2006-09-23 05:02:25 · 22 answers · asked by bestofintent 2 in Social Science ➔ Sociology
Lust.
2006-09-23 05:04:23 · answer #1 · answered by dh1977 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In what society? Also, think about this: is lust a part of love, or love a part of lust? I'd go with lust is a part of love: love of body. If true love is love of another person's soul, spirit, body, mind, and emotions, then lust might just be the first one to surface, therefore appearing most common.
2006-09-23 12:24:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lust confused with love
2006-09-23 12:34:10 · answer #3 · answered by kermit 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lust.
2006-09-23 18:02:54 · answer #4 · answered by MikeL 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe they're as common as each other, and are necessary to ensure the survival of each. You see, I believe one leads on from the other.
As far back as Ancient Greece this question was being asked: what's the difference between love and attraction There's a stark difference between Aphrodite and her son, Eros, after all. Aphrodite was considered the goddess of love and represented an ancient and pure love which is primordial. Whereas Eros was the god of a younger love, one founded in attraction and desire where individuals are smitten with each other. The Greeks realised that the two were connected and probably mutually exclusive.
Attraction and desire, or lust as you put it, is likely to lead to love just as love may lead to renewed attraction and desire.
If this has interested you, read 'The Symposium', which covers all philosophical aspects of love.
2006-09-24 04:02:06 · answer #5 · answered by Twinkles 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
From every thing I have seen Lust. To bad to because love is so much better.
2006-09-23 12:04:24 · answer #6 · answered by Kali_girl825 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Thirty years ago when the sexual revolution was beginning to be in full swing, many argued that the value of the sexual revolution was that it was going to liberate men and women from the repressive view of sexuality pervasive in society; people would be free to make love to those whom they loved without the strictures of marriage. Now we have a society that is confused about love, romance and sexual activity. This seems to affect both men and women and may account for a considerable number of disastrous relationships and a number of embittered women and frustrated men. True love is hard to find so people confuse lust with love.
2006-09-23 12:33:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Lust if hes poor,Love if hes got lots of money
2006-09-23 12:29:43 · answer #8 · answered by Allie 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lust & love are both as common as they always have been...
2006-09-23 12:04:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
lust is a lot simpler. Love needs attention and it's too much like hard work for some
2006-09-23 12:09:58 · answer #10 · answered by stormyweather 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋