Why It's Better to be Single

[~sabaisabai~]

want to marry jiu marry
want to stay single jiu single

discuss so much for what

this is forum, for discussion.. lol lol

 

[TopGun]

I have nothing more to add. Just repeating. When there is a lust, there is a desire for the opposite gender.

To satisfy the lust. Unless you want to use a dog.

Whatever the reasons, can't find, can't get along, dun want to merry, phobia, misogyny, psychological vs biological, self gratification etc does not change it.

Have a think

When there is lust, there could be a corresponding desire to act on it, be it via self, via an opposite or same gender, or other means.

It does not necessarily mean a desire to have a partner and marry.

Let's recall. I said that not everyone is built the same, and it's not always better to have a partner. Your counter to this is that everyone experiences lust and therefore desire for a partner.

To disprove you, I only need to show that lust does not always lead to a desire for a partner, which I have done.

I also note that you have not substantiated this statement "doesn't take away the fact it is always better to have a partner." Unless you mean that it's always better to have a partner since we all have lust and therefore having a partner helps with that.

 

[~sabaisabai~]

Rubbish video.

Cannot eat grapes, say grapes sour.

Single is sibeh lonely.

Find the right partner, one expert say it is happiness x 2, sadness ÷ 2.

even married can be lonely too
no such thing as perfect partner, cos human is never perfect
just need to constantly mutually adjust and accommodate to each other
the world is changing all the times, thus human also will change..
i do see some of my colleagues, also quite lonely even have spouse and children
not everyone is suitable for marriage life vice versa single life not meant for everyone
so it is to each of their own.
perhaps to you single is lonely but to single they are very happy cos they enjoying their freedom
loneliness is very subjective leh

 

[helloicanseeu]

Talking about 'fairytale'.

I have a 60 yo high-flyer friend recently fell in love with a mid-30 man she met via online app. I recongised it as a love scam but she is so into the relationship that I have to keep my mouth shut (she is a highly intelligent woman).

Then I told her recently I watched the below movie which I find it's nice:

60yo still falling in love ... hmm ... how to read that?

 

[TheApathetic]

Why need so much justification to be/do something.
want then just do it.

 

[mummynew]

60yo still falling in love ... hmm ... how to read that?

Have.

Like last year I attended an ex-schoolmate's lavish fanciful wedding. She (divorcee) is about 60 yo and husband (widower) close to 70. Both second marriage and with own adult kids. Both look physically very fit and well off in their own means. Can see her husband doting her like a princess (60 yo princess!).

So 'fairytales' do exist.

 

[MoeLanYong]

When there is lust, there could be a corresponding desire to act on it, be it via self, via an opposite or same gender, or other means.

It does not necessarily mean a desire to have a partner and marry.

Let's recall. I said that not everyone is built the same, and it's not always better to have a partner. Your counter to this is that everyone experiences lust and therefore desire for a partner.

To disprove you, I only need to show that lust does not always lead to a desire for a partner, which I have done.

I also note that you have not substantiated this statement "doesn't take away the fact it is always better to have a partner." Unless you mean that it's always better to have a partner since we all have lust and therefore having a partner helps with that.

You found an alternative to satisfy your lust. The first principle is a life partner via a wife.

I don't demean people who find ways around it. It's your personal choice as I have said earlier.

I am addressing the concept from the pov of creation, that man and women were created to need/want each other. Else there will be no Eve. Just Adam.

 

[TheITGuy]

Marriage will only be happy when both parties core values overlaps like 99%…

 

[CanIsayNo]

what are basic fundamental values of marriage?

One basic fundamental is.. having each other’s back. Sounds simple enough but it is alarming when you speak to people and many of them acknowledge that deep inside they know their spouse will not stand by them when things get rough. If even this fundamental value is not there, the marriage has no legs.

 

[A Better Tomorrow]

When basic need to connect via secks, is not met, it is a matter of time when the marriage collapses.

Giving the benefit of doubt to folks who are not fluent in English language, telling your spouse that you are annoyed and unable to reason well, is not an excuse to fall negotiation.

If you want something, ask. Vice versa, dont assume that having the 'upper' hand does not make you a winner.
Sometimes, the other person wants to see how willing you are to change. No effort invested, sorry, my door is open and you can walk out anytime.

Time is too precious to spend on people who use emotions to validate the things they do and it makes the person blind to make things work.

 

[Notbbfa]

prefer to have alot me time

attached also can have 'me time' no....? some hobbies overlap maybe do tgt save time

 

[TopGun]

You found an alternative to satisfy your lust. The first principle is a life partner via a wife.

I don't demean people who find ways around it. It's your personal choice as I have said earlier.

I am addressing the concept from the pov of creation, that man and women were created to need/want each other. Else there will be no Eve. Just Adam.

Man and woman need each gender to reproduce. But need =/ want.

Your first principle is not necessary my first principle nor is the concept of Adam and Eve universally accepted. If you are coming from a theological perspective, then say so from the beginning as it becomes pointless to debate when not everyone shares the same doctrinal beliefs as you.

I say again. While lust is a biological function, the desire for marriage and a partnership is not universal to all. So having a partner is not Always better.

 

[mickey88]

More like self consolation thread

 

[tomsss]

ppl nowadays here need to seek validation to live life

see if its worth doing or not, will kenna judged or not, it is something that every one else is doing or not, cannot decide ownself. i mean can decide, but keep doubting ownself cos dun wan to be seen as the odd one out

then got videos and influencers cloud your mind, make you confuse. end up most ppl just give in to the crowd and follow

 

[Lchlch]

Why?
Less suffering.
Less attachment.

 

[MoeLanYong]

Man and woman need each gender to reproduce. But need =/ want.

Your first principle is not necessary my first principle nor is the concept of Adam and Eve universally accepted. If you are coming from a theological perspective, then say so from the beginning as it becomes pointless to debate when not everyone shares the same doctrinal beliefs as you.

I say again. While lust is a biological function, the desire for marriage and a partnership is not universal to all. So having a partner is not Always better.

This is a forum. People exchange views. We may not necessarily agree, and most don't here. But the intellectual get to see the other pov. The dumb become rude and cast aspersions. I hear your pov and I have shared my pov, detailing it from the root concepts. We can agree to disagree, and be cordial.

Man was created to require a companion. Eve was the companion. You have evolved it to using women to satisfy your lust and not wanting to merry. That's fine. I am happy you are happy.

I have chosen the other path. Merried 25 years and steel in love. I will just say it is beautiful. She completes me.

Just arrived in Jeju 1 hour ago. Now at a cafe. A picture just for you.



I wish you happiness in whatever your choice : )

 

[FORSTA]

This is a forum. People exchange views. We may not necessarily agree, and most don't here. But the intellectual get to see the other pov. The dumb become rude and cast aspersions. I hear your pov and I have shared my pov, detailing it from the root concepts. We can agree to disagree, and be cordial.

Man was created to require a companion. Eve was the companion. You have evolved it to using women to satisfy your lust and not wanting to merry. That's fine. I am happy you are happy.

I have chosen the other path. Merried 25 years and steel in love. I will just say it is beautiful. She completes me.

Just arrived in Jeju 1 hour ago. Now at a cafe. A picture just for you.



I wish you happiness in whatever your choice : )

uncle you got how many chewren?

 

[MoeLanYong]

uncle you got how many chewren?

4, sir.

 

[TopGun]

This is a forum. People exchange views. We may not necessarily agree, and most don't here. But the intellectual get to see the other pov. The dumb become rude and cast aspersions. I hear your pov and I have shared my pov, detailing it from the root concepts. We can agree to disagree, and be cordial.

Man was created to require a companion. Eve was the companion. You have evolved it to using women to satisfy your lust and not wanting to merry. That's fine. I am happy you are happy.

I have chosen the other path. Merried 25 years and steel in love. I will just say it is beautiful. She completes me.

Just arrived in Jeju 1 hour ago. Now at a cafe. A picture just for you.



I wish you happiness in whatever your choice : )

I am happy to keep this intellectual but your conclusion relies on a non-sequitur.

You state that because man was created for companionship (premise A), my distinction between lust and partnership means I am 'using' women (conclusion B). The logic does not hold. Nice try there though, throwing in a false dilemma (using the biblical 'eve' model), and then stating that I am 'using' woman for lust.

Acknowledging that lust is a biological baseline that does not always evolve into a desire for marriage is not a moral failing; it is a distinction between an impulse and a choice. To equate different relationship goals with exploitative behavior is a flaw in reasoning, not a reflection of my actual views.

To be very clear, you have conflated 'not wanting to marry' with 'using women.' These are not the same thing. 'Using' implies treating a person as an object for one-sided gain. Recognizing that sexual attraction (lust) can exist independently of the desire for a life partner (companionship) is simply accurate psychological observation. Very sneaky of you to try frame me in a bad light.

I don't have a picture for you but have fun at Jeju nevertheless.

PS. The dumb become rude, I am happy you are happy, hallmarks of passive-aggressiveness. Time and again this has showed up and I am not surprise by it.

 

[mummynew]

Relationship concepts have always been evolving as society and human needs change over time. I am of the opinion that we need to evolve with changes instead of sticking to the 'norm'.

My girl chatted with me ytd about her visit in one of the museums that shows the lives of women in Europe in the 16th century. That time men kept mistresses secretly as their customs couldn't allow more than one wife. So the discussion went on to talk about the fates of women as a lower class human being, how King Henry VIII 'invented' Protestantism to allow him to divorce, how Chinese system was actually 'better' coz it encouraged / allowed 三妻四妾 (and concubines generally have better lives than kept mistresses), etc. The conclusion was we were both glad that I had the chance to attend school (my time girls could still be denied schooling in a poor family) and she had the chance to do as she wishes, and that we are both in the more modern era than to be 'lower class status' compared to men.

Live lives with open minds. Respect everyone, esp our kids, as unique individuals, and that there are many roads that can lead to Rome instead of insisting that the path one has taken seems to have reached Rome and therefore the others should follow the same.