Comments by "Sammy B" (@sammyb1651) on "Your money's no good here: you cannot buy a relationship long-term" video.

"Loyalty to your feelings" is basically just another way of saying inconsistent. Or disloyal.
28
@davyr847 If you cheated on your wife because you were being "loyal to your libido" (ie your sexual "feelings"), she would have absolutely no hesitation in calling you disloyal. I can guarantee that. Women know exactly what loyalty means when it suits them. People get too easily propagandised by nonsense, including Patrickrada it would seem. Sad to see the content creator fall for it too, however.
17
@ You're literally describing the process of having "feelings" and then not acting on them. Precisely out of loyalty (to someone else).
2
@Msmith074 Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however, yes; it's far easier to kill womens love because womens "love" is far more conditional than a mans. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isnt something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it. The really good thing is that the message is becoming widely understood amongst men now and they're beginning to wake up to much of the nonsense that women have benefitted from for so long. 👍
2
@ That's very interesting. But also a load of BS. For instance if I was married to a woman and slept with her best friend (because I was being "loyal to my c0ck's feelings"), do you imagine she'd regard me as "loyal" or "disloyal"? Because my instincts tell me she'd regard me as disloyal. And have very little trouble telling me so either. Women know exactly what loyalty means when it suits them. Don't get propagandised by nonsense.
1
@ That's very interesting. But also a load of BS. For instance if I was married to a woman and slept with her best friend (because I was being "loyal to my c0ck's feelings"), do you imagine she'd regard me as "loyal" or "disloyal"? Because my instincts tell me she'd regard me as disloyal. And have very little trouble telling me so either. Women know exactly what loyalty means when it suits them. Don't get propagandised by nonsense.
1
@ You're literally describing the process of having "feelings" and then not acting on them. Precisely out of loyalty to someone else. You're an actual moron.
1
@Msmith074 Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however; yes. It's far easier to kill women's love because women's "love" is far more conditional than a man's. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isn't something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman in a relationship. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it. The really good thing is that the message is becoming widely understood amongst men now and they're beginning to wake up to much of the nonsense that women have benefitted from for so long.
1
@Msmith074 Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however, yes; it's far easier to kill womens love because womens "love" is far more conditional than a mans. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isnt something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it.
1
@Msmith074 Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however; yes! It's far easier to kill women's love because women's "love" is far more conditional than a man's. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Real love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isnt something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman in a relationship. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it.
1
@Msmith074 Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however; yes! It's far easier to kill women's love because women's "love" is far more conditional than a man's. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Real love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isn't something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman going into a relationship. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it.
1
@Msmith074 Most men would be glad of the attitude you've expressed there if true. In reference to your more general point however; yes! It's far easier to kill women's love because women's "love" is far more conditional than a man's. So if there are more conditions it relies upon then there are more chances of it going into default. And in that sense it's arguable whether it's really "love" at all. Real love is sacrificial rather than acquisitive. Ultimately I'd say a woman's "love" probably isnt something women would regard as worth a great deal if that was what a man was offering a woman. Ie companionship with lots of performance related conditions attached. I think that's the best way I can explain it.
1