If we were to say that in a scenario where Adam buys Eve an anniversary gift, Eve is the beneficiary, and that in a scenario where Eve cooks Adam a delicious dinner, Adam is the beneficiary, who is the beneficiary in the following scenarios:
Man filled with lust/love kisses his girl on the neck.
Man filled with lust/love kisses his girl on her breasts.
Woman sees, as she puts it a" cute, delicious" baby, and proceeds to kiss/bite the baby’s cute cheeks.
Man sees his mother after months of longing and being apart, rushes to her and kisses her cheek.
I will reveal more based on your answers, which I look forward to.
All benefit if love or caring is reciprocal except 2. A shrink would benefit because any mom that thinks her baby is delicious and bites it, has some severe issues.
I blame this on the Public school system, Liberals, but deep down I think genetics has a role in it too, people these days just don’t have the drive to overcome it.
So who is the beneficiary in 2? And why do you make a distinction between 1 and 2?
As for the baby-eating mom, don’t take it literally. I’m sure you would’ve heard adults refer to cute things such as babies saying things like: “Omg you’re so cute I could eat you!”
Or something along those lines, you know… and many times adults will get the urge to bite or pinch or squeeze their source of excitement, which in this case is a cute baby. So in instances when this happens, keeping in mind the model listed in the OP, who is the beneficiary?
Sorry for replying so late by the way, I was abruptly sent offshore, and had no access to internet, but I’ve finally returned to civilization.
Well an oops is in order. I did not mean 2, I meant 3 for the mom.
I do not know about many adults wanting to cause pain to an infant because they are excited, if they want to do such a thing they need to get some control or help. Yes people say that they could eat you if the object is adorable or they love it. The meaning is traced back to ownership and keeping infants always held due to no safe place to set the child down. Eat is just a slang word that somehow worked its way into modern phrases.
In your post you distinctly said bite. I stand by what I said.
If it is just words and no action then only the adult benefits. The infant would not understand the words .
Is this some kind of set-up? “His girl” is man’s adult lover? 1-4 can be spun different ways, for instance in #4, his mother could be deceased in a casket. Not enough info. given so all answers would be based off of our differing personal assumptions.
Like MM said, there’s not a lot of information to go on here. For example, in 1 and 2, is the girl “not in the mood”? But I think there are some default images we are to presume. I imagine the guy and girl in 1 and 2 are “in the heat of the moment”, that both are enjoying a moment of passion… but all that’s injected by me.
lol Well, all I can say is that if you spend a lot of time “offshore” - say, in the company of men - and you’re a normal red-blooded man, this may be WHY this post.
For him to be truly the beneficiary, the scenario would have to proceed further. I would also say that mutual reciprocation would make for both of them the beneficiaries.
As a Mom, I might watch out for that one. She might be the beneficiary there but if, for instance, that cute baby is sleeping, he certainly wouldn’t be.
Also as a Mom, I wouldn’t just allow some stranger to kiss my babies - she would have to ask for that privilege. If she didn’t, she might be the beneficiary of something she didn’t want.
By “longing” (a bit much but that’s just me) do you simply mean “missed her”? Well, he would be the beneficiary BUT what if his Mom doesn’t really like him much? lol
If he felt a cold chill and rejection, what can kind of benefit would that have served him?
