It does indeed.But.... But..... I don't have a room anymore! You rented out my room out to turkeys when I went away to college this year!
Well that means we have a platonic relationship does it not?
It does indeed.But.... But..... I don't have a room anymore! You rented out my room out to turkeys when I went away to college this year!
Well that means we have a platonic relationship does it not?
If it was possibe to use such number I would say one million percent. I'm absolutely convinced.Online relationships are a bit different, no? Also how SURE are you that there is no romantic feelings from your co-worker?
I'm calling my lawyer. He has a court order to offer you a clean-furnished-turkeyless room to live in. Don't worry, mummy will have this sorted in two shakes of a lamb's tail.But.... But..... I don't have a room anymore! You rented out my room out to turkeys when I went away to college this year!
I've never held any sexual or even romantic feelings for turkeys, but admittedly I find myself obsessed with how extremely cute they are.
I'm calling my lawyer. He has a court order to offer you a clean-furnished-turkeyless room to live in. Don't worry, mummy will have this sorted in two shakes of a lamb's tail.
Liar. My lawyer will be contacting you about our son's room.
@Deus : So how do you make peace with the existence of the asexual community?
I would imagine they simply can't experience romantic relationships.
O_O Alright, I admit that is one way to sort it. But, it seems to me that it makes more logical sense to presume there must be something intrinsic to romantic relationships which is not sexual. I'm not sure it's jealousy, but I am sure it is the sort of connection. Even the bffship doesn't really come close to the same as the type of companionship shared by a romantic relationship.
Why does it make more logical sense to presume that?
Sex and sexual desire in all cases that I know of exist in romantic relationships therefore I presume it is a factor that must be present for the relationship to be classed as romantic.
Not in asexual romantic relationships...thus my saying it seems logical to presume there must be something else if romantic relationships do exist independent of sex.
I think love and lust are independent. My dick may wanna smash sally and ladies in the porns, but I only love Gretchen Carlson from the Fox News Channel.
How is it so hard to understand that a loving, romantic relationship does not have to have sex in it? Just because you want to have sex does not mean that every single other person in the world does as well.I'm suggesting they don't exist independent of sex. Without the sex related feeling it would change significantly the type of relationship it is and therefore should be classified as something else.
I'm suggesting they don't exist independent of sex. Without the sex related feeling it would change significantly the type of relationship it is and therefore should be classified as something else.
But isn't that a platonic love for Gretchen then?