately! Learn a new word, K? :laughhard:
Quote from: SippinTea on February 09, 2008, 03:22:36 AM
"Guys will always lust after what they don't respect, and mock what they would give anything to have."
Agree? Disagree?
There was a time when I would have totally disagreed... but now I think I'd agree... I don't know about using the term "mock" but definitely something along those lines
guess I've met one too many that said he didn't like one type... and then thats exactly the type he's with now instead of me - once they got tired of disrespecting me :smirk2: lol
relationships - what fun
*HUGS* the respectful nice guys
Quote from: SippinTea on February 09, 2008, 03:22:36 AM
I heard someone recently say:
"Guys will always lust after what they don't respect, and mock what they would give anything to have."
Agree? Disagree?
:beret:
Sounds like it was said by a pseudo-intellectual.
I think men can lust after a ton of stuff whether they respect it or not. I definitely think you can have strong desire for someone you respect. Actually, the above statement kind of sounds like it was said by a woman or a guy that is married to one. Sometimes women who make statements like the one above have been hurt and are looking to "put guys in their place" and categorize them.
We would all be in the right place if we lived our lives with the following principle in mind which simply says . . .
LOVE GIVES
LUST TAKES
Quote from: TRAV on February 12, 2008, 10:41:45 PM
Actually, the above statement kind of sounds like it was said by a woman or a guy that is married to one. Sometimes women who make statements like the one above have been hurt and are looking to "put guys in their place" and categorize them.
Funny you brought that up. It was a young man (early 20s?) who isn't married, so far as I know.
And I would have made the same guess as to the speaker as you did, Trav. *smile*
:beret:
marriage is both give and take Trav....LOL *potstirring*
I'm not single, I'm buttin' in anyway... knowing someone is attractive/beautiful/handsome is not the same as being lustful. You can have either without the other. And in marriage, you can totally be attracted, and because it's God covered, you can physically, intensely desire, without an ounce of sinful lust. It's an amazing thing when our eyes are opened to that understanding.
Quote from: MellowYellow on February 12, 2008, 10:50:03 PM
marriage is both give and take Trav....LOL *potstirring*
I'm not single, I'm buttin' in anyway... knowing someone is attractive/beautiful/handsome is not the same as being lustful. You can have either without the other. And in marriage, you can totally be attracted, and because it's God covered, you can physically, intensely desire, without an ounce of sinful lust. It's an amazing thing when our eyes are opened to that understanding.
I totally agree. :thumbsup2:
I also plan to have plenty of that stronnnnggggg desire in my own marriage someday. My lucky wife and even luckier me. Cool. Glad you feel that way, Sista!
Quote from: GlassDarkly on February 09, 2008, 08:56:19 PM
:eyebrow: I detest blanket statements.
B
Do you detest ALL blanket statements? :D
QuoteI'm not single, I'm buttin' in anyway...
That's why we love you, MY! :laughat:
Quote from: TRAV on February 12, 2008, 10:56:30 PM
Quote from: MellowYellow on February 12, 2008, 10:50:03 PM
marriage is both give and take Trav....LOL *potstirring*
I'm not single, I'm buttin' in anyway... knowing someone is attractive/beautiful/handsome is not the same as being lustful. You can have either without the other. And in marriage, you can totally be attracted, and because it's God covered, you can physically, intensely desire, without an ounce of sinful lust. It's an amazing thing when our eyes are opened to that understanding.
I totally agree. :thumbsup2:
I also plan to have plenty of that stronnnnggggg desire in my own marriage someday. My lucky wife and even luckier me. Cool. Glad you feel that way, Sista!
awesome, that's great Trav! I was hoping you detect my silliness in potstirring. :thumbsup2: :grin:
I've never thought about it but it would probably be a very important element for someone to know that difference before they get married.
Quote from: Sis on February 12, 2008, 11:52:57 PMQuoteI'm not single, I'm buttin' in anyway...
That's why we love you, MY! :laughat:
thanks! I can't help it, you singles have such interesting conversations.
Me? Single? Only because Stevebert went to the store. We'll be a couple again in about a half hour or so. :laughhard:
Quote from: RainbowJingles on February 12, 2008, 11:02:26 PM
Do you detest ALL blanket statements? :D
Yep! Outside of God and His Word, there are virtually no absolutes. Every statement referencing a population (of significant size, randomly chosen without controlling any parameters) requires some kind of qualifier. :teeth:
Obviously, if you have specifically selected the population you are referencing, then you can make sure they all fall under whatever blanket statement about that population you desire to make. I would consider that a different situation, though. :)
B
Forgive him, he's been studying for a statistics test. :laughhard:
rofl! Yeah, after rereading that, it does sound like it's been influenced by some statistics. hahaha!
*apologies*
B
Quote from: GlassDarkly on February 13, 2008, 07:34:41 PM
Quote from: RainbowJingles on February 12, 2008, 11:02:26 PM
Do you detest ALL blanket statements? :D
Yep! Outside of God and His Word, there are virtually no absolutes. Every statement referencing a population (of significant size, randomly chosen without controlling any parameters) requires some kind of qualifier. :teeth:
Obviously, if you have specifically selected the population you are referencing, then you can make sure they all fall under whatever blanket statement about that population you desire to make. I would consider that a different situation, though. :)
B
So what about the *ahem* blanket statement that states that you hate ALL blanket statements?
What about the blanket statement that states that there are virtually no absolutes?
:freaky2:
(where's that pot-stirring smiley when I need it?)
Quote from: RainbowJingles on February 13, 2008, 11:47:16 PM
So what about the *ahem* blanket statement that states that you hate ALL blanket statements?
What about the blanket statement that states that there are virtually no absolutes?
For the first question, my stating that I hate all blanket statements is not a blanket statement. :teeth: It's a statement about one person (namely, me), not a population. It's also something over which I have full control (considering
I decide what I do and do not hate. lol).
For the second question, it also is not a blanket statement. It's actually an example of what I prefer to blanket statements - qualified statements.
Quote from: GlassDarkly on February 13, 2008, 07:34:41 PM
Yep! Outside of God and His Word, there are virtually no absolutes.
Notice the italics. That's a qualifier. It indicates that there is the possibility of exceptions. *grin*
B
Quote from: GlassDarkly on February 13, 2008, 11:54:47 PM
Quote from: RainbowJingles on February 13, 2008, 11:47:16 PM
So what about the *ahem* blanket statement that states that you hate ALL blanket statements?
What about the blanket statement that states that there are virtually no absolutes?
For the first question, my stating that I hate all blanket statements is not a blanket statement. :teeth: It's a statement about one person (namely, me), not a population. It's also something over which I have full control (considering I decide what I do and do not hate. lol).
For the second question, it also is not a blanket statement. It's actually an example of what I prefer to blanket statements - qualified statements.
Quote from: GlassDarkly on February 13, 2008, 07:34:41 PM
Yep! Outside of God and His Word, there are virtually no absolutes.
Notice the italics. That's a qualifier. It indicates that there is the possibility of exceptions. *grin*
B
Brat. You're making a blanket statement when you lump together all blanket statements under one blanket and implying that they're all alike.
You're obvioulsy prejudiced against all blankets. This makes me sad, as there are some really nice blankets out there that you haven't even given a chance!
Quote from: RainbowJingles on February 14, 2008, 12:04:57 AM
Brat. You're making a blanket statement when you lump together all blanket statements under one blanket and implying that they're all alike.
You're obvioulsy prejudiced against all blankets. This makes me sad, as there are some really nice blankets out there that you haven't even given a chance!
lol! I thought about that, but I wasn't sure if that's how you were looking at it. :teeth: I still don't think I would consider it a blanket statement, because I am not saying anything at all about blanket statements. The implication that they are all alike is something you interpreted. I'm only making a statement about and applying an action to myself.
Oh...and blankets rock! *grin*
B
Noooooooo! Blankets are SOFT! Not rocky! lol
And I'd love to take this argument to the next level, but we're already a bit :offtopic: lol
Quote from: RainbowJingles on February 14, 2008, 12:35:03 AM
And I'd love to take this argument to the next level, but we're already a bit :offtopic: lol
No, no... by all means continue! The subject line says 'Open for debate'... and you two are certainly debating. ;)
:beret:
Manana
Do do do do do
All these blanket statements are making me chilly. *Sis goes for a blanket to warm up*
My blanket statement: I wuv my bwankie.
i think i hear my blanket calling my name, but the fresh blanket of snow outside has hushed most sounds so i'm not sure . . .. i better go check. :hi:
The opening statement up for debate is too much of a blanket statement to be true for everyone all the time, however, there is definitely some truth to it. The first part particularly.
Quote from: RainbowJingles on February 14, 2008, 12:35:03 AM
And I'd love to take this argument to the next level, but we're already a bit :offtopic: lol
There's actually a topic about blanket statements in
General Discussion.
B
lol I had a feeling you'd mention that. :-)
:argue:
What if I wanna talk about it in here, though? :eyebrow:
You can, we dont care. (See the "Off Topic" thread, we WAY outnumber Brannon in that one....)
Awwww... I was hoping someone would say, "don't you dare get off-topic" so I could debate with them about something. :hypocrite:
Topics on GP function more as conversation starters than conversation guidelines. haha!
B
Now, THAT, dear sir, is definitely a fact.
WAIT! I was on a roll disagreeing/debating with you tonight!
Phooey. :sadbounce:
Must be time to go to bed. lol
Quote from: SippinTea on February 09, 2008, 03:22:36 AM
I heard someone recently say:
"Guys will always lust after what they don't respect, and mock what they would give anything to have."
Agree? Disagree?
:beret:
I don't agree with the first but, I think guys just lust after something they like, without any issues about respect.
The second point....I both agree and disagree, I agree because when I see it in younger brothers, I think awww he likes her....but when it happens to me, I get annoyed and think they're just out to make my life miserable and if they do like me, here's a newsflash, you want a girl to like you, then
be nice...d'uh!
lol Count on Chris to try to get us back on topic. :)
lol, ty, Elona...I think the operative word in this case being 'try' :lol: