Sex and relationships: a practical consideration

Originally Posted by Monkey King

Everybody knows it deep down, and this is hardly a new concept, but nobody is rich off it because people don't want to hear it. They much prefer the popular superstition of love being this magical force that overcomes all obstacles and hardships, and that each romance is a unique, delicate, beautiful things. People do not give up their superstitions easily; it forces them to critically evaluate their world, and the world is often a scary place. Far better to hide in your little safe place of misconceptions and half-truths.

I know I'm probably just spinning my wheels here, trying to beat people about the head and shoulders with the facts in the desperate hope they'll spontaneously stop being foolish. But it's far worse to stand there silently in the face of such raw ignorance and not try to speak up.

Honestly? I don't even care about the topic. I'm just trying to shake people up and put some honest thought into all these preconceptions everyone takes for granted. You can't just judge relationships by statistics and known behaviors? Why? Nobody ever asks why anymore, and that's the problem.

Firstly, trying to define a 100% purely subjective matter is... somewhat off. However, I would also think it foolish were anyone to argue that there is no basis for that of statistics; of course statistics have their grounding by virtue of their existence to begin with.

Alas, it wouldn't matter if scientists, lexicographers, God, or any varriant of a person, entity, organisation, or lack thereof went to try and define the topic of love, to which your argument did indeed shift to; they would have neither the standing or intellect to conclusively and universally do so. I think it's reasonable, in light of that, to shed whatever arguments are or were to ensue in light of that topic.

On a different note, it would be rather foolish to base any important life decision on statistics due to, once again, their nature alone. A statistic is a generalisation and they are sharply different then a conclusive definition. Surely, it would seem sensible to take the generalisations into acocunt, but to use it as the only factor upon which one's mode of thinking is to take place would seem rather limiting.

Jam it back in, in the dark.