I love nice smelling pretty pussy religiously .... works every time. Oh that pussy. Let's fuck real good, love love, so nice  .... Thanks pussy cat  .... what's your name, come back again, let's practice lustful godly pleasure .... fast and slow .... Oh yeah, more more .... My thing loves your attention .... feels good .... I like it .... Yum.

      .... pussy can taste real good .... I love girls so very much  .... Cpt is a tease, thanks for waking me up .... What's that hole for .... let me show ya .... please please .... be a good girl, we will have fun fun fun ..... if we can not fall stupidly in love .... I like your Pink ....

A study , what I am, as I AM GOD as YOU ....

Still...You turn me on

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGNm67kFods&feature=related

 Pink Me , mess with me ....

U and Ur Hand

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DowvJ6h1WnM

   Do me good .... let me have my fun, give me your honey, entertainment, uh hu ....

 

if love is delusional then tears are delusional.

I suppose one could deny the cause of one's wet cheeks and deceive themselves into believing that it is raining on a sunny day.

Being in love is delusional to the extent that you overlook or never notice things about the one with whom you are infatuated. Even worse is when it is one-sided and you have an unwarranted infatuation that you think is being in love while the other person has no clue you exist. Especially in the latter case the person is completely deluded. As someone who has been around for awhile I have been "in love" at least 9 times where it was mutual. All have ended when I/her discovered we had no idea who the fuck the other person really was.

  

 

I think you need to spend more time experiencing for yourself the fun and excitement of relationships. I respect your understanding of many complex issues where you have shown exceptional brilliance at times. You can literally kick my ass at physics as I am but a lowly R and D engineer.  As with many scientific studies you really need  to do real world experimentation on the subject of "being in love" for real understanding.

 

Hookers demonstrate the principle of supply and demand works even with sex. As pointed out anyone can have sex without being in love. I currently advocate only being "in lust" as I have done marriage, long term girlfriends, and the in love thing enough in my life. Though you never know when it will go from one phase to another learning to control your emotions and desires is key to better fulfillment for the individual.

 

I've been in probably the most powerful emotional storm of my life for the past two years now and it doesn't seem to be over yet. That is, the ex girlfriend that I've brought up many times on these boards...

The "honeymoon phase" explanation doesn't quite fit my experience, as this is an ongoing emotional state, and I have to say, that by my own definition at least, I am still very much in love.

However, I have not during most of this emotional storm suspended my thoughts on the subject.

I surround myself with alot of friends and family, who understand me and how I think, and who consider it their duty, as people who love me, to tell me their honest oppinion about me and my behavior, regardless of wether it hurts my feelings.

So I have never been in short supply of occassions to examine my emotions critically.

If the definition of insanity is: To attempt the same approach again and again, while expecting different results, then I can honestly say that I am in no way insane.

Because while I have certainly attempted the same approach again and again with regards to my ex-girlfriend, I have at no time expected a different result...

I have always known exactly how things would go: I would seduce her with my self-confidence, honesty, and my sexual charisma, and we have a few months of passion, until she becomes worried that I am too lazy, and too hedonistic, to be the kinda knight-in-shining-armour, with ferocious ambition, and a large pocketbook, that she, in her youthful naivete, still expects to end up with.

But I have made the conscious calculation that my emotions are what they are, and that I may as well indulge them when possible, since I have the choice of loving her in absentia, and suffering the emotional fall-out of the loniless that that entails, or suffer the emotional fallout of her dumping me, and then missing me, and succuming to me again, only to dump me again.

During this whole process I was keenly aware of what emotional damage I was inflicting on myself, and on her, and took steps to avoid that which I believed was too dangerous for both of us.

I stay completely honest with myself, and as honest with her as my vanity allows.

I hope my vanity doesn't extend very far, because my vanity is based on my ego, and my ego is based on the foundation that I am a very honest person, who is not afraid to admit when he's wrong, especially not to himself. (of course, I could be deluding myself about that, but that is a different matter)

All in all I would say that I am being perfectly rational, while also acknowledging that my emotions are counterproductive to my hopes for a beautiful, perfect relationship. After all it is that acknowledgement that makes me rational, not my subsequent actions.

Because those actions would only be irrational if I held the belief that: "doing thing that are counterproductive to my hopes for a beautiful, perfect relationship is wrong", and I don't hold that belief.

I hold the belief that if the woman who can "save" me from this current, less than ideal, emotional state came along tomorrow, I would notice her, and I would focus my attention on her, and until that, I may as well make the best of my less than perfect situation.

In the beginning, I would honestly think that she and I would someday be in a perfect, blissful state of love-that-asks-for-nothing-in-return, once we had conquered our mutual differences, but this lasted all of two months, until we hit our first major bump in the road.

But for those two months I suppose I was somewhat delusional, but not in a way that was impervious to rational argument, had I heard any, so not a very effective delusion.

 

And just for the record, I may be an interesting case study, but I'm not suggesting that everyone is just like me. Some may be considerably less emotional than me, and others may be less rational.

There are a few chemicals that have been implicated in feelings of love, but you're probably thinking of oxytocin.  It's most strongly implicated in maternal instincts, as it is released in large doses during labor after the distension of the cervix and vagina.  However, in studies with mice, and a few dealing with social recognition and bonding in humans, it's becoming more certain that it does play a significant role in long term sexual bonding as well.

Serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrin have all been implicated in the short term lust and infatuation stage of attraction.  These might actually be more of what you're thinking of in terms of the blindness to shortcomings and faults.

 

No.  Not seeing flaws isn't a belief.  It's a lack of perception.  You can't believe something of which you're unaware.

That's a belief, and is usually wrong.  However, note that some people do stay married until they die.  If anything, we could say that many people overestimate the odds against love conquering all.  That, I suppose, is a belief.  However, I think you'd be hard pressed to make the case that this is the central delusional belief in a delusional disorder.  I suppose it can be, but ordinarily, people don't have really huge life-altering changes in their personality because they believe they'll be married forever.  If you told most people -- with near certainty -- that they'll probably end up divorced in twenty years, and for whatever reason, they believed you, they'd probably still get married.  In other words, I just don't see the belief in the permanence of love or marriage as having a significant effect on most people's day to day life, although I'm certainly willing to entertain the idea if you can support it.

I've found that the only people who believe this are the young and the religious or pseudo-religious.  I'd attribute such beliefs to larger delusional beliefs.  For those of us who don't see any purpose in the universe, and recognize the true random nature of sexual reproduction, it's pretty hard to substantiate any kind of real belief in "the one." 

Also, Pineapple, please consider that people aren't stupid.  They know how far the truth is likely to get them.  If anything, I think many people sort of knowingly substitute romantic language about "soul mates" for the much less romantic truth that they believe -- "This one's probably as good as I'm ever going to get."

Consider, which of the following monologues is more likely to end in a steamy sexual congress:

1) "Baby, you're the best ever.  You're the most beautiful woman in the world to me.  We're soul mates.  We were meant to find each other.  I will never need anything except your love."

2) "Baby, you're probably the best I'm ever going to be able to get.  You're the most beautiful woman I think I'm capable of getting who also has enough suitable qualities such as intellectual compatibility and shared life goals.  The odds are very slim that anyone better looking than you will ever be attracted to me."

This one... yeah.  I'm just about willing to call this a full blown delusion.

Note, though... this is not love that's delusional.  It's the belief regarding love.

 

Haha, that's 100% pure panty peeler right there that is, mmmhmmm. If you followed that up with

"In fact, I've calculated my chances using a complex Bayesian analysis and proven that there is only a 6.31x10^-8 percent chance plus or minus 1x10^-9 of me ever hooking up with someone better than you. Let's get married."

hoo buddy, you're gonna get some TO-NIGHT!

So the whole "I go to Hooters for the chickens wings" thing is bunk?

 

 

You know, their wings aren't that good and I don't fuck girls or find them sexually attractive, but I still go to Hooters once in a while.  What's it about Hooters?

I wonder how big the average tip is at Hooters?

 

 

 

 

Guys need something to do while prepping for the next page.

 

I've never even seen a Hooters. Except in a movie maybe. > >

 

 

Well, the universe is expanding. I believe it's called the Viagra model.

Bloodhound Gang....forgot all about these guys!

I liked their "One Fierce Beer Coaster" CD.

And if i remember right, they let Michael Moore use one of the songs from that disc for his movie F 9/11....don't think they charged him any dough, either.

 

 

So is love a delusion?It’s actually a great question. I think that when you are falling in love you are literally drug addled, and your perceptions are suspect. At the same time, I think that once you get past that stage and into the attachment part of the relationship it’s really hard to tell. Until I was able to find someone who I could really join with in a meaningful and committed  partnership, I was always dissatisfies and always looking. This was a huge drain on my energy, and I have become freer in other areas of my life because I know I’m with someone who I can trust and who has my back. For this reason, I think that courting is highly underrated in our culture. People need to court so that they can fall in love, get over it, and find out what they are really working with. Rituals around this process are really important. I wish I had been more deliberate in my courting as a young man – I might have suffered less.Ok enough autobiography.If you look at the research by Helen Fisher, she describes 3 reproductive emotional systems in the brain. Lust, Love and Attachment.Of the 3 certainly love is the one where you are most likely to become delusional. But it is a temporary insanity – love comes and goes. Even in this ideal relationship that I am in now, there are times when I am totally gaga about my partner, and there are times when I find that she gets on my nerves. Those feelings of intense bonding, of obsession with her and of sexual jealousy come and go. They are part of the emotional program that I am running in the context of our relationship, and they are clearly an evolutionary adaptation to keep me focused on one woman so that I will make babies and stick around and raise them.The rational part of my brain knows this. But It also knows that I am not really a rational creature. Being rational is one of the survival tricks that I have, it is not who I am, it is what I do. Who I am is a gene survival and transmission machine, and falling in love is one of the other tricks that I do.   In fact one can argue that it is a MUCH more important trick than being rational from my gene’s point of view. If delusion is one of the prices for gene transmission, then certainly it is a cheap price to pay, but I think my autobiography above attests to the fact that my genes care nothing for my personal happiness, as a gene transmission machine. So there you go.Hamby is right of course (as usual). The technical definitions of a delusion are not met by the “illusions of love,” and clearly a specific brain process is going on in the process of love that is qualitatively different than a delusional state. Still, it cannot be denied that the state of mind of love is one in which selective perception and poor reality testing are the norm. So here is an idea that I had a while ago, and I want to finish out the last post here by brining the thread back around to the topic of religion.I have this idea that addiction is a misfiring of the love processes of the brain. People stimulate the pleasure centers of their brain and then the “fall in love” with their drug of choice and it becomes the primary relationship in their life, then they become attached to this drug and will actually suffer loss and bereavement when they are separated from their drug (in addition to withdrawal of course). This process is not unlike the process of having a fuck buddy, then falling in love with them, and then grieving when the relationship implodes. People who are in love will abandon or betray their own children, and even lay down their lives for their lover, and the same can be said of drug addicts. This leads me to believe that the brain systems that are in charge of falling in love drive a lot of the addict’s behavior as well.

 

 I'm really interested in reading the next two types, Susac.

I'd like to make a couple of preliminary observations, though.  First, I'm just going to copy and paste from another thread:

Sorry for the length, but I think it's important to get all of that in mind before going on.  I've been married before, but only once.  To repeat your disclaimer, don't take this as bragging, but I feel like I learned my lesson the first time.  I've been divorced now for well over a decade, and except for a couple of low periods that had very little to do with where I was putting my penis, I've never felt like my life was less empty for not having a wife.  Then again, I'm definitely not an INTP, so I wouldn't expect your life to be much like mine in that regard.  I am a strong E, and make new friends very easily.  Typically, when I'm at home by myself it's because I want to be, not because I don't have anyone to call.

Curiously, my previous lengthy relationship (5 years-ish) was with a very attractive redhead who also happens to be bat shit crazy.  The more distance I get, the more I'm convinced she's a borderline sociopath, but that's neither here nor there.  Just interesting, I suppose.

Anyway, what I hope you're getting from all of this is that I believe one of the cruelest myths about humans is that love is forever.  It's not.  It's something that changes over time.  Sometimes, people enter our lives and leave them, and though we wouldn't want them back, we treasure the time we had with them.  Despite the fact that my marriage ended badly (she cheated on me -- a lot.) I would not trade the five good years with her even if I had to relive the one bad one.  We were amazing friends and very good lovers.  We just outgrew each other and went in different life directions.  Still, we were great for each other for that short time in both our lives.

As another autobiographical note, after I was divorced, I was not prepared to have a close relationship with a woman for some time.  I was very young, and my emotions were far from clear, and I had yet to own up to my own mistakes in the marriage.  During this time, I made friends with a remarkable young woman who visited her grandmother every couple of months.  The rest of the time, she lived over five hours from me.  I feel sorry for her grandmother because for most of a year, her visits included a perfunctory hello to her family followed by two or three days of pure physical lust with me.  Neither of us was ready for a relationship, but both of us needed the physical intimacy which had been suddenly removed from our lives.

After a year, it became obvious that our need for each other had waned and that we were both ready to move on.  We parted as friends, and as the years passed, we saw each other from time to time -- sans the horizontal mambo -- and were both thrilled to learn that we had each found ourselves in better emotional places.  In the same way that I wouldn't trade my time with my ex-wife, I wouldn't trade my time with this girl, who was obviously a rebound.  In fact, I'd suggest that we handled the situation very maturely, realizing that we were using each other for what we needed, but being ok with the arrangement.

I could recount my whole romantic history for you, but that's not the point.  I give these two illustrations because one is traditional and the other is not, and yet the result is the same.  During one part of my life, I found what I was currently ready for.  During another, I found what I needed.  Humans are not designed to have lives that perfectly parallel the life of a single soul mate.  We are dynamic creatures that change over time.  This is why we all tend to have stories of various loves that have come and gone.

This is normal.

As you can tell from my comments on monogamy, it is also reasonable that some people choose to have more than one sexual relationship at a time, and their partners are fine with it.  Kinsey was right... some people really do like both sexes, and it seems odd that because of a convention we would make everyone "settle" for one.  There are tons of other variations on monogamy, obviously, but the point is that it is backward thinking to suggest that everyone conform to a certain sexual ideal.  The more we learn about the science of human sexuality, the more we learn that there are lots of ways that people can find sexual, emotional, and romantic happiness.  Expecting ourselves -- just out of principle -- to be the exception rather than the rule is selfish and silly.

 

 

 Gosh, I'm having a brain fart.  Somebody I've read has postulated the same thing about drugs/love.  It's a really interesting idea, although it certainly opens up several more areas of inquiry.

1) Do humans have (by way of metaphor) so many points of "addiction" to spread around?  That is, if someone has a metaphoric limit of a hundred addiction points, does that mean that once his brain has committed to a "relationship" with alcohol for 30 points, Suzy for 60 points, and work for 10 points, does he have no room for commitment left in his life?

2) Is the "love" felt by a heroine addict for his girlfriend quantitatively different than that of a teetotaler?  We should one day be able to answer this question rather definitively with new brain scan technology.

3) How much capability do people have for spreading love around?  I know plenty of women who keep a really hot boy toy for sex and have two or three less physically desirable nerds around for intellectual stimulation only (much to the dismay of the nerds!)  How far can we spread our emotional needs and still expect to have consistent contentment?

I must say that I think it's probably better to spread oneself around a little bit.  As an example, my current girlfriend sometimes gets down on herself because she feels like she doesn't have enough educational background to keep me interested in deep philosophical conversations.  The thing is, I have friends for that.  I don't need those discussions as part of our relationship, and in fact, it's really nice for me to be able to relax, have a beer, and NOT talk about religion or philosophy for a while.

Supposing that this relationship came to an end, I could still call up my friends and have deep conversations.  Those women I mentioned?  If either their boyfriend or their conversation date leaves them, they still have quite a lot.  The question becomes whether the sum of the parts is greater than the whole.  That is, when we get everything from one person (supposing that's really possible) do we get a greater happiness than if we get everything we need from three people?

I am coming to doubt whether it's good to get everything from one person.  You and I both know the dangers of codependency, and how easy it is for people to literally abandon all their friends when they've decided they've found "the one."  As you say, courting more would probably be a good thing, as courting is traditionally a rather public affair.

In fact, historically, the idea of getting total satisfaction from our mate is very recent.  One must question whether it's founded on ideology or fact.

 

 I'm not a big fan of the "points metaphor" either, but I do wonder if it has limited use.  Another metaphor that comes to mind is the brain as a computer.  It's flawed on a lot of levels, but most people have a basic understanding of how computers work, and that they're based on binary, so it becomes useful if not completely accurate.

For instance, you mention that many addicts essentially get points on credit.  Is that not equivalent to saying they have a certain number of points but extend themselves past their limit to their own detriment?

Like I said, it's just a metaphor for illustration, and I don't think neurologists will ever discover such a set limit.  Clearly brains are plastic enough to change significantly over a lifetime.  However, for someone battling addiction, it seems an easy illustration to show them that they're devoting so much of their energy to their addiction that they are losing a lot from other sources of "healthy addiction."

I suppose in the end it really does come down to time and energy, of which there are real limits -- points, if you like.  If I have to work two jobs to afford my drug habit that takes up another thirty hours, there simply isn't much time left.  Similarly, I'm spending all my energy.

I do see an awful lot of people using religion as a surrogate relationship, and I agree with you that it's useful to some people, particularly those fighting chemical addiction.  Astute readers will notice that I never say religion is useless or has no practical value.  I just say it causes far more harm than good.  Religion is very addictive in its own right, and the many negative consequences of buying into it outweigh the benefits of having a surrogate addiction.  Particularly when we're talking about people who have been poorly socialized in the first place (you are, of course, correct about the effects of teen addiction) it seems almost cruel to subject them to a religion that glorifies so many destructive beliefs and behaviors as does Christianity.

I also agree with you that self honesty is the most important thing for dealing with any kind of addiction.  Although, as an interesting little wrinkle, I'm sure you're aware of the well established finding that depressed people are often more aware of their own level of control over their environment than non-depressed people.  That is, many people blissfully go through life believing they're in control of themselves, and many depressed people realize just how little control they have.

Have you read my essay on free will?  I don't want to rehash much of that material, so if you haven't, give it a look and just apply that viewpoint to addiction, and you'll probably understand my position really well.

Free Will: Why we don't have it, and why that's a good thing.