Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
I felt that too!
kissing on check has other meaning, is more love than sex.
Still sexual act. More or less, doesn't matter. You said "answer about sex, I consider them lame." You didn't mentioned intensity of sex involved.
@Twenty2Stop, there are different types of kisses that transmit different types of feelings, a kiss in the cheek is more of an act of endearment which transmits a kind of love.I wonder if you consider kissing your sister, brother, mom or dad in the cheek a sexual act too.
There is a difference between lovers and family members. I don't think your little brain understands that. With lovers, kisses are mainly sexual. And you're also saying the same thing, "more of an act of endearment" meaning there's a little bit of sexual Nature and she didn't say anything about intensity of sexual nature. She just said that she think sexual answers are lame. And in Hindu culture, we don't kiss brothers and sisters!
@Twenty2Firstly i will adress the things that you said that are of no importance to the matter at hand1- I'm going to pretend like you aren't 19 years old cracking a joke about a "little brain" when it is proven that the development of the brain lasts at least until the age of 20, continuing...2- Personally I neither believe or practice any culture, traditions or religion, i tend to make up my own mind, and hindu culture is a minority so stay on point please.Secondly i will adress the things you said that are of importance to the matter at hand1- You do not know what endearment is as an act of endearment is an act of: »Love (intense or deep feeling of affection) »Or simple affection (gentle feeling of fondness or liking)Neither of those are NECESSARILY sexualThe adjectives for the feeling that NECESSARILY transmits deep sexual desire would be an: »"Lustful", from "Lust" (Strong sexual desire)2- Of course there is a difference between lovers and family members.Yet... there is no difference between an act of endearment / a kiss on the cheek practiced in either as an act of endearment is as stated in point 1 and act that transmits love. affection, fondness or liking, therefore NOT NECESSARILY sexualOh and by the way if you want to be specific and get your point across instead of "family members" you should use "blood relatives"Some people don't consider X relative as familyAnd others consider their girlfriend and friends as family
Thanks for supporting me!😊Firstly, things that didn't matter to you but you wanted to bitch about :First, "little brain" is a metaphor, not literally applicable.Second, everyone follows a culture. From handshake to hug everything is a part of culture that we are taught since childhood. Hindu culture might be a minority but from a Hindu perspective (my perspective) I am on point. Now to matter at hand,1 - you yourself are supporting me by saying that too in capital letters "NECESSARY". You do understand that your argument proves my argument that there is a chance of it being sexual and with lovers, especially if they have sex drive like I do, chances are more.2 - "NOT NECESSARILY" Thanks for supporting me again. You're so nice to me. Supporting my argument. Like I said I follow Hindu culture, in Hindu culture every relative is family members no matter how far away the relative it. I am putting this argument from my perspective, not someone's else perspective unlike you. And you are supporting my argument so thanks for that.
@Twenty2That's why i said you cracked a (dumb) joke about it.Yes but you are arguing that the kisses on the cheek her boyfriend gave her were most likely sexual, neither of them is Hindu as far as we know therefore your culture does not matter in that situation.Incorrect, i wasn't taught culture and if i practice any of it, it would be what you said, things as simple as handshakes, hugs and kisses that are present in various cultures therefore not attached to one in specific.Your argument is that a kiss on the cheek it a sexual act, incorrect, if it is not necessarily a sexual act it isn't a sexual act until practiced with that intent, therefore i am not supporting it.That was not what i meant by family, i meant it metaphorically, the meaning of family for me is more than who belongs to it by blood, for me family are the people i would trust with my life.
I bought Hindu culture when you said kissing brother and sister, we don't do that here. Other than that my argument was question specific. If a lover kisses on cheek, or anywhere, it can be sexual. That is what I was trying to say. And you agreed with me by saying that "NOT NECESSARILY" which means it can be what I was saying from the start. I made the argument because she said that "answers about sex, she considers them lame." Whereas she herself is sexual. That's a shitty thing. And I am still correct and you're supporting me. and your last comment was a very weird one because you supported me yet said you're not supporting me. I am getting confused here about what you want little kid.
If it was what you were trying to say it was not what you said.Seeing as you were saying that it is only possibly a sexual act that means that what she said was also only possibly sexual, meaning that, as she clarified, it was not making you wrong when you said it was also "lame".
Your English is going above my head, my friend. Please break it down. She said that "kissing on cheek has other meaning, is MORE love than sex." Yeah I agree. But still more or less there's a possibility of it being sexual. Especially in lovers, kissing is sexual. Kissing on lips by the celebrities to their kids came onto spotlight recently, was it lust? I don't think so. It was love and care. Can it be sexual? Yeah, tho I hope not as they are family. But when it comes to a couple, eventho kissing maybe out of love, there is a big chance of it being out of lust. There is a reason the couple isn't a couple anymore because it wasn't full love. There was lust in it too. If it was full love, they would have found a way to make things work and married and lived together but they didn't. And it's not like sex wasn't involved either. So when she is in a relationship which isn't out of full love and having sex, why is she calling sex lame? Sex is a beautiful thing. She kissing no matter where can be sexual too. She herself is missing kissing him, which is a sexual act, and is not considering herself lame because in her head, it's not fully sexual. And then saying that whomsoever gives sexual answers is lame! Well, That's wrong.
She said it was lame if a sexual thing was what you missed the most in a relationship, and it is."She herself is missing kissing him, which is a sexual act, and is not considering herself lame because in her head, it's not fully sexual. And then saying that whomsoever gives sexual answers is lame! Well, That's wrong"She doesn't consider it lame because it is only possibly sexual and not fully sexual, she would however consider it lame if it was a necessarily and fully sexual act.
She never specified. You're defending someone you don't even know. You don't know her boyfriend either. I on the other hand, have given full details and reasoning behind my comment. And still I am fighting for my comment. She on the other hand, has left the fight. I consider her lame according to her logic because it is sexual, only possibly but still possible. She should have been clear if she didn't wanted to appear lame. Tho I believe everyone is different and we must respect all and not consider any person lame unless given a reason to. She disrespected the opinions of people by calling it lame. Not everyone is into romantic shit. Some love sex. She herself loves kissing.