REAL MAN OR ROMANTIC LOVER ?

I don't like extremely romantic guys.. damn it, they make me feel like I have to say "awww" all the fucking time with every detail and every romantic thing they say, and I'm not like that! Once a guy told me "I will draw my love for you in the heaven" and I was like <_<

LMFAO

Daniela...I like you LOL. That is true. I hate having to react to shit like that all the time lol.

I don't like extremely romantic guys.. damn it, they make me feel like I have to say "awww" all the fucking time with every detail and every romantic thing they say, and I'm not like that! Once a guy told me "I will draw my love for you in the heaven" and I was like

And as I put that face, he said "You know what that means, right? That means I love you"

<_<

I don't like extremely romantic guys.. damn it, they make me feel like I have to say "awww" all the fucking time with every detail and every romantic thing they say, and I'm not like that! Once a guy told me "I will draw my love for you in the heaven" and I was like <_<

Romance surely is the very absence of choice. It is feeling as opposed to rational thought. The question presumes that the man can control his thoughts - between some stoic 'reality' or into unchecked dreams - that he can choose to be one or the other...

This is about love, no? Romance is artistic expression of innermost desire - it's exaggerated - and sometimes ludicrously so. Me, I'm all for the love. Otherwise what's the point?

But I'm not talking flowers and chocolates, shall I compare thee to a summer's day, "let me hold your hand" cliches. Romance is more than that. People who have read my posts before know that I'm not averse to flowery language (still too 'rococo' for you SympathysSilhouette? ), but that isn't what this is about. Romantic love ignores custom and convention; the norms of life. A 'Romantic Lover' is not some fey, poetry spouting fop - welling up at chick-flicks and content to stare into his lover's eyes forever... Rather he is melancholy, with a wanderlust, and a rejection of the establishment.

A 'Real Man' pays the bills, sure. He will make certain your kids get into the right school. He will buy you the aforementioned flowers and chocolates - the tenets of 'supposed' romance - on the necessary calendar dates. He may even defend your honour in a fight - but only in the sense that you have been wronged and society has his back on this occasion. He has no exclusivity on physical strength, on being able to open up jars, or - if the situation demanded it - carrying a tiny kitten out of a burning building. He is good, honest, hard-working, decent. He is a provider. He is loving - of course. AND HE WILL DO YOU GOOD - don't get me wrong. But maybe, just maybe, he is a little...dull???

If you want that: fair play to you. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind here. Just trying to find the essence of the difference.

So - the 'Romantic Lover'? Romanticism, as a movement, in all the arts was about this thing called "feeling". Passion, emotion, desire. The 'Romantic Lover' can have the same background as the 'Real Man' - he is not necessarily physically different. Perhaps he may dress up as Lord Byron, have long cascading curly hair, and spout poetry - but that is an affectation, it bears little relevance to the actual character trait.

No, rather he simply acts on these "feelings" - instead of accepting societal boundaries. Intoxicatingangel makes an excellent point - Western society wants the man to be the (conventional) man. He is not to show emotion - except maybe when his first baby is born (but then only briefly - after which he must go about handing cigars to other men and shaking hands briskly). The 'Romantic Lover' puts feelings ahead of all else. That's the simple fundamental difference.

I've been lucky enough to have had a family that accepted my rather more 'bohemian' approach to life. My rejection of a lot of societal norms has landed me in periodic "spots-of-bother", and they have welcomed me back with open arms. Likewise I was lucky to have a grandfather who was (albeit briefly) a professional boxer. You do need to be able to look after yourself should you choose the road less travelled

So I'm wanting the whole thing. Of course love can be the most painful experience in the world. But only because it can be the most glorious. That's what I want - and what I want in my partners: The most ludicrously heart-breaking escapades counter-balancing the sheer brilliance of that moment. The pain and the anger. The ball-crushing, lip-splitting, bloodied fist of passion. Heading down those old dirt roads of who-knows-what. The joy of the big "Fuck-You" to everyone else and disappearing from the radar. Tangoing in the madrugada. Looking her in the eye and simply saying "I'd do anything for you" and mean it, not in a flouncy "I will draw my love for you in heaven" affected way - but just in the simple truth - let's do it and see where it takes us...

I appreciate that my way won't put bread on the table, or keep the heating on over the winter. And maybe your dad won't hand over the business to me on his retirement either - but I never asked for that anyway. And, of course, there are large gaps of introspection and worrying about the practicalities of this existence - society is insidious. But ultimately I couldn't contemplate the narrow world-view of the 'Real Man', I couldn't 'not' question... It doesn't make me less of a man; it doesn't mean I can't change a light-bulb.

Or have a fight with anyone who says otherwise...

Rebel without a cause delusions are fine for those of us who are still young enough to afford them.

As for your view of Romanticism, I would argue that the title character from "Die Leiden des jungen Werthers" is the prototype of the male romantic protagonist.

It's a far cry from the boxing bohemian you make it out to be.

brat of fratton, maQe love or have sex?

Rebel without a cause delusions are fine for those of us who are still young enough to afford them.

As for your view of Romanticism, I would argue that the title character from "Die Leiden des jungen Werthers" is the prototype of the male romantic protagonist.

It's a far cry from the boxing bohemian you make it out to be.

Alas, I'm also getting a little long in the tooth for this lifestyle - however, I resent it being called "delusional". Who knows how it will pan out; and if society will finally triumph? But perhaps that is the romantic in me..!

I never made out that my "boxing bohemian" ways should be considered archetypal of a 'Romantic Lover' either. But they are my ways; and I do place myself in that camp. Also, I have not read that book so I can't comment - which I suppose rewards your reasons for mentioning it in the first place.

Still, it is good to know that my posts continue to irk you whenever our paths cross...

brat of fratton, maQe love or have sex?

What both? Tonight??

brat of fratton, maQe love or have sex?

What both? Tonight??

I never made out that my "boxing bohemian" ways should be considered archetypal of a 'Romantic Lover' either. But they are my ways; and I do place myself in that camp. Also, I have not read that book so I can't comment - which I suppose rewards your reasons for mentioning it in the first place.

Qué?

Still, it is good to know that my posts continue to irk you whenever our paths cross...

Actually, I'll gladly believe that someone like yourself will probably live a better, more interesting and eventually more fulfilling life than I ever will. But that says more about the distorted sense of values and priorities in modern society than it does about you and I.

You don't irk me. I just like to call out BS whenever and wherever I see it.

Actually, I'll gladly believe that someone like yourself will probably live a better, more interesting and eventually more fulfilling life than I ever will. But that says more about the distorted sense of values and priorities in modern society than it does about you and I.

You don't irk me. I just like to call out BS whenever and wherever I see it.

It is not easy - to need to do things differently - and there are long dark nights of the soul where I question the sagacity of my choices...

But there is no BS involved.

Rebel without a cause delusions are fine for those of us who are still young enough to afford them.

As for your view of Romanticism, I would argue that the title character from "Die Leiden des jungen Werthers" is the prototype of the male romantic protagonist.

It's a far cry from the boxing bohemian you make it out to be.

what my brain gathered from what baron had to say is that prototypes of male behaviour have nothing to do with him.

hes following his heart and soul regardless of it possibly being the success or ruination of him

rebel without a cause, i dont see that, i see rebel or die in a sea of mediocrity and life unfulfilled

hehe or maybe i just wish he lived in america and was about 15 yrs older BWuahahahahahaha

I just like to call out BS whenever and wherever I see it.

If that was true, you would be the #1 poster in the Love & Sex section. But for the BS you do call out:

romantic. he should die for me...

I think a real man should have a little ramance in him... Anyone know any real men?

I think a real man should have a little ramance in him... Anyone know any real men?

a guy who;

a. treats me right.

b. has a dash of romance in him.

c. can be my best friend; but knows how to keep me apart from 'the guys'. Not treat me like a male.

d. knows how to relax.

e. has a great personality.

I can't really say; romantic lover OR real man. Because what is a real man these days? Everyone's opinions vary from male to male. You can't really determine stuff anymore. But if I ever date a romantic lover; and he starts going all... mushy. I'll punch him in the face, because that stuff really annoys me. I like a little bit, like compliments every now and then; shows of affection, dinner for two out every 2nd week...

Not like the romance you see and the movie where the guy goes over the top. And you sit there going, 'o_O that girl would be so embarassed right now.'

>_< I can't handle that, yo. If he so much as sung a note, or some how got into my house to leave me rose petals trailing to the room; or even a bouquet of roses... I'd accuse him of stalking. x_x

I like them sensitive, just not... too sensitive. x_x I don't like the clingy, cry at the drop of a hate, sookie type. x_X I want 'em to be tough, independant and stable. YAY! *coughs*

And i doubt I made any sense. x_X

a guy who;

a. treats me right.

b. has a dash of romance in him.

c. can be my best friend; but knows how to keep me apart from 'the guys'. Not treat me like a male.

d. knows how to relax.

e. has a great personality.

I can't really say; romantic lover OR real man. Because what is a real man these days? Everyone's opinions vary from male to male. You can't really determine stuff anymore. But if I ever date a romantic lover; and he starts going all... mushy. I'll punch him in the face, because that stuff really annoys me. I like a little bit, like compliments every now and then; shows of affection, dinner for two out every 2nd week...

Not like the romance you see and the movie where the guy goes over the top. And you sit there going, 'o_O that girl would be so embarassed right now.'

>_< I can't handle that, yo. If he so much as sung a note, or some how got into my house to leave me rose petals trailing to the room; or even a bouquet of roses... I'd accuse him of stalking. x_x

I like them sensitive, just not... too sensitive. x_x I don't like the clingy, cry at the drop of a hate, sookie type. x_X I want 'em to be tough, independant and stable. YAY! *coughs*

And i doubt I made any sense. x_X

I understood you

You want this --> :brows: