Which is worse:
Love without lust or lust without love?
Edit: >.<>.<
Twitter Updates
Labels
- veganism
- research
- Film
- LGBTQ
- life update
- Drunkards Walk
- Reading Update
- cycling
- news
- social justice
- education
- music
- nonviolence
- peace
- politcal correctness
- probability
- protest
- randomness
- summer
- AIDS
- Aftereffect
- Christianity
- Christmas
- Chrome
- Firefox
- GLSEN
- NPR
- Ramadan
- Thats so gay
- This American Life
- Trans
- blogs
- class
- college
- food
- games
- intergroup dialogue
- procrastination
- publicity
- recording
- running
- typography
- web browser
Posts
© Copyright 2010 Life Barrels on like a Runaway Train
lust without love...love without lust i could handle, that's like a friendship, but lust without love? that's an empty commitment to me.
but hey, that's just my thoughts
and hey colin..
i love you. :D
~katy
I will fucking beat you if you continue to ask such stupid questions. You are smarter than that and know the answer.
i don't believe that love without lust is possible, if only because the subconscious cant handle not being attracted to the one you are romantically in love with so it brings the lust in. so i guess that means lust without love, though i really don't think that is bad. in sound it is horrible. but really all it means is that u are attracted to someone, you know think they are hot =p. and if thinking someone is physically attractive when u arent inlove with them is horrible, then you should just castrate yourself
-taran
In my opinion lust is not bad but love is far better. Lust can turn into love I guess, but not the other way round.
Lust without love - lust without love is a vice; love without lust is just a problem (assuming you're using lust to mean sexual attraction. Actual lust is a vice regardless of its circumstances)
Acutally, now that I think of it, neither one is really so bad. I love my brothers without lusting after them. I lust after what´s his face and I´m not in love with him. No-one´s getting hurt and it´s kinda groovy.
love without lust is way worse. lust without love is...just a fling. sex. everyone has those.
but love without lust- ouch. i'm assuming that you're not just saying like, platonic love- but romantic love. loving someone but not wanting them...that's just tragic.
-piper
The first one.
Defining Love and Lust would have helped. I'm assuming love in the romantic sense. Then, love without lust is way worse.
Lust is the first step in any serious relationship.
Love without lust is horrible. I say that with knowledge of just how bad it is. I'm currently in a relationship with one whom i love romantically but do not lust for. Saying it sucks is not even close to it. It creates a lose/lose situation.
Yeah, I was young, stupid, and a bit desperate. Man, that's a bad mix. Still paying for it.