Is the primary purpose of couples to breed? (43)
Ambrose2007: Then you wouldn't be bothered if your man thought of your primary value as being a "baby machine," Taino?
Just wanting to make sure...
Just wanting to make sure...
Baby Machine?
You must have me mistaken for someone else, I don't usally hang out with Neanderthals.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Brian67: Humans breed? well your right we are animals.
The first Primal purpose of any women is to fined financial security with the man she chooses to bare her young.
The first Primal purpose of any women is to fined financial security with the man she chooses to bare her young.
Yes, wheather the modern day woman likes it or not, she is still a "baby machine" ... fact. As in nature the female animal seeks out the stongest and most virile mate to obtain the best genes.
The male doesn't really care, he is programmed to procreate and move on to the next female! Nature doesn't want monogany, it needs diversity.(If you agree with Darwinian principles).
Us humans have learned that bonding in social groups or tribes brings greater security and caring for the young and old. Team work basically, which is rare elsewhere in nature. Religion helped to promote the family bonds and secure a united audience.
LTRs have developed from this and the primary purpose is to create a family. Any parent will know that the love for a child is different from that of a spouse. Most of us are here because we have lost what we thought was true love from a partner but are eager to go out and find another one, even better perhaps ! I don't think you get website for parents seeking a replacement for a child they might have lost. You can recover from lossing a lover, never a child.
Children must always take first place, they are the future, the next
packet of seeds, this is natures way.
------ This thread is Archived ------
RDM59: Yes, wheather the modern day woman likes it or not, she is still a "baby machine" ... fact. As in nature the female animal seeks out the stongest and most virile mate to obtain the best genes.
The male doesn't really care, he is programmed to procreate and move on to the next female! Nature doesn't want monogany, it needs diversity.(If you agree with Darwinian principles).
Us humans have learned that bonding in social groups or tribes brings greater security and caring for the young and old. Team work basically, which is rare elsewhere in nature. Religion helped to promote the family bonds and secure a united audience.
LTRs have developed from this and the primary purpose is to create a family. Any parent will know that the love for a child is different from that of a spouse. Most of us are here because we have lost what we thought was true love from a partner but are eager to go out and find another one, even better perhaps ! I don't think you get website for parents seeking a replacement for a child they might have lost. You can recover from lossing a lover, never a child.
Children must always take first place, they are the future, the next
packet of seeds, this is natures way.
The male doesn't really care, he is programmed to procreate and move on to the next female! Nature doesn't want monogany, it needs diversity.(If you agree with Darwinian principles).
Us humans have learned that bonding in social groups or tribes brings greater security and caring for the young and old. Team work basically, which is rare elsewhere in nature. Religion helped to promote the family bonds and secure a united audience.
LTRs have developed from this and the primary purpose is to create a family. Any parent will know that the love for a child is different from that of a spouse. Most of us are here because we have lost what we thought was true love from a partner but are eager to go out and find another one, even better perhaps ! I don't think you get website for parents seeking a replacement for a child they might have lost. You can recover from lossing a lover, never a child.
Children must always take first place, they are the future, the next
packet of seeds, this is natures way.
You made a very good point in this post, R!
Though I will point out that some younger parents have had another child to "replace" one that is lost. But overall, you're right. We seek to find another partner when one is lost for whatever reason, but not to replace a child, for we consider them to be irreplaceable.
------ This thread is Archived ------
The primary relationship is the parents, then the kids. I have four kids never married. Go figure. I have learned though to put the effort on the parents the kids will learn from example. The kids will flourish when the parents do.
------ This thread is Archived ------
How can you teach ur kids what true love is, if you love them more then ur partner?
My kids will recieve more protection but not more love.
My kids will recieve more protection but not more love.
------ This thread is Archived ------
tainogirl: Baby Machine? You must have me mistaken for someone else, I don't usally hang out with Neanderthals.
Well, my point is that if you view kids as primary, and think your lover/spouse should, too, then your primary role in a relationship is to procreate, no? Doesn't that logically follow?
Don't USUALLY hang out with Neanderthals? You mean, sometimes you do, and they're kinda hot?
------ This thread is Archived ------
heatherhuntsman: The primary relationship is the parents, then the kids. I have four kids never married. Go figure. I have learned though to put the effort on the parents the kids will learn from example. The kids will flourish when the parents do.
------ This thread is Archived ------
somechick: Of course not noone is equally loved in any relationship.
So...? You're making me play twenty questions, Anna!
------ This thread is Archived ------
rodolpho: I like to think like this.
Although I do understand single parents opinions.
I will choose for my love, I cant choose what kinda of children come into my life.
I want my first love to be my first always.
Although I do understand single parents opinions.
I will choose for my love, I cant choose what kinda of children come into my life.
I want my first love to be my first always.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Ambrose2007: So...? You're making me play twenty questions, Anna!
I don't have 20 answers.
------ This thread is Archived ------
somechick: I don't have 20 answers.
That's what I was afraid of.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Ambrose2007: On the "Would you leave your love for your children?" thread, I raised a question substantially different but nonetheless related to the OP's inquiry: Should one's romantic partner/spouse be one's highest value?
Though virtually everyone, with a few possible exceptions, replied to the above with a resounding "NO! Kids always come first!", my suspicion is that if their romantic partner had said to them: "Honey, I want to be with you so we can have babies!", most of these very same respondents would find that off-putting and perhaps even offensive. Surely most women would not like to be thought of by their spouse or lover as primarily a "baby-machine" (or vice versa)?
And yet I believe this is precisely the view that logically follows from the premise "kids are more important."
My view is somewhat different. I believe that romantic couples are the well-spring from which a family life flows. Their love for each other is, as the Ayn Rand-lover, Wonderworker, might put it, the "Fountainhead" of all relationships.
Can you imagine standing on the altar, and your beloved declares to you: "My dearest, I love you more than the Moon, the Sun, and most stars. However, when we have children, you will need to take second, or possibly even third or fourth place in my heart behind them." Would you reply: "Ah, baby, you say the sweetest things!"
This is a better way of looking at things Ambrose... I'll read this with interest.Though virtually everyone, with a few possible exceptions, replied to the above with a resounding "NO! Kids always come first!", my suspicion is that if their romantic partner had said to them: "Honey, I want to be with you so we can have babies!", most of these very same respondents would find that off-putting and perhaps even offensive. Surely most women would not like to be thought of by their spouse or lover as primarily a "baby-machine" (or vice versa)?
And yet I believe this is precisely the view that logically follows from the premise "kids are more important."
My view is somewhat different. I believe that romantic couples are the well-spring from which a family life flows. Their love for each other is, as the Ayn Rand-lover, Wonderworker, might put it, the "Fountainhead" of all relationships.
Can you imagine standing on the altar, and your beloved declares to you: "My dearest, I love you more than the Moon, the Sun, and most stars. However, when we have children, you will need to take second, or possibly even third or fourth place in my heart behind them." Would you reply: "Ah, baby, you say the sweetest things!"
------ This thread is Archived ------
This
Is spectacular!
rodolpho: How can you teach ur kids what true love is, if you love them more then ur partner?
My kids will recieve more protection but not more love.
My kids will recieve more protection but not more love.
Is spectacular!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Sommerauer71: This is a better way of looking at things Ambrose... I'll read this with interest.
Hey, T!
Yeah, I thought of this last night. I really can't imagine anyone preferring to be thought of a reproducing machine, nor accepting that this is his or her primary purpose in life.I find it interesting that while some here have declared that children are the most important, they chose to skip over that and related telling questions.
A more cynical person than I might suspect that perhaps they would be uncomfortable taking their position out to its logical culmination.Fortunately, I'm not not that cynical, so I'm guessing it's merely lack of time or perhaps that they simply forgot my questions.
------ This thread is Archived ------
You next.
Actually, when my son was born, my ex husband said he saw me in a different way. He was very involved with our son, at the tender age of 20, right from the word go. But to come back to his words, when my eldest was ten days old, I asked him how he was feeling and he said he loved me much more as a mother than he did as the single girl he had met.
He went on to say, that he found me fascinating when I was pregnant, the curves, (I was a skinny miss) the way I looked softer and that I was much nicer to him and made him feel more important to him, because I was carrying his child. Did I feel second place? No. My heart lurched with love, because then I knew that this was the right move for us, even though he was unplanned and it made me see my husband in a different light. Our son blended into our lives and my husband remained uppermost in that unit of the three of us...
Their needs were different, my son needed his mother and when that time was done, my husband needed his wife, when he was out working (do remember this is all prior to the spectacular end of our marriage) to provide for his wife and his child, our son did not move up in his love ranks, the whole unit became something that he knew he had to work for to keep us healthy, warm and a roof over our heads.
I gave him what ultimately made me forgive him, his children and in that, now 21 years later with his new partner and his new child, he has never forgotten that I gave him his hearts desire and that was his children and that in his mind makes me still, even though we are divorced and our daughter gets married next year, up there as a person that he loves very much indeed.
In response to: On the "Would you leave your love for your children?" thread, I raised a question substantially different but nonetheless related to the OP's inquiry: Should one's romantic partner/spouse be one's highest value?
Though virtually everyone, with a few possible exceptions, replied to the above with a resounding "NO! Kids always come first!", my suspicion is that if their romantic partner had said to them: "Honey, I want to be with you so we can have babies!", most of these very same respondents would find that off-putting and perhaps even offensive. Surely most women would not like to be thought of by their spouse or lover as primarily a "baby-machine" (or vice versa)?
And yet I believe this is precisely the view that logically follows from the premise "kids are more important."
My view is somewhat different. I believe that romantic couples are the well-spring from which a family life flows. Their love for each other is, as the Ayn Rand-lover, Wonderworker, might put it, the "Fountainhead" of all relationships.
Can you imagine standing on the altar, and your beloved declares to you: "My dearest, I love you more than the Moon, the Sun, and most stars. However, when we have children, you will need to take second, or possibly even third or fourth place in my heart behind them." Would you reply: "Ah, baby, you say the sweetest things!"
Though virtually everyone, with a few possible exceptions, replied to the above with a resounding "NO! Kids always come first!", my suspicion is that if their romantic partner had said to them: "Honey, I want to be with you so we can have babies!", most of these very same respondents would find that off-putting and perhaps even offensive. Surely most women would not like to be thought of by their spouse or lover as primarily a "baby-machine" (or vice versa)?
And yet I believe this is precisely the view that logically follows from the premise "kids are more important."
My view is somewhat different. I believe that romantic couples are the well-spring from which a family life flows. Their love for each other is, as the Ayn Rand-lover, Wonderworker, might put it, the "Fountainhead" of all relationships.
Can you imagine standing on the altar, and your beloved declares to you: "My dearest, I love you more than the Moon, the Sun, and most stars. However, when we have children, you will need to take second, or possibly even third or fourth place in my heart behind them." Would you reply: "Ah, baby, you say the sweetest things!"
Actually, when my son was born, my ex husband said he saw me in a different way. He was very involved with our son, at the tender age of 20, right from the word go. But to come back to his words, when my eldest was ten days old, I asked him how he was feeling and he said he loved me much more as a mother than he did as the single girl he had met.
He went on to say, that he found me fascinating when I was pregnant, the curves, (I was a skinny miss) the way I looked softer and that I was much nicer to him and made him feel more important to him, because I was carrying his child. Did I feel second place? No. My heart lurched with love, because then I knew that this was the right move for us, even though he was unplanned and it made me see my husband in a different light. Our son blended into our lives and my husband remained uppermost in that unit of the three of us...
Their needs were different, my son needed his mother and when that time was done, my husband needed his wife, when he was out working (do remember this is all prior to the spectacular end of our marriage) to provide for his wife and his child, our son did not move up in his love ranks, the whole unit became something that he knew he had to work for to keep us healthy, warm and a roof over our heads.
I gave him what ultimately made me forgive him, his children and in that, now 21 years later with his new partner and his new child, he has never forgotten that I gave him his hearts desire and that was his children and that in his mind makes me still, even though we are divorced and our daughter gets married next year, up there as a person that he loves very much indeed.
------ This thread is Archived ------
bodleing: Yes, romantic love is a fairly modern conception. You could
say no popular culture has built itself on the idea of romance
more than twentieth century America has.
A culture that seeks affirmation in projection, illusion and
delusion may well be setting itself up for disappointment.
Its no coincidence that divorce rates have increased with our
modern day longing to be involved in the rush for romance.
say no popular culture has built itself on the idea of romance
more than twentieth century America has.
A culture that seeks affirmation in projection, illusion and
delusion may well be setting itself up for disappointment.
Its no coincidence that divorce rates have increased with our
modern day longing to be involved in the rush for romance.
I take that beating heart to signify that you'd like to join that beautiful charge toward illusion, G?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Sommerauer71: You next.
Actually, when my son was born, my ex husband said he saw me in a different way. He was very involved with our son, at the tender age of 20, right from the word go. But to come back to his words, when my eldest was ten days old, I asked him how he was feeling and he said he loved me much more as a mother than he did as the single girl he had met.
He went on to say, that he found me fascinating when I was pregnant, the curves, (I was a skinny miss) the way I looked softer and that I was much nicer to him and made him feel more important to him, because I was carrying his child. Did I feel second place? No. My heart lurched with love, because then I knew that this was the right move for us, even though he was unplanned and it made me see my husband in a different light. Our son blended into our lives and my husband remained uppermost in that unit of the three of us...
Their needs were different, my son needed his mother and when that time was done, my husband needed his wife, when he was out working (do remember this is all prior to the spectacular end of our marriage) to provide for his wife and his child, our son did not move up in his love ranks, the whole unit became something that he knew he had to work for to keep us healthy, warm and a roof over our heads.
I gave him what ultimately made me forgive him, his children and in that, now 21 years later with his new partner and his new child, he has never forgotten that I gave him his hearts desire and that was his children and that in his mind makes me still, even though we are divorced and our daughter gets married next year, up there as a person that he loves very much indeed.
Actually, when my son was born, my ex husband said he saw me in a different way. He was very involved with our son, at the tender age of 20, right from the word go. But to come back to his words, when my eldest was ten days old, I asked him how he was feeling and he said he loved me much more as a mother than he did as the single girl he had met.
He went on to say, that he found me fascinating when I was pregnant, the curves, (I was a skinny miss) the way I looked softer and that I was much nicer to him and made him feel more important to him, because I was carrying his child. Did I feel second place? No. My heart lurched with love, because then I knew that this was the right move for us, even though he was unplanned and it made me see my husband in a different light. Our son blended into our lives and my husband remained uppermost in that unit of the three of us...
Their needs were different, my son needed his mother and when that time was done, my husband needed his wife, when he was out working (do remember this is all prior to the spectacular end of our marriage) to provide for his wife and his child, our son did not move up in his love ranks, the whole unit became something that he knew he had to work for to keep us healthy, warm and a roof over our heads.
I gave him what ultimately made me forgive him, his children and in that, now 21 years later with his new partner and his new child, he has never forgotten that I gave him his hearts desire and that was his children and that in his mind makes me still, even though we are divorced and our daughter gets married next year, up there as a person that he loves very much indeed.
Thanks for that, T.
Made me feel a tad verklempt. ------ This thread is Archived ------
Ambrose2007: I take that beating heart to signify that you'd like to join that beautiful charge toward illusion, G?
Stranger things have happened J.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Ambrose2007: Hey, T! Yeah, I thought of this last night. I really can't imagine anyone preferring to be thought of a reproducing machine, nor accepting that this is his or her primary purpose in life.
I find it interesting that while some here have declared that children are the most important, they chose to skip over that and related telling questions. A more cynical person than I might suspect that perhaps they would be uncomfortable taking their position out to its logical culmination.
Fortunately, I'm not not that cynical, so I'm guessing it's merely lack of time or perhaps that they simply forgot my questions.
I find it interesting that while some here have declared that children are the most important, they chose to skip over that and related telling questions. A more cynical person than I might suspect that perhaps they would be uncomfortable taking their position out to its logical culmination.
Fortunately, I'm not not that cynical, so I'm guessing it's merely lack of time or perhaps that they simply forgot my questions.
The things you think of...
And thank the blue skies that you do.
I was swimming this afternoon and was thinking about the other thread, so I can say I am damn pleased that you have started this one... It makes me think of Captain and how he would have loved a child, something I cannot give him, but I have some he can share and plough some love into which he does... As they do him, he started this daft blog for the kids to add to and they do and often they say 'he has not written on the blog, tell him to write some stuff for us' and he makes them feel important, loved, gives them attention, makes them laugh with his zany humour, he takes that time out, from me to give that to them.
I come back to Rodders profound post, because it is something that I believe in, that we show our children through our behaviours how we love, if we cannot love as adults, how the hell are they to have happy, fulfilled balanced relationships? If we just walk away? With the view that, 'another partner will be along, but you kids will always be here'
Then I think of my father, who gave me enough love for a mother as well as a father, he had to make a choice, he had to put his children first as they were neglected, which we were at that time.
But that was not because he was choosing his children over their mother, it was because he wanted to remove the burden so that she had a shot at becoming well so that she could be a mother.
And to me, that is what makes also a special man, he took his children to take care of them, so that their mother, his wife could have a chance at being a mum, I say that is pretty big love going on there... Even if she could not become that mother.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Are the ads on here as phony as some of the profiles?
The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
Unions support Democrats!
I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
men's perspective towards women
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
wanting beyond need
Why is this shameful?
s*xual skills
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Related Forums
- Are the ads on here as phony as some of the profiles?
- The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
- More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
- Unions support Democrats!
- I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
- men's perspective towards women
- Would you hire this guy - for any job?
- wanting beyond need
- Why is this shameful?
- s*xual skills
Anyway...when we're younger, we anticipate getting married and raising a family. When we're older, we seek a mate who meets the needs we've discovered inside us. Our children are still important to us, they are the ones we labored so hard to bring forth into the world and cared for when they were so tiny. But a mate is now also important to us for who they are to us, not for creating children together.