Defining Love

[midwestyankee]

I would be remiss in not saying something truthfully.......I have truly fallen in love with a person I chat with regularly. Yes...love in the true sense, not cyber bullshit or empty typed words with lies behind them. She has enriched my life in many ways and we've learned new things about ourselves...good and bad.....She has the same passion for me as I do for her , yet we are own people....and that is a good thing. The dynamics we have is incredible, as is the fire and strength of our relationship .

I see all the definitions, thoughts, and deep delving on this thread about love.........feelings......acts.....heartbreak, etc.

We are in ........LOVE

Congrats!

No matter where you find it or how you define it, love is a remarkable experience, isn't it?

 

[Bent]

Originally posted by EarthquakeMan

***Is insecurity the main cause of sexual jealousy? Or has our society made sex “dirty"***

I think insecurity is the main cause of sexual jealousy, but also of emotional jealousy as well. For instance, how many women have you known, that have been jealous of a woman who you just look at or talk to, when you know that there is NOTHING going on with the other woman? It isn't your inability to make your woman (hypothetically speaking) feel special, it is her inability to accept that she is special in your life. And that insecurity will eventually be the downfall of the relationship. The relationship is doomed from the getgo if a woman feels that way. Most men aren't this way - that's either because they don't have as strong of an emotional bond with women OR he is just happy where he is and doesn't entertain the idea of any outside interferrence, so that's why I use women as an example.

***Kurt Vonnegut was asked why he never writes of love. He says it’s because readers are suckers for love, and as soon as love is fulfilled in a novel the story is over for the reader, regardless of whether or not the author is finished.***

I agree with Kurt, because for me, to watch an action flick or read a novel and have some yucky love thrown in the mix, will instantly ruin the movie or novel for me. Everything has a time and place.

***He is also suspicious of the whole concept of love and believes that “mutual respect” may be the most intimate bond two people can share.***

Again, I agree. I can easily spend the rest of my life with one man as long as we respect each other. There doesn't have to even be the whole 'making love' involved, to me, that is just a perk. Why base a relationship on something that either happens occasionally, not at all, or has the ability to be unsatisfying. I have heard nearly all the men that I know in real life, do nothing but complain about the women they are with because she isn't sexual, and she is a nag, and blah, blah, but they stay...I even had a thread going about it.

***Infatuation is thrilling. But is it an early stage of love, or just infatuation?***

I don't think that infatuation is the early stage of anything real. Yes, it's thrilling, but the reality of love is that it's harsh. It's something that you struggle to keep strong, it isn't flighty or handed to you. As they say, true love lasts forever....infatuation doesn't.

***Must we define it as an early stage of love in order to give it weight and legitimacy, unwilling to accept it as simple, honest, and delightful infatuation?***

I believe more people than not, do that. It's all about validation and justification when what you have isn't real...not only are you trying to convince others that it's real, you are trying to convince yourself.

***Similarly, how often is lust eagerly defined as love?***

Love, has to go both ways, until it does, it is just lust. The two aren't the same.

***For some, whether they might admit it or not, lust is laden with guilt. But love! Love is a glorious thing! Do some convince themselves that lust is love in order to lust with a clear conscience?***

Again, I agree. Justification and validation again. Love is absolutely glorious. I thought I had loved before, but as I get older, I have found that I am just beginning to love truly.

***“Love” gets thrown around like confetti on Lit, deflating it’s value.***

As does the term 'friends' as you stated. And I agree with you completely on this point as well. I don't however believe that it's a quest for love so much as one's quest for validation...'if they like me, or they love me, if I'm in the 'in crowd', then I'm somebody'...that is what I see alot of on Lit, and honestly, in everyday life. I don't live by that obviously, but most do.

***We are inundated from childhood with a simple message: that love conquers all***

Yes, it does...love for yourself...if you love yourself, you can do anything.

 

[Bent]

Originally posted by mayi
okay guys, i have to ask............why is it wrong to express love for someone?

If I may answer...It isn't wrong to express your love for someone, as long as the love you feel doesn't overwhelm and alter their lives. Love has to go both ways, when it is given by one, sometimes the one feeling the love, is the only one feeling it and trying to drive it home in the off chance that the other person will perhaps 'see the light and love me back'...love...stalking...sometimes it goes hand in hand.

Now if you mean just an occasional 'I love you', then of course, that's something different entirely, but again, sometimes the other person might not be comfortable with it...as you stated, we are all different people, all individuals.

 

[midwestyankee]

Bent, you have made an excellent addition to our discussion.

I would like to address one point you made. You said, "Love, has to go both ways, until it does, it is just lust." I wonder if this is so, or if I am not understanding you correctly.

I see plenty of cases where love is given but not returned and yet the giver is neither harmed nor disappointed. It is what it is. and I can't see these cases as lust either. They can happen between close friends who have no sexual attraction. A good psychotherapist might well extend himself fully enough to a patient that it becomes a form of love. So I am not sure I can accept the idea that one-sided love is the same thing as lust.

Now, if you are suggesting that lust is mostly a one-way emotion, then I agree completely. Lust, like infatuation, is very much a self-centered condition.

Did I read you correctly here?

 

[Bent]

Originally posted by midwestyankee
Bent, you have made an excellent addition to our discussion.

I would like to address one point you made. You said, "Love, has to go both ways, until it does, it is just lust." I wonder if this is so, or if I am not understanding you correctly.

I see plenty of cases where love is given but not returned and yet the giver is neither harmed nor disappointed. It is what it is. and I can't see these cases as lust either. They can happen between close friends who have no sexual attraction. A good psychotherapist might well extend himself fully enough to a patient that it becomes a form of love. So I am not sure I can accept the idea that one-sided love is the same thing as lust.

Now, if you are suggesting that lust is mostly a one-way emotion, then I agree completely. Lust, like infatuation, is very much a self-centered condition.

Did I read you correctly here?

Thanks. The reason I say lust is because (in my opinion) it is a desire, a hope, a passion, a possibility of what isn't just yet. To me, love is the epitome of all emotions. To attain love, in the truest sense of the word, you must surpass all over levels of being to get there.

What happens when you see someone and think it's love at first sight? It isn't that you love who they are or what they bring to your life, because in all actuality, you don't really know them yet. So...you desire, you lust, you want, you hope for...you don't have it...yet.

Can you love someone in a platonic sense? I think for me, I would say admire. I love those that have stuck by me for many years, through the good and the bad...simple because of that...we have been through it all together.

I do not love people that I hardly know. I have been guilty in the past of telling someone 'I love you' only for it to actually mean 'I admire you'. I think alot of people mistake admiration for love as well.

So, lust is a very self centered emotion, because it means what the *I* wants, not the *we*. Admiration, on the other hand, and I realize I just brought it up, can be one sided. Love however, to me, has to go both ways...it has to be reciprocated, welcomed, appreciated.

I hope that made more sense, I tend to ramble.

 

[midwestyankee]

Thanks. The reason I say lust is because (in my opinion) it is a desire, a hope, a passion, a possibility of what isn't just yet. To me, love is the epitome of all emotions. To attain love, in the truest sense of the word, you must surpass all over levels of being to get there.

What happens when you see someone and think it's love at first sight? It isn't that you love who they are or what they bring to your life, because in all actuality, you don't really know them yet. So...you desire, you lust, you want, you hope for...you don't have it...yet.

Can you love someone in a platonic sense? I think for me, I would say admire. I love those that have stuck by me for many years, through the good and the bad...simple because of that...we have been through it all together.

I do not love people that I hardly know. I have been guilty in the past of telling someone 'I love you' only for it to actually mean 'I admire you'. I think alot of people mistake admiration for love as well.

So, lust is a very self centered emotion, because it means what the *I* wants, not the *we*. Admiration, on the other hand, and I realize I just brought it up, can be one sided. Love however, to me, has to go both ways...it has to be reciprocated, welcomed, appreciated.

I hope that made more sense, I tend to ramble.

This made a great deal of sense, Bent.

I like your point about admiration. That too, it seems to me, is a rather self-centered emotion. It's all about how we feel in the presence of someone else and not about what we want to give to that person or how we want to help that person in life.

 

[Bent]

Originally posted by midwestyankee
This made a great deal of sense, Bent.

I like your point about admiration. That too, it seems to me, is a rather self-centered emotion. It's all about how we feel in the presence of someone else and not about what we want to give to that person or how we want to help that person in life.

I'm glad I usually take the long way to get where I'm going I believe that pretty much every emotion except for love is selfish. If we sat down and wrote out every word that would be used to describe what we feel for someone else, obviously, by saying what WE feel, that in and of itself, shows the selfishness in it all...of course we could use nearly every descriptive word in our language. If you wrote down the word that would describe what we BOTH feel for EACH OTHER, that of course would be, undoubtedly....love.

 

[midwestyankee]

I'm glad I usually take the long way to get where I'm going I believe that pretty much every emotion except for love is selfish. If we sat down and wrote out every word that would be used to describe what we feel for someone else, obviously, by saying what WE feel, that in and of itself, shows the selfishness in it all...of course we could use nearly every descriptive word in our language. If you wrote down the word that would describe what we BOTH feel for EACH OTHER, that of course would be, undoubtedly....love.

Now let me pose a question for your consideration:

What do you think of the idea that love is an action, not a feeling? The idea here is that love is what you do by extending yourself out to another in acting on a commitment to help that person grow throughout life.

 

[DLL]

Originally posted by EarthquakeMan
Some thread food – random questions, opinions, observations, and a bit of the devil’s advocate . . .


For more post people, love comes saddled with sexual jealousy. This is illogical, yet ubiquitous. Is insecurity the main cause of sexual jealousy? Or has our society made sex “dirty”, and in order to clean it up sex must be accompanied by love, or made synonymous with love. (Walker Percy touches on this in several of his novels).

Kurt Vonnegut was asked why he never writes of love. He says it’s because readers are suckers for love, and as soon as love is fulfilled in a novel the story is over for the reader, regardless of whether or not the author is finished. He is also suspicious of the whole concept of love and believes that “mutual respect” may be the most intimate bond two people can share.

Infatuation is thrilling. But is it an early stage of love, or just infatuation? Must we define it as an early stage of love in order to give it weight and legitimacy, unwilling to accept it as simple, honest, and delightful infatuation?

Similarly, how often is lust eagerly defined as love? For some, whether they might admit it or not, lust is laden with guilt. But love! Love is a glorious thing! Do some convince themselves that lust is love in order to lust with a clear conscience?

“Love” gets thrown around like confetti on Lit, deflating it’s value. (On a similar note, the word “friends” gets plenty of use, too. We all have a different definition of friendship, but for me someone I’ve exchanged some PMs with or posted with is an acquaintance, not necessarily a friend. True friendship involves much more, but then that’s another thread altogether )

For some on Lit, the quest for “love” seems so desperate that it saddens me.

We are inundated from childhood with a simple message: that love conquers all; that true happiness is found only in love; that everything is secondary to love. This is the message of popular culture (books, movies, songs, advertisements). How could any child grow up with such a pervasive message and not believe it. But is it true? Look around. How many instances in the real world do you observe where love actually does conquer all? Have we been brainwashed into believing a fairy tale?

Is there such a thing as truly unconditional (romantic) love?

 

[Bent]

Originally posted by midwestyankee
Now let me pose a question for your consideration:

What do you think of the idea that love is an action, not a feeling? The idea here is that love is what you do by extending yourself out to another in acting on a commitment to help that person grow throughout life.

Making love, is an action...touching caressing, expressing love is an action. Love is definately a feeling. Love is when you see the other side of you. Love is the sum of all things...it isn't what you do, it's what is. The final result of all insignificant, and significant actions all rolled into one feeling...but then again, feeling is an action now isn't it? It's difficult to explain, isn't it?

 

[Ammo44]

In a word...YES...

Finallyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!! An answer that makes sense..... When you find it..hold on to it tight...it's harder to find these days.

 

[Peteslaw2]

In a word...YES...

And I feel yours every day!

 

[midwestyankee]

Making love, is an action...touching caressing, expressing love is an action. Love is definately a feeling. Love is when you see the other side of you. Love is the sum of all things...it isn't what you do, it's what is. The final result of all insignificant, and significant actions all rolled into one feeling...but then again, feeling is an action now isn't it? It's difficult to explain, isn't it?

Sometimes it seems to be difficult to explain, but I think the key is in your phrase, "expressing love." When I suggest that love is a verb (and not a feeling) I am talking about what you are calling "expressing love."

My concern with the idea that love is a feeling is this: if we love someone, we want to help make their life better. But we can't do that simply by feeling wonderful about them. We have to do things. So to me, love is active.

I think there is a reason why our language has us say, "I love you" as the strongest statement of devotion and commitment. It's not "I feel love with you" or "You make me feel great." That reason is that in our heart of hearts we know that love is doing things for other people. It's a verb.

Our beloved can gain nothing from our feelings; only we can enjoy our feelings. Only when we act on those feelings and do things for our beloved are we actually loving them. The rest is all self-centered feelings.

Not that these feelings aren't wonderful in themselves, but the love happens when you do things.

 

[Shoshisexy]

For me, feeling love -means- expressing it. If I feel it, I cannot help but express it in some way. It may not be verbal, but it will be expressed to the person I love.



Shoshana

 

[midwestyankee]

For me, feeling love -means- expressing it. If I feel it, I cannot help but express it in some way. It may not be verbal, but it will be expressed to the person I love.



Shoshana

Exactly.

 

[Maxell46]

And I feel yours every day!

 

[Maxell46]

In a word...YES...

Get real!

 

[DLL]

Originally posted by Maxell46
Get real!

 

[midwestyankee]

Get real!

Max, I and all the regular readers of this thread would greatly appreciate it if you would carry on your petty tiffs elsewhere. This thread is intended for serious discussion and not bickering. Thanks.

mwy

 

[Maxell46]

Max, I and all the regular readers of this thread would greatly appreciate it if you would carry on your petty tiffs elsewhere. This thread is intended for serious discussion and not bickering. Thanks.

mwy

Oh......sorry!
I didn't realize the serious discussions going on.

Did you see me bicker
Did you hear me petty tiff

I now return you Midwestyankee to your regular program.
Enjoy your serious discussions

 

[Shoshisexy]

Thanks!



Shoshana

 

[midwestyankee]

One of the things that has become very clear from many of the postings to this thread is that one of the differences between the state of falling in love and the long-term state of loving your beloved is the strength of the emotions that make up the state of falling in love. And one of the instinctual actions that is driven by those emotions is the declaration of one's love.

It's a beautiful thing, really, to see people declare their love publicly. They get creative in their language, they try to tell everyone in the world of their bliss, they become evangelists for love, and they both charm and amuse the rest of us. We have all been there at one time or another. To tell the world, and at the same time tell your beloved, that you are flat-out in love, is one of the purest joys we know. If it weren't, Hallmark would have gone broke a long time ago.

Unfortunately, not everyone accepts these public declarations in the same way. I won't begin to speculate why this might be, but it's clear to me the declarations must spark some inner chord that jars their psyches.

Too bad.

I, for one, have rather enjoyed watching some of the recently formed couples on Lit gush out their feelings for each other. Who among us hasn't been warmed by the many times that 69forever and Goddess of Souls have said "I love you" on these pages? And there have been many others as well but l don't want to miss anyone so I won't name any more.

So, to all of you who are enjoying making your declarations public here on lit: here, here! Enjoy.

And for those who, like me, enjoy reading these postings, let's enjoy with them.

And for everyone else, well, I feel a little sorry for you. Perhaps, like a famous Dr. Seuss character, your heart is just a size too small?

 

[Shoshisexy]

Declarations of love are just that, a declaration of one's feelings. Even as anyone on these boards posts what they like, it is a declaration. Perhaps not as impassioned, but it is still the same.

A declaration means nothing without form behind it. One can say they like my writing, but without anything else said, I have no idea what it means.

Love is more than words. Even platonic love must have a form and action behind it.

Romantic love all the more form, action, and reaction.

True love must be willing to give to the other at the expense of oneself. I am not saying blindly giving everything...but giving all that one can. When this is returned in kind, a relationship is formed, whether in person or here on these boards. True love does not have to be a romantic love, but it can and does exist in person and here.



Shoshana

 

[midwestyankee]

<snip>

True love must be willing to give to the other at the expense of oneself. I am not saying blindly giving everything...but giving all that one can. When this is returned in kind, a relationship is formed, whether in person or here on these boards. True love does not have to be a romantic love, but it can and does exist in person and here.



Shoshana

I really like the way you put this, "must be willing to give to the other at the expense of oneself."

What I like is the idea of sacrifice and I don't think we have touched on sacrifice much in this thread yet.

What are some sacrifices that people have made or would be willing to make for love?

 

[wicked woman]

Originally posted by midwestyankee
I really like the way you put this, "must be willing to give to the other at the expense of oneself."

What I like is the idea of sacrifice and I don't think we have touched on sacrifice much in this thread yet.

What are some sacrifices that people have made or would be willing to make for love?

I loved my husband (now ex) enough to let him go when it became clear that our goals in life were completely incompatible. Took primary custody of our two small children and all the responsibilities that entailed. I think that was a sacrifice for love and even though he threw the gift away I still think it was the right move. Of course now I'd look through those rose coloured glasses we wear during the beginning blush of love and make sure out goals were compatible.