Is it a sentence to marry in our time?
Someone is getting married. I think I would not marry.Vanya Rygalov
Don't flatter yourself. Leave self-satisfaction to us bachelors.
Uilenspiegel
Don't flatter yourself.
Heh, heh ... Modesty? It's not about me.
I now certainly have no doubts about the doctor. It's my ... - a doctor. Smishno.
Vanya Rygalov
Ugh on you. And what are your arguments against the fact that I am Aesculapius? Very interesting to read. You really tell the slave what he does wrong?
Vanya Rygalov
Oh, where are you going. How can I teach me the wisdom of a married man? What about my request? Don't leave me like this.
"All women are whores" (the desire to generalize and adjust reality to fit their own worldview), "In our time" (as if in other times it was different). Gentlemen, this is no longer "Chatterbox", but "Bitardnya".
I don't want to cosplay the victims of fascism at all.
Fascism is under Musollini :)
Vanya Rygalov
No, it will be a sacrifice for the sake of all the harsh men, bachelors. Like Giordano Bruno.
Yes, Bruno trub, I can't do that.
Timur Asailov
But if all organs are tested then yes - MAN !!!
Experiments are usually performed on mice and rats, aren't they?
Oh yes ... a verdict and another one: D How can marriage be a verdict? If for love, then only for joy. If on the joint (child), then yes. If you are any gypsy at all, then yes ... marriage is a sentence: D
Do not marry because of your stupid youth and problems, and there will be no sentences.
To marry or not is a matter of taste and personal preference. In some cases, as they say, history will judge, but life shows that then someone will have to convince himself that he was not mistaken in his own tastes and did not get confused in preferences. The rapture of the "free choice" made in favor of marriage is slightly blurred by the existing system of social values ​​and priorities, the policy of which is aimed at strengthening families based on marriage, literally imposing this idea on a person. Free choice, oh yes. In ancient Rome, if I am not mistaken, a slave or slave woman was put on a finger a symbol of their lack of freedom - a ring. Now it is a sign of people connected together at the legislative level.
Marriage, like love, is a very controversial thing, in fact it is an irrational desire to possess and possess. Individually. Absolutely. The word "romance" is applied to this and endowed with a halo of mysterious and beautiful feeling.
Vanya Rygalov
After marriage, everything is the same, only the cough is still empty and the big fat woman sits on the TV.
To be honest, I don’t want to get married, because I look at my friends who are just dating girls and see how they deftly manipulate them. And if they marry these girls, this is the end of the salary, the end of get-togethers, fucking with hoes. If you knock you a khan. And again, the most interesting thing is that it is women who are satisfied with the rules of the house, and women who do not work. These women get tired of the washing machine washing, the dishwasher washing the dishes, and she dusting the table.
To be honest, I don't want to get married, because I look at my friends who are just dating girls, and I see how they deftly manipulate them. And if they marry these girls, this is the end of the salary, the end of get-togethers, fucking with hoes. If you knock you a khan. And again, the most interesting thing is that it is women who are satisfied with the rules of the house, and women who do not work. These women get tired of the washing machine washing, the dishwasher washing the dishes, and she dusting the table.
Wing42 The rapture
of the “free choice†made in favor of marriage is a little blurred by the existing system of social values ​​and priorities, the policy of which is aimed at strengthening families based on marriage, literally imposing this idea on a person. Free choice, oh yes.
How is it to impose? The conspiracy theory ... the authorities are hiding ... society benefits - we have already gone through all this. More like a paranoid delusion, not real arguments.
What does a person need their brains for? If he marries / does not marry, then he must firmly weigh the pros and cons, assess the situation and understand why he needs it, is he ready for it. That's all.
Marriage, like love, is a very controversial thing, in fact it is an irrational desire to possess and possess.
It is not necessary at all - it is rather an interest in another person as a person. Common interests, character traits, etc. In essence, love is a more advanced version of friendship. Not to be confused with passion and love.
The word "romance" is applied to this and endowed with an aura of mysterious and wonderful feeling.
Undeniably beautiful, but not mysterious - a set of chemical processes, I think you know that.
EVIL PLAYER
What do you mean by that?
Alexey Chichigin
After the marriage, everything is the same, only the cough is still empty and the big fat
cranberry is sitting on the TV set ...
Gauguin
I understand your train of thought.
"How is it to impose?"
Everything is simple here. To impose is when to impose.
"The conspiracy theory ... the authorities are hiding ... society is beneficial - we have already gone through all this."
Happy for you. I also went through this. Fortunately, I passed by, just like this time. You can hide your conspiracy theory beneficial to society from the authorities and further.
"Sounds more like paranoid delusions than real arguments."
Inattention. The basis of unwillingness to perceive is inattention. "To marry or not is a matter of taste and personal preference." Is it possible to conclude from this that I am going to persuade or dissuade someone? And you say: arguments. In favor of what? Or to the detriment? Or maybe I defend a specific point of view? Or maybe you are mistaken?
You can consider me paranoid if you have every reason to do so.
"What does a person need their brains for?"
I still can't figure it out. Believe - don't believe.
"Not to be confused with passion and love."
I'll try.
"Indisputably beautiful, but not mysterious - a set of chemical processes, I think you know that."
We know for sure that we do not know anything for certain. Too few people in the world are able to decompose this "totality" into separate elements, to form connecting links between the process and its manifestations in the form of emotions and experiences. And even fewer of those who are capable of combining (and this is the most interesting!). So it is clearly not for you and me to talk about the nature of the aggregates of chemical reactions in the brain (unless, of course, you have the title of Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the field of organic chemistry and biochemistry).
Gauguin
Their brains to a man what? If he marries / does not marry, then he must firmly weigh the pros and cons, assess the situation and understand why he needs it, is he ready for it. That's all.
You seem to be the guy's arguments above, you called it nonsense, but you yourself didn't go far ... or rather, didn't go at all. Those. here are all the young people who marry, obviously out of their own stupidity, and then part after a few months, obviously weighing everything, right? And since there are a lot of such cases, we can talk about the absence of a brain. You seem to have said the truth, but you yourself believe in it? You personally, you might not screw it up, but we're not talking about you personally, right?
Wing42
Marriage, like love, is a very controversial thing, in fact it is an irrational desire to possess and possess. Individually. Absolutely. The word "romance" is applied to this and endowed with a halo of mysterious and beautiful feeling.
He spoke as a true misanthrope. Also confirm my phrase that devotion is a tool for using a person for their own purposes. And then everything is clear with you. But I think you will confirm my phrase ... because marriage is a desire to own. And if to own, then to use, right? And power is nothing more than the ability of the subject to force the object to fulfill the will of the first. And the only mistake is yours is that it is not at all an irrational possession, but quite rational. Let's start with you ontology, what is irrationality? This is the opposite of rationality, i.e. reason. And feelings are opposite to reason. It is impossible to own a person on the basis of feelings. It is only possible to manipulate him, but this already speaks of a lack of feelings, right? Or am I missing something?
Why are you here divorced, to marry, not to marry, we nerds, it still does not threaten, so relax.
Garrus-1994
Said like a true misanthrope.
This is not true.
"Also confirm my phrase that loyalty is a tool for using a person for their own purposes. And then everything is clear with you."
This is not true. Loyalty is a much more interesting thing than just a trap or a tool (weapon). After all, a person can be devoted not only to a person. Ideals, ideas, Fatherland, their position in life, and much more. The unwillingness to see the forests for the trees does not in the least cancel the fact of its existence.
Is everything clear with me? That's wonderful, that's figured out.
"Or am I missing something?"
Yes. Firstly, the possibility, and secondly, you misunderstood me. But I will not grieve over this, and if you say that it is impossible to control a person on the basis of feelings, then it means that this is really so. Feelings and emotions I see only as an initiating mechanism that forms the desire to own and possess. Such a desire, based on a foundation of feelings and emotions, from the point of view of common sense seems to me extremely doubtful and, based on this, irrational. But you're right anyway, you can't help but admit it, ha.