Steam installieren
Anmelden
|
Sprache
简体中文 (Vereinfachtes Chinesisch)
繁體中文 (Traditionelles Chinesisch)
日本語 (Japanisch)
한국어 (Koreanisch)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarisch)
Čeština (Tschechisch)
Dansk (Dänisch)
English (Englisch)
Español – España (Spanisch – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (Lateinamerikanisches Spanisch)
Ελληνικά (Griechisch)
Français (Französisch)
Italiano (Italienisch)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Ungarisch)
Nederlands (Niederländisch)
Norsk (Norwegisch)
Polski (Polnisch)
Português – Portugal (Portugiesisch – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (Portugiesisch – Brasilien)
Română (Rumänisch)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Finnisch)
Svenska (Schwedisch)
Türkçe (Türkisch)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamesisch)
Українська (Ukrainisch)
Ein Übersetzungsproblem melden
It goes too much into carnal eros. And could easily be argued as lacking conscious philia and humanity.
As for how was it, the first time, our teeth had a war with each other, and then everything else went as smooth as two teens kissing for the first time.
Aka, sandpaper smooth.
You have to keep in mind the number of people here who've never made out.
More of a problem many moons ago when I was young. Most women my age know what they're doing.
https://youtu.be/9vaw8RbBVPI
After all, the barking of a dog is purely material and chemical. It involves no qualia, and is much akin to the unconscious babbling of a 1 year old baby, which is the intellectual level on which animals operate. With said babbling baby, before it learns actual language, having no conscious memories. That is something we know from ourselves, as the understanding and expression of actual language seems to directly coincide the formation of conscious (actual) memories and the experience of qualia.
Which makes such a kiss a simulacrum (drawn imitation) of love, at best. And not only is it a simulacrum, but it is also a low (carnal and hedonistic) form of love. The same way, that when a dog appears as chemically happy, then not only is there no conscious (actual) experience of happiness, but it is also carnal happiness, much akin to how a bark is carnal relative to actual language. With the emergence of actual language, again, coinciding the formation of conscious memories.
Hence also, just as by the way, the dilemma of how you could never ask a 2 year old about whether it was conscious at the age of 1: Because there is no actual language to ask with. And without actual language (be it verbal or nonverbal)… there also appear to be no conscious memories, and most likely also no conscious experiences. (You could argue that we are actual language in itself.)
And surely, if there is actual love (conscious love), then love is an element of (or it coincides) actual language. And with a carnal kiss still being akin to a carnal bark or the purely imitative babbling of a baby… Etc.
It could be considered artless behaviour. That of pure matter. That of an unconscious simulacrum on the canvas that is our world. Hence why the rejection and naturally conscious dislike thereof is surely understandable. (Which the likes of "psychologists" will of course write huge essays about not understanding, never bringing actual arguments beyond their own inadequacy, believing it to somehow strengthen their position.)
Maybe you could indulge in it, hypothetically, to humor the body, even if that might just be a rationalization of one's own weakness? But surely only if it being carnal is acknowledged. Still it would beg the question of "why?" Although that is another topic entirely. (I am not going to comment on that here.)
I am bored and can't sleep.
Sadly it did not make up for...other things. I still was a great kisser. Foreplay was my grounds. Lol. So sad.