About love … (therapy, relationship, animals, people)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The word LOVE is so overused, I feel it lost much of its power and meaning.
I don't ever say I love shoes. Or any other objects. Or actors I never met. I don't say I love food. The word LOVE for me is very deep and powerful and is only used for very few people in my life.
In other languages the word LOVE is only used for people that you actually, really love. It is much more sparingly used and kept its original power.
I don't even say I love my friends. Maybe my few very good friends that I have for 25 years but we don't say that to each other. LOVE for me is reserved to my partner, my family and my pets. That's a deep love that is in no comparison to friends that may come and go and drift away. A person you REALLY love doesn't fade away.
And here is the polar opposite of my perspective on it.
Which is A-OK fine for you, but I wish you would not speak as though you can tell me (or anyone else) what "REAL" love is and isn't.
It's just your way of using the word, understanding your feelings and managing your relationships.
Again, just because I prefer to experience love in great abundance and with great ease, does not cheapen or trivialize it in my mind, nor in the minds of those with whom I relate.
It is not a commodity in a capitalist market, where it can only be valuable if it's scarce and carefully rationed out.
When you say that a person you really love doesn't fade away... How exactly do you know that any person who is ever in your life, will always be there where you have them in the present? If you believe that they are that constant and you give them the gift of your so-very-scarce love, and they go away, does that then mean that your love was never real? I don't think so.
My love is about what I feel. I don't need someone else to perform in a certain way to validate its reality and existence. It's real because I feel it, acknowledge it, and lean into it and don't deny it. I encourage it and nurture it. I want to feel it, even if it flashes and fades like fire on a match. And love that is just a memory of love, is still love.
I think that's a big part of my love for people that I don't necessarily like or respect or who weren't the best for me, too. Like I can grow to have appropriate boundaries with someone and I don't let them harm me, but the reason I still acknowledge love as a thing there, is that I had to grieve the possibilities of it, and I hold memories of it. I might love my memory of how a relative was at some point in the past when I saw them with a child's eyes, even though I now see them clearly through the framework of adult knowledge. I may love the hopes and dreams in my memories when I believed in someone and saw a future that was not to be...but I didn't know that, then. Doesn't mean that the past version of me who was really engaged with active love at that time was a fool to be stomped on in the rearview mirror. You don't know what you don't know, and it's all part of the journey. Love is what lets me grieve and let go, too, it's what lets me have peace.
I love the journey, for that matter! I love life. People. Experiences.
Here's a thought, this is part of a difference, I suspect, in this perspective (yours and that of other people I've spoken to) and mine... I don't see my love as a thing that I give to someone else necessarily, I see it as an experience that I give to myself. A way of seeing the world and living in it. When I choose to think and act and feel in the spirit of love, I feel like a healthier person. The more I let myself love, the better I feel about life. So it's not just about what value it may have for others, in the way you describe, it's more about giving myself that kindness by embracing that feeling. And I also have the vague sense that there is an almost "internal locus of control" lens I see this through. My love is not all about whether another person deserves it or the nature of a relationship, it's my own thing. It doesn't even have to be expressed if I don't feel comfortable or have no reasonable opportunity, and that doesn't matter. It need not be reciprocated to be acknowledged. It just is.
I see love as a philosophy rather than a commodity.
I'd use "love" for anything beyond just an ordinary like (love a good coffee, love a beautiful day, love a tasty meal, look a good book, etc.) I don't think that's too excessive, and it's not like those things even happen daily or weekly.
Seems rather narrow to only link love with a relationship.
And here is the polar opposite of my perspective on it.
Which is A-OK fine for you, but I wish you would not speak as though you can tell me (or anyone else) what "REAL" love is and isn't.
It's just your way of using the word, understanding your feelings and managing your relationships.
Again, just because I prefer to experience love in great abundance and with great ease, does not cheapen or trivialize it in my mind, nor in the minds of those with whom I relate.
It is not a commodity in a capitalist market, where it can only be valuable if it's scarce and carefully rationed out.
When you say that a person you really love doesn't fade away... How exactly do you know that any person who is ever in your life, will always be there where you have them in the present? If you believe that they are that constant and you give them the gift of your so-very-scarce love, and they go away, does that then mean that your love was never real? I don't think so.
My love is about what I feel. I don't need someone else to perform in a certain way to validate its reality and existence. It's real because I feel it, acknowledge it, and lean into it and don't deny it. I encourage it and nurture it. I want to feel it, even if it flashes and fades like fire on a match. And love that is just a memory of love, is still love.
I think that's a big part of my love for people that I don't necessarily like or respect or who weren't the best for me, too. Like I can grow to have appropriate boundaries with someone and I don't let them harm me, but the reason I still acknowledge love as a thing there, is that I had to grieve the possibilities of it, and I hold memories of it. I might love my memory of how a relative was at some point in the past when I saw them with a child's eyes, even though I now see them clearly through the framework of adult knowledge. I may love the hopes and dreams in my memories when I believed in someone and saw a future that was not to be...but I didn't know that, then. Doesn't mean that the past version of me who was really engaged with active love at that time was a fool to be stomped on in the rearview mirror. You don't know what you don't know, and it's all part of the journey. Love is what lets me grieve and let go, too, it's what lets me have peace.
I love the journey, for that matter! I love life. People. Experiences.
Here's a thought, this is part of a difference, I suspect, in this perspective (yours and that of other people I've spoken to) and mine... I don't see my love as a thing that I give to someone else necessarily, I see it as an experience that I give to myself. A way of seeing the world and living in it. When I choose to think and act and feel in the spirit of love, I feel like a healthier person. The more I let myself love, the better I feel about life. So it's not just about what value it may have for others, in the way you describe, it's more about giving myself that kindness by embracing that feeling. And I also have the vague sense that there is an almost "internal locus of control" lens I see this through. My love is not all about whether another person deserves it or the nature of a relationship, it's my own thing. It doesn't even have to be expressed if I don't feel comfortable or have no reasonable opportunity, and that doesn't matter. It need not be reciprocated to be acknowledged. It just is.
I see love as a philosophy rather than a commodity.
The word LOVE is so overused, I feel it lost much of its power and meaning.
I don't ever say I love shoes. Or any other objects. Or actors I never met. I don't say I love food. The word LOVE for me is very deep and powerful and is only used for very few people in my life.
In other languages the word LOVE is only used for people that you actually, really love. It is much more sparingly used and kept its original power.
I don't even say I love my friends. Maybe my few very good friends that I have for 25 years but we don't say that to each other. LOVE for me is reserved to my partner, my family and my pets. That's a deep love that is in no comparison to friends that may come and go and drift away. A person you REALLY love doesn't fade away.
I love so many things, I use the word love quite frequently. It's mostly stems from my appreciation and gratitude for stuff.
Nothing equals the love I feel for my pets though.
The concept of love goes back at least as far as the Ancient Greeks who took time and thought to categorize them. Here's a listing from the psychological point of view:
How do you define “love?” More particularly, I am interested in seeing if “love” for you necessarily implies a relationship with another being. Or do you think it can be used in a broader, more “political” sense?
Personally, I feel that we can only pretend to love either another being or a group of other beings if we know them personally or have some level of emotional intimacy with them. We cannot truly pretend to love strangers … as long as they are still strangers to us.
To me, there are different kinds of love. Love for our parents, our children, our close friends, and romantic love. Then there is love for our pets, who many consider members of the family. Those are the close, intimate kinds of love.
I think there is also love in a general sense. Love of animals, wildlife, certain kinds of people who have shown they are exemplary humans in some way. These are impersonal kinds of love. Love of someTHING, not the individual.
I suppose there is also a love of self, at least for some people. I'm not sure if this can be called love, though.
The concept of love goes back at least as far as the Ancient Greeks who took time and thought to categorize them. Here's a listing from the psychological point of view:
I agree with this part - "By preoccupying ourselves with romantic love, we risk neglecting other types of love that are more stable or readily available, and that may, especially in the longer term, prove more healing and fulfilling."
I guess it's pretty difficult to define love - it's broad but also very specific. I'd say it's something like a condition. Not only in the sense of a certain state, but also a reason why we do some things the way we do. But I definitely see it as something positive.
I do not have children. However, I suspect a parent's love for a child might be the closest thing to pure love.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
