Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Or gay.

Or straight, depending on where you started.

But much of this thread is assuming "in love" (in the sense this practice purportedly produces) is a state that is inherently linked to sexuality. I'm not sure whether or not that's the case.

Ancient Greek had four words for love, only one of which meant the love a man has for his wife. There was also the love of family, the love of friendship, and the love of spirit. CS Lewis gives a great lecture on the Greek ideals of love, here, https://medium.com/message/radically-renovate-your-relations...

Well, tightly connecting it to sexuality carries an implicit assertion that asexual people cannot love (or be "in love"). Seems untenable.

It might motivate the assumption, but it doesn't have to be the case. One can imagine a model where there is some fact about a person that determines who they can fall in love with, and that hetero-, homo-, and bisexuality fall out of that for people with interest in sex, but which is still present but possibly less observable for asexual people. I have no particular confidence that this matches reality well at all, but it should be enough to show that there's no logical implication...

right, what about bro love?

Or best bros/sisters forever.

That might or might not fall under "just [...] closer friends".

Applications are open for YC Summer 2019

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact