Ok, ok, la primavera, bla bla bla.... Questo post non c'entra assolutamente.
Scorrendo su deviantART la gallery del bravissimo *davidkawena ho notato questa deviation.
Tra i commenti ne ho notato uno che mi ha colpito particolarmente. E leggendo un articolo scritto dalla stessa persona, mi sono fermata a pensare.
Il fatto che esistano uomini e donne, che siano due sessi differenti che si attraggono... ho sempre pensato che fosse una cosa naturale. La Natura ci ha fatto così, Dio fin dal principio ha creato il maschio e la femmina in modo che la specie potesse andare avanti. Ogni specie vivente in natura ha al suo interno un maschio e una femmina e per ogni specie vivente è naturale che il maschio e la femmina procreino.
Sono rimasta un po' sconvolta dal pensiero di questa persona (e sono sicura non è la sola) che è convinta che uomini e donne siano uguali a tal punto di non poter stare insieme, che praticamente (a mio parere) sceglie la solitudine perché è l'unica scelta che le è concessa, perché non è omosessuale e quindi non può stare con qualcuno del suo stesso sesso.
Gay o etero, secondo me l'amore è una cosa bellissima, non riesco davvero a concepire chi decide di privarsene.
La prima volta
04/05/08
Iscriviti a:
Commenti sul post (Atom)
37 commenti:
Che persona infinitamente triste, gli auguro di tutto cuore di poter cambiare!
questo personaggio, secondo me, semplicemente non ha ancora trovato la persona che gli fa sentire la primavera...
oppure, peggio ancora, è una persona non molto piacente e si nasconde dietro questa scusa... un po' come la volpe e l'uva... siccome non arriva a prendere l'uva, allora decide che fa schifo...
oppure, peggio due volte, ha qualche problema "fisico" e in tal caso mi dispiace...
Stefano, I can "change," but I don't want to. If I can be convinced my thinking is wrong, I'll probably change though.
dicheryl, perhaps I just don't view people as sex objects like you do?
Try attacking my reasons and not me. Kthx.
Alex, dicheryl wasn't attacking you... she was just perplexed like me and stefano. I'm really surprised and , I must say, also pleased that you read my post. I wasn't trying to raise a fight but I was just trying to understand your reasons.
Love is, in my opinion, the most important and valuable thing you can find in this world. I really can't understand why you reject it...
Teniamo conto che il ragazzo ha 16 anni, a quanto dice il suo profilo. Ognuno di noi a 16 anni aveva delle idee bislacche in testa, di cui era visceralmente convinto, e che poi ha cambiato. Lui sostiene che non c'è nulla nell'atteggiamento di donne e uomini che sia determinato esclusivamente dal genere a cui appartengono e che quindi non ci sono differenze tra gli uni e le altre. Dategli qualche anno di tempo e vedrete che si accorgerà di aver sbagliato di grosso :))
Ciao Tamina!!
La Giò
Again with the personal attacks. ZOMG I'M 16 THEREFORE I'M WRONG! How could I have not seen that before! You make a very convincing argument Anonimo.
Tama, I found your post here: http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en&scoring=d&partner=wordpress&q=link:http://asolis.net/
Feel free to comment on my post about anything you don't understand. I do have reasons, so if you think something is wrong with any of my reasons feel free to say what is wrong with it.
Alex, that's just my opinion, and if you want me to respect your opinion, you have to learn to respect mine.
I'm not trying to convince you that you're wrong, or that I'm right.
This is not a fight, I don't want to attack you, but I think that when you're 16 there are many things you have not seen yet, so you can't understand them like somebody who's a little older than you (especially when you talk about love and sex). Everyone bases his opinions on the own personal experience; in time, your experience will change and so will do your opinions.
There's no such thing as being right or wrong, there's only what each one of us feels is the right thing for them.
In my opinion, sexuality goes way beyond being just a physical instinct or an "innate desire to reproduce" as you call it. To me sex is a fundamental part of a much bigger thing — love.
That's why I'm sceptical about your views: I'm not concerned about you not being interested in sex for itself (that would be totally understandable), I'm only worried that this attitude, at such a young age, might lead you to not being able to love at all.
Sorry, I can't respect prejudice and ageism. That's like telling a black person, "You can't understand that slavery is OK because you're black. You'd understand if you were white though." I can't help that I'm 16; that's not my choice. I can form opinions based on reason regardless of my age, however.
"Everyone bases his opinions on the own personal experience; in time, your experience will change and so will do your opinions."
That's only true up to a point. For example, my parents both voted President Bush, and they're both fairly conservative. In fact, I recently found this book while looking through my old books from when I was younger: What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs? Yet I don't think I've ever really even believed in a god. While people's views may be influenced by their experiences, reason (hopefully) will determine people's views.
Stefano, I love my friends. :)
Come on, Alex, you perfectly know what stefano was saying... but you can't go on this way. We are trying to understand your reasons, but you don't explain them clearly... As I said, we are not attacking you or trying to change your mind.
Which reason did I not explain clearly?
And assuming I must be wrong on account of my age does amount to attacking me. Instead, attack my reasons.
That's like telling a black person, "You can't understand that slavery is OK because you're black. You'd understand if you were white though."
It's completly different: you WILL grow and you WILL see a lot af things you just don't even imagine right now. For example: a kid who doesn't know what love and sex are, what kind of "opinions based on reason regardless of his age" can have? You said you've never been in love or had sex: what are your opinions based on?? I would understand if somebody who was in love and had sex at least once would told me: "I tried, I dind't like it, I don't understand it and I don't need this, so I won't do it never again". But you're talking about things you don't know: that seems to me like speaking at random.
I think, but I'm not sure, that in time you will change your mind, I don't even care at least, I was only explaining my view because you misunderstood it first time.
But now, I think you DON'T WANT to understand, you're sure you're right so you will not accept any kind of arguments or different opinions, but yours.
I wish you to meet somebody who will change your mind, because when you're in love you became a better person, you feel better with yourself and with anybody else, love can give you something you will never find elsewhere. I wish you to feel this, at least once in your life.
Opinions are like ass holes: everyone has his own one, and each one stinks. (L. Frederiksen)
BTW, I think alex has good reasons. Why the **** shall we be the same? It could be beacause of his age, even if when you're 16 you're already sexually mature and are already thinking about it. I mean, "everyone" is in love when you're 16. Alex I'm with you. Even if I'm in love.
Mr. BDKX, ma lei non era quello che non leggeva i blog? *.*
Condivido la citazione di Lars, e per questo invitavo Alex a spegarsi meglio, sono seriamente incuriosita dalle sue idee perché per me è un'opinione nuova e ci tenevo a capire e saperne di più...
Anonimo, no its not different. While its true that I will become older, I can't help how old I am now just like a black person cannot help the color of their skin. If my reasons are valid, my age shouldn't matter, just as a black person can argue slavery is bad if their reasons are valid.
I don't have to experience it to argue against it. Do I have to try killing someone to argue that people shouldn't kill each other? No because I have reasons people shouldn't kill each other.
"But now, I think you DON'T WANT to understand, you're sure you're right so you will not accept any kind of arguments or different opinions, but yours."
Um, no, that's not true at all. I'm arguing about this because I want to see if there is anything wrong with what I think. You're the one who isn't willing to admit you might be wrong, so instead you argue that no matter what my reasons are, I can't be right because I'm 16.
If you want to start arguing against my reasons instead of saying I must be wrong because of my age, you can find my reasons here on my website.
Do I have to try killing someone to argue that people shouldn't kill each other? No because I have reasons people shouldn't kill each other
You have experienced life, that's why you know that killing each other it's wrong... you're example is a matter of experience, once again.
dicheryl, perhaps I just don't view people as sex objects like you do?
you don't know me at all... first, I need to say you I didn't mean to attack you, I simply guessed... since I don't know you I just can suppose.
I said expecially the last sentence because I strongly believe in the importance of physical part in love and relationships... we're made of flesh and hormones, not only of heart and mind...
Anyway, I can give you 3 reason [I have reasons, too] which can explain why I can't agree with you:
1. scientific
again, we're made of flesh and hormones... not only humans, but also animals have the characteristic of being attracted by something... this can be an idividual of the opposite sex, an individual of the same sex, an individual of a different age, an individual of another species, the person itself and maybe more...
that's why I said that it could be a "physical problem"... there wasn't irony in my sentence at all...
2. psychological
talking about Freud in few lines is quite impossible... but if you studied him you perfectly know what I'm talking about and why your opinion is totally against what he said...
3. sentimental/religious [if you wish]
love is the biggest gift of God/nature/whatever you believe in... and it's for everyone!
in the end, I gave you 3 reason that should explain why I don't believe in you... but at the same time I have to say you cannot have reasons about your opinion...
simply because love is irrational ;)
Diddy.... VIVA I VOMBATI! °°
evviva l'ammòre!
anche se sono single da un pezzo. -.-'
Ma alla fine fate un po' quello che volete, secondo me l'amore è una cosa splendida, mente anima e corpo! Non penso sia necessario dare ragioni o spiegazioni, è così santo cielo!
"You're the one who isn't willing to admit you might be wrong, so instead you argue that no matter what my reasons are, I can't be right because I'm 16"
exaclty.
I CAN'T admite I could be wrong because I WAS in love and I HAD sex, and I am perfeclty sure that I couldn't live without this two things anymore.
MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE IS MY REASON, that's what you didn't understand yet.
Dear Alex, you don't have REASONS, just THEORIES. That's the difference between what I say and what you say, and the difference between having personal experiences or don't have any. And I would say the same thing to a 30, or 40, or 120 years old person, believe me.
So, here are my reasons (again):
1- I know what love and sex are (by tring them both) and I know I couldn't live without them.
2- I see many differences between women and men, I think they are complementary - and two things, for being complementary, have to be absolutely different.
3- Love produces only good things. Hate produces fights, fear produces xenophobia and racism, evil feelings bring to violence. Not love. Love doesn't admit any kind of negative aspects, it's the good part of us, we express the best part of us with people we love. So, love is absolutely necessary, to balance the evil part (of us, of life, or world's equilibrium).
And I also have a theorie:
"I believe in God. God IS love. God WANTS people to fall in love, because, as I said before, love makes you a better person, and a happier person. Love is God's language, we feel Him not with our ears, but with our hearts."
I can't prove that God exists, so that's just a theorie. Completly different from the reasons above, wich I can prove one by one.
Ok, now that I repeated the same thing for the fifth time, I hope you got it. I can't explain my opinion better then this, I am pretty sure it's comprehensible, so if you will keep on protesting that I am attacking you for your age, I will have to infer that you don't have any other argument to contest my reasons.
Last thing: we can disagree. We don't have to have similar opinions, I don't want to force you to think like me, we can, at the end of this discussion, keep on having exaclty the same ideas we had before. You can tell me: "I still think I'm right, you didn't convince me", that's good for me. But please stop saying that only your reasons are "real" and what we answer is just prejudice and ageism. That's a very conceited view.
I still can not understand how you can have REASON about something IRRATIONAL...
I can't prove that God exists, so that's just a <
theorie.
God is not a theorie, God is faith... it's something you "feel"... it's completely different...
dicheryl guarda che io non sono mica Alex! Che fai rispondi a me adesso? :))))
Effettivamente non avendo un Identità e risultando come "Anonimo" forse sarebbe stato meglio firmare ogni commento...
Cmq grazie per avermi scambiata per una madrelingua :P
Anonimo, ma sei sempre la Giò?
Santo cielo tutto questo sta diventando troppo complicato per una piccola mente come la mia XD
eccerto che sono sempre io muahauhauhauahuah vabbè dai prometto che da ora in poi firmo ogni frase che scrivo ;)
*la frase sottostante è da leggersi come gli annunci degli sponsor in televisione*
Questo commento è stato postato da: La Giò
muahahahahah brava! XDDD
Lìüís ti quoto... e come ha detto luchino, viva l'amour, i vombati e abbasso le lame, santocielo! XD
ulalà 27 commenti tamins! il tipo è bello stranuccio eh! sapevi che anche io ho un blogspot *_* e l'ultimo commento è anche dedicato al nostro ammore *_* we love big gim *_*
santo cielo Melina, dici cose così e non mi lasci il link???? *____________________________*
dicheryl guarda che io non sono mica Alex! Che fai rispondi a me adesso? :))))
ecco perché mi sembrava che d'un tratto il tizio ci stesse dando ragione XDXD ma tra me e me ho pensato "si vede che non capisco più l'inglese" XD
"You have experienced life, that's why you know that killing each other it's wrong... you're example is a matter of experience, once again."
That's not true. I don't think people should kill each other because people may desire to live.
Basing what one thinks solely on experience and not reason leads to bad conclusions. Racists, for example, often justify their racism by saying the people who happen to be of a certain race always seem to act a certain way, such as stealing things. They don't rely on reason which might explain why many people act that way (e.g., how they were raised, where they were raised, and their quality of life). Instead, they come to ignorant conclusions based on their experience without any real thought put into their conclusions.
"you don't know me at all..."
I don't know you; I can just suppose.
"I said expecially the last sentence because I strongly believe in the importance of physical part in love and relationships... we're made of flesh and hormones, not only of heart and mind..."
Just because I'm made of flesh and hormones as well as other things doesn't mean those things are "me".
"1. scientific
again, we're made of flesh and hormones... not only humans, but also animals have the characteristic of being attracted by something... this can be an idividual of the opposite sex, an individual of the same sex, an individual of a different age, an individual of another species, the person itself and maybe more...
that's why I said that it could be a "physical problem"... there wasn't irony in my sentence at all..."
Well my body is attracted to females and, again, my body isn't "me" so I don't see any good reason why I should let my body's urges control my actions.
"talking about Freud in few lines is quite impossible... but if you studied him you perfectly know what I'm talking about and why your opinion is totally against what he said..."
I've read a little bit about him and I have some upperclassmen friends who have taken psychology. Based on what I know, Freud was batshit crazy. Needless to say, I don't care what Freud thought if he didn't give good reasons for it.
"love is the biggest gift of God/nature/whatever you believe in... and it's for everyone!"
I'd say it's just another human flaw that was useful for our evolution (helps to raise/protect children, encourages procreation, etc.), but that is otherwise negative, just like aggressiveness, for example.
"in the end, I gave you 3 reason that should explain why I don't believe in you... but at the same time I have to say you cannot have reasons about your opinion...
simply because love is irrational ;)"
Well, I do have reasons for my opinion, so obviously you're wrong here. If I didn't have reasons, I wouldn't hold this view.
"I CAN'T admite I could be wrong because I WAS in love and I HAD sex, and I am perfeclty sure that I couldn't live without this two things anymore."
So why in the world would you criticize me for not being able to admit I'm wrong when I'm more than willing to do so, and yet you aren't willing to?
"MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE IS MY REASON, that's what you didn't understand yet."
Personal experience isn't reason. If anything, personal experience harms one's ability to think objectively, as is true in your case where you say you would never be willing to admit your wrong.
"Dear Alex, you don't have REASONS, just THEORIES."
I'm not sure what you mean by "theories" here.
"So, here are my reasons (again):
1- I know what love and sex are (by tring them both) and I know I couldn't live without them."
Again, not a reason. Someone who uses drugs might say they can never live without them, but that's not a reason drugs are a good thing.
"2- I see many differences between women and men, I think they are complementary - and two things, for being complementary, have to be absolutely different."
I have female friends who contradict your over generalization, therefore you must be wrong. I also know I contradict your over generalization since I don't fit into your stereotype myself.
"3- Love produces only good things. Hate produces fights, fear produces xenophobia and racism, evil feelings bring to violence. Not love. Love doesn't admit any kind of negative aspects, it's the good part of us, we express the best part of us with people we love. So, love is absolutely necessary, to balance the evil part (of us, of life, or world's equilibrium)."
Hahah. I'm sorry to tell you this, but an equilibrium of "good" and "evil" is an incredibly silly notion. First of all, "evil" isn't necessary as you imply by saying there should be a balance of good and evil. There isn't a need for any fear, xenophobia, racism, etc. According to you, there should be just as much good as there is bad to maintain some arbitrary balance. I think having only good is something to strive for, not having as much good as bad.
Some bad things that result from love/human sexuality: sadness, fear, anxiety, drama, sexism, irrationality, physical abuse, etc.
"so if you will keep on protesting that I am attacking you for your age, I will have to infer that you don't have any other argument to contest my reasons."
I only protest you attacking me for my age when you attack me for my age. If you don't, I won't protest it.
"we can disagree. We don't have to have similar opinions, I don't want to force you to think like me, we can, at the end of this discussion, keep on having exaclty the same ideas we had before."
I don't want you to think like me either. I want to know why I'm wrong, that's all. This is merely a test to see if my reasons are valid.
"You can tell me: "I still think I'm right, you didn't convince me", that's good for me. But please stop saying that only your reasons are "real" and what we answer is just prejudice and ageism. That's a very conceited view."
Only when you respond to my reasons with ageism will I point out how you've failed to address my reasons and instead are being ageist. I don't know if my reasons are correct, but as far as I know they are. If I believed with absolute certainty that I was right, I probably wouldn't bother posting comments here.
"First of all, "evil" isn't necessary as you imply by saying there should be a balance of good and evil"
I didn't say evil is necessary, I said it exists.
And "fight for a world without evil" is as silly to me as my "equilibrium of good and evil" is to you.
I said you don't have reasons but theories because you're talking about things you don't really know. So, you can only have theories about that. You can suppose. Reasons are usually based on something more concrete.
Anyway, I'm tired of this discussion. As I said before, we can disagree, you can think what you want, have any opinion you want.
Per example: "I have female friends who contradict your over generalization, therefore you must be wrong" isn't correct, because something that's good or wright for me can be wrong for somebody else (as your female friends). So, if you are convinced that your opinions make you live better, or be happy, that means that they are right, for you. Not for me.
If this was just a way to test your convintions, it was useless: there are no universal truths, only opinions (and opinions change in time :P)
Ecco, mi sono di nuovo dimenticata di firmare!!
Il post di qui sopra è stato scritto dalla Giò
...
...... e anche questo
:)))
"I didn't say evil is necessary, I said it exists."
No, that's not what you said. You said, "So, love is absolutely necessary, to balance the evil part (of us, of life, or world's equilibrium)."
This implies there needs to be a "balance" of things you believe to be good and evil, meaning just as much evil should exist as there is good.
"And "fight for a world without evil" is as silly to me as my "equilibrium of good and evil" is to you."
I didn't say "fight for a world without evil". What I said is that humans should strive for only having "good".
"I said you don't have reasons but theories because you're talking about things you don't really know. So, you can only have theories about that. You can suppose. Reasons are usually based on something more concrete."
The word theory isn't used like that in English. In the non-technical, non-scientific sense, a theory sort of means an educated guess. Like if your car is missing you might have a theory that someone stole it when in fact it may have either been stolen, towed, or something else entirely. If I say, "I don’t want to let my body’s desire to reproduce control how I treat or think of others," that is a reason, not a theory. Reasons are causes for a view. Something can be a reason regardless of whether or not it is a valid reason.
"Per example: "I have female friends who contradict your over generalization, therefore you must be wrong" isn't correct, because something that's good or wright for me can be wrong for somebody else (as your female friends)."
Wow. Perhaps you should take into consideration what it was I was replying to?
You said, "2- I see many differences between women and men, I think they are complementary - and two things, for being complementary, have to be absolutely different."
My female friends are NOT absolutely different from my male friends and they are not any more "complementary" to males--whatever you mean by that--than my male friends are to my male friends or my female friends are to my female friends. Your over generalization is wrong and your reply had absolutely NOTHING to do with that fact.
"So, if you are convinced that your opinions make you live better, or be happy, that means that they are right, for you. Not for me.
If this was just a way to test your convintions, it was useless: there are no universal truths, only opinions (and opinions change in time :P)"
Unlike you, I don't base my views off what makes me happy or what makes me live better. While opinions change over time, I'm obligated to hold the view that, as far as I know, is the most reasonable at any given time, and also to test my reasons for that view against those who disagree with me.
I'm not going to keep checking back here, so if anyone in the future wants to argue this, feel free to comment on the original post at my site. Otherwise, it's unlikely I'll see your comment, at least immediately.
Posta un commento