Another WTF? moment

[impressive]

Why do people always feel there are limits on love? Shouldn't it be the last place we put limits?

I think that jealousy and posessiveness are not allies of love but deadly enemies. I think that sexual exclusivity is an outdated concept and will become more so as our life spans increase. I also know I made a promise. I intend to keep it. But damn, sometimes it is hard!

I was a sexual adventurer who settled down. Sometimes it is hard to remember why.

Bel, we are kindred spirits.

 

[rgraham666]

Once again, I'm speaking from a position of envy here.

I've only been in two relationships my entire life. And probably less than 20 dates, certainly less than 30.

If I do get into another relationship, I'm not going to risk it by fooling around. It would be foolish for me to do so. Rather than have x number of relationships working successfully at the same time, the result would probably be 0 relationships working at all.

I prefer simplicity to complexity. If you're confident enough and socially adept enough that you can handle multiple lovers, go ahead, I won't judge you.

I'm none of those things so I will work on making what I have work, as imperfect as it may be.

I'm now relating shereads thread on Everest with this one. In both cases, it involves people who can't be happy with what they've got.

And finally I read this earlier.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Why do people always feel there are limits on love? Shouldn't it be the last place we put limits?

Hmmm. I don't think that there is a limit to love itself, per se, but I would argue that there is a clearly a limit to the time and resources each person has. Jealousy is less irrational than we'd like to make it. Marriage and living together involves not just sex and wild fun (alas) but also tedious things like chores and paying bills and raising children and dealing with the in-laws. A spouse who is devoting significant time outside of the relationship is not only spending sexual energy elsewhere, but also eroding those daily bonds and leaving the upkeep of the relationship, physically and emotionally, to the other spouse.

Or to put it simply - I love my dog. I adore her. But now I've got the new puppy, and I really just don't do as much any more, because I've got to devote huge amounts of time to yelling "no no no no no NOOOO not on the carpet!" I still love the older dog just as much - but I am worried, as well, because I know she's not getting the attention she used to. Hopefully potty training will soon be over and we can do more together - but I know this. I don't love her any less, but I can't show her I love her as often when my attention is elsewhere.

Shanglan

 

[MarieaWishAway]

delete

 

[cantdog]

Not if they're an addition to your lives. I feel that, as a couple, we could marry another person whom we loved, and then another if it seemed right.

 

[cantdog]

Love is extensible, elastic. Couples have children, adopt children. A family changes shape all the time. We never acted on any of this because she was raised to be suspicious first, instead of trusting first. She wants to fulfill responsibilities, competently; I want to serve, excellently. I believe in hospitality and wisdom, she believes in obligations and God. It was not a gulf we could bridge, and now we are facing graver things and the question is shelved, for good, most likely.

But love got us through the very worst things, really. Love and a sense of commitment. This is far from thrill seeking, which is hardly a good basis for branching out, in my view.

I'm not talking about sport fucking, but a real bond of mutual support, a real addition to the family in every sense.

cantdog

 

[cantdog]

But jealousy is just greed, not love. Love laughs at it.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Profound, cantdog - profound.

I actually agree with you on the topic of expanding a relationship to a mutally loved other party. I guess I'm just pessimistic about the odds. It's hard enough to get two humans to cooperate together. On the other hand ... sometimes it seems like more people might take the pressure off any one person ... dunno.

But you point out the flaw in my metaphor, at least. I love all the pets, but alas - they don't think much of each other I think your parents/children analogy works better. The happiest families seem to be those in which all members love all members and strive together.

Shanglan

 

[MarieaWishAway]

delete

 

[MarieaWishAway]

delete

 

[cantdog]

One of the firemen told me there was a fifty-mile limit on those licenses. Then Louie says, "No. Two culverts and a bridge."

cantdog

 

[impressive]

Now that's a thought! Should relationships/marriage licenses be renewable on a yearly basis...like a contract! You could put it all down in print and everyone would know where they stand, what the rules are, so to speak, and go from there!

Marriage a la Heinlein. I could live that way.

 

[cantdog]

It would prevent a commitment of resources to the joint venture. If you had to arrange the objects and money and investments, income, insurances, and all the rest so that you could break off painlessly at year's end, it would be a most tentative thing.

Heinlein said those things, but his Howard families got the way they did because the fortunes and equity of all their number had been pooled over time. When you become old enough to be inheriting, you will realize that it is your family's total fortune which will keep your descendants from paupery.

There will be no such thing if no one commits to each other. If we live 600 years, then there may be tweny- and thirty-year licenses, for the purpose of raising a clutch of kids with that person, but a yearly sunset on it would atomize society.

 

[MarieaWishAway]

delete

 

[cantdog]

The article makes clear good sense. A lot of young people lack simple roommate skills.

People actually divorce each other over roommate skills. Or hold each other hostage. "If you loved me you could do the dishes for me," and all that malarkey.

Separate roommate issues from the things that matter. Thank you. Pay the receptionist, and I'll see you next Monday at three-thirty.

Marriage counselors.

 

[rgraham666]

I'm glad I'm not the only one that feels this way...Your words were almost like reading my own thoughts...only you said it so much better...

Well, I am a writer. You didn't do so bad yourself though.

Now that's a thought! Should relationships/marriage licenses be renewable on a yearly basis...like a contract! You could put it all down in print and everyone would know where they stand, what the rules are, so to speak, and go from there!

Now I'm going to show how weird I am. I, personally, would have a problem with that. I dislike contracts as it's impossible to cover all eventualities.

I prefer The Art of War to On War (to use a bad analogy) for this reason. Sun Tzu speaks in metaphors, Clausewitz in absolutes. The former provides inspiration, the latter, direction.

I prefer inspiration.

Another problem is that contracts are usually used by what I call 'rules mongers' (the gamer in me is showing) to put all responsibility for success on me.

My own belief is that a relationship requires two things. Clear communication, without blame or rancour, and forgiveness.

But me talking about relationships is like me talking about combat. All second hand fantasies.

 

[MarieaWishAway]

delete

 

[Belegon]

Imagine not being able to speak during a major disagreement but having to write it all down to get your point across...seeing your thoughts in writing would slow down the escalation process that occurs during a verbal sparring....should drawing pictures be allowed? And if so...should color be added?

The idea has some merit...but I can see it being a trap as well. The answer of course is that there is no single answer and different situations will require different solutions.

I still like the idea.