love on the internet is it possible?

Silent K wrote:Dude...they're all nuts. You just have to find your right kind of crazy.

BlueMaxx wrote: Platonic equals an affection for one another. Intimacy is more. And more than just fucking. Not to be cornball.

potatojoe wrote:Sometimes, I just wanna fuck the internet.

kidspider2099 wrote:

BlueMaxx wrote: Platonic equals an affection for one another. Intimacy is more. And more than just fucking. Not to be cornball.

it starts inti platonic and turns intimacy.

BlueMaxx wrote: Platonic equals an affection for one another. Intimacy is more. And more than just fucking. Not to be cornball.

Foxy wrote:

kidspider2099 wrote:
not only that the net is all about inward beauty and not so much on the outward.

What internet are you using?

Silent K wrote:I mean, really...internet hookups have a stigma...but is there really a better way to meet someone that might be just right for you? Previously, the best ways to meet someone would be going to clubs/bars, the workplace, chance meetings, or through family and friends. With the internet, your options are limitless...you're not confined to the finite number of people within your immediate reach. Why should I go to a bar and hope that 1 out of the 100 females that are there is to my liking...and then pray to God that she'll talk to me, when instead, I can befriend someone on the internet that has similar interests, tastes, and who I connect well with, cultivate that relationship, and then go from there?

BlueMaxx wrote:
Huh?

But everyone who's found someone on the internet, like those who've stated, has met them, experienced them. They're expressiveness via manuerisms, emotions, and their thoughts shared up close and personal are why they're together. You can't reach intimacy or romantic mutuality without those key components of a person.

goatt wrote:Of course you can find love on the internet, just look at me and Knize!

Paroxysm wrote:

Silent K wrote:

BlueMaxx wrote:
Huh?

But everyone who's found someone on the internet, like those who've stated, has met them, experienced them. They're expressiveness via manuerisms, emotions, and their thoughts shared up close and personal are why they're together. You can't reach intimacy or romantic mutuality without those key components of a person.

You're wrong, and you continue to be wrong. I've experienced it personally, as have others on here. Eventually, meeting face-to-face happens, if all goes well, but to say the relationship is nothing but platonic, and neither romantic nor intimate until the in-person meeting occurs is wrong.

Silent K wrote:Platonic equals non-sexual affection. Intimacy does not have to be face-to-face.

BlueMaxx wrote:

Silent K wrote:Platonic equals non-sexual affection. Intimacy does not have to be face-to-face.

Platonic is considered as the basis for all mutual relationships. Friend, family, even lovers. Doesn't necessarily mean that someone doesn't find someone attractive while under this type of love. It stands for a shared understanding between two people. Or more.

Intimacy...say you've been chatting with someone over the internet or over the phone for a long time. You have deep conversations, have some laughs, even get naughty...do you really know this person? You can't have intimacy until your life has experienced his/her life first-hand. And vice versa.

BlueMaxx wrote:

Silent K wrote:Platonic equals non-sexual affection. Intimacy does not have to be face-to-face.

Platonic is considered as the basis for all mutual relationships. Friend, family, even lovers. Doesn't necessarily mean that someone doesn't find someone attractive while under this type of love. It stands for a shared understanding between two people. Or more.

Intimacy...say you've been chatting with someone over the internet or over the phone for a long time. You have deep conversations, have some laughs, even get naughty...do you really know this person? You can't have intimacy until your life has experienced his/her life first-hand. And vice versa.

Silent K wrote:

BlueMaxx wrote:

Silent K wrote:Platonic equals non-sexual affection. Intimacy does not have to be face-to-face.

Platonic is considered as the basis for all mutual relationships. Friend, family, even lovers. Doesn't necessarily mean that someone doesn't find someone attractive while under this type of love. It stands for a shared understanding between two people. Or more.

Intimacy...say you've been chatting with someone over the internet or over the phone for a long time. You have deep conversations, have some laughs, even get naughty...do you really know this person? You can't have intimacy until your life has experienced his/her life first-hand. And vice versa.

Main Entry: pla·ton·ic
Pronunciation: \plə-ˈtä-nik, plā-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin platonicus, from Greek platōnikos, from Platōn Plato
Date: 1533

1 capitalized : of, relating to, or characteristic of Plato or Platonism
2 a : relating to or based on platonic love; also : experiencing or professing platonic love b : of, relating to, or being a relationship marked by the absence of romance or sex

Stop telling me what I can and cannot do. I've DONE what you've said I can't do. How much do you really know a person anyhow, even one that you meet in person? You're wrong. End of story. You can repeat the same argument in as many different ways as you'd like, misrepresenting the word platonic and completely missing the point of the word intimacy. I've been there. Apparently, you haven't. Maybe you should broaden your horizons, and learn first-hand that you don't have to touch skin-to-skin to be intimate with someone, or even to fall in love.

BlueMaxx wrote:But that definition isn't complete. It just states platonic as if it soley for non-sexual relationships. And that's not the definition. Course, you got it off the internet. The philosophical term implies spiritual connections, trancending sexuality. And I even said intimacy wasn't "skin-to-skin". You responded to that very thing.

BlueMaxx wrote:
I'm not going to deny what you felt was real. How would I know? But the definition of intimacy is a close personal relationship to where the partners in question need one another in their lives, they've built each others' lives together. Long distance is impossible to keep up. I'm not spouting opinion, these are the concepts' definitions, what they stand for. If you felt that, good for you. Again, wasn't denying your feelings, Knize.