h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Jazzman was being unusually cruel (although I checked with her today, and she claimed that I had just mis-read what she said). As to what was unusually cruel ... ah, well, that would be telling, wouldn't it?

you want a specific performance on your chocolate fish? Well ...
a) it better be a big chocolate fish, otherwise I won't fit on it, let alone all my props.
b) you'll have to be more specific about what sort of performance you want - mime, clown, drama, comedy, farce, etc ...
c) who said I was going to give you a chocolate fish anyway? In fact, I never said I'd give Jazzman a chocolate fish either, I just said she wasn't getting one.

You are unusually cruel, but that's only when armed with a plastic flower.

I was accusing Jazzman of projecting - since she said that I was talking about the trauma of falling in love in my first posting, rather than the feeling of love itself (whiich I still maintain i was actually talking about) - as explained in my post above. Since you referred me to the unrequited love thread you possibly have the same problem.

I don't actually think that Jazzman is suffering from unrequited love, but I thought it might get a rise out of her. Alas, she missed it completely. Rats.

... Stop being obscure?!!!! You started it!!!

Since I ain't gunna give you a chocolate fish, you're just going to have to accept me damaging you. Sorry.

you suffer from the 'click the button twice' syndrome too, eh?

Because I'm bored if going to toss a handgrenade of a question into this crowded forum.

Do you all think that, refering to the kind of Love we are discussing, it is possible to love more than one person at a time? Or is true love only possible with undivided attention?

There are a couple of things I want to add to the question.
Firstly, I don't want to reopen peoples old (or not so old) hurts. Most of us have experinced one or both sides of this, and it leads to interesting times. I'm just curious about people thoughts and opinions.
The next thing was, I don't feel it to be a gender dividing question. To begin with I thought it might be, with men saying yes,of course and the ladies going no,no love only me. But even in my own experinces, I've seen both sexes give both answers.

*booom*

H&K
Z

Endless possibilities there Zed,

I think it has to do with each individuals own personal viewpoint, and their circumstances, truth be told...

My _own_ personal stand is that one at a time is more than enough No, more seriously - when I do _really_ fall in love with someone, that never ends, even if/when the relationship itself ceases... however it is always possible to love again even if at first that seems a ghastly prospect, but one at a time is more than I can handle *grin*

To consentrate one's attention or more than one person and call it love must be very draining.

I think you can only love one person, but lust after many...

Oh, yeah Sid?

Care to expand on that *ahem*?

...procreation!

*no, please, not the wet...*

Hmmmn...not many 'rose' to that one *groan*

Back to the issue in hand *ahem*...

Love is...a country boy moving to a loathsome hole of a city with an unreasonable ultimatum...(happened to one of my best friends...and he's deleriously happy, good for him!)

...not giving unreasonable ultimatums.

When you're in love, you don't notice if they're being unreasonable...

Not so. But if you're desperate (Right word?) enough, you go along with it!

'sus

Okie, I can see that...

Love is...knowing she's _not_ going to try _that_ trick with the Mar...erm...yeast extract spread

*Euch* *Ahem* Love is...

...like a butterfly, a rare and gentle thing.

*I'm gone!* Night!

'sus

even the strongest of people can give in to unreasonable ultimatums but it often leads to resentment and ultimately the death of the relationship. there's a fine line between compromise and capitulation sometimes. and then there's the people who give you an unreasonable ultimatum which you refuse to give in to, so they drop it, then they come back the next day with a "crisis" which means you have to give in to their unreasonable ulltimatums. or so i've heard. maybe i've just argued myself round to the point that if someone gives you an unreasonable ultimatum they don't respect you, and, as i've said in a previous post, respect has to be the bedrock of any love relationship (friendship, lovers, soulmates etc.).

and like that proverbial butterfly, the flapping of love's wings can have repurcussions (sp?) far beyond the immediate. sigh

No wonder people can not describe love. It is so different for everyone. I am not sure what spannergirl mean't by ultimatum's. Are you talking about direct ultimatum's in a relationship, or implied ultimatum's. In the case of direct ultimatums I agree that the relationship is doomed because of lack of trust. But in many relationships there are sometimes implied ultimatums, or maybe even oly implied by one of the persons. This can lead to problems but the problem would not have likely arisen if both people communicated with each how they felt. Then again if the couple cannot talk about their feelings maybe the relationship is also doomed. This does not make sense, but then love does not make sense. It goes against all our best judgement.

...a concept so abstract and ineffable that this thread has absolutely no end. Love is...illegal for people who look that young. have you seen that couple that used to be in the 'mail on sunday' cartoons? they looked about five! disgusting, that's what it is. i really need a little image of a face sticking it's tongue out!

Love is...when you really don't mind the smell or the taste; you just won't let it stand in the way of their fun. think about it...

anyone killed by the blast of the above grenade, contact me and i will see about restoring you to a more active phase of existence. zombiehood is no bad thing...

necro.

Hope you're referring to the taste of your partners experimental cooking there

*frowns* Hmmm... I never realised love was so many things. No wonder I got it wrong!

'sus