In the days of old, marriages were often arranged in the name of power and royalty.
In the days of old, but much more recent, it was wrong to have a baby without being married first -- enter shotgun weddings.
These days, the naïve viewpoint is that people have relationships or get married in the name of pure love. But is this really the case, or is it based on so much more than that?
For instance, I am very close to somebody who swore by the gods he was in love with this girl, she was his soulmate, but there was one problem -- she was already with somebody else, who she'd been with for ten years, and just didn't have the guts to break it off with him, so my good friend started to pursue a girl as a means of distraction.
This other girl was introduced to him by a friend of his. This new girl, had absolutely nothing in common with my good friend, and no spark or "chemistry" occurred when they met, and even after they had gotten to know one another. He even asked me one day, "Why is it so hard to converse with her?" And this wasn't based on shyness or anxiety which often comes along with an initial attraction to somebody, this stems from the fact that he knowingly was not attracted to this new girl, but he continued to pursue her anyway because a distraction was much better than thinking about the girl he was truly in love with, but couldn't be with. I understand that, and I'm sure many have been through a situation along those lines.
Anyway, they began a relationship, and after three months decided to rent a house together. Add a few more months and they planned to buy and build a house. While they say that they love each other, I just don't see it.
Perhaps they grew to love one another, but love is something that you just know it when you see it, even observing two people from afar. And those two just don't fit the shoe, so to speak. In fact most of their life and conversations with one another revolve around 1. Finances and 2. The management of finances, as my friend is a working pawn in the FIFO mining craze, and she is a secretary at a doctor's surgery.
Of course this is just my opinion, who am I to say they don't love each other? Let me be clear on that part before somebody else decides to pipe up and be a smart-a$$ about it  ;)
The question is, going by your personal experiences, do you believe that an emotional based love is real, and that it exists when it comes to a union/relationship, and if so, is it common or rare?
Can it be true that a lot of relationships are based on finances or survival?

Freedumb wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 12:19am:

The question is, going by your personal experiences, do you believe that an emotional based love is real, and that it exists when it comes to a union/relationship, and if so, is it common or rare? Can it be true that a lot of relationships are based on finances or survival?

Relationships are based on so many things - sex, companionship, security. Often people forego finding a soul mate, because they're hard to find, or if they haven't given up - then they're hoping to find it in their partner. Sometimes they do when they've tolerated each other for long enough.

How many people stay in a bad relationship because of their fear of loneliness or financial insecurity?

Your friend appears to have faced reality. His soul mate is unobtainable, so in your eyes he's accepting second best.

Time will tell whether their relationship has any substance.

how do you define LOVE.? impossible....

I have a question for you.. you claim he LOVES someone he cannot have...

how is that love?..have they had a clandestine relationship?.. or is it worship from afar..some people believe they are in love with a picture.. ::)

look at stalkers... ye gods..

relationships are based on many many things... if two people can work together respect each other there isnt anything wrong with that relationship...not every one marries for LOVE..in a perfect world yes they would...just to have that moment .

some dont realise how much they did love that person until they lose them..

dont forget this soulmate talk is all new jargon....

he has moved on.. thats a good thing...

cods wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 8:29am:

how do you define LOVE.? impossible.... I have a question for you.. you claim he LOVES someone he cannot have... how is that love?..have they had a clandestine relationship?.. or is it worship from afar..some people believe they are in love with a picture.. ::) look at stalkers... ye gods.. relationships are based on many many things... if two people can work together respect each other there isnt anything wrong with that relationship...not every one marries for LOVE..in a perfect world yes they would...just to have that moment . some dont realise how much they did love that person until they lose them.. dont forget this soulmate talk is all new jargon.... he has moved on.. thats a good thing...

He loved someone he couldn't have, and she loved him back (supposedly). But to break it off with her boyfriend would bring about a lot of change, and a lot of scorn from others, which she was afraid of.
Yeah, it is good that he moved on. To love someone from afar, as you say, is more painful than good. But on the other hand I just wonder if he rushed into things with his distraction and potentially ruined his life in the process, but who knows?

What do you call a...

Smart Man + Smart Woman = Romance
Smart Man + Dumb Woman = Affair
Dumb Man + Smart Woman = Marriage
Dumb Man + Dumb Woman = Pregnant

;)

Jasin wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 6:25pm:

What do you call a... Smart Man + Smart Woman = Romance Smart Man + Dumb Woman = Affair Dumb Man + Smart Woman = Marriage Dumb Man + Dumb Woman = Pregnant ;)

That is hilarious. Well done  :D

I find that most couples - married or in unmarried "relationships" - aren't really in love. Very few couples are in a real love-marriage, whereas the the love was natural from the beginning, sealed with a commitment for life. More often than not the women are effectively prostituted to a single permanent customer...and the men are enslaved in their jobs...

gone wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 5:40pm:

I find that most couples - married or in unmarried "relationships" - aren't really in love. Very few couples are in a real love-marriage, whereas the the love was natural from the beginning, sealed with a commitment for life. More often than not the women are effectively prostituted to a single permanent customer...and the men are enslaved in their jobs...

Yeah that is the impression that I often get with most people, which makes me wonder if "true love" actually exists, in terms of sexual attraction and what not?
For me, a long term relationship started out with attraction and spark, etc but as time went on, it just became more of a habit and less fun and excitement, then the relationship became toxic and though I fought to keep it alive in the end I just said to myself, "screw this."

oops  :-[

oops again.

What are you oopsing about, wise one?  :)

Remembering not to get 'too involved' with all things...
...relationship.  ;)

Yes, a relationship is certainly a trap in that regard. It makes you blind.  ;)

I am happy to be single, it means I get to keep my brain.

gone wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 5:40pm:

I find that most couples - married or in unmarried "relationships" - aren't really in love. Very few couples are in a real love-marriage, whereas the the love was natural from the beginning, sealed with a commitment for life. More often than not the women are effectively prostituted to a single permanent customer...and the men are enslaved in their jobs...

Great observation.

Freedumb wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 12:19am:

This new girl, had absolutely nothing in common with my good friend, and no spark or "chemistry" occurred when they met, and even after they had gotten to know one another.

That's the problem with people today when it comes to "love." They want immediate "chemistry."

It's not that "love" can't involve chemistry. It's just that people think they need the drug-like high that hits them like a hammer. The feeling of being "loved," doesn't have to be something that hits you in a short period of time. It could develop over a longer period of time as you get to know each other and make sacrifices for each other.

If a woman cooked for me every day and my success in life depended on those meals she cooked for me, I would develop feelings of attachment toward her over time, probably even if she was ugly. The idea of someone making sacrifices for me every day is like a hole I am in danger of falling into. It's the idea that your life depends on someone else and that there is nothing you can do about it. You are trapped in this state of dependence and it scares you because it makes you feel vulnerable.

It's not the feeling that hits you like a hammer and gives you a drug-like high that I would regard as "love," but rather the little things you allow someone to do for you over a much longer period of time (possibly a whole decade or lifetime) that I would regard as love.

Love is like a plant. It takes time to grow. I think people who think of it as like a drug you can inject into your blood like a syringe (speaking metaphorically), that if you just don't feel it, that it isn't love, have got it all wrong.


Freedumb wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 12:19am:

Perhaps they grew to love one another, but love is something that you just know it when you see it, even observing two people from afar.

I think that's precisely the problem with today's generation and its concept of love. It's about "liking" someone, not about caring for them. If even one person cares for the other, that is love. It's not a question of whether they have chemistry or whether they are attracted to or like each other. The "love" is in the "caring," because when someone cares about you, you can't help being drawn to them.

In the old days, if someone saved your life, you owed them your own.


Freedumb wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 12:19am:

The question is, going by your personal experiences, do you believe that an emotional based love is real, and that it exists when it comes to a union/relationship, and if so, is it common or rare?

Human emotions are so unstable, if relationships depended on them, they wouldn't last. Human emotions are just a series of neural signals in your brain sustained by hormones. It is part electrical and part chemical. Once the hormones stop flowing, the neural signals representing those emotions will slowly die and disappear.

I think "love" should depend on what you "do" for another person rather than how you "feel." Referring back to that example about a woman cooking meals for me every day, the dedication and devotion that the act demonstrates would make me feel "loved." How that woman actually feels about the favours she does for me is actually irrelevant. For her, it might just be a monotonous chore. It's how I feel about the act that is important. The "love" is in the act, not the feelings you have independent of what others do. The love is in what do you and how you make others feel, not how you feel personally. The love comes from someone else. It is not in you.

Life is a series of continuous rituals that must be repeated over and over again and there is no reason why "love" can't be "ritualistic." There may be some emotion behind these rituals, but emotion is not enough. It is not enough to just feel. We must also act. Our emotions will cease without something to sustain them, so there must be some external stimulus to keep them going. "Ritual" and "emotion" must work together to create "love."


Freedumb wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 12:19am:

Can it be true that a lot of relationships are based on finances or survival?

Survival and vulnerability is one way to win (and maybe keep) someone's heart. Put yourself or allow yourself to be put in a situation where you're vulnerable, in danger and need to be rescued or a situation where you need to be "loved" and "cared for" and you will naturally be drawn to the person who comes to your aid.

That's how affairs start! Two people find themselves with mutual needs. If you have everything you need and always feel safe, you probably won't develop an attraction for anyone because you don't need anyone.

gone wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 5:40pm:

I find that most couples - married or in unmarried "relationships" - aren't really in love. Very few couples are in a real love-marriage, whereas the the love was natural from the beginning, sealed with a commitment for life. More often than not the women are effectively prostituted to a single permanent customer...and the men are enslaved in their jobs...

Marriage isn't supposed to be prostitution or slavery. It's supposed to be a lifelong endeavour, not a business transaction. Prostitution is a business. It is a transaction. Marriage is not a transaction, so maybe it isn't prostitution. For it to be slavery, you would have to be property and lack autonomy. But husbands aren't owned, they're just in a contract, just like contractors and employees. They have autonomy. They can quit their job (get a divorce), so it's not really slavery. Besides that, consider what happens before the marriage even starts. You can choose not to marry someone. Slavery is something forced on you. People aren't forced into marriage. They choose it for themselves.

But more importantly, there is "honour" behind marriage. People got married in the past because they believed there was something "honourable" and "noble" about it. Marriage is like a marathon or some sports exercise or endurance test. Some people fail or quit. Those who keep going are doing it for the prestige and pride of staying in the race.

cods wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 8:29am:

how do you define LOVE.? impossible.... not every one marries for LOVE..in a perfect world yes they would...just to have that moment . some dont realise how much they did love that person until they lose them.. dont forget this soulmate talk is all new jargon....

It's a tragedy in today's world that people think of "love" as about liking someone or about a feeling, rather than what you do for someone that makes them feel a certain way.

I think the tragic, one-dimensional view of love as about your feelings and about liking someone that prevails in today's society is due to the loss of old-fashioned values like honour, faith and loyalty.

Faith - you have to believe in what you're doing.

Honour - you must know what you need to do and do it, despite the risks or the costs involved, despite what you know you might lose. It's like a soldier dying for his country. He knows he might die if he charges forward with his bayonet and faces enemy fire. But he also knows that if he doesn't do his job, the army he is part of might be defeated. If every soldier ran in the face of danger, the battle will be lost. In life and in "love," a person must know what they need to do and do it.

Loyalty - stick to those you care about and don't waver. Honour and cherish them and they will honour and cherish you. If you stumble and fall, keep going back. Don't take someone else's weakness or failure as a reason to give up. If everyone gives up, nobody succeeds, so someone has to keep going and keep trying.

The idea that you have to like someone or have feelings for them is a serious diversion in today's world away from healthy relationships. It's this naive pursuit of something that is inherently unstable: emotions and hormones.

I am not saying we should think like Star Trek Vulcans, but I do think that if we focused on things that were a little less "emotional" like honour, faith and loyalty, relationships might last longer. Of course, honour, faith and loyalty aren't completely "non-emotional," but they aren't completely "non-logical" either. The basic idea is to stick to your values rather than let your heart guide you, because by following your emotions, you will almost certainly stray from the path one day.

Emotions are simply too weak. Emotions without values and proper discipline is the cause of a lot of marital breakdowns IMO.

Freedumb wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 7:42pm:

Yes, a relationship is certainly a trap in that regard. It makes you blind.  ;) I am happy to be single, it means I get to keep my brain.

I thought being single was what makes one blind?
I sure felt like that a number of times when things were getting a bit hard when alone...  8-)

Jasin wrote on Sep 15^th, 2014 at 10:14pm:

Freedumb wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 7:42pm: Yes, a relationship is certainly a trap in that regard. It makes you blind.  ;) I am happy to be single, it means I get to keep my brain. I thought being single was what makes one blind? I sure felt like that a number of times when things were getting a bit hard when alone...  8-)

Hahahaha, maybe blind drunk.
My cure for being lonely is owning a pet. At least they don't talk   ;)

Mnemonic wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 5:06pm:

cods wrote on Sep 6th, 2014 at 8:29am: how do you define LOVE.? impossible.... not every one marries for LOVE..in a perfect world yes they would...just to have that moment . some dont realise how much they did love that person until they lose them.. dont forget this soulmate talk is all new jargon.... It's a tragedy in today's world that people think of "love" as about liking someone or about a feeling, rather than what you do for someone that makes them feel a certain way. I think the tragic, one-dimensional view of love as about your feelings and about liking someone that prevails in today's society is due to the loss of old-fashioned values like honour, faith and loyalty. Faith - you have to believe in what you're doing. Honour - you must know what you need to do and do it, despite the risks or the costs involved, despite what you know you might lose. It's like a soldier dying for his country. He knows he might die if he charges forward with his bayonet and faces enemy fire. But he also knows that if he doesn't do his job, the army he is part of might be defeated. If every soldier ran in the face of danger, the battle will be lost. In life and in "love," a person must know what they need to do and do it. Loyalty - stick to those you care about and don't waver. Honour and cherish them and they will honour and cherish you. If you stumble and fall, keep going back. Don't take someone else's weakness or failure as a reason to give up. If everyone gives up, nobody succeeds, so someone has to keep going and keep trying. The idea that you have to like someone or have feelings for them is a serious diversion in today's world away from healthy relationships. It's this naive pursuit of something that is inherently unstable: emotions and hormones. I am not saying we should think like Star Trek Vulcans, but I do think that if we focused on things that were a little less "emotional" like honour, faith and loyalty, relationships might last longer. Of course, honour, faith and loyalty aren't completely "non-emotional," but they aren't completely "non-logical" either. The basic idea is to stick to your values rather than let your heart guide you, because by following your emotions, you will almost certainly stray from the path one day. Emotions are simply too weak. Emotions without values and proper discipline is the cause of a lot of marital breakdowns IMO.

Excellent post.
You often see a lot of people going through relationships like underwear and it's because of a lack of everything that is stated in your above post.
Chemistry, I think, is important -- but will mean nothing without faith, loyalty and honour.

Freedumb wrote on Sep 15^th, 2014 at 10:45pm:

Jasin wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:14pm: Freedumb wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 7:42pm: Yes, a relationship is certainly a trap in that regard. It makes you blind.  ;) I am happy to be single, it means I get to keep my brain. I thought being single was what makes one blind? I sure felt like that a number of times when things were getting a bit hard when alone...  8-) Hahahaha, maybe blind drunk. My cure for being lonely is owning a pet. At least they don't talk   ;)

Ha! Funny  ;D

As of last week, I officially own a pussy that I've been feeding for months now.

Jasin wrote on Sep 15^th, 2014 at 11:09pm:

Freedumb wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:45pm: Jasin wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:14pm: Freedumb wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 7:42pm: Yes, a relationship is certainly a trap in that regard. It makes you blind.  ;) I am happy to be single, it means I get to keep my brain. I thought being single was what makes one blind? I sure felt like that a number of times when things were getting a bit hard when alone...  8-) Hahahaha, maybe blind drunk. My cure for being lonely is owning a pet. At least they don't talk   ;) Ha! Funny  ;D As of last week, I officially own a pussy that I've been feeding for months now.

Riddles again!  :D  :D
I cannot figure out whether you are saying:
a) You've been feeding a stray cat and now you own it or
b) You've been rooting a girl for months and now you're officially in a relationship

But either way, congratulations.

Do you want the 'Truth'?  :-?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j2F4VcBmeo

I love that line. It is what I think of whenever I'm accused of being a tinfoil hat wearer

Well, after 2.5 years of trying (living in the dog-house) to get my marriage back together after stuffing it up.
It is now officially over.

:(

---

Jasin wrote on Sep 18^th, 2014 at 2:09pm:

Well, after 2.5 years of trying (living in the dog-house) to get my marriage back together after stuffing it up. It is now officially over. :(

Aww.  :(
I am very sorry to hear that. I often think that if you have to try so hard to make something work and if it still doesn't seem to work, it's best to move on and perhaps one day you'll find somebody who you won't have such a hard time making it work again, even with stuff-ups.

Oh well.

So, FreeDumb - whaddaya doing tomorrow night allllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll the way over there in WA ?
:)

Jasin wrote on Sep 18^th, 2014 at 10:32pm:

Oh well. So, FreeDumb - whaddaya doing tomorrow night allllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll the way over there in WA ? :)

Hahahaha  :D I'll probably be on this god-forsaken forum  ;)
Want to go out on a date? Fringe forum, 7 pm Western time. Wear something nice.  :D

I'll be there at 4pm Eastern ST.
Will be wearing a nice t-shirt depicting heaps of sharks.
:)

Jasin wrote on Sep 18^th, 2014 at 11:23pm:

I'll be there at 4pm Eastern ST. Will be wearing a nice t-shirt depicting heaps of sharks. :)

Couldn't make it. I was still at work at that time  :P

I'm a  ::)
I got the time-zone wrong.
WA 7pm is NSW 10pm.

Well past 10pm and no FreeDumb  :-?

*standing in the pouring rain with a broken umbrella and no raincoat, with a cold southerly wind howling and the odd drop of hail while wearing nothing but a t-shirt and shorts while having to walk barefoot...
...back home again.   :(

Jasin wrote on Sep 19^th, 2014 at 10:37pm:

Well past 10pm and no FreeDumb  :-? *standing in the pouring rain with a broken umbrella and no raincoat, with a cold southerly wind howling and the odd drop of hail while wearing nothing but a t-shirt and shorts while having to walk barefoot... ...back home again.   :(

:D Awww, I'm sorry! I wasn't on the forum for very long on Friday night.

*sniff   :(

LOVE = sustainable LUST. ;)