relationship advice

[big_ole_jpn]

Originally Posted by AzzarTheGod [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He has invested a lot of time with her and engaged in a monogamous relationship, a monogamous steady dating arrangement is one step before marriage, its pretty serious... so that isn't dating you fucking moron.

Dating is when you date and see other people. You know, actual dating. Not playing house.

You are a misogynist asshole.

Originally Posted by AzzarTheGod [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You lose. Calling the referees to take a look at the plays I made.

I don't think anyone is going to agree with you that dating = steady and monogamous. Dating implies you are allowed to see other women.

Just take this L and walk. We'll hear from the refs in a bit on dating/steady/monogamous relationships.

Technical foul.

The disagreement arises from plebs adhering to the plebeian definition of "dating" as implying some kind of a serious commitment. You see, the typical consumptive automaton is not capable of maintaining genuine emotional connections with other humans, and instead forms transactional bonds centered around the exchange of goods and sex, held together moment to moment with the conversational duct tape of memespouting (from "much sex very wow" to "are you coming with me to the Bernie rally Friday?").

The arrangement "dating" would seem distinct from a serious relationship to a living human since typically it would only serve as a formality (ensuring the transactional part of the relationship will function) at the beginning of a human bond. However, to a typical roboperson who would settle for a vagina attached to a parrot that repeats hilarious stuff from the talmudvision during what would be intense emotional episodes, dating and a serious relationship are in fact one and the same, since an automaton cannot ever progress past the transactional formalities and into the emotional phase of the relationship. Of course I have never "dated" anyone even as a formality as I possess both halves of the transactional relationship due to the high value placed on sexual relations with me and my own material success, but I think my hypothesis and consequent judgment are reasonably well-informed.

Because you have already consented to a long-term relationship with a weakened entity who depends upon you for sustenance, breaking the arrangement would constitute a violation of the contract. It's up to you if you want that on your conscience (such as it is) but it wouldn't put you in the right to suddenly start claiming you're a real human being with feelings since you claimed brainlessness when the pussy was offered not just for a night or two, but for so long that a dependence ensued.

Within the paradigm of being a idiot retard I can see how Azzar could be considered in the wrong, but as far as the wider world of masters of the universe is concerned, the God is 100% correct. Sit down child.