Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Faith, in the sense in which I am here using the word, is the art of holding on to things your reason has once accepted, in spite of your changing moods.” - C.S Lewis

This quote is about faith not love, but you can see how the same logic applies. If faith is not merely to "feel" as if you believe something, why should love be merely to "feel" that you like something?

In the end, faith is remembering you have reason to believe, and love is a choice about how you treat someone. Feelings are irrelevant. They are passing. They are constantly changing, and that's natural. They can indeed play a role in our decisions about relationships, but are a fickle factor to base an entire decision off of. It's like building a house on the sand. We're human beings with intelligence, and there is no such thing as a feeling so powerful we HAVE to act on it-that is fantasy.

What about circumstances? What about age? Can it ever be simply a waste of time?

On my last deviation, people argued that in Percy and Annabeth's case they "went through hell together," and therefore proved their love. Here is what I have to say after thinking about this:

Yes. That is love, but not necessarily romantic love. Would those characters have done that for any of their other friends? Yes.
What then, is the point of romantic love? Well, there is only one thing.

That they would go on an adventure together? Apparently not.

To be attracted to each other? No, otherwise it would be acceptable to cheat on your spouse with the next hot person walking by.

What's missing here? It's one simple thing that we seem to forget: the ONLY point of love being romantic as opposed to simple love that you have for your brothers and friends is... that you consider getting married and having kids.

"Hahahaha! But they're just kids. Why would you expect them to do a silly thing like that? How ridiculous. Everyone knows love is just about kissing and cuddling."

I wonder why then, this is the part of love that is so easy to make fun of. There is certainly a place for kissing and cuddling, but maybe... just maybe... we make it far too much of a focus in comparison to other parts of romantic love. It's gotten to the point where this is the only reason people get in relationships.

It makes sense that humans naturally have something that eases them into a huge commitment. Like C.S Lewis says, "It's on this love that the engine of marriage is run: being in love was the explosion that started it.”

"Now no feeling can be relied on to last in its full intensity, or even to last at all. Knowledge can last, principles can last, habits can last but feelings come and go."

Sometimes there is just no point in being in a romantic relationship, in which case we have the power to put those feelings on hold or let them die out. This can be sad sometimes, but despite what the corny soap-operas say, people are capable of moving on. They're made that way and do all the time.

Odds are, that crush you have on that guy at school isn't going to matter in the next year. Month. Week.

When two twerpy teenagers are only capable of kissing and, as someone once called them, the "pukey bits of being in love," that can easily be called making romance into too much of a priority.

Is romance just a fun, cute hobby, or is it a serious commitment? If we glorify only the "fun" part, then isn't it just like "a world in which trees were always blooming but never giving fruit, a world full of sign-posts that were leading nowhere?"

And furthermore sometimes aren't there other equally as serious (or more serious) of commitments that we can sacrifice romance for?
In Harry Potter (I think this is the only Young Adult book I've praised on here so far), Harry refrains from getting in a relationship with Ginny because he has things to do. He has to defeat Voldemort and he understands that. When he does get in a relationship with Ginny (after everything is completely resolved), he actually marries her.

They didn't act like Ron and Lavender who had no purpose or goals for their relationship other than selfish pleasure.

Is pleasure wrong? No. I'm just saying there's more.

I have read books that the author will have two teenagers make out, and then in some other part of the book, talk about them thinking of their future. Many times they say things like, "Would I ever actually marry Fang? I don't know if I see myself ever getting married or having a family. I'm just too much of a free-spirit."

It's all part of the way relationships are watered down in these stories. Yes, they're usually just kids who can't do anything else anyway. So why do anything at all?

From Maximum Ride:

Then somehow we slid sideways so we were lying in the cool sand. I was holding him fiercely, and he was kissing me fiercely, and it was...just so, so intensely good.


Sorry, what? Is this the only kind of thing we get in relationships for? Because it feels good? Whether we're kids or adults, boys or girls, 100-year-olds disguised as teenagers, animals, married, single, on the run, trying to defeat an evil villain and prevent a war, etc? Our number one priority is to "get in a relationship" which here only means consenting to make out with someone because you decide you have a "feeling" that you want to?

In the world of Young Adult literature there is only one kind of love: romantic love. The definition of which, they (indirectly or otherwise) tell us, means seeing a hot person, labeling them "your boyfriend," kissing them and then.........

Well, it never gets that far. The story always ends.

They get married? No, they ruled that out.

They break up? I guess so. It's the only thing left. See how this doesn't work?

"They're just getting practice."

As a wise person once sarcastically said, "Yeah, that's just what I want out of a wife. One who's had plenty of practice!"

There are plenty of successful marriages where nobody got any "practice...." But I suspect that's just a whipped up excuse people don't really believe anyway.

"Well, maybe they are going to get married."
Cool. So why are they making out nine years in advance?

"What's wrong with that?"
It's over-valuing something that is a very small part of something that is much larger. It causes us to lose sight of that larger thing... especially when it's mandatory of every eleven year old protagonist. 

50% divorce rate? Well duh. Pleasure is not an end in itself. It's a factor, and one of the smaller ones. Relationships based on pleasure aren't true "love," no matter what we label them as. 

"Real love is to will the good of the beloved." Romantic love is the same, with the addition of a commitment that you must will the good of. Why do Young Adult books forget this? Otherwise there is no point. Romance isn't something that appeared in human nature for no reason other than for stupid kids to clown around with.

"It's just puppy love."
Why don't books portray this as immature if that's what it is? Why is it portrayed as serious and important?

Why do we make fun of Twilight, but turn a blind eye to the crap from which it was spawned? 
Enough of this shallow idea of love.

On a side note, what's with kids being encouraged to over-analyze and flaunt their "sexual orientations" these days? In the first place, since when is that a fun little game that we ask each other about in question tags?

Ten year olds:

1. do u like wafflez? :3
YEAH

2. WHAT'S YOU SEXUAL ORIETNTASHION?111"
Well im attratced to anime characters who are boys but also some furries so I think im like bi or something

Seriously though, does ANYBODY reading your deviantArt bio need to know how you feel about sex? Why do we need to dwell on that at all? As if we had love all worked out in the first place. :l Fun times we live in.
An extension of: makingfunofstuff.deviantart.co…
I'd like to ask everyone who sees this to please read the original first if possible. I felt like the first one didn't explain things far enough... I had more to say, (especially after this fight I got in after reading the Mark of Athena).

Might I take this opportunity to encourage everyone reading this to read C.S Lewis (no, not just Narnia). He has the BEST quotes, and makes fun of things 100000 times better than I can. Even if you just looked up some of his quotes, it would be well worth your time.

Read my other deviations making fun of stupid books:
Why you might want to reconsider writing about "bullies:" makingfunofstuff.deviantart.co…
How to judge a book by its cover: makingfunofstuff.deviantart.co…
Mary Sue is an attitude: makingfunofstuff.deviantart.co…
Is your story too shallow? makingfunofstuff.deviantart.co…
Most common cliches in story-telling: makingfunofstuff.deviantart.co…
Problems with self-inserts: makingfunofstuff.deviantart.co…

Side thoughts: The more I think about it, I really don't believe in labeling yourself as "gay" or "straight" or "bi." It implies that you have to act on -and furthermore think about in the first place- what your sexual attractions are. And no, I don't believe it's "natural," to overthink that and have to have an answer for it. Whenever people ask me "what I am," I just say I'm nothing. No, not straight. No, not asexual. I have a right to just plain refuse to play this game, as do others who don't care about it. Stop asking people how they feel about sex the same way you ask them about their age and their name. If I ever get married, it DARN well won't be because of how I feel about sex. People on deviantArt can ship as many kinds of pairings as they want, it doesn't mean real human beings are as uncomplicated as your Hetalia OCs and have no free-will whatsoever. Does anyone else ever feel the same way?



Hey, this is kind of irrelevant, but my good friend has a petition that maybe you could consider signing. It's about filters on dA not doing a good enough job and making the kids who look up fan art from My Little Pony and Phineas and Ferb have to see basically X rated material. Even if it doesn't bother you, remember that a better filter that others could turn on wouldn't hurt anyone, so be considerate if you can. Thanks: theliltingfrog.deviantart.com/…
Add a Comment:
 
:iconclarentinthia:
Clarentinthia Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2015  Hobbyist Digital Artist
All young people need to read this.
Reply
:iconhalfblooddragon:
HalfBloodDragon Featured By Owner Feb 26, 2015  Student Filmographer
Love your stuff! So glad you take the time to deal with YA literature, instead of just dismissing it as crap. If we can see WHY it's crap, maybe it won't have to stay that way. 
Reply
:iconshermansquiggly:
ShermanSquiggly Featured By Owner Feb 24, 2015   General Artist
Hmm, this is interesting, thanks for writing. Personally I don't think it's necessarily bad that more shallow relationships are portrayed in literature, but the problem is the fact that it's considered all the same thing and that kids grow up thinking all love is is mutual prettiness.
I am one of those idiots who thinks young people being in relationships without thinking about marriage isn't a bad thing. Being in a long term relationship like marriage is all about communication and compromise. Not all teenage relationships are going to be like this, but for the ones that are, isn't that a good thing?
Doesn't make teen lit any less gag worthy though. That's another great thing about Harry Potter though, they had failed relationships, relationships that ended badly, some that ended mutually. They all looked different from the well established couples that ended up married, but I prefer that to having your characters marry their first love interests and portray the idea that every relationship is easy and flawless.
As for the sexual orientation thing, I actually understand that. While dA might not be the best place for it, being closeted sucks and online places like this are the only place people are able to be out and express a part of themselves that they have to hide in other situations. In a perfect world we wouldn't have to deal with any of this, but if I had to choose between people being encouraged to identify and embrace, I guess, this or surrounding it with stigma and assuming everyone you meet is straight, I'd prefer the former. It's just growing pains of a society that's coming to better accept people; I don't think it will always be this way.
Reply
:iconreidepenguin:
REIdepenguin Featured By Owner Edited Feb 21, 2015  Student Traditional Artist
Thanks for writing this piece. I've wanted to write a few of my fan characters (who I personally think I'm putting a lot of effort in...) in a romantic relationship and I wanted to avoid those YA pitfalls. This is really helpful.
I think you can write relationships which are mostly built on pleasure. there are relationships in real life. but the thing is that if the relationship is built on pleasure then the author should acknowledge that its mostly pleasure.  That's where I think most YA books fail at
Reply
:iconwilelle:
wilelle Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
Now I feel happy. In the book I'm writing I managed to avoid all the don'ts you pointed out, even though I thought I would add in tons of dumb cliches for sure. I thought I sucked at writing love stories, but based on this I'm at least passable. I guess being asexual helps me care less about the whole "attraction" part and focus more the truly important stuff.

Very informative, and I'll make sure to check out the rest of your pages to make sure I didn't screw up in some other area.
Reply
:icondrop-of-amethyst:
drop-of-amethyst Featured By Owner Oct 14, 2014  Student Traditional Artist
Very well-written and you made some great points, but I really disagree with one thing you wrote:

"What's missing here? It's one simple thing that we seem to forget: the ONLY point of love being romantic as opposed to simple love that you have for your brothers and friends is... that you consider getting married and having kids."

Personally, I think somebody can be in love and not want to get married or have kids. I mean, if you've been dating somebody for years, you certainly don't feel the same way towards them than you feel towards a sibling. Romantic love can exist without marriage/children.

Basically, what I'm getting at is that there doesn't have to be a point to love. There's no goal or anything. Maybe you're just in love with somebody and want to be with them. Relationships come and go, and a couple that has been dating for a few weeks could love each other just as much as a couple that has been married for years.

There's a million different definitions of love.

However, if you have a different opinion, that's fine of course :)
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Oct 18, 2014
Well, that was really the whole point of the essay.

I'm not claiming people *can't* be in love without goals. I'm questioning the point in over-emphasizing it if this is the case. Why should I take their relationship seriously and act as if it's important if it's essentially only something about their personal pleasure?

I think that's why soap operas get made fun of, and a lot of teen romance. It's love watered down to be for the least important things, but trying to act as if it's still the most important thing in the world... and it just isn't.

I think the meaningful part of their relationship is really just friendship and if they have no goals, why get into physical displays of affection? That's when things tend to get problematic and shallow.

Thanks for the comment and your input, btw. I like when people leave long comments, and to talk about things like this.
Reply
:iconkitamikichi:
KitaMikichi Featured By Owner Apr 18, 2014  Student General Artist
THANK YOU!!! *round of applause*
Reply
:iconpetitspas:
Petitspas Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
Er wait...are you saying if you make out before marriage you aren't really in love ? XD 

You're also excluding something. Love can stay or it can vanish. And it has nothing to do with "it isn't love" it's just as "idealistic" as those romance you're accusing, and as idealistic as thinking you can only have a single love in your life. We change over time, people change over time, there's nothing wrong with that. You might have gotten along with a friend (friendship is a form of love) but over time it can change because the two of you became too different. It's the same with love. Waste of time ? Well...then any relationship basically is one, you never know if it will last or not, be it love, friendship, family, etc. 99% of your relationships are a waste of time then.

If it is true a lot of people just get into a relationship for the sake of it, it is also true that a lot of young people think they are honestly in love. The reason why it so quickly fades is because of their idealistic view of love and not because they weren't in love (of course you also have people convincing themselves they are in love). Most people think love is a one phase stuff when it actually has several phases. Most couples break up with the second one.

You also seem to be against sex for sex. Well...whether you want it or not, that desire is...natural...reproduction. Sure, you can say nowadays it is for pleasure and not reproduction, but if it is pleasurable it's for us to actually reproducte (initially). And whether you want it or not, a human body has hormones telling you to "reproducte". Now, we should not use that as an excuse for any behaviour. But what I want to say is, you can't blame people for sexual need. And as long as the two people clearly know there's no "love" well, I don't see anything wrong in that. Oh and scientists have a biological explanation for love too, by the way...
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
Actually, I'm just pointing out that when you're a twerpy 11 year old, it's always going to be a waste of time. You're right people can change their minds. So why get in a relationship at a time in life when there is no point? It's unnecessary... At least, since I was talking about books, it's very annoying to be portrayed as something we have to take seriously.

When did I say I was against sex...? 
I mean, it is pretty stupid to have on a whim just because you "feel" like it, if that's what you mean.
Reply
:iconpetitspas:
Petitspas Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
Well, being in love when you're 11 is something I can't really imagine...but who are we tell people when they should start to have feelings ? I agree books have a tendancy to show unrealistic relationships. But...it's the aim...most books' aim is to sell dreams, not reality. The problem is when you are awaiting relationships like they are in books.

It was the impression I was having...sorry ?
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
Wait, have feelings?
I'm not saying they can't have feelings. I'm talking about acting on those feelings as if they're the most significant thing regardless of circumstances and common sense. My whole point is that we're not slaves to our passions... if they can even be called such from 13 year olds, but hey.
It's even worse if that's how you treat sex, but that wasn't really what I even had in mind while writing this. Unless you mean the thing at the end, which was again, just about feelings (feelings about sex; otherwise known as your "orientation").
Basically you can sum up the whole deviation by saying it's dumb to take our fickle feelings too seriously. 
Maybe that's a selfish, shallow dream for books to be selling and encouraging?
Reply
:iconpetitspas:
Petitspas Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
I agree, we shouldn't be slaves to our passions, and we shouldn't be slaves to our reason either. Those both statements are true. But here once again...is it really to anyone to tell someone when they should have their first intercourse (or any intercourse at all) ? It's something personal. People make mistakes in life, you can't avoid it, and it's as important as good experiences. And again, when can we say someone is really ready for it ?

Anyway, for 11-13 young people, yeah...I think they're just unable to tell stuff apart, but as I say below, fighting fictions won't solve it, it's fighting the wrong enemy.

Books, movies, everything sell us dreams (and not only regarding love), BUT the real issue is when people are unable to make a difference between reality and fiction. "Perfect" romance were already there in myths. You're fighting the wrong enemy. It's not those dreams you should chase, it's when people aren't able to tell things apart anymore. We are sold dreams to be able to forget about reality a little. Is it bad ? I personally don't think so. And in a way, it's honest. You can try as hard as you want, fiction will always stay fiction, it'll never be able to go to the level of complexity of a real human being. The relationship you'll create with characters (be it love, friendhsip, family, etc.- will always be idealized in some ways, be it negatively or positvely.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
I really wasn't talking about sex, so I'm not too sure what you're getting at. I was talking about "getting in relationships" like it's a fun little hobby for kids.

My concern for this happening in books is for the reason that it promotes it. They're presented in ways we're supposed to take seriously. And the thing is, it's EVERY book too. Yeah, it's fiction but when it's not treated that way it can cause problems. Imagine if every book was portraying selfish brats as role models until we just accepted it? Sometimes we need to step up and say enough is enough, and we're better than this. That's all I'm doing here.
Reply
:iconpetitspas:
Petitspas Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
Not every books shows those kind of relationships though... You perceive books showing them as they should be that way, but I would say...no...that's how you took it. You seem to expect finding reality in books. Exactly as I said confusing fiction and reality (a fiction should be reality).
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
Well, they should be aiming for a believable approach. That's actually what's good about fantasy. It takes something that isn't real and makes it feel real. Though yes, lots of stories are just corny, and that's fine. You could say I'm just calling them what they are, then. That kind of "romantic love" is corny, shallow, stupid. We can still write about corny, shallow or stupid things, I guess. :shrug:
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
It was interesting to read. Though, personally, I have more liberal view to all this. And, if only out of curiosity, I would like to ask you a few questions. What do you think is the general understanding of love? Why do you think that your understanding of love is the right one? What is the point of love? 
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
Answer to the first question: To love is to will the good of the beloved, despite changing feelings and circumstances. To love is furthermore, to be willing to help achieve the good of the beloved (note: good does not merely mean giving into their wishes, rather: doing what is truly best for them even if it's not what they "want").

Romantic love is the same thing with the addition of a commitment that you must likewise will the good of. 

Attraction -the power of evoking interest or liking for something- is a factor that can lead us to making the conscious decision to love someone in this way. However, attraction is not an ends in itself.

Answer to the second question: Who cares? It's just what I believe. If someone has a different idea, then I hope they would share it. How is a person supposed to explain *why* they believe something, except to explain the belief the way I do in my deviations? I find that to be a mind game and a waste of time, and I'm done trying to figure out what it means. That said, I would really like to have discussions about this subject. If you have a counter argument or other new ideas, feel free to share them. The only way to find out the true credibility of an idea is to explain the actual idea.
Reply
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2014
Alright then. As I see it, regarding the way the word "love" is used, there are two essential understandings of it. A more common understanding is that it is something irrational, involuntary, it's what people mean when they say: "I love you and I can't live without you!", what they talk about in films, probably in works by W. Shakespeare and in these books you talked about. In this case, love can probably be defined as strong attachment. A less common understanding is that it is something intellectual, dependent on will. That's how love is seen by you, one of my friends, E. Fromm, Jesus, etc. And I suppose, generally, here it can be defined as strong good will. In fact, once, I looked in an encyclopedia and love was separated into two understandings in a similar way.

Neither of these understandings can be said to be the correct one. Because, as language itself is just made up anyway, there is no way to determine what words should mean. It would be better if the understanding of words was unified but it's not always easy. It's especially hard for more abstract concepts (e.g. love). One develops an understanding about what words mean in a few ways: noticing its usage, accepting the definition given by an "authority" (a teacher, a dictionary, etc.) and maybe coming up with it oneself. But everyone always thinks that his/her own understanding is the correct one. 

And I'm not sure, have you answered my third question?
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2014
Okay, but if it has two different definitions it gets confusing. Here I'm just trying to clear up that confusion. It's not one or the other that exists. That's why I brought up attraction. You're calling it a strong attachment.
You can have both versions of love at the same time no matter what we call them.
The point is that it's up to us whether we want to settle for just self-satisfying attachment or if we want to let it become something deeper.

Regardless of there being a right or wrong decision here, there is always going to be a great difference between a relationship based on pleasure and a relationship based on giving (the latter being the only one that actually has the potential to include both versions of love that you described).

As for "what is the point of love?" Again, regardless of there being a right or wrong answer, what do you think the point SHOULD be? Merely something we get pleasure from, or something also selfless?
The decision is ultimately up to each individual. I'm only here to call a spade a spade.
Reply
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Apr 6, 2014
Well, they probably also think they're calling a spade a spade. The point I'm making is that neither definition/understanding is better than the other. They're just different. And I'm not talking about which type of relationship is better.

But, of course, it is best when a person both cares for the other and gets benefits him/herself. And probably both versions of love usually go together. Though, I am skeptical about the idea that one can be totally selfless (that's why I asked about the point of love). And I think it is not up to the person himself, that is just human nature. 
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 6, 2014
Who do you mean when you say they also think they're calling a spade a spade? People who have different definitions of love? Just forget that title then. I'm talking about two different real things, not a label. I'm not so much talking about my opinion on what the word love should mean, as two different things that factually exist already and the way they get confused under that word. There are no opinions here. The choice between which "kind of love" you want to settle for will always ultimately be up to you.

Nobody is perfectly selfless, but when we talk about anything, are we talking about being it perfectly? When I tell someone they're kind, am I saying they're always perfectly kind no matter what? It's just something we should strive for as a goal. And by selfless, I don't mean "never get anything for yourself," rather to be willing to give and accepting when you don't seem to be getting anything back (which you won't always). If you get pleasure for yourself as well, all the better.
Reply
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Apr 6, 2014
I see your point. I may have taken it all too meticulously. Though, I would argue that the relationships you criticize are not inherently wrong. It is all fine if both in a couple are fine with it. And, even if these relationships were wrong, it wouldn't be wrong to write about them. These are real, topical and things, likely to bring experience and enjoyment for the reader.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 10, 2014
True, when something is wrong, it doesn't make it wrong to write about. It depends solely on our portrayal of it. If we write about a murderer and glorify him for murder, that can be wrong. In the same way, if we blow romance out of proportion in a story and expect people to take it seriously, it's different than say... a book making fun of taking romance too seriously.

I'm not sure how we got to the word "wrong," in any case, but I don't think it's right for the reason that they "both agree" to it. That's essentially saying that the only thing that determines something being right or wrong is whether or not we want to do it, isn't it? If something is wrong, it would be harmful in any situation.
In the case of these relationships whether or not they're harmful or not is obviously debatable. My whole point is just that I think they deserve better.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconliketheisland:
Liketheisland Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Professional Filmographer
...Can one of your tutorials please get a DD? Like, immediately? 
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
I'm not even sure how that works, but it happened once. It was really exciting and flattering.
Thanks for the great comment.
Reply
:iconart-lover221:
Art-lover221 Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
What is love?
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
I'm glad you asked.

To love is to will the good of the beloved, despite changing feelings and circumstances. To love is furthermore, to be willing to help achieve the good of the beloved (note: good does not merely mean giving into their wishes, rather: doing what is truly best for them even if it's not what they "want").

Romantic love is the same thing with the addition of a commitment that you must likewise will the good of. 

Attraction -the power of evoking interest or liking for something- is a factor that can lead us to making the conscious decision to love someone in this way. However, attraction is not an ends in itself.

I hope that helps.
Reply
:iconart-lover221:
Art-lover221 Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
Now I understand thank you :)
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
Sorry, I got confused of the order of your comments, I think.
I'm glad if that helped. :)
Reply
:iconart-lover221:
Art-lover221 Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
You did but I chose to ignore that and yes you helped me very much thank you for your insight.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
Thanks for ignoring that, I feel dumb now.
And you're welcome XP
Reply
:iconart-lover221:
Art-lover221 Featured By Owner Apr 3, 2014
Don't feel dumb accidents happen, :)
Reply
:iconart-lover221:
Art-lover221 Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
In your opinion i mean.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
I don't know what you mean. I don't care about any other crappy definitions. :shrug:
Reply
:iconouroborosragnarok:
OuroborosRagnarok Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
I like what you have outlined here, but it has a bit of an immaturity in it, too. The same kind that you mock in literature. A person shouldn't marry the first person they kiss or have sex with. Nor should they put off either of these things in favor of marriage. Maybe 100 years ago, when people seldom lived much past 50,that was realistic, but not anymore. The world is full of experiences, and to discount Any because they aren't built out of love is foolish.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
Sorry, I think it's a little more than just some old "experience," considering its nature and consequences. I'm just saying it's not something to be taken as lightly as its made out to be in some corny stories.

My point isn't to marry the first person you kiss for that reason.
It's more like, why are you kissing someone you're not going to marry for no reason?

There is only one answer: for pleasure.

You can make from that whatever you will, but it will never be for quite the same honorable or sacred reasons as a real commitment. In the end we have to decide what's the most important to us.
Reply
:iconouroborosragnarok:
OuroborosRagnarok Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
I see what you're saying, but you seem to be implying that there's something wrong with acting out of a desire for pleasure.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
It depends on your means of getting pleasure.
Reply
:iconouroborosragnarok:
OuroborosRagnarok Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
Assume that whatever it is is consensual between all parties involved.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
Isn't that ultimately saying it's only about what we want?
Is it always best for us, or for the other person, to do things just because we want to? 
Reply
:iconouroborosragnarok:
OuroborosRagnarok Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
It might be better in the short term to just give in to desires as they come. Granted, there are long term consequences, etc. But again, it's not only about what we want. If I want to do something involving a certain person, but that person says no, they aren't interested, then it would be wrong to do it. It's not only about what we want. there are limits. But to hold yourself back from doing what you want for no concrete, real reason, would be silly.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
As long as you're not harming anyone.
Though I think we might disagree as to what does or doesn't cause harm.
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Student Digital Artist
In Harry Potter (I think this is the only Young Adult book I've praised on here so far), Harry refrains from getting in a relationship with Ginny because he has things to do. He has to defeat Voldemort and he understands that. When he does get in a relationship with Ginny (after everything is completely resolved), he actually marries her. 


--
I take it you didn't read the book. Harry stayed away from Ginny because at first he had a crush on another girl, that and he saw her as a girl to young for him.
That ended and after Ginny 'grew a bit older'' he developed an attraction to her but didn't do anything because for one she was Ron's sister and Ginny was involved with someone else at that time. He kissed her after he won a game, way before everything ended. Imo their relationship is kind of shallow and if i am not mistaken even the creator wasn't too posetive about them together she wished she would have ended Harry with someone else.


On a side note, what's with kids being encouraged to over-analyze and flaunt their "sexual orientations" these days? In the first place, since when is that a fun little game that we ask each other about in question tags?

-
What does this have to do with how people write love interest? People have the right what they state on their profile and you have the right not to like o
If teens can flaunt their religion, their hobbies, their parents-job (yes that happened.) their heritage. I don't see why their orientation is any different. I don't care if you don't like it but its not your page nor your orientation. I'm not a big fan of people flaunting and preaching their religion but I do believe people have that right and that it doesn't make them bad.


I don't disagree with ever single point but I was hoping to read more critical state on how people should not write love interest but it's a bit messy and near the end you get a bit off topic. 
Overall it's not to bad.

Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
I was talking about Harry and Ginny's relationship, not Harry and Cho's. That was probably mostly a waste of time, yes.
Harry and Ginny, in as far as being boyfriend and girlfriend, weren't really in the books, so I'm just assuming they took their time about it and were reasonable. We do see them married of course, which shows their relationship must've had more of a goal than just making out for fun. 
The problem is really that we don't see much of their relationship (or of Ginny in general), so that's probably why a lot of us feel like it was too shallow in the books. And for the record, I was trying to be positive, but their kiss seemed kind of pointless and just there to satisfy the audience, so yeah... it wasn't perfect, I agree. It would have been even less so if they had been together as kids like you said Harry kind of wanted to be. I'm kind of biased when it comes to HP, so sorry if I made their relationship out to be better than it was. At least it was good for the example.

Well, that was a side note, so it was off topic. But I like talking about things I disagree with, so it's good when people bring things up and challenge them in comments (not that you have to get in a big debate with me, I just mean it's good to talk about our different ideas and learn from each other. I think the question is, why not?). On that note, don't you think there's a fine line between flaunting hobbies, jobs or even religion as compared to how you feel about sex? No matter how tactful you try to make it, calling it your "orientation," sorry, but when did sex become so important? In the long run it just seems to cause a lot of confusion among teenagers who end up with skewed ideas because they think they have to put themselves in such insignificant boxes as how they feel about sex. The point I was trying to make was, why is that even necessary?
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Student Digital Artist
I think we both agree on the Harry / Ginny thing. Thank you.

On that note, don't you think there's a fine line between flaunting hobbies, jobs or even religion as compared to how you feel about sex?

Yep, But people still have the right. I work with a young woman who is very kind but she cannot shut up about Anime. She is obsessed about anime and always finds a way to bring anime into the topic. I told her about it she agreed to it and is trying to keep that down however in the end this is something I have to accept about her if I want to remain friend with her.

To me these are all the same, I don't need to know about someone's religion or sex life. But its their right to show it.
There is also a fine line between flaunting once sex life and just stating on one's profile that they are straight/gay/bi.
Just by saying they are doesn't mean it's flaunting its just part of the profile.

 sorry, but when did sex become so important?

Why do people feel the need to tell the world what Gender they are? why is that important?
Why do people feel the need to tell if they are in a relationship here?
Why post a photo of yourself here, its not like it's facebook. Ect Ect
It's to make their page more humanized and give their profile more character.
A lot of people like to know more about their favorite artist. Why do you think many artist have Questions about their personal life ? because friends/family do want to know. 
After all why do you feel the need to speak out your beliefs on DA when its about art? Because it's important to you after all and to some people their orientation is an issue why because...
In a lot of countries it's very serious thing or they feel alone. I have spoken to a Gay-DA artist who was kicked out of the house when he was 17 he is now doing fine, making money of his art and living with his boyfriend but to him its important to state it instead of hide it. Thats a personal thing really.
 I can understand that you don't like it but some people do have important reasons to it.

As for teenagers..that's something that is common with teens I find it anoyying as well but its pretty normal for teenagers.
Stating those things to early won't keep them confused it just make them laugh in embarrassment when they look back once they got older.
I also first I was bisexual for a long time in my teen years, Maybe I was just confused or maybe my orientation wasn't fully grown or whatever.
Trough I am way more embarrassed about my ''Goth'' fase. 
You shouldn't be to worried or mixed up about teenagers there just pretty harmless. 


The point I was trying to make was, why is that even necessary?

I just find it annoying, its off topic and it's not the reason why I came to read this. I saw this submitted to the anti-sue-stu group after all, It's like reading a rant on Why people and their Fan characters should be careful with their designs....and then the writer goes of on a rant about how much he hates Socialist Health Care, it's annoying for the reader. You also submitted another piece about Judging in the Anti-Sue group and it simply doesn't belong there.  So compared to that, this is very mild at least and I apologize if I come out aggressive. Its just that I believe these type of topics are better suited to different rant and/or your personal journal.
 My English is really bad.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
I'm not talking about their "right," to do so.
Should they be thrown in jail? No. Should it be illegal? No. I'm just questioning why they do it.

Like you think it's annoying for me to be talking about it here for example, I'm just doing the same thing and trying to explain how it could be kind of stupid regardless of the fact that they're "allowed" to do it.

Religion is how you feel about your gods or your morals, and it makes sense for that to be important to some people. Orientations are just how you feel about sex. It's 1. too much information, and 2. not harmless when it makes people really think it has to affect how they live their life.

Also, it's one thing to say if you have a boyfriend or girlfriend, but come one. Do we really need to know it's because you're "sexually attracted." It's just as stupid as if a boy and girl said it that way. Next do we have to talk about how we prefer to go to the bathroom?

I think it gets confused with general romance too much, and is therefore accepted by people. But when you really think about it, it's just a waste of time. And yes, some people might disagree with me. I'm only here to hope that they realize what they're doing is shallow. They have to ultimately make the decision themself. I can only say to think about it.
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Student Digital Artist
There is an artist I know who draws Lesbian-art and makes gay-rigts stamps works but states on her profile that she is straight she did that because people sometimes assume from artwork and her stamps that she must be gay as well. I also understand that notion.

Well that is your decision and I respect that personally I don't need to know people's personal belief. I don't like it when people preach and feel the need to tell the world on what they deem right or wrong. Maybe its fitting for Facebook but for Deviantart I don't care. However You feel the same way about orientation so I can this this topic is a bit diffecult because we both are on the other teams for it. However we can agree to disagree.

Like you think it's annoying for me to be talking about it here for example, I'm just doing the same thing and trying to explain how it could be kind of stupid regardless of the fact that they're "allowed" to do it.

-
That's not the same thing trough.
If I came to your profile and told you to stop flaunting your religion you have all the right to tell me to STFU. Because it's your profile. Its your right to do so.
However you did submitted this in a group where I can see the devations myself I didn't watch you or went to your gallery. I came here to read more about anti-stu's and anti sues and I was caught of guard with your personal belief being stated here. You have the right to do so in your own work I just want to say it might be annoying for some people. Just a critical advice from a viewer.
I felt that your were hinting that people dont have the right but since you cleared that up sorry for the misconception about that.
Now I think it would be more fitting to criticize  Artist  who have Teenage OC's and state their sexual orientation. That would fit the group-theme.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014
I would ask, why are they making stamps about being gay in the first place, as if anyone has to dwell on what sexual orientation they are in the first place. :shrug:


I'm not going to people's profiles and targeting them about anything. It's just something I felt like discussing, so I put it in a fitting place to start discussions. I guess it's not the most relevant to Sues-and-Stus, but the group accepted it, and are you sure it doesn't just annoy you because you disagree with it? Isn't the very fact that you are questioning whether or not it's best for me to talk about certain things in a deviation, exactly the same thing as me questioning whether or not it's best to talk about certain things in bios?
Nobody is forcing anything on anyone, it's not even possible here. I just want to talk and compare ideas. There's no shame in that.

How will our "personal beliefs" ever be good ones if we never think about or challenge them? 
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Apr 2, 2014  Student Digital Artist
There are also stamps about being straight, bisexal, male, American, White, Black female ect. I don't see the problem unless you are against all of them so we end this discussion on that.

Well you're other submission was removed from the group the one another Christians and judging (?) This one isn't because it still has a part about Love interest. 
Yep I do disagree with it I don't mind to debate about it but my critical point still stands. I'm an admin of several groups one of Sonic, Interracial relationships, TWEWY, Comic's and I know many admins slip up and sometimes let things go because they didn't pay attention.

I also made a couple of mistakes where I allowed Base-work in a group where it wasn't allowed or when I put fan-art in the OC Featured -Folder. 
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:iconmakingfunofstuff: More from MakingFunOfStuff


Featured in Collections

Story Help by Deek1

Story Stuff by xSilverSilhouettex

Literature by VoadorChama


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
March 31, 2014
Submitted with
Sta.sh Writer
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
1,549
Favourites
67 (who?)
Comments
72
×