Is it true that only men can love unconditionally? Why?

*sniffs your bumhole*
OOO WEE PEE EWEE
That's some NASTY raNK!
Who would ever love THAT sKuNk StAnK/!??!?
*barfs*

why?

My parents hate each other, but they are together because they don't want the divorce to cause trouble on their children

yes, because women are parasites yet men still love them.

No, anyone who values everything and understands it or just appreciate what they don't understand is close to it.

What everyone means by "love" is actually a bias. It's a shame that billions won't ever know what love is. They'll never see the weirdness in "loving" one person while other person exist. How can that even be considered love? You either have love, or you don't, and someone who's full of love would never choose one over the other.

>They'll never see the weirdness in "loving" one person while other person exist.
I'm tired, and I already forgot what I meant to type instead of this.

Only men love, period.
Females only 'love' money, status, etc that come with a 'good' man.

Unconditional love is retarded, since it removes incentives for good behavior. And as far as self-serving idiocy goes, neither gender seems to have a monopoly on it.

I doubt you even want to see it from women--ITT right now, we have responses like "women only love status/money" (not entirely true anyway), and at the same time it's common on this garbage board to see idiotic women staying with absolute shitbags or being degenerates "because they love him"--and the same group of people saying women are incapable of 'love', will also criticize this kind of behavior.

Don't bother working yourself up over some amorphous concept like 'love'. Don't be a piece of shit and your interactions can proceed on that basis--yeah, if you act like a massive prick, your wife should eventually leave you. But if you don't act like a prick, it's irrelevant--i.e. whether love is conditional or not won't matter.

Do you want unconditional love?
If it were truly unconditional, it could be aimed at fucking anybody. There's at least one condition by default, that you're you, but that you is subject to change.

Attached: 1550542171177.jpg (570x738, 33K)

No. There have been women who stick by their disabled husbands, ugly husbands, poor husbands, etc until they fucking die. If my husband became a vegetabl I would take care of him until I died, I can’t even think about choosing another or ever being with another. Is it because I couldn’t or because he’s literally the “best” choice on planet Earth? No - I have had more attractive more skilled and funny/smart guys be into me while dating my husband. I had zero interest in them despite them having “objectively” better value, because I was so compatible with my husband, I loved him and clicked with him so much, absolutely no one could ever come close to our bond. The most important thing is not random qualifiers, it isn’t your relative value in particular areas - it is your personal bond.
Sadly most relationships don’t have a true and irreplaceable bond, they don’t have a true compatibility with each other. They have what I describe as “relative compatibility” - they are not “the one” for each other but they are both more compatible than others, so that is recognized and being used to intentionally form a relationship and intentionally craft a bond. There isn’t anything wrong with this, since people don’t want to be alone and most people will never meet someone that has that inherent and permanent connection - but it’s these relationships where people can “fall out of love”, meet “higher value” options and change their mind, etc. Because men are much less selective than women, women have more access to potential mates than men do, so women more freely change their mind. That’s part of it anyway.

When two people share a true and innate sort of love, a connection that absolutely changes your world permanently, changes your whole worldview forever, when you discover the half of yourself you didn’t know existed and now cannot picture life without - Men don’t feel that more than women. It’s mutual always.

Oh well, it seems that besides being lucky you are also the exception of other women in general. I don't think I'll ever find such a person.

I think it's like some people said here, everyone has a condition to keep that "love" alive. He has never admitted it but my husband's conditions are:
- Physical appearance (he actually said he likes me more now that I lost weight).
- Mental health (some people have more patience with it than others).
- How 'useful' you are. He'll be more loving and appreciative if I do things for him, basically.

I came to terms with that and I wonder how superficial his love for me is but who cares at this point.

I think unconditional love is not about loving the other person when they are disrespectful towards you and you smile at it because 'nobody is perfect'. Unconditional love is when you know your husband is an asshole, you tell him he is and try to work it out to make the relationship healthier.

I think men care less about these things though, as long as the wife gives good head. If they're emotionally "crazy" and they don't even care to keep them sexually satisfied, forget about unconditional love. Women sometimes believe a man should be perfect in any way, I feel like they put them on a pedestal and when they get married, it's all a disaster.

>I think men care less about these things though, as long as the wife gives good head.
What kind of absolute degenerates are you associating with?

Also, about
>How 'useful' you are. He'll be more loving and appreciative if I do things for him, basically.
I don't know your husband, obviously, but this sounds like bullshit. Expressing gratitude for an individual action is in no way equivalent to the existence of an emotional bond (or lack thereof), and it's not healthy at all if you think that your own actions are a precondition for his feelings towards you.

Moreover, it's not a stretch to see how you can justify superficial or selfish behavior on your own end if you pretend that's all that comes from his. I'm not accusing you of either, mind you, but I am cautioning against holding a mindset which poses such risks.

Those are all words that came from his mouth, I am not imagining anything. He told me he loved me more because I was more mentally stable and prettier physically.
I never loved him less because he was an asshole to me, it just gave me thick skin and an indifferent attitude towards it.

About the usefulness, let's say one day I am really clumsy and silly in general. He'll get really annoyed at me at some point, tell me I am fucking dumb or other insults, leave me, go to his room, he will not talk to me while he is with his phone and maybe he'll fall asleep without saying anything to me at all. If it was outside, he will not talk to me either, walking ahead of me and pretty much ignoring me (or being rude). He got better at this so it's not a big deal anymore but it used to be pretty bad (the example I gave you was not too bad) and it made me cry a lot. He'd say "you deserve it because X". Empathy at it's best.
When I am "useful" and "efficient", then he'll be all loving and "grateful" for me.

Well, there you go.

It's opposite actually.

Oh and the good head it's something he said. How men don't have high expectations of women and how they only really care about looks (crazy bit a pretty wife at the very least) and good head. What's the point of having a wife who is ugly, nagging and doesn't satisfy you?

I think I got this mindset/indifference to protect myself dude, I've been dealing with this shit for so long and pretty much all my life.

Sorry I meant ugly and doesn't satisfy you* Who wants to deal with a nagging wife/husband anyway.

tits or gtfo

>Those are all words that came from his mouth
Well, you did say
>He has never admitted it

That aside, your husband sounds like an ass, and I think my initial post (before yours) covers it:
>it's common on this garbage board to see idiotic women staying with absolute shitbags or being degenerates "because they love him"
Phrased a tad harshly, but you get the point. I wouldn't call your current arrangement a model to be aspired to.

>What's the point of having a wife who is ugly, nagging and doesn't satisfy you?
You marry someone you love to have a family with them.
>ugly
Everyone gets ugly with age. Attraction is important initially, and men are even more visual than women, but it's not something that will be maintained.
>nagging
Depends how you define it. If he was the one berating you for inane things, he's not just nagging but being overtly hostile. Not good for a stable and happy relationship, let alone an environment to raise kids in.
>doesn't satisfy you
If someone gets married on the counsel of their dick they should have it chopped off. Moreover, simply being with your partner as themselves should be satisfying in itself. If the only thing keeping you together is sex, you shouldn't be together--yet another reason why waiting until marriage is invaluable, but I digress.

tl;dr deal with your husband however you want, but don't assume his behavior is normal or desirable. I hope for your sake that your marriage is happier than you've described it.

Not all men can, but only men can. Women will always be worried about hypergamy. It's a constant struggle to continually prove you're the best man around before she loses interest.

I didn't know how to word it, my bad. Yes, he has never admitted it but he has also said it directly. He is weird, if I do ask him right now "do you like me more now because I am prettier?" he will deny it, of course. He did say that he likes my body more now though but if I tell him, he will say I just don't remember it well.
Same thing happened when he said my ass was "okay" -with a kinda disgusted look on his face- back then. When I tried telling him that was hurtful, he denied saying that too. He is all about my ass now and he used to ignore it's existence back then too.

Well, I do think he has some gaslighting tendencies and I am not under that influence anymore. I don't let it affect me anymore but that's why I am so sarcastic about it.

And no, I don't agree with that (not marrying someone because they're ugly, nagging or whatever), it's just sarcasm about how superficial people can be.

I do love him, I don't tolerate his bullshit, I don't tolerate any disrespectful comments about me. He is not an ideal man and I am working in improving myself and my career. Like a coworker said, I do love him but if he leaves me tomorrow I'd be able to be okay alone. Before someone says that I don't really love him, it just means I don't depend on someone else to live and be happy to me.

shush now, logic is a tool of the patriarchy.

I don’t know, but women often come with conditions like ”we have to get married and do this and that”.

In the real they care more about social media and what their parents/friends/sisters think about them rather than you.

You would think they would put you before everyone else, but they do not. They put the image of their life before anything, and they wanna have a more beutiful family than everyone else etc.

Maybe you're the one that's retarded. Women don't stay with shitbags out of love. They stay becauz ov dependency. Do you think that people who stay in horrible jobs stay becauz they love being there? They don't love them, they've just manipulated to believe they are. Being attached to someone isn't the same as loving them.

Proof?

This is so untrue. Of course you can have boundaries. It's not about being a pushover. Parents don't let their children do anything they want just becauz they love them. Stop being retarded.

>Women don't stay with shitbags out of love. They stay becauz ov dependency.
Semantics. They use the term "love" themselves, and if love were meant to be unconditional (the topic of this thread), that would include their situations.
Call it whatever you want; 'love' is probably the most vague and amorphous term there is. I think it's clear what is actually being discussed. The point is that some women DO stay with garbage, and they DO justify it by saying that they are "in love"--and furthermore, if you accept the premise in the OP that 'unconditional love' is ideal, then you are also saying that they are trying to fulfill an ideal action.

The term "stop loving"is an oxymoron. Love is different from attachment. Attachment in its nature is selfish and a relationship built off it is really about just serving yourself. It's to cover up their insecurities and their problem or to avoid loneliness. These relationships are about "what about me". That false rush you get when "the love is alive" is nothing more than drugs released by your body. That ain't love, that's a drug induced high that you're chasing and when that one wears off you look for another one and another. Don't look for that, look for people who respects you enough to be your own person. Not enough women do that. They want CONTROL. They "love" you until they find someone else for their high.

>Is it true that only men can love unconditionally? Why?
Women have greater emotional intelligence, meaning they fall in and out of love easier.

>fall in and out of love easier
Did you not read the abov post?

Men are raised to believe being giving and of use is what defines them. Men can easily learn to stop loving once they realize the one sided mold they've been trained like dogs to fit into

Sniffing my bumhole is a sign of attraction

Emotional intelligence is about knowing how you feel and the management that comes with it.
Wich is different from being led by you emotions, and is diferent for every human being.
If all, only obeying your emotions would be low emotional intelligence, user.

Attached: 82CF3156-3D4D-4A8E-8C35-0145360EB4AB.png (620x779, 481K)

anyone with self respect will love with conditions

No, men cannot. The only unconditional love that exists is a mother's love for her children. Romantic unconditional love is nonexistent.