FSTDT

What is love, actually? What is love being misunderstood as?
Love explained

Theory:
Love is an anti-sexual feeling
image

image
First of all, I know all of this by experience. I have been in love multiple times before, and I am as certain as one could ever be, that what I felt was love. It was amazing. It was an experience of quality, and definetely something that everyone deserves to feel and understand. ...Which they clearly don't.
Though I never succeeded at getting into a relationship, I have been close, and I have felt what it would be like to have a girlfriend, without being in doubt about anything.

Okay let's begin...
Love is the most effective feeling against sexual thoughts. The idea of thinking sexual thoughts have never been more distant, and for once, revealingly demotivating, than that very moment of quality when you're in love. On top of that, being in love also makes you feel alive and very emotional, whether it's the happy kind, or the sad kind where you're missing that person.

Love is basically two things:
• Emotional and
• Anti-sexual

Couples who are having sex is just as misunderstood about love as couples who claim to not feel emotional about their relationship. I'm having a hard time respecting people who can't see the logic in this, who choose to have sex with that very special "loving" partner that they claim to love. B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T...
If you haven't felt this kind of emotional and anti-sexual feeling before, then you are unexperienced with romantic love, and you shouldn't be allowed to have a girlfriend/boyfriend.
If you haven't felt this kind of emotional and anti-sexual feeling before, then you are unexperienced with romantic love, and then you probably haven't found that one and only person yet. But don't worry... once that happens, you'll know EXACTLY what I mean.

But how come our relationship seems to work out so well, when we're having sex?
Because you're confused about whether you're having a nonromantic sexual relationship, or a romantic nonsexual relationship. I'll get to that later... But keep in mind that you two WANTED eachother. You are simply partners. I prefer to call that "natural attraction". However, the day you realise what it would be like to have a LOVER then you will not want to think about having a simple partner anymore. Until then, please don't abuse the word "love" again. It's a strong word that one should simply not condescend with something as silly as sex.
image

image
Okay, so let's bring up some facts:

• You can have a romantic non-sexual relationship.
• You can have a non-romantic sexual relationship.
• You can have a non-romantic non-sexual relationship.
• You cannot have a romantic sexual relationship*

* Such a thing does not exist. Romance is non-sexual. Sex is non-romantic. These two things does not work out together at any time. When you “crush on” someone, your brain sees the non-sexual beauty on someone. Both the inner non-sexual beauty (approachability, intelligence, interest in you, personality, etc.) and the outer non-sexual beauty (look, voice, clothing, and all those things). Basically, every positive thing that you can find on someone that does not include anything sexual. Love is like a magic thing that can vanish ALL sexual feelings and temptations, and replace them with all the non-sexual qualities of that one special person that you’re having a crush on.

The more in love you are with someone, the more inappropriate it feels to think of them in a sexual way. When you’re truly in love, you might even forget that sex is a thing that exists in this world, temporarily! Love is simply the most powerful feeling in the world, and the more you feel it, the more distant the idea of sex becomes. This is why I think EVERY SINGLE PERSON in this world NEEDS to read, and think about this quote: “Love is an anti-sexual feeling” before even talking about, and using the word “love”.

Also, make sure you don't misunderstand my point! If you want to have a child, and reproduce, go ahead and do it! Just make sure my message is clear, and you're doing what you have to do for the right reason ☺
This has nothing to do with religion. I am 100% atheist, and this is nothing but pure knowledge that comes from years of experience with being in love, and being part of the loving nature in mankind.

Think of a girl or a boy that you really like. Maybe your crush, or your girlfriend/boyfriend.
Now imagine that their parents just died in a traffic collision, and now they're standing next to you crying. What would you do? Comfort them, right? This is where, my theory about love really becomes clear. The thought of doing anything sexual to them suddenly becomes very inappropriate. Inappropriate because giving comfort just really doesn't work out with sex, or have anything in common with anything sexual.
That feeling you get, when you decide to comfort someone, is exactly how love is supposed to feel. Love is like wanting to comfort someone all the time, even when they're not sad. Love is also the ability to feel "comfortful" torwards someone who isn't even sad. You can tell that two people really love eachother, when the 'comfortful chemistry' is between them as a standard, and no tragic experience is needed. These are difficult words, but actually, this is precisely what I mean. Sex is just an inappropriate thing when it comes to love. Period.
image

Another reason to say that love is an anti-sexual feeling
When you fantasize about someone in a sexual way, you're thinking of them as an object. A sexual object. You may not always think of them as an object, but once you're fantasizing about them in a sexual way, all you see is an object.

Now... love is the exact thing that makes us humans see the PERSON that hides behind a human's body. Love makes us feel the other person's identity, as if it was our own. Love makes us realise that behind another person's body, exists something far more amazing than just an object. If you're actually in love with someone else, then it also means that you will find it wrong to think of them as an object - at any given time.
In other words: You will not think of them in a sexual way, because the personality, and the identity that you see will keep disturbing your sexual thoughts. It is NOT possible to sexually fantasize about someone that you love unless you're really concentraded about not thinking about their personality, and identity. So yes... it IS possible to sexually fantasize about a loved one, but only if you're trying hard to not think about all the things that makes you love them. And honestly... as you get closer and closer to someone that you love, get to know them better and better, this whole idea of thinking sexual thoughts about them WILL become more and more distant. Because you will automatically find it wrong to think of them as an object for sex. THAT'S HOW LOVE WORKS! If you do not feel this way, then you do not feel love, simple as that.

Remember:
" People who find the love of their lives, and then later have sex with them, is like people who buy the most expensive meal in the world, and then soaking it with Heinz Ketchup. "
image

image

Theory: Love is an anti-sexual feeling
Theory proven and confirmed

Transgender ideology

Transgender ideology is a loose catch-all term referring to philosophies, world views, and dogmatic statements adhered to by political activists who see themselves as trying to uphold the human rights of transgender people. The political movement of furthering these ideologies is called the transgender movement. Feminists tend to use these terms critically when pointing out sexist, homophobic, or otherwise problematic aspects of the movement. Those who support the transgender movement tend to oppose the term transgender ideology, likening it to phrases such as homosexual agenda which is used to ascribe a sinister intent to gay/lesbian/bisexual rights activists.

The practice of supporting transgender ideology is called transgender activism (often shortened trans activism) and a person who follows this practice is called a transgender activist (often shortened trans activist). The word "transgender" in the phrase "transgender activist" is not to be understood as an adjective for the person in question (i.e. "an activist who happens to be transgender") but as a reference to the activism they practice (i.e. "an activist supporting transgender ideology"). Many trans activists are not transgender themselves.

The term trans rights activist (shortened TRA) is sometimes used for its similarity to men's rights activist (shortened MRA). Just like so-called MRAs claim to support men's human rights but end up blaming everything on women and opposing feminism, TRAs claim to support transgender human rights but end up blaming everything on women and opposing feminism.

Aspects

Trans women are women

One of the core dogmata of the transgender movement is the statement that trans women are women (and the less often repeated trans men are men). Under this view it's important to write trans woman as two words (adjective and noun) and not transwoman, to stress the fact that so-called trans women are literally a subtype of women, just like white women, black women, short women, tall women, and so on. The statement "trans women are women" is not meant as a vague slogan of moral support, but in a literal sense.
Since the statement contradicts the dictionary definition of the word "woman" (adult human female), it implies that a different definition would be better. When asked about this, transgender activists usually avoid providing an actual definition. Most attempts tend to revolve around a circular definition, such as "anyone who identifies as a woman, is a woman." As such, the statement "trans women are women" is probably best described as a dogma.
The idea that transwomen are literally women is taken as the basis for many problematic conclusions, such as: transwomen deserve to partake in women's sports, transwomen should be seen as part of the natural dating pool of lesbians (see also cotton ceiling), transwomen deserve to use all female facilities, enter female-only spaces and events, speak on women's rights as women, and so on.

Gender identity

The idea that "trans women are women" is usually backed by a belief in an essential, inborn, and immutable "gender identity" that every person supposedly possesses.[6] Transwomen are said to be real women on the grounds that they possess a "female gender identity" which they are said to share with women. Likewise for transmen and a "male gender identity" that is supposedly shared by all men.
Just like transgender activists refuse to provide an objective definition of womanhood, they tend to refuse defining gender identity on any objective terms. Usually, when explaining how a person has discovered their gender identity, one hears references to sexist stereotypes ascribed to womanhood and manhood. When confronted directly however, transgender activists refuse the notion that gender identity is based entirely on those stereotypes. Since no objective measure exists at all, they are effectively forced to accept the claims of anyone and everyone regarding what their gender identity is. Thus we see transwomen with full beards and intact male anatomy, who are said to be literally real women like any other.
Transgender children
Since gender identity is said to be inborn, it follows that some children would be transgender, and only need to find this out. Once it's found out, the only way forward is to support the child in its transgender identification. This leads to the transgender activist "affirm-only" approach towards youth, where for instance a boy who says "I wish I was a girl" or "I'm actually a girl" is from that point on treated as if the child is literally a girl. (Given a female name, referred to by female pronouns, asked to be considered a girl by others, and so on.) Likewise for girls who express that they wish they were a boy, or claim that they are internally a boy. Trans activists are opposed to the alternative "watchful waiting" approach.
The trans activist affirm-only approach has been supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics.[7] Parents concerned over this model of treatment published a long criticism and launched a petition reaching 1,200 signatures.[8] Psychologist James Cantor also published a fact-check article criticizing the AAP's decision.
Trans activists usually support giving puberty blocking medication such as Lupron to children who think they are transgender.[7] These children may be as young as 10 years old.

Cisgender people oppress transgender people

Another core tenet of transgender ideology is the notion that cisgender people oppress transgender people, just like how men oppress women, white Americans oppress black Americans, or how straight people oppress gay men and lesbian women.[11][12] As such, when a man identifies as a transwoman, his position relative to that of a woman turns from being her oppressor to someone who is oppressed by her. His male privilege is denied as he is now considered a woman, and the fact that he is a transgender woman means that he is oppressed by so-called cisgender women. Further, being both a woman and transgender means he is considered to suffer under two axes of oppression, akin to how black women suffer both from racism and sexism. This way, a white man suddenly becomes comparable to a black woman with regards to oppressive power dynamics in society.
As per the principle of intersectionality (appropriated from black feminism), transgender activists often say that the feminist movement should not only include transwomen's concerns, but outright center them in many discussions, as otherwise the feminist movement might fail to sufficiently address their concerns.

Collusion with "sex work" activism

For reasons not entirely clear, many if not most transgender activists also seem to support the "sex work" movement.[13] Possible explanations for this collusion might be:
* Both movements stem from queer ideology, which is based on transgression of social norms without regard to ethical concerns
* The transgender movement being dominated by autogynephilic men who are interested in upholding a society in which women exist for male sexual pleasure
* Anti-feminists supporting both the transgender movement and the "sex work" movement, simply because they see both of them as weapons against women's liberation