The new sprite was not made by Pele Mele. He's found bigger opportunities elsewhere, and we're very happy for him, but for the same reason I took it into my hands to make the new sprite myself. Never done this before. Consider supporting me on Patreon so I can improve, and make more! (Link in the description.)
I really liked this trio. Venti kept making logical holes, but understandably so, as "love" is complicated. Her view of "love" was intriguing, but I don't think she actually could have given it, since she kept contradicting herself for the sake of the argument. Sauvage was respectful, and gave good insight to his point of view without being overly rude, which is surprisingly rare. Actually, I liked that he argued against both of you two, without fully disagreeing with either of you two. The way all three of you bounced was just really fun, especially at the end, like Venti was so done, and Sauvage noted what you said.
I didn’t really like her, she just seems like an ignorant person who can’t fathom not having the “correct” perspective all the time and will just insult those who disagree with her.
@@_Sloppyham Yeah, and I suppose you are a perfect being without biases and misconceptions. She is consistent with her beliefs, that's enough to make a fruitful conversation.
@@mahpell7173 just a very presumptuous comment all around. Saying I don’t like a person because of a character flaw doesn’t translate to “I’m perfection.” When you make accusations, try to have something beyond a baseless claim to back you up, alright? And let’s not pretend we can’t call out people’s bullshit because we aren’t perfect ourselves (if you plan on going that route).
@@mahpell7173 "fruitful" her ass was not fruitful aside from dropping room temperature takes she literally just went like "i don't care" and "idgaf" because she had no means nor actual thought to back her argument only to get back into the argument when she noticed "faux" was being disagreed with she literally calls all her self-deluded opinions a "fact" or "truth" please don't lie and say you can make a fruitful conversation with someone like this
On the alcoholism argument: My dad used to smoke when he was alive. He knew how awful it was as my grandmother also smoked and died from cancer as a result. My mom tried to make him quit. Instead, he hid it from her. Love for my mom didn’t necessarily make him better or bring out the best in him. It just made things better *for my mom.* However, what *did* bring out the best in him was love for my brother and I. More specifically, I basically bullied him into quitting by being a child who hated the smell and came home with D.A.R.E pamphlets saying “See? See? It’s bad for you.” The point I’m trying to make is that love (of any kind) *can* bring out the best in people, but do not expect it to. Do not cling onto the hope it will and only believe love helps someone when you see it do so (when you see results). My dad died due to unrelated causes years later. He died addicted to vaping, which was his way of quitting smoking. My dad quit smoking for my brother and I. So that he could be alive for us. He bettered himself out of love, but he also could’ve done it earlier for my mom.
I uh… sounds like what happened is the guilt made him do so, especially with you constantly pushing for it. Sorry to be rude, but that’s not out of love, that’s out of pressure. If it was out of love, he would have done so irrespective of any pressure, because he would have wanted to improve himself regardless of whether or not his family had issues with it. Not that it’s a bad thing. Addicts often need that pressure to have any hope of breaking the cycle.
@@anubis7457No, that's just the link in-between. Love causes guilt, guilt causes pressure, pressure causes change. If he would have wanted to improve himself, that would either mean that he was already planning on quitting, so the very small pressure from love was enough, or that changing for the better is a part of his morales, which just changes the cause of guilt. P.S. That's not rude, even though someone could think so. If your reasoning isn't enough to understand that it isn't, then saying "sorry to be rude" won't change anything.
@@anubis7457 It's both. While not close to cigarrettes, I was addicted to something and I know I have a problem but couldn't stop until both love and pressure pushed me out of it. OOP's father stopped because the love and pressure was greater than the addiction. It can depend from people to people, but love alone can't change someone. I know people who changed for the better because of love, and there's me who needed love and the pressure from them to change.
@@fishingfishka To clarify, what I meant was that if he had the mentality “I love my family and want to spend more time with them, so I should quit smoking.” I would consider that an act of love. “My family is constantly reminding me about my smoking habits and I know how disappointed they are in me.” has a much stronger element of shame than love, although I would say love might be present in the “equation.” As FC said in the video, love might get the ball rolling but the actual necessary catalyst is shame.
@@anubis7457 Shame is present in both, it's just that in the second variant he is much more addicted, so much more shame is required, so much more signs of disappointment are needed.
I think the reason people will say things like “If he hits you, he doesn’t love you, so leave him” is because almost everyone has the belief that love makes people better. A lot of victims will stay out of the misguided belief that they can “fix” their abusive spouse with the power of love. By contradicting the idea that their abuser loves them, it’s a way to convince them to leave or even inspire the correct feeling of rage in response to their mistreatment. However, even though I understand the logic behind the statement, I think your approach of “his feelings be damned, leave if he hits you no matter what” is much better, since, as you pointed out, even abusers can and often do express affection. As far as I’m concerned, if someone hits you or otherwise treats you like shit, their feelings are no longer important and should not factor into any decision you make going forward.
Yeah, the “he wouldn’t hit you if he loved you” line has always seemed to me more like a persuasion tool for abuse victims stuck in the mindset where they feel the need to stay and fix their abuser, rather than a statement of truth. That said, though, it definitely is taken as a truth by a lot of people.
Although, I'd like to add that just "they don't love you because they hit you" or "you should leave because they hit you" should also take into account the severity. How much does your lover hurt you and for what reason? Perhaps you had a really bad argument about something you feel strongly on but that is still not closely related to your relationship or personal lives. Perhaps they have their own anger issues that, while a big enough problem to make them willing to hit you or stay mad for a period of time, but are otherwise mostly fine. The problem isn't just "they can bring themselves to hurt you", it's what exactly brings them to the point of hurting you and how severe of a problem it is for you and them.
In my sexuality textbook I read for a class, there is actually a chapter on love, and a part of that chapter includes “Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love”. It basically details the 3 components of love (passion: quick and strong physical/sexual attraction, intimacy: emotional connection and deep understanding of another, and commitment: the decision to maintain a relationship with someone.) It also details the relationship types that have combinations of these aspects. Love that includes only passion is called “Infatuation”. So I’d say that infatuation is not necessarily “not love” but more an incomplete or short-sighted type of love. It is still a type of love, but still lacks some major components, and may not last long.
@@ssjbread2803 no. plague used "short sighted love" more as in the lack of a better term. OC claimed its part of love when the lack of two major components that being intimacy and commitment, is saying its NOT love. infatuation is a quick strong passion but lacks intimacy and the commitment by definition. the problem is OC does slightly conflates attraction with love.
"Your parents aren't in love with you." - "Your parents are cousins." Your honor, we witnessed a murder in the courtroom today, where are the bailiffs?!
I honestly get FC falling in love after managing to change someone's mind at the end, that shit is so rare due to how dogmatic opinions are that it must have felt like true glory
I like that you added Korra's hair style to Franziska, and i might say, that you did a very good job with modeling, i would like to see how you would draw others in your style
Ngl I am of the same opinion as Faux Cares here, this debate was honestly very enjoyable to watch as it brought a lot of points that were thoughtful and interesting. I just really liked it
I will admit I have never understood poly relationships I have thought about it a bunch and I just can't wrap my head around the feeling but I'm not going to say that their feelings are invalid or wrong. My sister thinks snakes are cute which I also don't understand but I'm not gonna say that her feelings are wrong. It's ultimately just another thing you have to talk about when you get into a relationship with someone.
Come to think of it, it would be interesting to apply this question in anime/manga/webnovels that include harems. ... Kinda makes me want to think about it, considering how one of the lead characters in a novel of mine has a harem.
Something I'd add is that love and sex are not mutually inclusive: you can fuck without love, and you can love without fucking! And we all love multiple people all the time - our families, our friends, the people we look up to...
Y'know, one thing I'd have liked to see talked about is one-sided love. Just because you love someone doesn't mean that they'll love you back, and that brings a very good question, do you give up, in that scenario, or do you persist? Was it not true love if you just move on with your life, or was it not true love if the other person doesn't return it? You're certainly not owed the other person's love, so what is one to do? Some may say it's infatuation, but what if you've spent so much time with that person they see you as a sibling due to how well they know you? Where there's no question that you know each other as well as can be known? There's so much more that can be discussed here, and this entire branch of the argument is just left untouched in its entirety.
An indepth argument with this topic is very much a desire of mine. I've known people (including myself) that have been part of an unrequited love for almost more than half a decade. It was not pretty, there have been periods where we have persisted and gave up, and yet found ourselves back into the metaphorical front door of that person. Would that love for that person be considered true love or invalid, due to reciprocating or not giving enough signs that the person was into us? Was it purely infatuation? That I would like to see.
@@whyudoit4009 It doesn't matter if it's true love or not. If your feelings for that person are making your life difficult, then the best course of action is to overcome those emotions through mindfulness, discipline and focus on what truly matters to you in life.
After a long argument with someone there's always that question of wether you successfully convinced someone or you just lost hours arguing at a wall I mean this is not 100% a win, but bringing new perspectives to the table that people actually keep in mind is very comforting
That "adriana" person makes it sound like love is a conscious and logical choice on a person's part, when emotions are anything BUT that. You don't "choose" to fall in love with a person or more, it just happens. You happen to find different things about different that you like about them, and over time liking that person may develop into "I want to be with them"
I think it’s deeper than that. “Love” the noun and “love” the verb are two very different things, which cannot be said for many emotions, e.g. “happy” is not a verb, “sad” is not a verb, etc. “Falling in love” is not a toggle switch that remains on at all times. When feeling attracted to someone or when a new relationship begins, everything is new and exciting and many things “just happen” because of that, but as time passes the novelty of your relationship eventually fades, and when that happens, the thing that gives the relationship staying power and keeps the love alive is commitment, which requires intentionality, aka choice. You choose to be loyal to your partner. You choose to forgo the possibility of dating anyone else. You choose to intertwine your life with theirs. Adriana is describing “love” the verb, not “love” the noun. Bell Hooks describes the concept of a “love ethic” in her book All About Love, which is defined as the way a person gives space and shows up for someone else in a way that promotes the emotional and spiritual growth of both parties. Every aspect of this is a choice, an intention. All that being said, I found Adriana to be very aggressive and annoying for the most part, and she seems to be very close-minded when it comes to the idea of polyamory, so she’s not really the best messenger for this stuff, lol.
It’s also kinda hard to have this discussion because the word “love” is not something that people can really agree on. These two people got different ideas of love to the point you might as well call it two separate emotions.
The new people had their sprites chosen PERFECTLY. Specially Gregory Edgeworth. Though Adriana Venti being Calisto Yew is funny, because I think she's the person with the most LOLs and LMAOs I've ever seen.
Gotta love those moments in debates When you start inventing hypothetical people for your hypothetical situations That’s the moment you either make a very solid point or lose the plot entirely
Really good to see you back mate, hope that pause you took was by all means good, and that new sprite is great, and surprisingly enough I binged myself some of your videos today, so I guess that was a kind of lucky accident. Also, completely out of topic but any opinions on the recent announcement of AAI Collection?
I feel the main problem is that people think of "True Love" as a separate feeling, rather than a combination of platonic love and lust. Love is when you genuinely care about the well-being of someone or something (A family member, a friend, a leader, a dream, etc.). It is created through reason and not exclusively for relationships with attraction. Lust is a natural feeling where you obsess over someone. It is triggered through feelings and purely manifests in relationships with attraction. "True love" is made when people reason that the best way to deal with their obsession over someone (while keeping the benefits) is to learn to genuinely care for them. In other words, loving someone is the socially acceptable way to deal with lust. This is probably why people have so many conflicting opinions on what is or isn't morally correct when it comes to lust, since you could come up with logical arguments to defend most opinions. Lust is simply unstable by nature. My Christian side wants the solution to all this to just be what I've been taught, but what the solution actually is, I can't (and probably shouldn't) say for certain. I just wanted to give my two cents.
Why do people always bring lust into this? Some people experience things through a split attraction model. Unless I secretly don't feel friendship for anyone except for sometimes when I get butterflies and itchy teeth???
@@EphemeralPseudonymI mentioned lust (or infatuation, if you prefer) because it was a major point not only to the video but my comment. As for the Split Attraction Model, I don't think it invalidates my point. Yes, people do experience attraction differently, but the attraction itself is fundamentally one-sided and meant to be possessive, and is therefore unstable. Perhaps it was my use of "Romantic", I didn't have the Split Attraction Model in mind when I wrote it (I'll do my best to edit it). My comment was never meant to insinuate anything about you or how you feel attraction. (That would just be foolish)
I love this channel. As someone who really loves debate, It's so fun to sit down with a snack or something and just watch interesting conversations, thoughts and jokes.
What really annoyed me about her is that she never bothered to explain why she thinks love brings out the best out of people. Instead, she just reverted back to that statement when she was out of arguments and never dared to question it or back it up in any way, as if its somehow true by default.
Definitely agree on the capital of semantics. Love is a complex subject, and reducing it to a single concept, I think, will not be able to completely capture the entirety of love. You're gonna need at least a few sentences or a paragraph, or even more
I have mixed feelings about love, romantic love anyway. It can be so lovely and soothing but at the same time. So controlling and blinding. Love can really blind you to the red flags. Almost all of the relationships I’ve witnessed have failed(?). From my parents, to three of my siblings, to myself and to my three best friends. Love is odd, Ted talk done lol
I usually do agree with FC on most stuff (except when it's bowl) but this is where he's really slammed the nail on. Love isn't all sunshines and rainbows, and people who think that way will get burned sooner or later. Love is a fire, a raging all encompassing fire that will burn everything and everyone you know if you let it. People who love you can hurt you in ways you don't even know, or think could be possible. I also dislike Miss Venti's "Familial love isn't love" take because that's just bullshit. There are literal stories about familial love trumping all kinds of disasters, and more hysterical strength feats are performed by a scared mother pulling out a fucking manhole cover with one arm than a guy you've been going out with for four years. As such, would you say that a mother who completely refuses to get her child vaccinated doesn't love them? Is simply believing that "A mother can do no harm to her child because she loves it" going to absolve the mother of all wrongdoings in this scenario? A misguided love is worse than hate, because here the person will wholeheartedly believe they're doing you good. The alcoholic may love you more than anything, but they're just human at the end of the day. And humans aren't infallible, they'll make mistakes again and again, and if their alcoholism is making it impossible for you to have a relationship, then EVEN IF THEY LOVE YOU TO BITS, FUCKING RUN! Also for "a person who hits you can never love you" thing. BDSM is a thing. Some people are different from your Disney World and think differently. Trying to simplify such a vast experience of the human condition is laughable at best and pitiful at worst.
This People forget platonic types of love are a thing that exists and it can sometimes be deeper/more rewarding than romantic love and usually doesn’t have all the same strings attached I did romantically date one of my friends but we didn’t work out, but I’d say i still platonically love them They’re wierd in all the best ways lol
Okay, but for real, though Maître sauvage is actually such a lovely person. I am feeling some parasocial, unrequited love for that human being, holy. They are just so damn cool, I admire MS a lot I think I want to be more like them and less like FC lmao
One of the most hilarious parts of this debate is that some people genuinely think "true" love exists. There's no true love, only one relationship you chose to stick around with and it worked out. You could have dropped it and had another relationship and it could have been true love too. You still love most of your ex-partners regardless of if you dumped them or not. You can love multiple people, and you can love them at the same time too. Also if this comes up in the video, i'm an idiot. Edit: It did come up with the "beat the disney out of you" line, sort of???
wow the first discussion where I find myself mostly disagreeing with Faux Cares atleast on the premise of argument. You were good faith about it; but I agree with the person represented by Gregory.
Not to mention we may hurt each other in our pursuit to better off ourselves for love's sake! Someone who carries all the work by themselves may make their significant other(s) feel useless; someone who decides to take therapy, go to the gym, and work more, may spend less in their relationship, hence nurture it less. Love is appreciation, but relationships are an agreement - there's no absolute "good", there's only what works for the participants!
Love has always been such a strange concept to me. I don't even know what it is, or if i've ever felt it before, because the way people describe it is so overly sentimental and pretentious that it loses all meaning to someone not already "in the know". Maybe i've never felt it, being the only single loser among my friend group who all have had several long relationships, maybe i felt it and suppressed the emotion due to insecurities. I know this wasn't the topic of the video, but i kinda hoped that a more in-depth discussion of love would shed a bit more light on the whole thing. Not surprised it hasn't happened though. So either i am way overthinking the emotion, and have loved like a quarter of the people i've met in my life, or i really am just an aroace husk of a person that was doomed from the start because of corrupted brain software
you're overthinking it, the way to go is to just try it out within safe boundaries. FC here is basically saying that this concept of true love leads to people going all-in instead of growing and learning and deciding whether you even *want* to love someone. In the perfect relationship, it'd come naturally, but that perfect person likely does not exist and will never exist.
The only way you can figure this out is to put yourself out there and see what works for you. If you have doubts about you being aroace, you should know that it is a spectrum really. Aroace people can still feel romantic love and be in relationships. It’s normal.
2:22 How the hell you going to shoot down having an open relationship(And I assuming poly as well) and say you love both equally and you built different.
Social programming most likely. If he genuinely feels like he loves both, and that they are both okay with an open relationship, he’d still reject it because we’ve been taught such relationships are shallow, selfish, and prone to failure.
It’s about the shame really. Society generally looks down upon this type of relationship (using Adriana’s line of logic regarding promiscuity to justify it). Even though I think C.O acted poorly in not being sincere with his current girlfriend about this other woman, I wish him all the best and hope he finds the solution with the least amount of heartbreak.
Cause it's not that simple? Monogamous people can love multiple people at once too, but the idea of being in a relationship with more than one person is not on the table for them. For instance, I despise the idea of being in a relationship with multiple people, but I can have feelings for more than one person, but I would focus on the partner who I am with rather than lead anyone else on. Poly is not always to easy option to solve emotional spread. Doubly so, it didn't start out polyamorous. If you're going to be poly, your relationship should start out poly.
@@Drakon_Minaka I think if he didn't say he was built differently I wouldn't have such a visceral reaction to his dilemma. He acknowledge the fact his tendencies is not the norm yet he will restrict himself to the social norms which doesn't fit him. Another point is he state that his love with non-partner is as strong as the one with his partner which quite frankly is impossible. If your love for non-partner is just as strong as your love for your partner you are basically in relationship with another woman without the titles. These two conditions is what prompt to me to believe perhaps he should look into ethnical non-monogamy. In total, I agree with your statement that monogamous people can love multiple people at once however I believe if your love for one or multiple of them is as the same as your partner perhaps you are in titleless relationship with them or wrong about your feelings. Poly and ethical non-monogamy isn't always the answer to a relationship problem. Yet also acknowledge people don't look into those things due to a social stigmas, ignorance, and social dogmatism. However your advice about starting the relationship as poly if you roll that way is good rather than get with someone who proclaim to be monogamous and convince them. Also what is emotional spread
@@horushyperion76 I just used "emotional spread" to refer to "liking more than one person at a time" because I was tired while commenting and was blanking on how to properly say it lol. It made sense in my mind at the time, "my emotions are spread out amongst multiple people."
Finally got to watch this. You managed to describe the core idea of my insecurity about falling in love. I don’t think I could tell whether I‘m in love or infatuated; especially since sometimes I‘ve thought I’ve been in love but later, after seeing a different person under their mask, I‘ve realised I was infatuated, but couldn’t tell. I guess it‘s hard to be rational when you’re wearing rose tinted glasses.
As an Aromantic Asexual, this topic has always fascinated me. I've always personally believed (besides my lack of interest in relationships) that the responsibility is just too high. We've created this cultural normalization of finding someone to spend an entire lifetime with, and that just seems incredibly complicated, challenging, and dangerous. Like, I used to think people were friends with individuals for a while, got to know them thoroughly, and that blossomed into a lover's relationship, but I've found that's a lot more uncommon than I originally believed. It seems that the person someone agrees to spend a lifetime of sharing responsibilities and learning to live with is picked based only on the fun, positive qualities your perception of that person is. Plus any specific attractions or advantages you'd think being in a relationship with that person would involve. I honestly think there should be less stigmatizations between relationships. I feel like the line between friend and lover is much too large of a gap. It's either a person you know somewhat surface-level and experience fun times with, or a person you spend your entire life sharing practically everything with. I don't think love is period good or bad, I just think that the way we've created it culturally makes it so we aren't "practiced" and that we make that commitment too soon. But eh. This is all rambling from someone who doesn't intend to have anything more than a platonic relationship with anyone ever, so my opinion is probably weaker than others. Either way, great to have you back, FBI!
If you can hate someone for bad/incorrect reasons, you can love someone for bad/incorrect reasons. Emotions can even be totally arbitrary. It's 99% of the reason bigotry exists. Both negative bigotry & positive bigotry like respecting someone just because they're a certain race/gender/sexuality/whatever. Like you can argue all day about why someone shouldn't hate women for the pandering committed by a male writer but they still will. They're wrong to hate someone for such a ridiculous reason but the hatred is still real. Similarly, a lot of abuse victims love their abusers & it's a misguided dangerous unearned love but it's still love. It's why someone can testify against their own kid in a murder case but still cry when said kid goes to prison as planned. Attachments are often easily made but much harder to break. I also agree that it's possible for love to exist without concern for the other's well being. There's a psychological term called "dark empath", which refers to people who feel empathy but will torment innocent people anyway because they understand how they make you feel & enjoy making you feel that way. Their behavior can be very similar to a narcissist but they have a better understanding of what they're doing to you & how to keep doing it. I think the idea that love can't exist without good intent is largely based on the false assumption that every evil person is a sociopath, a psychopath, or a person with anger issues caused by a tragic past. There are people who build up a relationship with someone they have a special bond with & then torment that person just because they think that person's suffering is beautiful, cute, attractive, or otherwise charming. It's deranged but reality often is deranged when it comes to emotions. People need to understand that a person who loves them & can't live without them can still be a remorseless danger to them. They may fall apart if you leave but that doesn't mean they'll improve if you stay.
Nice vid, it was nice to read! I was wonderin where you've been. The artwork you did for the sprite is great! I really like the little details like the markings under the eyes and the french earring, the outfit is pretty unique as well. The primary colors used here also look great! I'll note though that a lighter black probably should be used for the hair as pure #000000 black for shading usually doesn't look that nice, tends to be better for stuff like lineart. The sprite is still very pretty and dynamic tho!
Adriana forgets the very obvious flaw in her argument that you cannot love more than one person: polyamory. The concept lives and dies by the idea that love for multiple people is possible. Even if you refute the idea that romantic love can be felt for more than one, you make a silly distinction between romantic love and every other type of love: platonic, familial, etc. Just as you love your mother and father, you can love two people at once. This doesn't necessarily mean this is a good idea, just that it is possible. Critical O isn't lying to himself. EDIT: within a minute of typing this out, Sauvage brings up this exact point. My mistake lol
Glad you came back FC. Big fan of yours. Love your witty yet precise writting style, as well as the thoughtful and transformative debates your videos bring to the table. Keep it up!!!!!!!
Love is simply an emotion, and like all emotions there is nothing inherently good or bad about it. Like all emotions it is simply a reflection of the person experiencing it. Even if we define it as wanting what's best for someone else, that looks very different depending on what you consider as being "best" for them. Wanting to be better for someone changes drastically depending on what you consider "better" to be. Love can bring out the best in people, by only by their own metric of best. If a person's metrics are harmful, their love will be harmful, if a person's metrics are helpful, their love will be helpful.
Wait, you got people to agree with you? On the internet? In the 2020s? Is it possible to learn this power? In all seriousness, one point I'd like to make is that virtues easily become or at least feed into vices in excess or the right situation. Where does courage become recklessness? Where does skepticism become paranoia? Hell, we literally have a word for excessive confidence. The reason love brings out the best AND worst in people? Because they are very frequently rooted in the same things. I feel like it's less that love brings out the best/worst in people and more that it amplifies what's already there.
Man I loved Franziska Von Korra, speaking about the video the unrequited love part hit hard, I spent like 8 years with an unrequited love, but well at least I got an engineering degree during those years and I don't know if I could have done it without that girl
“Love brings out the best in people, you wouldn’t hurt someone you love” !! Spoilers for Moral Orel below !! This makes me think of Moral Orel, for a very specific reason. In Season 3, Episode 8, Passing, Clay Puppington (the Antagonist and the Protagonist’s father) is reflecting on his childhood as he presents a family heirloom (a gun) to his son, Orel (the Protagonist), for a hunting trip that they plan to do. In this episode, we find out the childhood of Clay Puppington and why he brings Orel on a camping trip, for the reason he never got to do it himself. But in the episode, we also find out why Clay spanks Orel. In his childhood, Clay’s mother had gone through several miscarriages before having Clay (all of which happened by abuse of drugs and alcohol), treating Clay like an angel. But when she told young Clay this, being the spoiled brat that he was, he was upset that he wasn’t the first child that his Mother had conceived. This resulted in a TH-camr-Like prank (he pretended to be dead) which when he revealed was a prank, his Mother had a heart attack (Edit: I forgot to mention but she had heart problems prior to the prank) because of everything and died. After his mother’s death, his father (who didn’t think of him so highly in the first place, since Clay’s mother always put her attention on Clay and never on him after his birth) was about to slap Clay across the face, but stopped himself, saying, “You’re not even worth it”. This line implanted a disordered view on love and worth, basically believing that getting hurt by someone, means that they love you, and vice versa. This belief resulted in Clay Puppington hurting others as a way of showing his love to them and telling them he thinks is worthy. This is the main reason as to why Clay Puppington hits Orel in almost every episode they are together. This stops in Episode 12 of the same season, Nesting, in which after getting eggs outlawed (Edit: By Clay after being convinced by Orel and a grotesque fever dream like sexual fantasy about eggs) (and after the camping trip which resulted in Orel permanently limping for the rest of his life after getting shot by his father in a very drunken state), the Librarian, Miss Censordoll, tries to run for Mayor of Moralton (the place they live in) (Edit: Miss Censordoll actually likes eggs- Orel wanted them gone when he found out they were birthed by chickens- and used the leverage of Clay outlawing eggs as a means to get him out of office and her into office). Since Clay Puppington was the Mayor, he was extremely upset by this, even more so after he learned Orel was helping her. Because of this and the camping trip, when he told Orel to meet him in his office (where Orel gets disciplined), he doesn’t spank Orel, because he betrayed him and doesn’t view him worthy of his love anymore (Edit: Also because he was losing control of Orel, which made him even more mad at Orel). This is really significant too, since he doesn’t beat his other son, Shapey, because he believes that he isn’t his son and his wife had an affair (which she totally did), and he doesn’t beat his wife either, since they only married because Bloberta (Clay’s wife, Orel’s mom) just wanted to get married out of jealousy that she wasn’t getting married while everyone else was, and Clay never loved her in the first place, only marrying when she convinced him to. His other lover, Coach Stopframe (who Bloberta definitely cheated on Clay with), doesn’t get physically hurt by him but they are in a perpetual state of hook ups and they break up at the series finale anyway so… My main point is that the idea of not hurting someone because you love them is optimistic thinking yet wrong. Sometimes, people grow up around abuse thinking that is what love is like. Sometimes, people were told at a young age being hit means the person loves them and believed them. Sometimes, people think being hit is a sign of worth and respect. Sometimes, people abuse is equivalent to love.
Well, I found this very good! Both very thoughtful and entertaining at the same time! Thank you for this. I wish and hope that you derive at least as much pleasure and satisfaction from doing all this (both participating in the discussion, and then editing a video out of it) as I do from watchinn and reading it!
My friend is in a pretty weird relationship right now and I felt like I haven't been able to help, but this video being uploaded almost feels like an act of God. I feel like this information would help my friend. I know it wasn't made for me in particular, but thank you French Baguette Man.
I can't believe you created God, FC. That's crazy... In all seriousness, it's nice to see another one of these, I love the new sprite too! What was your inspirations if I may ask? Oh, and I hope Critical is doing okay. Poor guy must be sweating having to literally choose between pressing one of two buttons.... as far as I understand it anyways. Wonderful work, regardless!! EDIT: THE FUCKING "THERE IS EGO IN LEGO" BIT KILLED ME LMFAO
Venti seems to be the member of the friend group that consistently has the worst takes on every situation regardless of context. ALSO, people who use 'lmao' in every other sentence provoke instinctive hatred in me. You don't sound cute you sound obscenely condescending.
Oh that's great to see you again, lad! The video as always funny and informative, and I hooe you're doing well. I am convinced to joined the Discord sercer now
FC's whole argument basically falls on the fact that love, just like any emotion, is inherently irrational. All emotions are vestigial states that helped our ancestors survive by basically "taking over" their consciousness to flee from danger/pursue situations in which they would survive better. As we evolved, we learned rationality, but we forget that the human experience is partly outside of the scopes of rationality. Hence, love isn't inherently virtuous because virtues only exist in the scope of rationality
Okay this video is a great example of people not understanding the 3 forms of love as proposed by the greeks. Those being Eros, Philia, and Agape. Eros is romantic love with ones spouse. Philia is familial love and friendships, and Agape is the love of God and of the truths that brings. These are basically the bedrock of all other types of love that without can in fact turn love vile or simply into hatred. It's like those 2 sayings about love, "All is fair in love and war."and "If a child does not feel loved in a village when growing up, he will burn it down to feel it's warmth."
About love being a vicious gamble. Isn't the whole point that it's a leap of faith? Love is not comfort in knowing the other person, love is stepping outside that comfort zone and commiting oneself to another without necessarily knowing everything about them. The whole point is that it IS scary, but that it's worth it (although that's unfortunately not the case for everyone). I also disagree with your definition of love. Let's take ancient Greek for example, which distinguushes between fondness (philō) and true love (agapē) (there's also eros but that's more sexual passion). I think that's a very important distinction to make, which we don't anymore (partly because we live in an anglo-dominated world). I may just be projecting but I believe agapē love (true love) is self-sacrifice, not simply just being fond of someone or something, which is philō love. It's not that love makes someone magically better, but that love encourages us to mature, that we choose to commit ourselves to someone else. It's true, though, people go into it with false expectations. Love is beautiful, but it's also scary, but again, that's kind of the point.
Man been a while since I watched one of your vids, was reminded why I like them! Props to the sprite, really like it. Whatever may have happened or will with Critical O. I hope he got his thoughts in order, I agree a lot with your ideas and whilst definitely difficult to put into reason to the other two, I'm glad they saw through it. This is definitely a subject that should be brought more to attention since the stereotypical love really makes so many people make god awful decisions. In any case I hope you're doing well and have a nice day/evening/night.
"idgaf" Sorry folks, pack it up. Debate over, Venti won. In all seriousness, generalising this sort of thing like saying "poly people are just lonely and horny" always leads to misjudging situations. I sympathize with C.O. and wish him the best, he's really not in an easy situation and I hope he'll manage to resolve it in a way that doesn't hurt anyone involved. A pretty nice discussion to see unfold in general. I personally am on FC's side on this one (unusual when ti comes to love). It's a complex thing that's a mix of attachment and many other emotions that would take way more research to fully describe than I care to do for the sake of one sily comment. But it is not mutually exclusive with anything else, be it virtues, flaws, or even distaste or hate. I'm sure there are domestic abusers who do love their partner (in whatever twisted or dehumanizing way). These things and situations are just messy to approach in general, and I can't help but feel like it's got to be a case-by-case basis every time. (And to add on the monogamy thing, widows and widowers are perfectly able to have had a very loving relationship, lose their partner, and then manage to fall in love again. That's not usually seen in species that truly mate for life)
The fact that the “seven-year itch” exists and is surprisingly reproducible strongly suggests that humans are some weird mix of non-monogamous K-strategy. Both parents are necessary for raising the child well, and that social bond will never go away, but every seven years or so both parties will experience a strong dissatisfaction in their relationship and strain it, potentially moving to a different one (or none). It’s not like monogamous birds that will usually form such intense life-long pair bonds (though those are absolutely a feature in humans,) but it’s also way stronger an attachment than most of these that end up in nature. It’s probably most analogous to average birds, where they’ll pair bond and work together, but at the end of the year they go shopping again and *may* not choose the same partner. I will especially note that one could probably expect to have 2-3 partners over their lifetime in a world perfectly designed for human satisfaction. During prime reproductive age, it’d be someone who makes life more fun; as age starts to catch up it moves onto someone intellectually challenging or comfortable and responsible; and then, as an elder, it’s whichever of those two fits best with your position in the community. It’s also not lost on me that around 5 or 6 years old is when, even in the modern world, we actively outsource the raising of our children. 7 years later, they usually went to an apprenticeship, now they go to high school (sometimes a boarding school); and then 7 years after that they’re expected to be independent. This sure lines up conveniently with a 7 year cycle of passion -> strong commitment-> dissatisfaction.
I think the discussion got unproper references of what love is to be able to expand on the idea. For the general public, love is poetry at best and imprudence at worst, but love alone is only an addictive impulse. How we react to it and how we express ourselves about it is more of a personal merit for the circunstances and experience we live with than the strength of the feeling. The strength of the feeling, if applied to an unprepared person, can be terrifyingly destructive. Faux Cares is correct on that. I say that because the same extreme reaction i had to infatuation to the point of blind adoration that made me develop a sense of devotion is what can easily turn the average person in a dangerous police case about possessive behavior. And reinforcing even more Faux Cares perspective, it was not the genuinity of my feelings that made me stay on the line, it was fear, extreme fear coming from the trauma of being alone after always scaring everyone in my infancy. Yet, this alone is not enough, because i also required the conscience to realize why i scared people and how to stop it. Our notion of love is not actually the feeling, but the good outcomes of this feeling while disregarding the bad outcomes since we glorified and poetized what love is.
![Arin has some notes | Danganronpa V3 [11]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kjdCFirnZ5Y/mqdefault.jpg)
![Arin has some notes | Danganronpa V3 [11]](/img/tr.png)
The new sprite was not made by Pele Mele. He's found bigger opportunities elsewhere, and we're very happy for him, but for the same reason I took it into my hands to make the new sprite myself. Never done this before. Consider supporting me on Patreon so I can improve, and make more! (Link in the description.)
is there also a way to directly or indirectly support Pele Mele?
Can this not also be said about every type of human interaction?
I can't help but notice the earring change color whenever the whip is held up high
@@yoster39 I will fix it.
Damn man I really love the new sprites, keep it up bro.
I audibly chuckled in public transport at "bro just invented god"
Babe wake up, it is time to reconsider an aspect of existence you were taking for granted again.
I really liked this trio.
Venti kept making logical holes, but understandably so, as "love" is complicated. Her view of "love" was intriguing, but I don't think she actually could have given it, since she kept contradicting herself for the sake of the argument.
Sauvage was respectful, and gave good insight to his point of view without being overly rude, which is surprisingly rare. Actually, I liked that he argued against both of you two, without fully disagreeing with either of you two.
The way all three of you bounced was just really fun, especially at the end, like Venti was so done, and Sauvage noted what you said.
These rare times of FBI actually having a consistent and finished conversation without sidetracking.
I didn’t really like her, she just seems like an ignorant person who can’t fathom not having the “correct” perspective all the time and will just insult those who disagree with her.
@@_Sloppyham Yeah, and I suppose you are a perfect being without biases and misconceptions. She is consistent with her beliefs, that's enough to make a fruitful conversation.
@@mahpell7173 just a very presumptuous comment all around. Saying I don’t like a person because of a character flaw doesn’t translate to “I’m perfection.” When you make accusations, try to have something beyond a baseless claim to back you up, alright?
And let’s not pretend we can’t call out people’s bullshit because we aren’t perfect ourselves (if you plan on going that route).
@@mahpell7173 "fruitful" her ass was not fruitful aside from dropping room temperature takes she literally just went like "i don't care" and "idgaf" because she had no means nor actual thought to back her argument only to get back into the argument when she noticed "faux" was being disagreed with she literally calls all her self-deluded opinions a "fact" or "truth" please don't lie and say you can make a fruitful conversation with someone like this
On the alcoholism argument: My dad used to smoke when he was alive. He knew how awful it was as my grandmother also smoked and died from cancer as a result. My mom tried to make him quit. Instead, he hid it from her. Love for my mom didn’t necessarily make him better or bring out the best in him. It just made things better *for my mom.*
However, what *did* bring out the best in him was love for my brother and I. More specifically, I basically bullied him into quitting by being a child who hated the smell and came home with D.A.R.E pamphlets saying “See? See? It’s bad for you.”
The point I’m trying to make is that love (of any kind) *can* bring out the best in people, but do not expect it to. Do not cling onto the hope it will and only believe love helps someone when you see it do so (when you see results).
My dad died due to unrelated causes years later. He died addicted to vaping, which was his way of quitting smoking. My dad quit smoking for my brother and I. So that he could be alive for us. He bettered himself out of love, but he also could’ve done it earlier for my mom.
I uh… sounds like what happened is the guilt made him do so, especially with you constantly pushing for it.
Sorry to be rude, but that’s not out of love, that’s out of pressure. If it was out of love, he would have done so irrespective of any pressure, because he would have wanted to improve himself regardless of whether or not his family had issues with it.
Not that it’s a bad thing. Addicts often need that pressure to have any hope of breaking the cycle.
@@anubis7457No, that's just the link in-between. Love causes guilt, guilt causes pressure, pressure causes change. If he would have wanted to improve himself, that would either mean that he was already planning on quitting, so the very small pressure from love was enough, or that changing for the better is a part of his morales, which just changes the cause of guilt.
P.S. That's not rude, even though someone could think so. If your reasoning isn't enough to understand that it isn't, then saying "sorry to be rude" won't change anything.
@@anubis7457 It's both. While not close to cigarrettes, I was addicted to something and I know I have a problem but couldn't stop until both love and pressure pushed me out of it. OOP's father stopped because the love and pressure was greater than the addiction.
It can depend from people to people, but love alone can't change someone. I know people who changed for the better because of love, and there's me who needed love and the pressure from them to change.
@@fishingfishka To clarify, what I meant was that if he had the mentality “I love my family and want to spend more time with them, so I should quit smoking.” I would consider that an act of love.
“My family is constantly reminding me about my smoking habits and I know how disappointed they are in me.” has a much stronger element of shame than love, although I would say love might be present in the “equation.”
As FC said in the video, love might get the ball rolling but the actual necessary catalyst is shame.
@@anubis7457 Shame is present in both, it's just that in the second variant he is much more addicted, so much more shame is required, so much more signs of disappointment are needed.
I think the reason people will say things like “If he hits you, he doesn’t love you, so leave him” is because almost everyone has the belief that love makes people better. A lot of victims will stay out of the misguided belief that they can “fix” their abusive spouse with the power of love. By contradicting the idea that their abuser loves them, it’s a way to convince them to leave or even inspire the correct feeling of rage in response to their mistreatment.
However, even though I understand the logic behind the statement, I think your approach of “his feelings be damned, leave if he hits you no matter what” is much better, since, as you pointed out, even abusers can and often do express affection.
As far as I’m concerned, if someone hits you or otherwise treats you like shit, their feelings are no longer important and should not factor into any decision you make going forward.
“Is because almost everyone has the belief loves people better” is exactly what the video said ans exactly what FC is criticizing.
Yeah, the “he wouldn’t hit you if he loved you” line has always seemed to me more like a persuasion tool for abuse victims stuck in the mindset where they feel the need to stay and fix their abuser, rather than a statement of truth. That said, though, it definitely is taken as a truth by a lot of people.
Although, I'd like to add that just "they don't love you because they hit you" or "you should leave because they hit you" should also take into account the severity. How much does your lover hurt you and for what reason? Perhaps you had a really bad argument about something you feel strongly on but that is still not closely related to your relationship or personal lives. Perhaps they have their own anger issues that, while a big enough problem to make them willing to hit you or stay mad for a period of time, but are otherwise mostly fine. The problem isn't just "they can bring themselves to hurt you", it's what exactly brings them to the point of hurting you and how severe of a problem it is for you and them.
I think much of this argument would be dependent on how you define the two words. After all, love is the capital of semantics
The person played by the detective was surprisingly respectful and articulate. Would love to see more of him.
Based Gregory Edgeworth sprite
paraphrased by fc himself!
That was Gregory Edgeworth, and he's exactly like that in the games too.
It was actually a defense attorney that person get as a avatar
Agreed that person was honestly great
I was just wondering why there hadn't been a new video in a while. Turns out FC was busy transitionning.
FC finally completed his metamorphosis to a French to a Frenchette. I’m so proud of her.
Don’t you mean… her?
I noticed that too! Is she trans or smth?
Bro forgor💀 o e
???😅
Maybe the real love were the friends we made along the way
In my sexuality textbook I read for a class, there is actually a chapter on love, and a part of that chapter includes “Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love”. It basically details the 3 components of love (passion: quick and strong physical/sexual attraction, intimacy: emotional connection and deep understanding of another, and commitment: the decision to maintain a relationship with someone.) It also details the relationship types that have combinations of these aspects. Love that includes only passion is called “Infatuation”. So I’d say that infatuation is not necessarily “not love” but more an incomplete or short-sighted type of love. It is still a type of love, but still lacks some major components, and may not last long.
Isn't that exactly what FC was arguing?
@@ssjbread2803 no. plague used "short sighted love" more as in the lack of a better term. OC claimed its part of love when the lack of two major components that being intimacy and commitment, is saying its NOT love. infatuation is a quick strong passion but lacks intimacy and the commitment by definition. the problem is OC does slightly conflates attraction with love.
"Your parents aren't in love with you." - "Your parents are cousins."
Your honor, we witnessed a murder in the courtroom today, where are the bailiffs?!
If this was on any Discord I've been part of, I feel like it'd just lead to people singing What is Love.
Baby don't hurt me
Don't hurt me.
No more
Baby don't hurt me.
@@emanyzal9813 what is love?
I haven't been back in a while, y'all are still as beautifully poetic and chaotic as ever.
People knows love has no rules, then they lecture others about what true love is like.
"I fucking hate love" -Baguette the Hedgehog, 2024.
I honestly get FC falling in love after managing to change someone's mind at the end, that shit is so rare due to how dogmatic opinions are that it must have felt like true glory
When the hell did the Frenchman embrace his inner Frenchwoman?
always was a woman
When he started using Von Karma when talking to the audience
And he's French after all. Can't say I'm surprised
A while ago really
According to bowl, they are the same.
I like that you added Korra's hair style to Franziska, and i might say, that you did a very good job with modeling, i would like to see how you would draw others in your style
Ngl I am of the same opinion as Faux Cares here, this debate was honestly very enjoyable to watch as it brought a lot of points that were thoughtful and interesting. I just really liked it
He has found a way to mix shadow the hedgehog and von karma. I "Love" your new sprite FC 😂.
I will admit I have never understood poly relationships I have thought about it a bunch and I just can't wrap my head around the feeling but I'm not going to say that their feelings are invalid or wrong. My sister thinks snakes are cute which I also don't understand but I'm not gonna say that her feelings are wrong.
It's ultimately just another thing you have to talk about when you get into a relationship with someone.
Bro has never seen a Burmese Python.
@@Samurrot07 😐
Blud never seen an arabian sand boa
@@Samurrot07 20ft
"Pride is not the opposite of shame, but it's source."
Happy pride month, shame month is right after
"You're really going to get a kick out of this, FC.... the true meaning of love was in my sleeve this whole time!"
@@LaCabraAsada goated avatar reference lol
@@LaCabraAsadaHoly shit a Eugene pfp
@@duxumbrarum People still remember that game? Wow
Toxic people are toxic to the people they love.
Like once my mom says I cant play video games because theyll make me violent then she beat me up.
i will say lmao because the delivery of that line was gold
but also bruh what a shit mom
How old are you? If you're above 18, get out of the house asap
@@BlindBosnian That was like 18 years ago
Sauvage seems like a chill guy
The way he addressed CO made me like him right away. At least he didn't laugh at someone in the middle of a pretty difficult situation.
@@leirbag1595 CO?
@@leirbag1595 ok nvm
Yeah i hope he and FC have a happy wedding.
29:08 lmfao, truly a hopeless romantic
Come to think of it, it would be interesting to apply this question in anime/manga/webnovels that include harems.
... Kinda makes me want to think about it, considering how one of the lead characters in a novel of mine has a harem.
28:01 Someone's really gotta' beat the Disney out of you...
Something I'd add is that love and sex are not mutually inclusive: you can fuck without love, and you can love without fucking! And we all love multiple people all the time - our families, our friends, the people we look up to...
Y'know, one thing I'd have liked to see talked about is one-sided love. Just because you love someone doesn't mean that they'll love you back, and that brings a very good question, do you give up, in that scenario, or do you persist? Was it not true love if you just move on with your life, or was it not true love if the other person doesn't return it? You're certainly not owed the other person's love, so what is one to do?
Some may say it's infatuation, but what if you've spent so much time with that person they see you as a sibling due to how well they know you? Where there's no question that you know each other as well as can be known?
There's so much more that can be discussed here, and this entire branch of the argument is just left untouched in its entirety.
An indepth argument with this topic is very much a desire of mine. I've known people (including myself) that have been part of an unrequited love for almost more than half a decade. It was not pretty, there have been periods where we have persisted and gave up, and yet found ourselves back into the metaphorical front door of that person. Would that love for that person be considered true love or invalid, due to reciprocating or not giving enough signs that the person was into us? Was it purely infatuation? That I would like to see.
@@whyudoit4009 It doesn't matter if it's true love or not. If your feelings for that person are making your life difficult, then the best course of action is to overcome those emotions through mindfulness, discipline and focus on what truly matters to you in life.
After a long argument with someone there's always that question of wether you successfully convinced someone or you just lost hours arguing at a wall
I mean this is not 100% a win, but bringing new perspectives to the table that people actually keep in mind is very comforting
The "objection" had a french accent. That's interesting.
Or is that an actual voice clip in Ace Attorney
Ace Attorney translates the line for different languages, and I found the French line.
If I’m not mistaken, it’s the French version of Fransizka’s Objection!
@@frenchbaguetteintelligence ah, i see. Thank you for explaining
A feat as difficult as landing on Mars, making people actually agree with FC
That "adriana" person makes it sound like love is a conscious and logical choice on a person's part, when emotions are anything BUT that. You don't "choose" to fall in love with a person or more, it just happens. You happen to find different things about different that you like about them, and over time liking that person may develop into "I want to be with them"
I think it’s deeper than that. “Love” the noun and “love” the verb are two very different things, which cannot be said for many emotions, e.g. “happy” is not a verb, “sad” is not a verb, etc.
“Falling in love” is not a toggle switch that remains on at all times. When feeling attracted to someone or when a new relationship begins, everything is new and exciting and many things “just happen” because of that, but as time passes the novelty of your relationship eventually fades, and when that happens, the thing that gives the relationship staying power and keeps the love alive is commitment, which requires intentionality, aka choice. You choose to be loyal to your partner. You choose to forgo the possibility of dating anyone else. You choose to intertwine your life with theirs.
Adriana is describing “love” the verb, not “love” the noun. Bell Hooks describes the concept of a “love ethic” in her book All About Love, which is defined as the way a person gives space and shows up for someone else in a way that promotes the emotional and spiritual growth of both parties. Every aspect of this is a choice, an intention.
All that being said, I found Adriana to be very aggressive and annoying for the most part, and she seems to be very close-minded when it comes to the idea of polyamory, so she’s not really the best messenger for this stuff, lol.
It’s also kinda hard to have this discussion because the word “love” is not something that people can really agree on. These two people got different ideas of love to the point you might as well call it two separate emotions.
Come back after a while to see FC embrace his inner -Widowmaker- Von Karma W timeline
The new people had their sprites chosen PERFECTLY. Specially Gregory Edgeworth. Though Adriana Venti being Calisto Yew is funny, because I think she's the person with the most LOLs and LMAOs I've ever seen.
Gregory’s damage sprite in particular really fits him, like he’s saying “not bad!”
Bro wakes up from 4 months of slumber only to dunk on love...again.
Amazing!
Bro just invented God.
😐
The createrrrr
Gotta love those moments in debates
When you start inventing hypothetical people for your hypothetical situations
That’s the moment you either make a very solid point or lose the plot entirely
Glad to see you’re back, missed your content a lot! :D
Ham is that you?
@@intelchip_x86 hello
Maître Sauvage: I agree with you.
Faux Cares: Wait, is that legal ?
this ain’t a battle bud
@@joechristo2 It's a callback to the chatgpt video. FC manadged to change the mind of the AI and jokingly went "wait, that's not allowed".
On another note the character design for FC is great! I love the little French flag earing
Wowzers, it's been a while.
You did a great job with the new sprite, i'll enjoy this a lot
Thank you!
Really good to see you back mate, hope that pause you took was by all means good, and that new sprite is great, and surprisingly enough I binged myself some of your videos today, so I guess that was a kind of lucky accident. Also, completely out of topic but any opinions on the recent announcement of AAI Collection?
I'm very happy the collection is coming. Hopefully it'll make AA videos trend again.
I feel the main problem is that people think of "True Love" as a separate feeling, rather than a combination of platonic love and lust.
Love is when you genuinely care about the well-being of someone or something (A family member, a friend, a leader, a dream, etc.). It is created through reason and not exclusively for relationships with attraction.
Lust is a natural feeling where you obsess over someone. It is triggered through feelings and purely manifests in relationships with attraction.
"True love" is made when people reason that the best way to deal with their obsession over someone (while keeping the benefits) is to learn to genuinely care for them. In other words, loving someone is the socially acceptable way to deal with lust.
This is probably why people have so many conflicting opinions on what is or isn't morally correct when it comes to lust, since you could come up with logical arguments to defend most opinions. Lust is simply unstable by nature.
My Christian side wants the solution to all this to just be what I've been taught, but what the solution actually is, I can't (and probably shouldn't) say for certain. I just wanted to give my two cents.
Why do people always bring lust into this? Some people experience things through a split attraction model. Unless I secretly don't feel friendship for anyone except for sometimes when I get butterflies and itchy teeth???
@@EphemeralPseudonymI mentioned lust (or infatuation, if you prefer) because it was a major point not only to the video but my comment. As for the Split Attraction Model, I don't think it invalidates my point. Yes, people do experience attraction differently, but the attraction itself is fundamentally one-sided and meant to be possessive, and is therefore unstable. Perhaps it was my use of "Romantic", I didn't have the Split Attraction Model in mind when I wrote it (I'll do my best to edit it). My comment was never meant to insinuate anything about you or how you feel attraction. (That would just be foolish)
I love this channel. As someone who really loves debate, It's so fun to sit down with a snack or something and just watch interesting conversations, thoughts and jokes.
Oh dang, I wasn’t aware FC returned! It’s always so pleasant to come back and just watch the chaos unfold. Glad you’re back.
That girl is the definition of "I can fix him." You can't "fix" someone. The only person you can "fix" would be yourself
What really annoyed me about her is that she never bothered to explain why she thinks love brings out the best out of people. Instead, she just reverted back to that statement when she was out of arguments and never dared to question it or back it up in any way, as if its somehow true by default.
BABE WAKE UP. FC DROPPED ANOTHER VIDEO.
Definitely agree on the capital of semantics. Love is a complex subject, and reducing it to a single concept, I think, will not be able to completely capture the entirety of love. You're gonna need at least a few sentences or a paragraph, or even more
FC is the only person i've ever seen arguing semantics and still able to progress the conversation
I have mixed feelings about love, romantic love anyway. It can be so lovely and soothing but at the same time. So controlling and blinding. Love can really blind you to the red flags. Almost all of the relationships I’ve witnessed have failed(?). From my parents, to three of my siblings, to myself and to my three best friends. Love is odd, Ted talk done lol
16:21
Oh no it's the Volkeh music....
But it's reversed expectation, I was prepared for her to go on full Joker arc.
I usually do agree with FC on most stuff (except when it's bowl) but this is where he's really slammed the nail on. Love isn't all sunshines and rainbows, and people who think that way will get burned sooner or later. Love is a fire, a raging all encompassing fire that will burn everything and everyone you know if you let it. People who love you can hurt you in ways you don't even know, or think could be possible.
I also dislike Miss Venti's "Familial love isn't love" take because that's just bullshit. There are literal stories about familial love trumping all kinds of disasters, and more hysterical strength feats are performed by a scared mother pulling out a fucking manhole cover with one arm than a guy you've been going out with for four years.
As such, would you say that a mother who completely refuses to get her child vaccinated doesn't love them? Is simply believing that "A mother can do no harm to her child because she loves it" going to absolve the mother of all wrongdoings in this scenario? A misguided love is worse than hate, because here the person will wholeheartedly believe they're doing you good.
The alcoholic may love you more than anything, but they're just human at the end of the day. And humans aren't infallible, they'll make mistakes again and again, and if their alcoholism is making it impossible for you to have a relationship, then EVEN IF THEY LOVE YOU TO BITS, FUCKING RUN!
Also for "a person who hits you can never love you" thing. BDSM is a thing. Some people are different from your Disney World and think differently. Trying to simplify such a vast experience of the human condition is laughable at best and pitiful at worst.
Also, even if it's infatuation (which you argue is love) I'm deeply crushing on that new sprite of yours lmao.
This
People forget platonic types of love are a thing that exists and it can sometimes be deeper/more rewarding than romantic love and usually doesn’t have all the same strings attached
I did romantically date one of my friends but we didn’t work out, but I’d say i still platonically love them
They’re wierd in all the best ways lol
I do miss the use of Phoenix Wright for the frenchy, only because bowl being Edgeworth made the rivalry so much more iconic.
Bowl will match, it is inevitable
Okay, but for real, though
Maître sauvage is actually such a lovely person. I am feeling some parasocial, unrequited love for that human being, holy. They are just so damn cool, I admire MS a lot
I think I want to be more like them and less like FC lmao
One of the most hilarious parts of this debate is that some people genuinely think "true" love exists.
There's no true love, only one relationship you chose to stick around with and it worked out.
You could have dropped it and had another relationship and it could have been true love too. You still love most of your ex-partners regardless of if you dumped them or not. You can love multiple people, and you can love them at the same time too.
Also if this comes up in the video, i'm an idiot.
Edit: It did come up with the "beat the disney out of you" line, sort of???
wow the first discussion where I find myself mostly disagreeing with Faux Cares atleast on the premise of argument. You were good faith about it; but I agree with the person represented by Gregory.
Also holy sh*t the person represnted by Callisto Yew was kind of annoying imo.
I got an ad THE INSTANT Troglo got on screen. That fricking jumpscared me.
Not to mention we may hurt each other in our pursuit to better off ourselves for love's sake! Someone who carries all the work by themselves may make their significant other(s) feel useless; someone who decides to take therapy, go to the gym, and work more, may spend less in their relationship, hence nurture it less. Love is appreciation, but relationships are an agreement - there's no absolute "good", there's only what works for the participants!
Love has always been such a strange concept to me. I don't even know what it is, or if i've ever felt it before, because the way people describe it is so overly sentimental and pretentious that it loses all meaning to someone not already "in the know". Maybe i've never felt it, being the only single loser among my friend group who all have had several long relationships, maybe i felt it and suppressed the emotion due to insecurities.
I know this wasn't the topic of the video, but i kinda hoped that a more in-depth discussion of love would shed a bit more light on the whole thing. Not surprised it hasn't happened though. So either i am way overthinking the emotion, and have loved like a quarter of the people i've met in my life, or i really am just an aroace husk of a person that was doomed from the start because of corrupted brain software
you're overthinking it, the way to go is to just try it out within safe boundaries. FC here is basically saying that this concept of true love leads to people going all-in instead of growing and learning and deciding whether you even *want* to love someone. In the perfect relationship, it'd come naturally, but that perfect person likely does not exist and will never exist.
The only way you can figure this out is to put yourself out there and see what works for you. If you have doubts about you being aroace, you should know that it is a spectrum really. Aroace people can still feel romantic love and be in relationships. It’s normal.
Took me five minutes to realise you're the girl, but she 'sounded' familiar 😅
Yeah, it took me five minutes to realise I was the girl, too.
@@frenchbaguetteintelligence👀
LMFAO the "Bro invented god" part broke me so much
2:22 How the hell you going to shoot down having an open relationship(And I assuming poly as well) and say you love both equally and you built different.
Social programming most likely. If he genuinely feels like he loves both, and that they are both okay with an open relationship, he’d still reject it because we’ve been taught such relationships are shallow, selfish, and prone to failure.
It’s about the shame really. Society generally looks down upon this type of relationship (using Adriana’s line of logic regarding promiscuity to justify it).
Even though I think C.O acted poorly in not being sincere with his current girlfriend about this other woman, I wish him all the best and hope he finds the solution with the least amount of heartbreak.
Cause it's not that simple?
Monogamous people can love multiple people at once too, but the idea of being in a relationship with more than one person is not on the table for them. For instance, I despise the idea of being in a relationship with multiple people, but I can have feelings for more than one person, but I would focus on the partner who I am with rather than lead anyone else on.
Poly is not always to easy option to solve emotional spread. Doubly so, it didn't start out polyamorous. If you're going to be poly, your relationship should start out poly.
@@Drakon_Minaka I think if he didn't say he was built differently I wouldn't have such a visceral reaction to his dilemma. He acknowledge the fact his tendencies is not the norm yet he will restrict himself to the social norms which doesn't fit him. Another point is he state that his love with non-partner is as strong as the one with his partner which quite frankly is impossible. If your love for non-partner is just as strong as your love for your partner you are basically in relationship with another woman without the titles. These two conditions is what prompt to me to believe perhaps he should look into ethnical non-monogamy.
In total, I agree with your statement that monogamous people can love multiple people at once however I believe if your love for one or multiple of them is as the same as your partner perhaps you are in titleless relationship with them or wrong about your feelings.
Poly and ethical non-monogamy isn't always the answer to a relationship problem. Yet also acknowledge people don't look into those things due to a social stigmas, ignorance, and social dogmatism. However your advice about starting the relationship as poly if you roll that way is good rather than get with someone who proclaim to be monogamous and convince them. Also what is emotional spread
@@horushyperion76 I just used "emotional spread" to refer to "liking more than one person at a time" because I was tired while commenting and was blanking on how to properly say it lol. It made sense in my mind at the time, "my emotions are spread out amongst multiple people."
We're so back
Love that we're back at it again. Also love the new sprite FC!
Poor Adriana having to wipe all that lipstick off of their cheek over and over again, they should be more careful while applying their makeup.
Finally got to watch this. You managed to describe the core idea of my insecurity about falling in love. I don’t think I could tell whether I‘m in love or infatuated; especially since sometimes I‘ve thought I’ve been in love but later, after seeing a different person under their mask, I‘ve realised I was infatuated, but couldn’t tell. I guess it‘s hard to be rational when you’re wearing rose tinted glasses.
As an Aromantic Asexual, this topic has always fascinated me. I've always personally believed (besides my lack of interest in relationships) that the responsibility is just too high. We've created this cultural normalization of finding someone to spend an entire lifetime with, and that just seems incredibly complicated, challenging, and dangerous.
Like, I used to think people were friends with individuals for a while, got to know them thoroughly, and that blossomed into a lover's relationship, but I've found that's a lot more uncommon than I originally believed. It seems that the person someone agrees to spend a lifetime of sharing responsibilities and learning to live with is picked based only on the fun, positive qualities your perception of that person is. Plus any specific attractions or advantages you'd think being in a relationship with that person would involve.
I honestly think there should be less stigmatizations between relationships. I feel like the line between friend and lover is much too large of a gap. It's either a person you know somewhat surface-level and experience fun times with, or a person you spend your entire life sharing practically everything with.
I don't think love is period good or bad, I just think that the way we've created it culturally makes it so we aren't "practiced" and that we make that commitment too soon.
But eh. This is all rambling from someone who doesn't intend to have anything more than a platonic relationship with anyone ever, so my opinion is probably weaker than others. Either way, great to have you back, FBI!
Is this franziska's french voice ? That's clever
If you can hate someone for bad/incorrect reasons, you can love someone for bad/incorrect reasons. Emotions can even be totally arbitrary. It's 99% of the reason bigotry exists. Both negative bigotry & positive bigotry like respecting someone just because they're a certain race/gender/sexuality/whatever.
Like you can argue all day about why someone shouldn't hate women for the pandering committed by a male writer but they still will. They're wrong to hate someone for such a ridiculous reason but the hatred is still real.
Similarly, a lot of abuse victims love their abusers & it's a misguided dangerous unearned love but it's still love. It's why someone can testify against their own kid in a murder case but still cry when said kid goes to prison as planned. Attachments are often easily made but much harder to break.
I also agree that it's possible for love to exist without concern for the other's well being. There's a psychological term called "dark empath", which refers to people who feel empathy but will torment innocent people anyway because they understand how they make you feel & enjoy making you feel that way.
Their behavior can be very similar to a narcissist but they have a better understanding of what they're doing to you & how to keep doing it. I think the idea that love can't exist without good intent is largely based on the false assumption that every evil person is a sociopath, a psychopath, or a person with anger issues caused by a tragic past.
There are people who build up a relationship with someone they have a special bond with & then torment that person just because they think that person's suffering is beautiful, cute, attractive, or otherwise charming. It's deranged but reality often is deranged when it comes to emotions.
People need to understand that a person who loves them & can't live without them can still be a remorseless danger to them. They may fall apart if you leave but that doesn't mean they'll improve if you stay.
Nice vid, it was nice to read! I was wonderin where you've been.
The artwork you did for the sprite is great! I really like the little details like the markings under the eyes and the french earring, the outfit is pretty unique as well. The primary colors used here also look great! I'll note though that a lighter black probably should be used for the hair as pure #000000 black for shading usually doesn't look that nice, tends to be better for stuff like lineart. The sprite is still very pretty and dynamic tho!
Thank you. Perhaps as I immprove I will return to this sprite and remaster it.
Whenever something gets attributed to greed, I am reminded of Biggering where greed has an underlying issue of pride.
Adriana forgets the very obvious flaw in her argument that you cannot love more than one person: polyamory. The concept lives and dies by the idea that love for multiple people is possible. Even if you refute the idea that romantic love can be felt for more than one, you make a silly distinction between romantic love and every other type of love: platonic, familial, etc.
Just as you love your mother and father, you can love two people at once. This doesn't necessarily mean this is a good idea, just that it is possible. Critical O isn't lying to himself.
EDIT: within a minute of typing this out, Sauvage brings up this exact point. My mistake lol
Great minds think alike and all that
@@leirbag1595 You think my mind is great?
Are you free later?
Blame the lies, the deceit, the intent and the actions.
Never blame the emotion, even if ones moral compass is twisted.
Glad you came back FC. Big fan of yours. Love your witty yet precise writting style, as well as the thoughtful and transformative debates your videos bring to the table. Keep it up!!!!!!!
Much appreciated.
Love is simply an emotion, and like all emotions there is nothing inherently good or bad about it. Like all emotions it is simply a reflection of the person experiencing it.
Even if we define it as wanting what's best for someone else, that looks very different depending on what you consider as being "best" for them.
Wanting to be better for someone changes drastically depending on what you consider "better" to be.
Love can bring out the best in people, by only by their own metric of best. If a person's metrics are harmful, their love will be harmful, if a person's metrics are helpful, their love will be helpful.
16:04 my respect for you grows more and more
Man, I am surprised to see a new video after so long, but I'm not gonna complain anymore. Good work.
Wait, you got people to agree with you? On the internet? In the 2020s? Is it possible to learn this power?
In all seriousness, one point I'd like to make is that virtues easily become or at least feed into vices in excess or the right situation. Where does courage become recklessness? Where does skepticism become paranoia? Hell, we literally have a word for excessive confidence. The reason love brings out the best AND worst in people? Because they are very frequently rooted in the same things. I feel like it's less that love brings out the best/worst in people and more that it amplifies what's already there.
Man I loved Franziska Von Korra, speaking about the video the unrequited love part hit hard, I spent like 8 years with an unrequited love, but well at least I got an engineering degree during those years and I don't know if I could have done it without that girl
“Love brings out the best in people, you wouldn’t hurt someone you love”
!! Spoilers for Moral Orel below !!
This makes me think of Moral Orel, for a very specific reason.
In Season 3, Episode 8, Passing, Clay Puppington (the Antagonist and the Protagonist’s father) is reflecting on his childhood as he presents a family heirloom (a gun) to his son, Orel (the Protagonist), for a hunting trip that they plan to do. In this episode, we find out the childhood of Clay Puppington and why he brings Orel on a camping trip, for the reason he never got to do it himself. But in the episode, we also find out why Clay spanks Orel.
In his childhood, Clay’s mother had gone through several miscarriages before having Clay (all of which happened by abuse of drugs and alcohol), treating Clay like an angel. But when she told young Clay this, being the spoiled brat that he was, he was upset that he wasn’t the first child that his Mother had conceived. This resulted in a TH-camr-Like prank (he pretended to be dead) which when he revealed was a prank, his Mother had a heart attack (Edit: I forgot to mention but she had heart problems prior to the prank) because of everything and died.
After his mother’s death, his father (who didn’t think of him so highly in the first place, since Clay’s mother always put her attention on Clay and never on him after his birth) was about to slap Clay across the face, but stopped himself, saying, “You’re not even worth it”.
This line implanted a disordered view on love and worth, basically believing that getting hurt by someone, means that they love you, and vice versa. This belief resulted in Clay Puppington hurting others as a way of showing his love to them and telling them he thinks is worthy.
This is the main reason as to why Clay Puppington hits Orel in almost every episode they are together. This stops in Episode 12 of the same season, Nesting, in which after getting eggs outlawed (Edit: By Clay after being convinced by Orel and a grotesque fever dream like sexual fantasy about eggs) (and after the camping trip which resulted in Orel permanently limping for the rest of his life after getting shot by his father in a very drunken state), the Librarian, Miss Censordoll, tries to run for Mayor of Moralton (the place they live in) (Edit: Miss Censordoll actually likes eggs- Orel wanted them gone when he found out they were birthed by chickens- and used the leverage of Clay outlawing eggs as a means to get him out of office and her into office). Since Clay Puppington was the Mayor, he was extremely upset by this, even more so after he learned Orel was helping her. Because of this and the camping trip, when he told Orel to meet him in his office (where Orel gets disciplined), he doesn’t spank Orel, because he betrayed him and doesn’t view him worthy of his love anymore (Edit: Also because he was losing control of Orel, which made him even more mad at Orel).
This is really significant too, since he doesn’t beat his other son, Shapey, because he believes that he isn’t his son and his wife had an affair (which she totally did), and he doesn’t beat his wife either, since they only married because Bloberta (Clay’s wife, Orel’s mom) just wanted to get married out of jealousy that she wasn’t getting married while everyone else was, and Clay never loved her in the first place, only marrying when she convinced him to. His other lover, Coach Stopframe (who Bloberta definitely cheated on Clay with), doesn’t get physically hurt by him but they are in a perpetual state of hook ups and they break up at the series finale anyway so…
My main point is that the idea of not hurting someone because you love them is optimistic thinking yet wrong. Sometimes, people grow up around abuse thinking that is what love is like. Sometimes, people were told at a young age being hit means the person loves them and believed them. Sometimes, people think being hit is a sign of worth and respect. Sometimes, people abuse is equivalent to love.
Well, I found this very good! Both very thoughtful and entertaining at the same time!
Thank you for this. I wish and hope that you derive at least as much pleasure and satisfaction from doing all this (both participating in the discussion, and then editing a video out of it) as I do from watchinn and reading it!
Small note, the sprite is excellent, but the earrings occasionally change color depending on the pose (ex. 21:04)
I'll be fixing that. Thanks for pointing it out.
20:20 that's....oddly sweet. VERY oddly
My friend is in a pretty weird relationship right now and I felt like I haven't been able to help, but this video being uploaded almost feels like an act of God. I feel like this information would help my friend.
I know it wasn't made for me in particular, but thank you French Baguette Man.
WELCOME BACK!!!!!!
Thanks.
Sound track for those who are interested:
01) 00:11 - 00:53; Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, Courtroom Lobby
02) 01:12 - 02:08; Phoenix Wright: Justice for All, Recollection ~ Scars Etched by Flame
03) 02:30 - 02:53; Phoenix Wright: Trials and Tribulations, Furio Tigre
04) 03:07 - 03:31; Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, Cross-Examination ~ Moderato
05) 03:49 - 05:26; Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, Pursuit
06) 05:37 - 06:42; Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, Perceive
07) 06:53 - 08:00; Ace Attorney Investigations, Confrontation ~ Moderato
08) 08:12 - 09:11; Phoenix Wright: Trials and Tribulations, Questioning ~ Moderato
09) 09:13 - 10:46; Ace Attorney Investigations 2, Confrontation ~ Presto
10) 10:57 - 14:04; Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, Apollo Justice ~ A New Trial is in Session!
11) 14:05 - 14:43; Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, Pursuit ~ Cornered - Variation
12) 15:24 - 16:13; Ace Attorney Investigations 2, Pursuit
13) 16:22 - 17:39; Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, Luke Atmey (also known as Volkeh's theme!)
14) 17:52 - 18:42; Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, Drew Studio
15) 19:11 - 20:31; Ace Attorney Investigations, Shi-Long Lang
16) 21:20 - 22:22; Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, Recollection ~ A Fate Smeared by Tricks and Gadgets
17) 22:29 - 24:05; Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, Investigation ~ Core
18) 24:24 - 25:02; Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, Perceive (huh, this again...)
19) 25:13 - 25:48; Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, The Steel Samurai
20) 26:31 - 28:40; Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, Kitaki Family
8:12 *_THIS MUSIC TURNS ME ON_*
Ha yeah, well 9:13 is my favorite cross examination theme in this video
God comments like this are the best, ty
I can't believe you created God, FC. That's crazy... In all seriousness, it's nice to see another one of these, I love the new sprite too! What was your inspirations if I may ask? Oh, and I hope Critical is doing okay. Poor guy must be sweating having to literally choose between pressing one of two buttons.... as far as I understand it anyways. Wonderful work, regardless!!
EDIT: THE FUCKING "THERE IS EGO IN LEGO" BIT KILLED ME LMFAO
The inspiration for this sprite was Avatar Korra, Sailor Moon, and an old fashioned French military uniform.
@@frenchbaguetteintelligence Interesting inspirations. :)
Venti seems to be the member of the friend group that consistently has the worst takes on every situation regardless of context.
ALSO, people who use 'lmao' in every other sentence provoke instinctive hatred in me. You don't sound cute you sound obscenely condescending.
I cant believe i stumbled upon such an underrated channel 🙏
Oh that's great to see you again, lad! The video as always funny and informative, and I hooe you're doing well. I am convinced to joined the Discord sercer now
Be welcome!
Hm, s'there another way for it? The funny link in tje description does not seem to work for me, maybe its a me issue
FC's whole argument basically falls on the fact that love, just like any emotion, is inherently irrational. All emotions are vestigial states that helped our ancestors survive by basically "taking over" their consciousness to flee from danger/pursue situations in which they would survive better. As we evolved, we learned rationality, but we forget that the human experience is partly outside of the scopes of rationality. Hence, love isn't inherently virtuous because virtues only exist in the scope of rationality
Okay this video is a great example of people not understanding the 3 forms of love as proposed by the greeks. Those being Eros, Philia, and Agape. Eros is romantic love with ones spouse. Philia is familial love and friendships, and Agape is the love of God and of the truths that brings. These are basically the bedrock of all other types of love that without can in fact turn love vile or simply into hatred. It's like those 2 sayings about love, "All is fair in love and war."and "If a child does not feel loved in a village when growing up, he will burn it down to feel it's warmth."
About love being a vicious gamble. Isn't the whole point that it's a leap of faith? Love is not comfort in knowing the other person, love is stepping outside that comfort zone and commiting oneself to another without necessarily knowing everything about them. The whole point is that it IS scary, but that it's worth it (although that's unfortunately not the case for everyone). I also disagree with your definition of love. Let's take ancient Greek for example, which distinguushes between fondness (philō) and true love (agapē) (there's also eros but that's more sexual passion). I think that's a very important distinction to make, which we don't anymore (partly because we live in an anglo-dominated world). I may just be projecting but I believe agapē love (true love) is self-sacrifice, not simply just being fond of someone or something, which is philō love. It's not that love makes someone magically better, but that love encourages us to mature, that we choose to commit ourselves to someone else. It's true, though, people go into it with false expectations. Love is beautiful, but it's also scary, but again, that's kind of the point.
Man been a while since I watched one of your vids, was reminded why I like them! Props to the sprite, really like it.
Whatever may have happened or will with Critical O. I hope he got his thoughts in order, I agree a lot with your ideas and whilst definitely difficult to put into reason to the other two, I'm glad they saw through it. This is definitely a subject that should be brought more to attention since the stereotypical love really makes so many people make god awful decisions.
In any case I hope you're doing well and have a nice day/evening/night.
i am Steve
Steve. With an K.
Stop harassing me please @steve
Holy fuck its Steve
Steve, do you not understand?
@@Greetanate how about you get good at Elden ring first
I swear half of Adriana's arguments were just straight ad hominems. I kept having to pause the video cause she was pissing me off so much.
"idgaf"
Sorry folks, pack it up. Debate over, Venti won.
In all seriousness, generalising this sort of thing like saying "poly people are just lonely and horny" always leads to misjudging situations. I sympathize with C.O. and wish him the best, he's really not in an easy situation and I hope he'll manage to resolve it in a way that doesn't hurt anyone involved.
A pretty nice discussion to see unfold in general. I personally am on FC's side on this one (unusual when ti comes to love). It's a complex thing that's a mix of attachment and many other emotions that would take way more research to fully describe than I care to do for the sake of one sily comment. But it is not mutually exclusive with anything else, be it virtues, flaws, or even distaste or hate. I'm sure there are domestic abusers who do love their partner (in whatever twisted or dehumanizing way).
These things and situations are just messy to approach in general, and I can't help but feel like it's got to be a case-by-case basis every time.
(And to add on the monogamy thing, widows and widowers are perfectly able to have had a very loving relationship, lose their partner, and then manage to fall in love again. That's not usually seen in species that truly mate for life)
The fact that the “seven-year itch” exists and is surprisingly reproducible strongly suggests that humans are some weird mix of non-monogamous K-strategy.
Both parents are necessary for raising the child well, and that social bond will never go away, but every seven years or so both parties will experience a strong dissatisfaction in their relationship and strain it, potentially moving to a different one (or none).
It’s not like monogamous birds that will usually form such intense life-long pair bonds (though those are absolutely a feature in humans,) but it’s also way stronger an attachment than most of these that end up in nature. It’s probably most analogous to average birds, where they’ll pair bond and work together, but at the end of the year they go shopping again and *may* not choose the same partner.
I will especially note that one could probably expect to have 2-3 partners over their lifetime in a world perfectly designed for human satisfaction. During prime reproductive age, it’d be someone who makes life more fun; as age starts to catch up it moves onto someone intellectually challenging or comfortable and responsible; and then, as an elder, it’s whichever of those two fits best with your position in the community.
It’s also not lost on me that around 5 or 6 years old is when, even in the modern world, we actively outsource the raising of our children. 7 years later, they usually went to an apprenticeship, now they go to high school (sometimes a boarding school); and then 7 years after that they’re expected to be independent. This sure lines up conveniently with a 7 year cycle of passion -> strong commitment-> dissatisfaction.
@@thesquishedelf1301 Interesting, I wasn't aware of such theories.
I think the discussion got unproper references of what love is to be able to expand on the idea.
For the general public, love is poetry at best and imprudence at worst, but love alone is only an addictive impulse.
How we react to it and how we express ourselves about it is more of a personal merit for the circunstances and experience we live with than the strength of the feeling.
The strength of the feeling, if applied to an unprepared person, can be terrifyingly destructive. Faux Cares is correct on that.
I say that because the same extreme reaction i had to infatuation to the point of blind adoration that made me develop a sense of devotion is what can easily turn the average person in a dangerous police case about possessive behavior.
And reinforcing even more Faux Cares perspective, it was not the genuinity of my feelings that made me stay on the line, it was fear, extreme fear coming from the trauma of being alone after always scaring everyone in my infancy. Yet, this alone is not enough, because i also required the conscience to realize why i scared people and how to stop it.
Our notion of love is not actually the feeling, but the good outcomes of this feeling while disregarding the bad outcomes since we glorified and poetized what love is.
"Bro just invented God" made me laugh so hard for no reason. 😂
Ahh, how long has it been since I've watched a French Peakette Intelligence video?
Thank you, F.C.
Dude! You returned! This is great! I hope you're good.