Thursday, June 02, 2005
Love?
What is love?
As I'm sure most people have at one time or another, I have oft wondered what love actually is. The term get tossed around frequently enough within the context of familial and romantic relationships to easily be a part of one's daily lexicon. The word is generally connected to a strong emotional tie with another person; and, though felt keenly, and recognized immediately and innately, the word forever eludes our abilities to adequately define. There is often some sense of obligation towards those to whom our love is given: of our own volition, we give of ourselves to those we love. The true measure of a love is sometimes demonstrated through what one would give for the loved one's benefit. Also, there is often a sense of sharing the life of loved ones; when they rejoice, we rejoice with them, and when they grieve, we grieve. Within the concept of romantic love, there is often also an element of possession: I love her, therefore I shall engage in sexual congress solely with her. However, this is not a necessary condition for love, only a common consequence of the strong emotional attachment developed through intimacy.
However, the word is all too often used as a means to validate one's own sexual indiscretions: I love her, therefore naught is amiss with the carnal knowledge of her I have gained during the brief tenure of our acquaintance. In some cases, the love even seems to have retro-active effects, forgiving yesterday's improprieties with today's emotional explanations. To further complicate matters, it is often untruthfully uttered with the sole purpose of advancing the progress of the physical element of a romantic relationship.
I personally never want to cheapen the word by using it as a cop-out for bedroom blunders, nor falsely voicing the term in hopes of new or continued intimacy. I also don't want to use the "L" word without having at least some rough concept of what it means to me. For this reason, I have occassionally been given over to pondering about love. After much thought and reading, the best I've come up with is this: to value another's desires/happiness/well-being more than I value my own. If I value the loved one's well-beingabove my own, it will take precendence in determining the course of my actions.
If I truly love another, I will not deceive her about my thoughts or feelings. For in this deception, I am placing my desire to avoid from her any of ill will above her desire to know me better. In loving another, I will trust her. For in denying her my trust, I am allowing my desire that my trust not be betrayed to rule over her desire that I open myself to her and believe her. While I may not be able to instantly lower my defenses and trust her completely, I will try to trust her more each day. In a similar vein, I will allow my loved one the time and space to open herself to me, understanding that trust must develop. In short, if I truly love another, I will be there for her, in whatever capacity I am able. To me, here and now, that is how I will love.
As I'm sure most people have at one time or another, I have oft wondered what love actually is. The term get tossed around frequently enough within the context of familial and romantic relationships to easily be a part of one's daily lexicon. The word is generally connected to a strong emotional tie with another person; and, though felt keenly, and recognized immediately and innately, the word forever eludes our abilities to adequately define. There is often some sense of obligation towards those to whom our love is given: of our own volition, we give of ourselves to those we love. The true measure of a love is sometimes demonstrated through what one would give for the loved one's benefit. Also, there is often a sense of sharing the life of loved ones; when they rejoice, we rejoice with them, and when they grieve, we grieve. Within the concept of romantic love, there is often also an element of possession: I love her, therefore I shall engage in sexual congress solely with her. However, this is not a necessary condition for love, only a common consequence of the strong emotional attachment developed through intimacy.
However, the word is all too often used as a means to validate one's own sexual indiscretions: I love her, therefore naught is amiss with the carnal knowledge of her I have gained during the brief tenure of our acquaintance. In some cases, the love even seems to have retro-active effects, forgiving yesterday's improprieties with today's emotional explanations. To further complicate matters, it is often untruthfully uttered with the sole purpose of advancing the progress of the physical element of a romantic relationship.
I personally never want to cheapen the word by using it as a cop-out for bedroom blunders, nor falsely voicing the term in hopes of new or continued intimacy. I also don't want to use the "L" word without having at least some rough concept of what it means to me. For this reason, I have occassionally been given over to pondering about love. After much thought and reading, the best I've come up with is this: to value another's desires/happiness/well-being more than I value my own. If I value the loved one's well-beingabove my own, it will take precendence in determining the course of my actions.
If I truly love another, I will not deceive her about my thoughts or feelings. For in this deception, I am placing my desire to avoid from her any of ill will above her desire to know me better. In loving another, I will trust her. For in denying her my trust, I am allowing my desire that my trust not be betrayed to rule over her desire that I open myself to her and believe her. While I may not be able to instantly lower my defenses and trust her completely, I will try to trust her more each day. In a similar vein, I will allow my loved one the time and space to open herself to me, understanding that trust must develop. In short, if I truly love another, I will be there for her, in whatever capacity I am able. To me, here and now, that is how I will love.
# posted by Jeffrey @ 12:05 AM 
