Damn, that's deep
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (100)
sorted by:
It's not contrarian, he's expressing it as a concept of entitlement. You are not entitled to Love, which is a very specific duty that your spouse/lover engages in with you as an individual responsibility and commitment to both you and the family you cultivate.
No it is being contrarian because "oh I meant this one specific definition of the word (that I never specified in the slightest) instead of the general everyone uses" is below his level of intelligence and retarded, so I won't entertain it.
Even going into that pit, you are absolutely entitled to love with your partner/spouse. If they are not providing that, then they are not keeping up with one of the expected, or outright stated, halves of the bargain and are grounds for being terminated. You are not entitled to anyone you choose loving you, but if someone enters a relationship with you you are absolutely entitled to their love.
Unless you/he want to argue that relationship's, and women, are purely transactional things that exist only for strict utilitarian means and emotions are just pure gravy on it.
Maybe it's just your location where it's different, but this is absolutely how "deserved to be loved" is used in common parlance where I, and apparently he, are at.
That love is an out-growth of that relationship. You are not entitled to such a relationship in the first place. It must be earned, and will never be granted.
You're still taking it the wrong way. Deserves and entitlement are used interchangeably in common parlance, and as such, there is no entitlement to being loved.
Trying to make one point of "this is exactly the definition that he was using and everyone I know uses" and then a different "these words are interchangeable and flip floppy about their use" really isn't a strong foot.
Regardless, you, like he, are doing everything possible to take the conclusion (a hard, strict 100% no one deserves love) and then working backwards by adding qualifier after qualifier to make that work when someone points out simple and easy times when someone does.
I'm taking it exactly as he said. "No one deserves to be loved" and have already disproven that. All you've said is "no no, we in (Europe like he is from) mean completely different things when we say common words."
Yes those are the words I also said repeated back to me, yet packaged as a rebuttal somehow.
It's not working backwards, it using the word 'deserves' in the way that it is used. You are using a different definition.