all 18 comments

[–]Antarchomachus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Yeah when I was a teenager. Not sure it was the healthiest thing in the world, I think loving someone is more rewarding than being in love with them.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Antarchomachus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Teenage love is the worst, so embarrassing. It counts even though, at least in my case, it never actually came close to the fully formed version I’ve experienced as an adult. It’s not necessary to me to differentiate between loving and being in love.

    I think we might be using these terms in different ways. I think that early stages of a relationship are driven by 'passion' which implies that I am primarily motivated by a selfish hedonism. Being in love feels exciting and invigorating, and can be addicting, so I pursue it. This might help you form a more meaningful bond with a person, but on its own is unsustainable as the basis of a long term relationship.

    Love, to me, means something different. I am perfectly willing to sacrifice my own hedonistic pleasure to make someone I love happy or limit their suffering. The motivation may still be selfish (I can't stand to see people I love suffer, and I want to avoid that, or I am getting fulfillment from their happiness), but the behavior isn't, and I think that is what makes this 'love' something different than 'being in love', at least how I am using these words.

    [–]soundsituation 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    I've experienced the in-love feeling a few times but it only progressed to the true, deep, flexible, forever-bonded kind of love once. Which kind did you mean?

    Either way, best feeling ever, better than drugs.

    [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

    I have been in love about 125 times. But each time, even though the hot sex was not an illusion, that feeling revealed to be illusory.

    But I matured, and my understanding of the psychological and occult mechanisms of these soul states grew. Now I can't "be in love" but I love. Every single day. All the time. And love is not an illusion. Rather, when it is real and not just a feeling or soul state, it is a force that bonds beings together. I will never again "be in love" and I am very glad to be rid of such illusions.

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    I like this.

    It reveals the beauty in love-making, though portraying the act as temporary. It's not love-making you seek, rather it's the connection with another human.

    So you've learned how to love life, while remaining sovereign in your stance to not be caught up in some kind of constant emotion of "being in love." for that would be an aching drudgery (like how you as a teen felt was the way of love).

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Wow. You get me! Woohooo!!! Somebody understands!!!!!!!!!!

    [–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    Pretend to love everyone so you can be selfish and actually not love anyone but yourself?

    Seems sensible.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    What could you possibly know about me? Oh, you're projecting YOURSELF onto me. Cute.

    [–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    I just read what you just wrote above and translated the guff.

    Looks like I hit a nerve.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    So much hubris, it inspires pity, nothing else.

    [–]FlippyKing 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    Why do you ask? Also, you need to define what YOU mean by love, or if you are trying to understand what the word means, or the possible meanings it may have.

    I've been in love multiple times, by various ways of defining it, and handled it badly nearly every time.

    This definition, that I stumbled towards, states it better than I could: Love is a disposition or state of being that leads one to seek and act or will the good of the other for the other's sake. For the state of being to be well ordered, it should balance both the intellectual and emotional aspects of our being and be considerate above all relevant else of the loved's states of being or where they are in life (unless were talking about humanity or some non-individual person).

    I think that in order to love, one has to be somewhat well ordered as a person. How well ordered, I do not know. But I do not think one can't be in the throws of addiction and properly love. I do not think one can be a real narcissist and love in any real sense of the word without dealing with that disording of one's self.

    So, love is not seeking a partner. Love is not being fan of someone's beauty or charisma. Everyone has experienced those many times, but calling those love makes love seem like "something I want" or "want to be around".

    The definition I'm using can't be applied to a piece of music or art. You can't really will the good of In A Gadda Da Vida by Iron Butterfly for In A Gadda Da Vida's sake, but I don't think being "in love" in any sense applies to such uses of "love".

    I think sorting out what love means is important. We're told and shown in media and culture that love and being in love is about sex and intimate relationships, but that is like telling a new student to the piano that playing the piano is about Lizt's Transcendental Etudes. No one would play their scales or any of the work that makes one the kind of musician that could play those because they'd rush ahead. Their training would be disordered. Playing Lizt's Transcendental Etudes (well) are a part of playing the piano for some, but for who specifically remains to be seen. Love, regardless of how it is defined (well), is part of life, but what part of life can only be seen when the other parts of life are well ordered.

    [–][deleted]  (4 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]FlippyKing 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

      if we didn’t agree about putting the kids on it, shit would have ended a long time ago.

      Not to pry or even ask but I don't know what this means. I know what ended a long time ago means. The things that keep people together when they might have, perhaps at least seemingly should have, ended are interesting but maybe only in that they are the things that make each person and each relationship unique (or not, sadly if that).

      I think one has to be very young to never have been in love (especially in the Valentine's Day sense), or has society sunk to a depth I can't fathom? Unlike the above, I really am asking this.

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]FlippyKing 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        Thanks! I get it now. But, you chose the easy one to answer (lol).

        [–]jet199 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

        Yes, wouldn't recommend.

        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

        Sure have, the ex, the wife, the gf, and the ladies of the bored housewives club.

        [–][deleted]  (4 children)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

          It's all based on oxytocin, the basic effect is the same. The experience isn't identical, there's a lot of factors at play, and hormones especially when young. They say you never forget your first love.

          Interestingly, testosterone interferes with oxytocin, men do not experience as intense an effect. Also it seems to diminish with age, it's a less intense feeling.

          It never lasts anyways. Some people chase the dragon, leaving their partners when they no longer feel the high anymore.

          [–][deleted]  (2 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

            Yeah, course they don't have to leave. There's always adultery. The r/adultery sub is interesting. A lot of them love their partners but they want to get laid and have fun too. That seems more understandable than leaving someone although that's pretty contrary to general opinion.

            [–]yabbit 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

            with your mothers mouth