Are women even capable of truly loving someone? I used to think

>>39623153
are you capable of truly loving someone?

>>39623163
Yes. I could love someone regardless of looks, money or status, so long as they were someone that was dear to me and was a genuine, loving person themselves.

>>39623153
Yes but only around 25-35% of them. Same goes for men. Most humans just mistake being horny for being in love.

>>39623153
Yes, their children.Sometimes their love for them is so passionate it drives them insane

>>39623636
Yes, I'm aware of that. What I was referring to was romantic love.

Only if they can exploit him or he's a provider, even status provider

>>39623153
some do. most just want you for money or to give them children so they can divorce you and get child support

>>39623153
100$ says picrelated is used in a vaporwave video

File: ccfwgvvfzrrlhno2fb0c.jpg (44KB, 680x440px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 680x440px

>>39623153
Yes. It would take a while for me to let myself trust a man enough to fall in love with him, but it is possible for some women at least.

But I have a genuine question thats not meant to offend: Are men capable of it? the older i have gotten, the more it seems that most men only value their partners for their looks, and some other men just seem to outright hate women. It's so sad and confusing to me

>>39623619
This desu. my parents have been together over thirty years and clearly love each other deeply.

>>39623153
So your mother didn't loved you?That's why you have ended up here with the rest of us

>>39623153
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxqDtqKYcfI

>>39624120
The hate mostly begins as a defensive mechanism initiated by getting hurt when loving. There's a lot of broken people walking around held together by negativity.

>>39624120
What's sad and confusing about it? There is no reason for men to have any affection for women.

I'm with my bf for 3 years now, if that's not love I don't know what is

>>39624471
A habit, maybe. People turn into habits easier than you might think.

>>39624435
It's confusing because some women have been nothing but kind and gentle their entire lives, and then still get treated like shit by men for simply being female. It's sad because it means that there will probably never ever be a man out there who feels genuine love for me. It's a very desolate plane of exisitance that we all seem to tread

>>39623153
The answer is a firm no. Some of them can surely imitate love but the true feeling is beyond their capabilities. The womens core , their very essence, is the antithesis of love. You can spend time around them, sure, but they must be treated like the beasts they are.

>>39624530
There has never been a woman in the history of humanity that was nothing but kind and gentle their entire lives for the sake of being kind and gentle their entire lives. Your gender is full of snakes and you wear facades constantly because you always have an agenda.

>>39624530
Hell to add to this, even Mother Teresa--that shining beacon of what unconditional love looks like for people--had an agenda. You stand no chance.

>>39624581
My agenda is to die. I have no ulterior motive. The only facade that I use is the facade of a normie whenever I leave the house.

>>39624611
what agenda was that? giving people who have been treated like shit their entire life a final opportunity to be valued and respected as the human beings that they are? and please don't tell me that you think that seeking to deliver people from moral and spiritual darkness to be some sort of evil agenda.

>>39624667
Gloating over the less fortunate and using them as stepping stones to your own salvation sure is egocentric and evil.

>>39624714
Dude, She seeked no further salvation for herself. She saw the untouchables as people worthy of salvation, and helped in any and every way she could. She was as selfless as they come. She didn't use these people as stepping stones, she made herself the stepping stone. If you truly see her as someone who only desired to take advantage of the less fortunate in the pursuit of spiritual vanity, you have no idea who and what Mother Theresa represented.

>>39624804
She left people to die in pain instead of letting them go to the hospital because she believed that pain purifies. She's a false idol.

>>39624804
She was a woman, of course she wouldn't confess that she did it for selfish reasons. Yet she acted like a vain and greedy hypocrit, slick with snake oil.

I know enough of her life to knock her down from your pedistal: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa

>>39623153
>Are women even capable of truly loving someone?
Nope. Women are parasitic in nature. Don't listen to the beta boi white knights from plebbit.

>>39624120
>it seems that most men only value their partners for their looks

I've thought about this quite a bit, and I think automatically discounting all passion that starts out as infatuation is a false criteria to apply and one of the worst hidden impacts on our culture of feminism. (This is where the ugly girls took their true revenge.)

For men, overwhelming physical infatuation tends to spiral out of control, turning first into obsession and later into tender care. (I know that for myself, strong infatuation would produce the kind of limerence that focuses all of your attention on the other person, and intimacy would grow OUT OF that focus.) And the attachment that develops during the obsession phase survives any later changes in physical appearance; what began as "merely physical" doesn't end that way.

>inb4 anyone says "That's not true love then"

In my experience, it is. And the "healthy relationship" type of love advocated by the therapeutic community is worthless and forgettable pap.

>>39623153
Women love men the same way men love their cars. Think about it.

if anything, it's guys who stay with women because of sex, not women. We can love more than you

File: 1502033753722.jpg (77KB, 1024x575px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 1024x575px

I don't think this generation's women are capable of that feat. Feminism is to blame.

>>39625202
Hell no. Maybe a small percentage but not in general.

>>39624471
>3 years
>Think it's love
Yeah tell me more in a few more years.

>>39625204
W
R
O
N
G
FAKE NEWS

>>39623153
Their children maybe. Otherwise not once the infatuation wears off.

>>39625204
Not at all roastie, you're really deluding yourself on this one.

>>39625204
A tape worm can feel content but doesn't love its host. The same with women. What you describe is their contentment towards their unfortunate male hosts and hasn't anything to do with love.

>>39625363
A tape worm can't feel anything, it has no central nervous system.

>>39625395
And what does that say about women then?

>>39625226
But you'd love your car a lot less if it stopped working.

>>39625412
Nothing because they in fact do have a CNS whether you like it or not

>>39623153
If you're asking for a love as if in unconditional love like your mother/grandmother, did then nope.

You're not extension of their own body and flesh, so they'd always view you in cost-benefit loss, transactional purely. People hate gold diggers, but at least they're honest about their intentions and upfront about the transactional nature of their 'services'.

Better than someone who talk and act sweet in front, but the moment your eyes are off would talk shit and just care about what could they get for themselves.

>>39625446
Angry and hysterical nitpicking = Roastie detected. The tape worm is the preferable alternative yet again.

>>39625542
Being a 23 year old male virgin I'm pretty sure I'm about as far from being a roastie as it gets. And I'm not sure having vs not having a CNS is all that trivial, since living without a brain and a spine is unironically not possible for humans.

>>39625537
If you would say that again, but break apart the love women have for men in terms of greek love (eros, ludas etc.) what would it be?

File: happy-ba-dum-tss-l.jpg (119KB, 1500x1292px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1500x1292px

>>39625571
>living without a brain and a spine is unironically not possible for humans.

Says the white knight...
Well, you are right about one thing. You are as far from a roastie you can get.

>>39625626
How does correcting mistakes in your comparison caused by your visibly inadequate knowledge of basic biology make me a white knight

>>39625542
>The tape worm is the preferable alternative yet again.
Are male tape worms called rape worms?

>>39625581
It'd fall to be the love to themselves, appealing to their emotions and narcissism.
Of course there's a pragma with deep understanding and tolerating each other. It's good, but doesn;t mean she'll put yourself first and certainly not something unconditional. She'll still always prioritzes herself, her mind/emotional, her physical needs first.

It'd only have potential to shift when they got body and flesh extension in form of child. It'll shift to the child, not the partner of course.

>>39625571
>>39625640
God, you're such a bitch. Sure his analogy was dogshit, but you're white knighting when there's no women around to even defend. Neck yourself.

>>39624714
agree too many stories of women using men for college money and then leaving them after college. also stories of women having no mercy in divorce court and taking everything from the husband.

>>39625750
I don't care about what his comparison says about women I care that it is based on being scientifically illiterate.

>>39623153
no because they fall out of love if you don't have the resources to provide for her offspring. her attraction to you is tied to the maternal instinct and she wants to give her offspring the best environment. the time you spend with her is payed and if you can't afford her she will leave you.

>>39625823
>I care that it is based on being scientifically illiterate
You're a tool. An analogy is supposed to convey a meaningful point through a comparison not to be scientifically factual. Stop acting like you're intelligent when you can't even grasp a basic rhetorical concept.

>>39625901
Education isn't the same as intelligence. A person with an iq of 190 who was never taught to read isn't magically less intelligent than you. Making idiotic comparisons and trying to defend them later by claiming poetic license smells of having 10 brain cells or less.

>>39625976
>smells of having 10 brain cells or less.
Hold on now, faggot. I for one take umbrage with your statement there. That clearly wasn't an exaggeration. You must be scientifically illiterate. You should get a proper education before asserting fallacies such as this.

That's what you sound like, fag. Your tangential and intentional attempt to ignore the point he was trying to get across was completely unnecessary and nitpicky. You argue like a woman. You just ignore what's being said and focus on the most irrelevant inconsistency. This is genuine autism.

Yes, everyone is capable of love, the real test in love is to experience one or multiple heartbreaks and still find it in yourself to have hope and love again. This is the test most fail. Having your heart broken is the greatest emotional pain there is, so since people don't want to experience it again, they shut themselves down emotionally in fear of getting hurt and don't trust anyone anymore. All of it makes dating needlessly complicated.

But romance is hard. The answer I've found through dating is that finding "the one" is hard for everyone and there is never any guarantee that the person you love, no matter how well you fit together, how good the sex is and how much you love each other, there is 0 guarantee that she's gonna be "the one". You could have 6 to 10 years of beautiful loving relationship and out of nowhere, either you stop having feelings for her or she does and, sometimes, there not really any explanation. There is never any guarantee of permanency in love. IMO, love is a short experience and if you find it, no matter where you find it and how shortly it last, enjoy it to the fullest. There is no such thing as the one. Only what tools and lessons your experience gives you and hope that the person you have found will stay by your side.

I have been in many relationships and have observed all of my friends and workmate in theirs. I've been dumped, rejected, told I was the best thing to happen in a girl's life, I've left some relationships, been used by some girls, genuinely loved by others and nothing lasted eternally. I stopped EXPECTING the one, now I just hope for her and I throw the dice once in a while.

You can't find love if you don't accept the risks of, maybe, having to get hurt 9 times out of 10 to find one who won't.

>>39623153
Well they're definitely incapable of loving me

>>39626102
Wow, an autistic person on r9k who's also a virgin at the age of 23. Sounds wildly incongruous with the character of this normally chad-oriented basket weaving forum. Maybe you could have noticed the obvious right away and saved yourself time you'll never get back instead of arguing with me?

>>39626134
Ad hominem. You could do better than that, or not.

>>39623153
Not in the way men can, no. We're simply different creatures. Men love women for their beauty, their helplessness -- we have a deep, hard-wired desire to want to protect them. Women, on the other hand, love men for the resources they can provide them.

This is admittedly a tough red pill to swallow, but there's no reason to hate women for it. It's simply how they've evolved.