I have recently learned that my views on love are somewhat different, so, as always, take my opinions with a grain of salt. The physical actions people can do for you and give you are more an aspect of attraction and compatability. In my eyes, these two things have little to nothing to do with love. Love is pure emotion. It is a spark or a tie to another person, whether that person is family, friend or SO, it does not matter. Love is love. I personally would like to believe that the spak is spiritual, but I am more than willing to admit that it could also just be a simple chemical reaction. Sometimes you love a person for who they are and sometimes you love a person despite who they are (and often its the same person). I love my dad, but often don't like who he is. We just aren't the same person. I love my friend Rik, but the gods know we've gotten in a few spectacualr disagreements and fights. I love my ex, but she is an ex for a reason. Love simply IS, without regard to compatability, attraction or anything else. If the
( ... )
I think that is one aspect that my Tech part has a problem with at times. The undifinable part to love. The one with out reason and with out boundries or rules. That is something that I try to just accept for how it feels and pushes me to do things. However the Tech tends to scan all reactions that I have or actions that I attempt to make sure I am... still of my own mind?.... still in control?... not doing something wrong?.... not messing up the feeling?... that one is a very problematic one, the fear of messing up what I already have or taking the wrong step forward and breaking everything or pushing it back. I understand that the love you speak of is something that is... suppoose to be.... To try to control or filter or measure or structure such love is "wrong" in many ways. Still you statments are helpful cause the make me think of new things, remember old things. Talking is good. Finding people, more so time, to talk is hard.
Re: yeah, something like thatmundanemageAugust 11 2006, 22:06:13 UTC
Thank you for your insight. I agree with the chain reaction idea. Although I am curious, why is loving someone for who they are possiblly not a good thing or maybe even distructive?
You are absolutly right, in my eyes, about the English language. We as a society have built the language to facilitate what we try to say, which at times seems very little or just some lazy attempt of communication that makes it all so much more difficult to be able to figure out how to express one's self or thought or feelings.
It is really hard to deal with some times when you really want to be loved and it seems like there is just none to be had. So then people will "settle" with what is availible at the time. Leading back to the chain reaction idea.
Thanks again, it is good to hear others ideas. It keeps my from being very oneside and self centered in my own thoughts. Granted I am a male and it can be hard not to be very one sided when only one head... I mean MIND can only work on one thought at a time. :P
Love is faith and is different from person to person because no one person is the same as another. I happen to be a big believer in unconditional love. That, I think, is what you're asking about. There are only a few people I love unconditionally, meaning, no matter what faults or personality quirks they have I accept them and love them for them because that is what makes up that person. There is very little they could do to make me walk away or rethink that feeling of trust (that's a huge part of it). Actually only one thing I can think of off the top of my head. Even with unconditional love, there are different flavors to it because, as I said, people are different. I agree with Dave, love is a spiritual thing. I also think the lust that can come with it is as much chemical as spiritual. To me there is a combination there because I have never found anyone attractive physically who wasn't a good person inside. Wow...i babbled a lot...ok, I'll go. Don't know if I answered your question at all, but it was fun to try. ;)
I am not sure if you answered it either but the babbling was fun to watch and helpful. You have given me something to think about. Reading what you were saying, I got an image of Baskin Robbins in my head and all of it's flavors. LOL But you have diffenantly given me something to think about. I feel a question trying to manifest but it is not quite there yet. When it finally forms, I will be contacting you with it. :) Thank you.
Comments 6
Reply
Reply
Reply
You are absolutly right, in my eyes, about the English language. We as a society have built the language to facilitate what we try to say, which at times seems very little or just some lazy attempt of communication that makes it all so much more difficult to be able to figure out how to express one's self or thought or feelings.
It is really hard to deal with some times when you really want to be loved and it seems like there is just none to be had. So then people will "settle" with what is availible at the time. Leading back to the chain reaction idea.
Thanks again, it is good to hear others ideas. It keeps my from being very oneside and self centered in my own thoughts. Granted I am a male and it can be hard not to be very one sided when only one head... I mean MIND can only work on one thought at a time. :P
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment