spookie Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Or rather (for the title) WTF is the deal with my attracting people who "don't know what love is"? Today Mr. AS writes to me: "I'm not sure what love really is, so how can I know what it feels like?" (regarding his parents.) This sent off warning bells in my head (as well it should) cause my ex regularly told me the same thing (regarding HIS parents, and regarding ME during our frequent off-times.) Now I understand this dude has a condition... and that my ex had parents who sucked. And that my best friend, who CONSTANTLY tells me the same thing (he also says that his relationship with ME (for him, it's a "monogamous friendship") is a "trial in caring") had a screwed-up childhood. But still... not to know what love is?! It's the most obvious thing in the world to me! There's a lot I don't know about myself, and certainly about the world, but LOVE? It's that ache in your chest. It's longing. It's trust, commitment, appreciation. Wanting someone's babies (to find out what he was like, when he was little). Knowing if the world was ending/ zombies were taking over, all that would matter was sticking together. But apparently, either I am alone in thinking it's obvious, or I have a knack for attracting screwed-up people. Which one is it? And why?
Nemo Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 But apparently, either I am alone in thinking it's obvious, or I have a knack for attracting screwed-up people. Which one is it? And why? It kind of reminds me about this (possibly excessively cheesy) quote from Love Actually: Whenever I get gloomy with the state of the world, I think about the arrivals gate at Heathrow Airport. General opinion's starting to make out that we live in a world of hatred and greed, but I don't see that. It seems to me that love is everywhere. Often it's not particularly dignified or newsworthy, but it's always there - fathers and sons, mothers and daughters, husbands and wives, boyfriends, girlfriends, old friends. When the planes hit the Twin Towers, as far as I know none of the phone calls from the people on board were messages of hate or revenge - they were all messages of love. If you look for it, I've got a sneaking suspicion love actually is all around.But, to me, part of understanding what love is, is being in touch with your own humanity. Then we have the mountains of poetry written on the subject. Sure - love is impossibly difficult to describe. However, love is pure, and love is what defines us at the deepest levels. It's that ache in your chest. It's longing. It's trust, commitment, appreciation. Wanting someone's babies (to find out what he was like, when he was little). Knowing if the world was ending/ zombies were taking over, all that would matter was sticking together. Absolutely. Fabulous. It's a feeling. It's an understanding. It's a glow. Anyway, if he really doesn't know, then you can teach him how to love. If anyone can, then spookie can.
Trialbyfire Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 It's a bit of a cop-out when people say that and base it on their childhood because familial love and the love you share with friends, are both very different than romantic love. You recognize romantic love when you've experienced it. People who say they don't understand it, have either never experienced it or are in some form of denial, due to the negativity associated to the dissolution of the relationship. spook, in your situation, your new love interest has AS. It's not surprising if he hasn't ever experienced romantic love and might not even recognize it, when it came along.
Nemo Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 It's a bit of a cop-out when people say that and base it on their childhood because familial love and the love you share with friends, are both very different than romantic love. Yes, communicating and expressing love is a little different, depending on the circumstances. Which reminds me, I must stop touching my friends in inappropriate places. I mean, on their body - not just in public.
Geishawhelk Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 One of the problems I perceive is that we have bandied these words around so much, they have begun to lose their real, in-depth meaning... I love horses I love chocolate I'd love to dance I love tortillas I love you... They all 'weigh' differently, but it's the same word...so I would say the vocabulary is lacking...Kinda like the 30 Inuit words for snow, but no actual generic word for 'snow'.... It's the same with the word 'hate' I hate to disappoint you I hate brussel sprouts I hate school I hate my mother I hate you. And in actual fact, the two emotions of 'Love' and 'Hate' are extremely close because apparently they fire off virtually the same neorons, receptors and cerebral responses.... which is why it's so easy to fall out of 'love' with someone, and 'hate' them the next moment.... Maybe, before we question why some people don't get it, instead of describing it by using emotive and physical responses as an indicator (some of the ones for 'love' could be substituted as sensations of Hate too....) why not actually try to define What Love IS? It's actually more difficult, if you don't use sensational or emotional similies or parallels.... Just a thought....
Nemo Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 I love chocolate Perhaps the most profound love of all.
Nemo Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 I agree, but I do not wish to put chocolate in other people's mouths (it's all MINE!).
Geishawhelk Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 (I was expecting a mwahahahahah!! W.E.L there....) Yay!! First definition... 'Selfish' or 'Narcissistic' Love...! Right, one down ....???... to go....!
Author spookie Posted January 1, 2008 Author Posted January 1, 2008 If anyone can' date=' then spookie can.[/quote'] Aw, thanks . I dunno if I want to get involved in another project though. Heh. It's a bit of a cop-out when people say that and base it on their childhood because familial love and the love you share with friends, are both very different than romantic love. In some ways they're different. But I think the other side of romantic love is the "choice" aspect, which familial love teaches you to be able to do. (thus the red flags) No one "gives" you feelings. You give them to yourself. IMO the act of falling in love is voluntary: a choice to be willing to let yourself do it. Those (horny) feelings definitely characterize romantic love, but that's later. The first part's selection, deliberation, decision. (But maybe that's my AS talking.) might not even recognize it, when it came along. Yup. That's what I'm afraid of. But even if that were the case, I haven't made up my mind yet whether or not it'd be a deal-breaker. I've always been insecure about how closely-tied to happiness love seems to be for most people, cause happiness is so devoid of logic. If Mr. AS can solidly convince himself it is in his benefit to pursue a long-term relationship under conditions satisfactory to me (aka my needs are met) maybe that would be what I've been looking for. I'd never have to doubt anyone's feelings again. (Cause they'd be irrelevant). That would be nice. But then... I dunno. I want someone to love me? Hahaha. How recursive my responses are. One of the problems I perceive is that we have bandied these words around so much, they have begun to lose their real, in-depth meaning... I love horses I love chocolate I'd love to dance I love tortillas I love you... They all 'weigh' differently, but it's the same word...so I would say the vocabulary is lacking...Kinda like the 30 Inuit words for snow, but no actual generic word for 'snow'.... It's the same with the word 'hate' I hate to disappoint you I hate brussel sprouts I hate school I hate my mother I hate you. And in actual fact, the two emotions of 'Love' and 'Hate' are extremely close because apparently they fire off virtually the same neorons, receptors and cerebral responses.... which is why it's so easy to fall out of 'love' with someone, and 'hate' them the next moment.... Maybe, before we question why some people don't get it, instead of describing it by using emotive and physical responses as an indicator (some of the ones for 'love' could be substituted as sensations of Hate too....) why not actually try to define What Love IS? It's actually more difficult, if you don't use sensational or emotional similies or parallels.... Just a thought.... You're totally right, and you bring up some very good points... I think love is so hard partly cause of the semantics surrounding its use. We think and feel largely with words and when a word means so many different things it's hard to know when the definition is satisfied (aka when you're in love). That's probably why we get so many "love vs. in-love," "what is love" threads.
Geishawhelk Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Those (horny) feelings definitely characterize romantic love, but that's later. Nice comments Spooky...Picked up on this one, because I think it's a moot point... The horny feelings we get are largely instinctual (instinctive? Must look up if difference exists...) It's the kind of stirring in the belly and loins we get, when we experience a mammalian desire to couple and satisfy certain sexual urges. But then, as human beings who have developped the ability to use logic, rationalise, write, express emotion and have a conscience.... we add an emotional aspect that, as you say, seems to characterise Romantic love. 'But that comes later'. Does it? Do we not initially feel lust and expand on it emotionally, ascribing to it the sensation of falling in Love, or do we realise Love first, then succumb to the physical desire and wish to fulfil our sexual urges? In short - what came first, the chicken - or the lay?
Geishawhelk Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Had to look it up, Grammarian stickler that I am.... (it's my job, I had to do it.....!) "INSTINCTIVE or INSTINCTUAL? Depends on your variety of English. 'Instinctual' sounds decidely unnatural to an English English ear. 'Instinctive' is the more original form. Technically they should have slightly different nuances of meaning. 'Instinctual' might be used to refer to matters pertaining to instinct, whereas "Instictive" would be more stricty applied to acts arising from instinct." So chasing birds and killing them unnecessary, is instinctual to a cat. the cat killed the bird because it's instinctive. Thanks Geisha, that's clearer now. Hey, no problem. What are alter-egos for?
Author spookie Posted January 1, 2008 Author Posted January 1, 2008 Nice comments Spooky...Picked up on this one, because I think it's a moot point... The horny feelings we get are largely instinctual (instinctive? Must look up if difference exists...) It's the kind of stirring in the belly and loins we get, when we experience a mammalian desire to couple and satisfy certain sexual urges. But then, as human beings who have developped the ability to use logic, rationalise, write, express emotion and have a conscience.... we add an emotional aspect that, as you say, seems to characterise Romantic love. 'But that comes later'. Does it? Do we not initially feel lust and expand on it emotionally, ascribing to it the sensation of falling in Love, or do we realise Love first, then succumb to the physical desire and wish to fulfil our sexual urges? In short - what came first, the chicken - or the lay? I realize it may be an individual thing, but for me it's definitely the chicken. I have no lust whatsoever for people I don't have romantic feelings for. And I've never felt romantically about anyone I didn't choose. Regarding people in my past and loving them uncontrollably - that's different. Once I make that choice, there's no return.
Geishawhelk Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Forgive me asking - and it is to just clarify, I'm not trying to be a smart-ass - Do you mean 'Uncontrollably' or do you mean 'Unconditionally'....?
Storyrider Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 It's the kind of stirring in the belly and loins we get, when we experience a mammalian desire to couple and satisfy certain sexual urges. But being mammalian has a lot to do with our ability to love (not just lust). I used to believe love comes from the top down--i.e. that when God gave us human souls, he taught us to love fully. But now I think love as we experience it evolved from mother love, as that would have allowed mammals with such big brains to survive despite being so helpless the first three years of life. Our mammalian mothers teach us to love (doesn't mean God isn't in the picture somehow, but that is another question). We branch out with different kinds of love from there. As for lust and the biological elements of it, well, I think lust tempered with human rationality etc. makes up the building blocks for romantic love, but of course anything that beautiful is more than the sum of its parts. Spookie, I don't know if you need to worry about these huge questions yet. Can't you just experiment with the relationship for a while and see how it feels? You really can't know what he is going to be to you without experiencing him more, I think.
HokeyReligions Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Lots of people don't know what love is. The definition is different for everyone. My husband didn't know what love is until our daughter got sick and died and then our son a few years later. I knew my husband had been an abused child, but I didn't know the extent or the depth until we'd been married a while and went to counseling. He always told me he didn't know what love meant or being in love meant. He didn't know how to show it other than to buy me things - and gifts do not equal love to me. He never admitted to loving anyone or anything until he lost something dear to him and then realized he loved those kids all along. 'I' knew he loved them, but he never believed me when I told him. Just as I struggled to believe at times that he loved me. Even after the kids passed we struggled with it - though he would tell me he loved me. When I nearly died a few years ago and the doctors told him they didn't know if they could save me and that it was touch and go for a while he and I both realized the depth of our love and it was like a sledgehammer over both our heads. The hardest part was him realizing how much I loved him and trusting that love. Thankgoodness I trusted that love all these years and never quit - although we came close a couple of times. I used to wonder why other people could find and trust their love without having to go through sickness, injury, and death - but I stopped wondering because it doesn't matter. We have it now and what it took for us to find it and trust it is just the way it is -- for us.
Nemo Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Spookie, I don't know if you need to worry about these huge questions yet. Can't you just experiment with the relationship for a while and see how it feels? You really can't know what he is going to be to you without experiencing him more, I think. You have a great point. Sometimes there is no substitute for experience, and a "just do it" attitude can often bring more than a surprise or two. Of course, we're not saying one should fly blind - more that a person is greater than the sum of their parts. And, at this juncture, you don't have to invest all your worldly emotions in him. Yes, indeed. Big parts in the right places - that's what I'm talking about.
Nemo Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Lots of people don't know what love is. The definition is different for everyone. My husband didn't know what love is until our daughter got sick and died and then our son a few years later. Shared experiences, and memories, undoubtedly play a fundamental role in binding people together. I think we all have a yearning to be understood, and sometimes there are very few people who could truly relate to the triumph of human spirit that has brought us to where we are today. Just getting through life often takes a lot of strength. And love.
Storyrider Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Shared experiences, and memories, undoubtedly play a fundamental role in binding people together. I think we all have a yearning to be understood, and sometimes there are very few people who could truly relate to the triumph of human spirit that has brought us to where we are today. Just getting through life often takes a lot of strength. And love. That is beautiful. Some heroics take place quietly on the battlefields of our minds and hearts. One can never assume someone isn't slaying dragons simply because we can't see it overtly. Maybe love is having that person's back, whether for battles without or within.
Trialbyfire Posted January 1, 2008 Posted January 1, 2008 Love happens, like other natural functions in life. What doesn't happen is acknowledging it and/or knowing how to express/communicate it sufficiently. If you've never had to give or share in your life, can you learn how to do it? More than likely, you'll continue to solely see it from a personal perspective, in that you will always do what is safest or perceived best for you, rather than what's best for the relationship.
Recommended Posts