>>116881694 I really wish there were less romance in animu. Every other title seems like an adaptation of some shitty trope-filled LN. Nobody is trying anything new. That's why I get excited about action anime like KlK whether or not it ends up being good.
Also I've never been in a relationship and watching others kiss makes me jealous and I hate watching it. Same goes for these shows about girls in high school having the time of their lives. I want to see some MC juggling midterms and being at a funeral or something realistic. So far only authors like FKMT can replicate that feeling for me
because Japan is it's own country it isn't the entire planet. This means that as the population ages there won't be enough young people to support them with social security and social benefits. The debt they have is gigantic and they won't be able to service it either...
declining population spells doom for a country
>but the Earths population
Is a separate question altogether. Overpopulation is a problem of 3rd world countries who breed non-stop, have no education and don't understand what contraception is.
1st world countries, western countries are facing population declines. Which is bad for economies and welfare states.
>>116888195 Regardless, even if I ignore it, all the shows seem like the same thing to me. Only when emerging from despair can characters be worth rooting for, at least in my opinion. Like, a show about some guy who tells his life story from a prison cell. I've probably read about five Manga in total with adult protagonists. And am I the only one who hates waifus here? I've acknowledged I'll never be with a girl, like why even fucking think about it?
>>116888098 > 1st world countries, western countries are facing population declines. That's natural. I don't understand the world's perversion with immigration to artificially, and temporarily inflate native numbers. The only way population decline can be 'corrected', is to either create high procreational pressures (e.g. 3rd world countries, pressures for both father and mother to create a large base of male children so that they can care for you in your old age), or overincentivize it socially (already disincentivized, stable monogamous marriages are dead) or economically (not economically feasible) in a positive fashion.
Simply put, we don't *need* this many people in our country, but we artificially inflate our numbers, which only serves to stave it off briefly unless the standard of living fails markedly as well (which happens when stringent immigration standards are dissolved).
>>116892999 Campione! I'm only telling you because I enjoyed it a lot. >>116893413 Yes, its more the tension of romance so you can have the girls acting cute and stuff. >>116893455 Because japan doesn't like consummation and thrives on the tension.
>>116897080 We she did. Because that sure as hell is not depth or romantic. You're just stupid enough to think kissing = romantic. It doesn't. Those are shallow, feeling-less, plot forced make out sessions that mean nothing.
>>116882988 >>116882901 Otaku are not numerically relevant when talking about Japan and their low birth are a combination of no immigration (european birth rate wouldn't be much higher without immigration if I remember right) and their society as a whole, with men not wanting to marry because of the pressure of being a husband and women don't want to marry because they are supposed to stop working as soon as they are married.
Anime has no impact on Japanese low birth rates and talking like it does is moves the attention from the real problem to something easy to blame for.
>>116897259 So you understand you're reading fiction? You god damn retarded. They can kiss in any fashion whatsoever, and have it still mean nothing. You know how you know that kiss is empty and shallow? Because he turns around and does similar, similar not the same, things with other girls almost moments later.
It's cheap, shallow pandering meant to appeal to retards like you who think shallow expressions like that are romantic.
>>116897573 Or someone with logic. >lol tumblr feminist Nope. Just someone who's not shallow and retarded. >>116897602 And that changes anything how? It's still just empty kiss pandering that means nothing at all. It's cheap story telling and clearly not romantic.
>>116897504 >You know how you know that kiss is empty and shallow? Because he turns around and does similar, similar not the same, things with other girls almost moments later. You mean it's not possible to love more than one person?
>>116897965 >something obviously isn't as special if multiple people have it. That's some shitty logic. If everyone had it would be one thing. But if only a select group has it, it can still be special.
>>116898004 >win olyimpic event >get your gold medal >suddenly see them giving identical gold medals to 2nd 3rd and even 4th place >you all have to stand on equal height platforms >news outlets and the official records don't show you as getting first, just "top 4" >hurr it's just shitty woman logic if you get upset over that
>>116897925 Not equally, especially not in this case. It is literally nothing but haremfag pandering. >all these girls wants me dick >and they're all cool with it >best orgies evuur The lowest brow of wish fulfillment. Plus this >>116897965 >>116898004 Nope, that logic is spot on if you're not an idiot and think with only your dick. Romantic love is defined as something between two people, not a group of people. Much less a bunch of female who are forced to compromise and share the person they like for sake of polygamy fantasies of the reader. It's not special "love" if you have it for multiple people, because all said love that's spread out could be directed at a single person.
>>116898116 plenty of people are in love too doesn't mean it feels less special if 1 particular person that you love exclusively does't exclusively love you back
but fine, if you want to be THAT faggot >win hypothetical universe wide once in eternity competion >get your special universe gold medal >suddenly see them giving identical special universe medals to 2nd 3rd and even 4th place >you all have to stand on equal height platforms >news outlets and the official records don't show you as getting first, just "top 4" >hurr it's just shitty woman logic if you get upset over that filthy communists who never accomplish anything in their lives and don't understand what it means to work hard or improve yourself or accomplish things need to leave
>>116898107 That's cool. I could be red in the face with rage. It still wouldn't change anything about what's said, or the objective points made. Self-insert haremfag are the worst cancer in anime. >>116898116 >double arrow quoting Ignorant newshit, automatically wrong about whatever you think.
>>116898086 You're only going to cause yourself massive heartbreak thinking like this. You can't help but love many people, just as your most beloved can't help either. And you're very likely going to get bored and lose all passion you have for one person when you're with them long enough. When you're old enough that sex doesn't matter that much, and you just want a companion for life, then you can settle with your forever-and-always. But while you're young it's normal and completely all right to want to tenderly love multiple people. You can't expect one person to only have their eyes on you either. Don't set yourself up for such pain. Learn to move on, let go, have fun. Love and be loved, and love life, enjoy every moment of your youth. Don't hold it against someone for loving someone else, love is nothing but a positive thing. Jealousy is nothing but destructive.
>>116898265 >figuratively assmad I kind of laughed at that one. Either way. It changes nothing about how pathetic harem fags are. >>116898304 Let me summarize your whole post in a few words. >mine feelings for people are cheap and shallow so everyone else must be this way Sorry that's not how it really is. You're about the same as a cheap bar whore who fucks the guy who buys them a drink because they think they're in love.
>>116898332 Nope, not how it works. Because if you can divide your love that means you're not giving all of it to a single other person. Meaning other people are getting slighted as well, and being forced to share. >>116898373 Not what's being said at all. Good job being retarded. Harem fags on the other hand think girls are there to collect. "It's okay if I love them all". Problem is that "love" is shallow and cheap.
>>116898384 It's pretty shallow of you that you can't comprehend the vastness and fluidity of human emotion. Having multiple lovers doesn't diminish the intensity or realness of any of them. It may not be for you but you're only depriving yourself of wonderful relationships, and hurting yourself by having these expectations for other people.
>>116898463 No, there is. Especially when it's all one sided so one person can have polgomy fetishes fulfilled. And again, the text book definition of romantic love is something shared by two people. >>116898482 All I can do when I read posts like this is think to myself; these people are clearly retarded and don't understand how they're points have been countered so they fill a post with mostly meaningless words that don't continue the argument.
Face it. You're wrong. You've had nothing but cheap feelings.
>>116898516 >slut mentality Yeah. it actually does. If you're not depraved and shallow that is. There's a reason cheating is considered bad. It's because if really feelings for someone they will prevent you from wanting to fuck someone else. Faithfulness is something that's clearly lost to you.
>>116898552 No, there's really nothing. Since you live exclusively in your own imagination where your harem of anime girls all love you for no reason and have no issue with being shared, nothing I can say will ever piece into your world.
>>116898573 It doesn't matter if you're the only person. If you're taking the other side in the argument then the points apply to you as well. >>116898586 >I can't make a real argument so I'll just reply to no one in thread and pretend I'm right
>>116898602 Yeah, you missed the entire second half of that post. Even if you're an idiot and don't care about cheating and slighting other people. Romantic love by nature is not something to be shared. Only shallow version of it are meant to be shared. Because if the love can be split then it also could have all been directed at one person.
>>116898628 I'm not taking the other side of the argument. What i've gotten out of your posts is that love is this magical, amazing, special thing that only comes along for your "chosen one". That was how I interpreted it, anyway. I read your posts and remembered a time when I thought that way, too.
>>116898766 time and effort are though. and if somebody isn't willing to give you as much of those as they possibly can (like by splitting it between multiple people) then they clearly don't love you as much as they could or at least, that they don't love you as much as you love them.
>>116898750 Different person here, but I'd just like to interject for a moment. Why can't I love four women just as much as you love one? Is there some barrier preventing me from doing so? I believe that the human mind is a very powerful tool, capable of many absurd things. If I had enough passion, why couldn't I love four women the same amount that you love one?
>>116898765 Did you think that discussing love with kissless virgins would go well?
>>116898731 No, I don't think it's a "chosen one" type thing. I STATED it's a concept where the real feelings are not shallow and something that can applied to many people. If you can love multiple people at once you're clearly not giving all of yourself to a single other person. Again, see my points about faithfulness. >>116898766 Yeah, it actually is. Notice how pologmy is illegal all countries that aren't third world. I shouldn't need to explain common sense further than that.
>>116898859 Because you're clearly retarded don't even understand what this base concept is about. This is not about you vs me. If you have that much "passion" it could all be directed at one person rather than four. Love is about being faithful and true, not about how much you have. By definition you can give one person your undivided love it's directed at multiple people.
>>116898988 Okay, let's break this down. >Notice how polygamy is illegal in all countries that aren't third world. >Look, this thing isn't allowed in places that aren't shitholes. That makes it inherently bad! >Everybody else isn't doing it, why should you?
>>116898979 His example unrealistic, I was accommodating. >>116898987 Can you not fucking read at all? >Love is about being faithful and true, not about how much you have
Great, you're a wild animal with tons of passion that can fuck four women in a row and not go limp? Awesome, that still doesn't mean anything. It just means you're not giving real love to anyone person.
>>116899033 Still missing it. Best part is you just exampled how stupid you are in other ways, too. You;re not even smart enough to figure out how to green text correctly. Meaning you're new and not smart enough to pick up on simple social cues.
>>116899074 My current relationship actually allows for me to fuck as many men as I want, and my partner to fuck as many women as she wants. I love her with every fiber of my being, though. I don't have tits for her to grope, and she doesn't have a dick for me to suck. We simply get half our sexual needs elsewhere.
>>116899068 >everything is an opinion >I can be a slut if I want Nope, fuck off haremfag. >>116899071 Google it. Literally google it. It's in the definition. If you're not giving all your attention and love to one person then they are being slighted if that's what they're giving to you.
a relationship is not built on the concept of multiple people making a compromise so one person can be happy.
>>116899183 ad ho·mi·nem ˌad ˈhämənəm/ adverb & adjective adverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem
1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. "vicious ad hominem attacks"
>You're just stupid! >You don't have common sense! >You're just new! >You can't pick up on social cues! I know I'm just being trolled at this point, but please, please point out how your response is not attacking me and not my argument.
>>116898414 I can't say I've ever been in a relationship myself, due to shyness and orientation issues. And despite my flowery words I actually feel the same way as you guys - jealousy consumes me every day because I'm so infatuated with one of my friends. She makes me feel like we have a little something special because of the nature of our friendship, it's hard to explain. But then there's her boyfriend and all her little classmate crushes. It kills me.
But I know how I feel is incredibly stupid and self-destructive, and I should let go. But what I know from my friends is that having multiple loves is still completely genuine - one of them, who has a history of promiscuity, took a break from her boyfriend last year and had a thing with another guy at our school. They were sweet as fuck and she still loves him, but they stay as friends now. Because she loves her boyfriend more than anyone, and he knows that. He's aware of how she is and what she's done, but he understands her feelings and loves her to death. It's complicated. People are complicated.
The one I'm crazy about tends to get a new boyfriend every year, but is 100% faithful while she has them. She just has flirty crushes on some of our classmates, and keeps cute but innocent friendships with them. Like me
Believe me, I have had incredibly mixed emotions about what they do. I've had the typical 4chan gut reactions of thinking of them as sluts. I know I'm the type that will end up with somebody and never leave them. But I KNOW that all the intricate relationships my friends have are genuine and amazing, and each one of them is special. I envy them for having lives filled with romance and love.
>bitches and whores I know. The only point I want to make is that just because it's not a star crossed lovers, you're-my-one-and-only-forever kind of deal, doesn't mean that a romance is shallow and not passionate. Sex alone isn't even shallow. It can be fleeting, but it can still be deep.
>>116899079 It doesn't matter if you meant passion or love. If you can't love one person wholly if you love multiple people. >>116899095 It's not. It's a chemical reaction. >>116899105 Again, his example is unrealistic. >>116899127 Where are you getting yours from? Harem manga where fucking every girl is perfectly normal?
>>116899271 No, it does matter if I meant passion or love. No, actually, it doesn't, because they are both intangible things that don't exist. Can you only have a limited number of thoughts? Ideas? Friends? Theoretical mathematical equations?
>>116899330 No shit, but the more we argue, the better I can undermine their argument, and the more I can feel like I've won.
>>116899122 So you love her just enough to want to fuck dozens of other people. Sure sounds like a normal and healthy relationship. >retards think they can make outlandish examples to prove their points about normal people >>116899237 That's impressive. You can look at the definition and still not know what it means. It's not just insulting people. ad hominem is when you dismiss an argument on a personal trait such as race. You're argument is not being dismissed because of who you are, it's being dismissed because you proved through objective actions they are you stupid.
>>116899289 >Love is not something that is divisible. Exactly. >>116899302 Actually that's exactly what it would mean because it would mean you stop giving attention and affection to the other person. You can't give two people your undivided attention at once. >>116899346 You can only have one best friend, you can only have one person you love with all your heart. Because all, and best have a limitation of one.
This thread is full of crossboardfags, most of all OP. Explain to me why haven't you reported it yet. Explain to me why OP hasn't been called out for ellipsis and excessive punctuation. Fuck weekend /a/.
>>116899380 Nope. You are stupid because of the actions you took. Not "just because ur dum". You took actions that proved you're stupid. Such as not being able to pick up on simple social ques. Tell a person who can't solve 2+2 he's smart. >>116899387 Romantic love is only romantic because it has a sexual attraction as well. Sex and romantic love are one hand in hand. Which is why if you fuck people you don't love it cheapens the relationship. Which is why cheating is bad because it means you don't love the person enough not to fuck someone else.
>>116899422 Why does someone need all your undivided attention? Maybe you're that needy but not everyone is
And I have 3 best friends. They're equally important to me. They're as important as my family. All my family is equally important to me. All our relationships are different though. But they're all just as important as the other in my life.
>>116899422 >that's exactly what it would mean Does the love you feel for someone not fluctuate? For instance, if the object of your affection were to present to you a handmade something amazing you've always wanted, or look into your eyes and profess their love for you, or stand up for you in front of their friends, wouldn't you have stronger feelings towards them then than you would when you were, say, at work, away from them?
>>116899477 >>116899521 Yeah, basically. Nobody is really doing anything horribly against the rules. OP is a fucking moron, agreed, but he has long since left the thread, or stopped pretending to be from tumblr.
>>116899473 That's great. Not reread my post about how a loving relationship is not built around multiple people compromising. Even if you think you can love multiple people equally why should two other people have to love only you when you love two people.
>>116899508 >because it means you don't love the person enough not to fuck someone else. No, it's not that cut and dry. Not everybody is disciplined. You may not want to hurt that person, that desire to protect them and not hurt them may be stronger than anything you've ever felt - but how many times have you betrayed your own desires for something stupid? I let myself down all the time. I wanted to finish this project tonight more than anything. But instead I shitposted on 4chan, which I really didn't want to do.
>>116899601 >opinion This is basically what it boils down to. Literally everything is subjective in every possible way. What one person calls love, another could call stabbing them in the chest with a kitchen knife a dozen times. It's kind of silly that you people are attempting to seriously argue about this.
>>116899510 Did you jump into this conversation late, or do you just have no memory at all? Undivided is the concept of being whole. The original point was that the feelings are cheap. If something is not whole it is less than it could be. Less for for synonymous for cheap. You're just slut who only has cheap feelings. >>116899518 I have no idea what you're trying to say. Even if it's changing it should all still be directed at one person. We'e already been over it's not about how much. >>116899533 My other replies is this post pretty much answer everything you've said. You added nothing new.
>>116899588 That's not what all relationships are. You're an idiot. >>116899601 No, it's not an opinion and in that post I exampled way. You can make all the hypotheticals you want but they doesn't change anything. Of course you can make up a counter situation on the spot, that doesn't prove anything about real people. >I am superman and my dick is 12' long See, I just said words too. Doesn't make them true. >>116899625 And now we come back to the feelings being cheap. You're feelings are so cheap and shallow that they can't even stop you from doing something bad. Strong feelings and motivation will prevent you from doing bad things such as cheating or fucking around.
>>116899751 It does have an objective definition. >>116899697 >>116899764 Because it is not a matter of amount. The concept of being whole. Some person my not be capable of expressing a lot of love. But if they direct what love they do have at the a single person then it is not cheap because they giving them the 'whole'. As opposed to someone who say, has a lot of love and if giving to multiple people. The important part is the concept of whole mitigating what is cheap. >>116899754 >you can love some a little bit >but it has no amount that can be divided You're an idiot, and a hypocrite.
>>116899882 >Because it is not a matter of amount. >The concept of being whole But if something has a ''whole'' that means there is an ''amount'' are you fucking retarded If someone has a lot or a little love, those are amounts.
>>116899923 I keep trying to explain to you that love isn't a limited resource. Love is an intangible, human construct with subjective meaning, but you don't seem to get that either, meaning that I can take two wholes from two people and give back eight "wholes" to each of them.
>>116899923 >Do you understand the difference between one person taking two 'wholes' from two people and only giving back one 'halfs' to each? But why is it like that? What basis do you have to say it works like that?
>>116899821 >No, I think it's just a few people attempting to define what "love" is. Everyone else is telling them that's not what "love" is. Well I don't think it can ever truly be defined. And it especially can't be defined as incorrect.
But it seems like a simple fact that the large majority of people in the world do NOT like being shared or cheated on. If you're cool with open relationships and can find other people into that then thats great for all of you.
But if you're with a typical, average person and you're unfaithful I don't think you can blame them for feeling hurt and being angry at you.
Thats my 2 cents, but I doubt it will end or even slow down any arguments going on here.
>>116899953 It can't though. No matter what you say. You can't give two wholes. It's impossible. >>116899969 That's because your feelings are cheap by nature one never meant much.
How about this. When's the last time you read a "muh epic love story" novel about how the people shared their love and settled down in a threesome? Never? That's right. Because that's not how it works. >>116899978 Actually you're a fucking moron beyond compare. This argument has nothing to do with what you like. And the point was being that you don't understand how subjectively works. Opinions do not rules everything.
>>116900039 Well maybe thats the point. That there isn't anything to add. Everybody has their own unique set of thought and feelings that they alone experience and can understand. Trying to force your own thoughts and feelings onto them isn't going to change them and probably just lead to lots of anger and conflict.
>>116899979 >But it seems like a simple fact that the large majority of people in the world do NOT like being shared or cheated on. If you're cool with open relationships and can find other people into that then thats great for all of you. This all still means they have cheap and shallow feelings. >>116900005 >Just because something is giving out two wholes, does not mean they are divided Actually it does. There is mathematical concept that defines giving out two wholes. Not single one. Feel free to source something that says otherwise if you can.
>>116900073 >opinions do not rule everything Except they do. Remember when I said that what love was to one person was to another person stabbing them in the heart six times with a kitchen knife? You know that whole thing about "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder"? It's like that, except replace the word "beauty" with anything at all.
>>116900094 I remember reading an article about it at some point. Google "the science of love" and you should find it. It was pretty interesting.
>>116899767 >Strong feelings and motivation will prevent you from doing bad things such as cheating or fucking around. Life is not a shonen. People aren't that perfect. A feeling can consume someones body and soul but they can still betray it because we're humans and shit happens.
>>116899882 You know what I mean. "A bit" as in not very deeply. You can love 50 people deeply. Deep as FUCK. You can kinda-sorta love another 50 people. Like meh. It's not being divided. It's just what each of these people make you feel. How each of you relate. Blah blah blah we're saying the same things over and over, and you're obviously the type that will NEVER give up an argument, just like you think someone should NEVER love anybody but their lover. Pure stubbornness - but don't confuse stubborn loyalty with genuine feelings passion, affection, and appreciation. Loyalty is crucial but it doesn't MEAN love.
>>116900124 No, you can't. If you can't add anything to argument just don't post. Moron. >>116900144 We're done here then. If you are honestly stupid enough to think opinions matter, then you don't deserve to talk. And that's this a problem in the first place. Just because something is liked doesn't mean it's good. Example? Naruto. >>116900153 Then you have tow whole apples pies, you fucking moron. When you have one apple pie you can't give that whole single apple pie to two people. >but muh love can make two apple pies!!! No. It can't.
>>116900137 I just feel all this arguing isn't good for people. Obviously I can't force them to stop and maybe some of them enjoy it but I just want to help some who haven't considered the non-conflict route.
>>116900265 Which is more exciting? >Sitting back and giving shit to other civilizations so they don't declare war on you >give people so much of your stuff they think you're the coolest dude around >eventually get diplomatic victory Or >Steamrolling over everybody else through sheer military power and superior tactics
>>116900243 You could break down the 2 pies and combine them into a larger single pie. The cloning itself is still a resource you have at your disposal that you aren't wholly giving to a single person.
So you're still only giving half of your full potential to each person.
>>116900179 >1700 results out of millions of books out there >all low rated compared to others >>116900192 >school days >muh epic love story Pick one. I didn't say pull a random threesome ending out of your ass. >>116900199 And do you know what happens when people betray each other? Feelings are broken and cheap. Obviously one feelings was stronger than the other. So if you feelings leads you to do something bad, than that feelings is stronger than your feeling of love. Thus meaning it was cheap in comparisons. So what if you didn't really want to do the bad thing. That was still wrong of you and proved something about your feelings.
And for your second part. Again. Hypotheticals don't mean anything.
>>116900256 Because. The mentality you carry is that anything can be good as long as your opinion supports it. But your personal opinion can not support shit on an objective level. And if you don't understand that there is no reasoning with you. >>116900261 Clones are only copies of the original. Good job giving someone a fake love pie. Plus clones don't love as long.
>>116900390 Usually you have to give some shit to other people so they don't fuck you in the ass while you're teching your way to the space age, which is almost functionally the same thing as dip victory.
Or split your resources and make some military too, which slows down your trip to Alpha Centurai.
>>116900374 Because again, this is not a subjective matter. Not everything under the fucking sun is subjective. >muh true love Mikoto cheats on girls multiple times, fucks them then says says he doesn't like them anymore. Fuck a guy at one point. True love, amirite? >>116900392 Romeo and Juliet-esque
>>116900566 >If one is ok with sharing but the other isn't, and you love them both equally, which do you appease? The one who isn't ok with being shared leaves, as you're incapable of making a decision one way or another, they will. >And what if neither of them is ok with being shared? Then you get neither.
It isn't some one sided decision.
Thread replies: 288 Thread images: 37
Thread DB ID: 20995
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.