|
|
| Author |
Message |
phenix
|
|
love, what is it?
| 
Sep 6 21:24 UTC 2001 |
Love
i hate that word, and not because i'm bitter and broken (which, arguably
i am) but more specifically the same way i hate religion, 'cause of all the
sad, pathetic, horrible, ugly, low down and dirty, well, utter shit that
get's done in love's name.
i'm sure love's not pleased either.
so basically we're all totally obsessed with love.
but what is it?
some say it is a bliss beyond bliss (and hollywood loves this one)
but bliss cannot last indefinatly, can it?
other state that it is total contentment, neither high nor low, just a
mild euphoric state,
but, is that not close to how death is described?
anyway, i got's no answers, so throw some out my freinds!
|
| 28 responses total. |
senna
|
|
response 1 of 28:
|
Oct 2 21:55 UTC 2001 |
The "Mild euphoric state" is an unsustainable level of infatuation and
enthusiasm that passes with the onset of routine and is a very, very dangerous
sort of thing to build a sustained relationship upon. Love isn't just gushing
emotion.
|
phenix
|
|
response 2 of 28:
|
Oct 2 23:31 UTC 2001 |
yup. it's called limerance.
very very documented
|
eeyore
|
|
response 3 of 28:
|
Oct 3 04:10 UTC 2001 |
Love can be incredibly beautiful, or very ugly.
You also have to think about what *type* of love....there is a different type
of love for every person in your life.
|
snowth
|
|
response 4 of 28:
|
Oct 5 23:13 UTC 2001 |
Love is just an excuse to be a masocist. Not that there's anything wrong with
that, but that's just my sad and imbittered view of the world. Don't mind me.
|
snakeeye
|
|
response 5 of 28:
|
Feb 6 00:18 UTC 2002 |
i think love is the thing that moves the earth
|
phenix
|
|
response 6 of 28:
|
Feb 6 01:10 UTC 2002 |
actually ,it's intertia
and love wouldn't be spiffy without friction
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 7 of 28:
|
Feb 6 07:20 UTC 2002 |
spiffy? friction? more like sex is a mortar to the bricks of true
love
|
michaela
|
|
response 8 of 28:
|
Feb 6 10:14 UTC 2002 |
Mortar or not... the wall has to shake once in a while to be fun.
|
morwen
|
|
response 9 of 28:
|
Feb 6 18:02 UTC 2002 |
I guess so. I think that everyone has to have their own definition of
love, because the feeling is so different from person to person.
To me, true love is what makes family possible. It brings the husband
and the wife together. It eliminates strife and conflict. I don't
think love is something that just happens. I think it is something
that is like a seed. You plant it and care for it and, if conditions
are right or you are lucky or whatever you like, it grows.
Okay, Spank me. I'm a Romantic.
|
jazz
|
|
response 10 of 28:
|
Feb 6 18:51 UTC 2002 |
This response has been erased.
|
jazz
|
|
response 11 of 28:
|
Feb 6 18:53 UTC 2002 |
I don't think it's something that most people *want* to understand,
to be honest. Though there's more than pheremones and biological programs
involved, there's an awful lot of Darwinian programming deep down in what we
feel for the people around us - no child, for example, ever had to earn its'
parents' love - that isn't all that pretty.
|
phenix
|
|
response 12 of 28:
|
Feb 6 20:44 UTC 2002 |
some kids have had to earn thier parents love..and let me tell you about those
people
|
oval
|
|
response 13 of 28:
|
Feb 7 16:30 UTC 2002 |
love is trust and understanding
or
love is an insecure pathetic guilt-ridden, guilt-giving need for
self-justification and physical affection &/or violence.
|
jazz
|
|
response 14 of 28:
|
Feb 7 18:04 UTC 2002 |
The first one, well ... bored now ...
The second one's interesting. Let's talk about that.
|
phenix
|
|
response 15 of 28:
|
Feb 7 18:46 UTC 2002 |
what? that love is just..pathetic needyness of people?
|
morwen
|
|
response 16 of 28:
|
Feb 7 19:12 UTC 2002 |
Jazz. True love is what keeps people together. Other substitutes we
CALL love are what you want to discuss. Am I right?
|
jazz
|
|
response 17 of 28:
|
Feb 7 19:18 UTC 2002 |
IMNSHO, a lot of things keep people together. The perception of love
is too fickle of a thing over the long term; if a person's depressed, for
instance, then they might never really notice it or be able to participate
in it actively.
|
morwen
|
|
response 18 of 28:
|
Feb 7 19:42 UTC 2002 |
I guess, I can see where you are coming from. I should probably not
have put my oar into this conversation. Like I said, I'm a romantic.
|
jazz
|
|
response 19 of 28:
|
Feb 7 21:06 UTC 2002 |
Having different opinions is what makes a conversation a conversation,
and not a chorus of agreeing voices. ;)
|
phenix
|
|
response 20 of 28:
|
Feb 7 21:50 UTC 2002 |
or a cacaphonie of diatribes
<shrug> love is overrated, you can't be happy all the time, you can but be
content
|
morwen
|
|
response 21 of 28:
|
Feb 8 01:46 UTC 2002 |
I guess.
I never claimed Jon and I were happy with eachother all the time. In
fact, we sometimes fight like dogs. But we are content with
eachother. We complete eachother, if that doesn't sound to sappy for
you. I do agree though. I think that sometimes people expect too much
out of love. The whole "love at first sight" thing. Too many silly
women are waiting for the legendary "white knight" to appear, sweeping
them off their feet, marrying them and taking them to a cute little
cottage with a white picket fence around it.
Pesonally, I think love should be based rather solidly on friendship.
Even friends don't get along ALL of the time.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 22 of 28:
|
Feb 8 04:09 UTC 2002 |
as has been mentioned elsewhere, I'm sure-- relationships just take
work-- and the higher the committment, I'm sure, the more the work.
The potential rewards, however, may be greater. It would depend upon
what you seek.
|
morwen
|
|
response 23 of 28:
|
Feb 8 19:04 UTC 2002 |
Yes, I think the problem with the idea of love is that no one expects
it to be work, but anything that is worthwhile is worth working to
keep. So it is with true love. As I said, true, real love is like a
seed. You plant it, and water it, and weed it and work at it.
Eventually, with time, love grows. I don't believe in love at first
sight. I don't believe in the world's concept of love as "oh I am in
love at 16" lalalala. skipping along through wild flowers and the hold
bit. Love is work, and it's worth it.
|
jazz
|
|
response 24 of 28:
|
Feb 9 19:40 UTC 2002 |
I agree with you there.
There's a part of me, though, that sees it from a different
perspective. When I've been annoyed that someone hasn't seen a relationship
as some degree of work, it's usually been a relationship that *I'm* in, or
that someone I care about is in, and it's difficult to get perspective. It's
very similar to a situation when someone doesn't *care* enough to put in the
necessary work, which is unfortunate, but it happens.
|