justify your existence

[lauralh]

[Poll #533238]

Comments

[duckierose.livejournal.com]

I like swimming in dirty rivers.

oh, no wait. I like "swimming" in "dirty rivers." I guess that's different.

[mcsnee.livejournal.com]

re: question 1, is this even DEBATABLE?

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

it's a quote from a friend, so apparently so.

[aj-reloaded.livejournal.com]

Work sucks, dude.

[chris.livejournal.com]

my gut reaction was that men are more likely not to confuse sex with love, but I know there are plenty of women who dont have that problem either. so I cant really say.

[bewing.livejournal.com]

I believe that you've pointed out yourself, laural, that repeated casual sex more often "turns into" love in the case of women? I don't think either side often accidentally "mistakes" one for the other -- except in the simplest "they agreed to have sex with me, maybe that means they love me" sense.

[crumblingchaos.livejournal.com]

I think it has to do more with age and experience then anything else.

[xaotica.livejournal.com]

absolutely. despite the stereotypes about men, the majority of the guys i've known have not wanted just casual sex. i hurt people quite a bit when i was younger, and although i don't mean this to justify my actions, i think part of me did believe that guys just didn't give a shit.

no matter how clear i've been about my intentions, the people who have been most likely to get confused were guys. none of the women i was involved with decided that we were life partners after a drunken one-nighter

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

perhaps because they were straight?

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

I wonder if a lot of guys think that about women b/c they are told to.

[bewing.livejournal.com]

There are only three possibilities for having an opinion on this topic. Either you run the experiment yourself by having lots and lots of casual sex and then follow up with the ex-partners and see how they feel about it (haha yeah right). Or, you have such a huge extent of friends and aquaintances that you can make a statistically valid sampling just by asking people you know (maybe if we non-social types could do a large enough sampling of random LJ peers -- but I don't see it happening any other way). Or, you can be told that this is the way it works.

So, yes, I agree with you -- but I don't see it as being any sort of reasonable counterargument. We'd be happy to hear counter-evidence.

[xaotica.livejournal.com]

nope, tho they may have felt i was