In reading posts recently the notion love is a decision popped up again, as it regularly does, something I contemplate often myself....that is far to simplistic a notion....


Love is NOT a decision....but neither is it a feeling. Love IS a grossly overused, misused, abused word which unfortuneately carries a lot of psychic "weight" (which is why it is used inappropriately so much). IMO it is impossible to specify one "love's" something (or someone) without a lot of qualifying clarification due to the inexactness of the word.

People "kill" (murder) people they claim to "love"...people neglect/abuse people they claim to "love"....people manipulate/coerce people they claim to "love". People extort/control/ignore people they claim to "love". And as well people "love" in obsessive/addictive/dependent manners...this is also not love (but is a whole host of psychological disorders/conditions).

IMO love has nothing to do with our instinctual drives to mate/procreate, which is the primary reason most people initially marry (at young ages). When the inevitiable "relationship" conflicts arise from such a strategy we then try to actually figure out who the people are, and try to find "love" through therapy (either self-help or professional). If the word love is to have any useful meaning at all it should reference a specific circumstance. Since we are talking about people that circumstance should generally be about well-being, that well-being should be greater than the persons's well-being without the relationship. We could be talking about a kin love, friend love, mating love...and each IMO is measureable by observing the well-being of the individuals involved....

I think it is also factual that all relationships are different, and fall on a continuum of "wellness"....each "kin" is not equally benficial to our lives (or us to them), likewise friends, or romantic relationships (which leads to a spouse). Yet we may say we "love" all these relationships....clearly we love some more than others, allthough we are generally loathe to make such comparisons. IMO this also has diluted the word love, cause now we love everyone in our circles....a silly notion, cause it is not how we actually act.

I have struggled mightily with the issue of marital "love" including the notion it is just a decision, and that the well-being of the participants is therefore irrelevant. I have watched (here) hundreds if not thousands of people "decide" (against their better judgement and instincts) to love... and then suffer substantially for that decision (usually finally decideing NOT to love), because they did not/would not assess well-being.
Likewise I have observed many people just act on their feelings with equally unhappy results, feelings do not assess overall well-being either, just the feelings of the moment.

Frankly I think marital love is a complex psychological concept consisting of 3 components, of which a lack of any one obviates "love".

1. First love requires individual capacity. An individual must have the psychological capacity to "love". This essentially addresses 2 things, the ability to "see" others needs, and the altruistic capacity to want to meet others needs. Seems simple, but large numbers of people do not have this capacity...the worst examples are sociopaths/narcissists, but there are many who are essentially emotional users just not as extreme, or more cany at "pretending" to meet needs. Life with such people is a constant stuggle to be "loved" because they will only give you the minimum amount to keep you with them. This IMO describes the vast majority of troubled marriages that limp along, I suspect the emphasis on love is a decision is in part that is an effort to convince these users to "decide" to overide their self-serving orientation. Naturally addictive personalities, obsessive personalities, etc. etc, do not have the psychological capacity to love, they are users of people...either needy, or abusively and efforts to love such people are a complete waste of time, and sacrificial in nature...that is decideing to "sacrifice" not decideing to love. Love is not present unless both people are being nurtured.

2. Assuming both people have capacity, the next component of love is awarenss, this is accomplished through application of radical honesty, and temperament fit. There are people who simply cannot be honest with emotions, thoughts, and all their vulnerable places...this makes sense, because being vulnerable goes against instinct. So if one cannot do this (regardless of reason), love cannot be present, you cannot love someone if you don't know them (keep in mind I am suggesting love is about well-being), or they you. You cannot promote well-being if you do not see the needs of someone, or they cannot/will not communicate who they really are.

Temperament fit is a fundamental characteristic....humans are not interchageable, we differ in many ways, substantially. Temperament match is directly related to communicateing/understanding someone, and sharing congruent similarities...congruentcy promotes cooperation and reduces conflict. It is possible for 2 healthy individuals with capacity to hold up there end of a love relationship, to not be able to "love" each other due to temperament differences...they are the best candidates for decideing to love, and can most likely craft a reasonably healthy relationship, but they will not be able to reach the degree of intimacy/connectedness we associate with "love" because of the reduced ability to get into each others head. The more you are "like" someone psychologically the greater understanding you will acheive with them...this seems obvious, yet is regularly disregarded, usually to the detriment of the parties.

3. Love also requires a committment to monogamy. Many argue you can love more than one person, I don't think so. Love requires a substantial committment of emotional/psychological resources, many don't even have enough for one love relationship...I don't think anyone has enough for 2. I also think the monogamy itself is a catalyst of sorts for the achieveing of the high state of intimacy we call oneflesh, or marital love. You cannot get there through polygamy, promiscuity, group marriage, open marriage etc. Since all humans are promiscuous by evolutionary design, monogamy is a choice, a choice made rationally not emotionally (emotions are all programmed instictual responses to our enviroment...albeit complex often, but always predictable). That means a person looks at relationships and concludes they value and choose monogamy because of the well-being benefits. Unfortuneately while most people will claim they value monogamy, the facts suggest otherwise, while a single deviation from a committed relationship (married or not) is often confusing, and/or a learning situation....serial wandering/flirting/EA etc. (which are common) clearly indicate a lack of committment to the concept of monogamy.... I suspect people mostly don't even consider what they actually believe, but rather run pretty much on our hardwired pursuit protocols, just assuming they believe in monogamy. However you do have individuals who right up front tell you they are not the committing type, and peole still date em...go figure.

Unless all 3 of the above are present, IMO you do not have a "love" relationship....you must have a "decision" (monogamy), you must have capacity as an individual, and you must have fit (which is experienced as a feeling, but does require rational oversite to make sure your feelings are correct...and you aren't being stupid, or played). If these things are present, than the opportunity exists for a substantial increase in the couples well-being as they mutually nurture and protect each other, while realizing their own potential...instead of just trying to endure, and accept conflictual, or unhappy circumstance. Decideing to love by itself is strictly about sacrifice, and is not only useless, but dangerous to ones well-being if you "decide" to love the wrong person...you can and must assess the capacity of any potential love interest in the ways I have described if you expect to make sense of your life, or be healthy. Likewise it is foolish to make a "feel" love decision, our emotions are not nearly precise enough to protect our well-being without a strong does of reality checking...if a potential initimate relationship is not enhancing your well-being (or you theirs) then it makes no sense to continue it....one may do so for other agendas, kids, security, fear...but it should not be mistaken for love....it is not....it is a calculated decision for specific benefits....a contract essentially. For some, loving that way is ok, and they promote love is a decision....but ya know what, if that were true than it is just as valid to decide not to love...if that is all love is....but that part of decideing doesn't seem to set too well with most...in fact, enrages many.....so it would seem most really do think love is a feeling also....which begs the question of why do people then promote love is a decision, just do it.

We really need a much broader lexicon for relationships descriptors....and we need to stop using the word love as pretty soon it really won't mean anything at all.....it still befuddles me after all this time to hear people talk about how they "love" their spouse (or their spouse loves them) and yet the "actions" clearly say otherwise. Love is not present unless well-being is being promoted, otherwise it is just a stupid obvious attempt at verbally manipulateing someone. Caring, and concern can be present, even for someone bad for you....that should not be mistaken for love....love is a dynamic wellness promoting condition, and exists by vitue of what is happening....NOT by what is being said.

Saying I love you, while at the same time lovebusting and mistreating someone (acting in ways that reduce their well-being) is not love....it is manipulation...you cannot love someone and mistreat them. You can have a bad day (followed by genuine remorse/apology), this is not about perfection, but if a pattern of lovebusting/mistreatment persists, there is no love present, there is conflict, and agendas, but no love...there may be, at some point... not now, nor any gaurantee there will be.

So for those who are unconvinced love is more than a decison...one must ask, ok then, how and why do you decide to love, what are the criteria, and what happens when the criteria turn out to be mistaken? Do you just then decide not to love? If not, why not...how can an idea be promted that something is a decision, but yet one cannot change their mind? I will agree with one thing though, love is not a decision, but decideing how to respond to, and work through relationship conflict is pretty much all about decisions, long as all outcomes are on the table. There is no point to being "married" if well-being is not being mutually promoted/realized....living in a sacrificial circumstance is not only senseless, it is also debilitateing, increasing health issuesm and reducing lifespan...very real consequences of poor decisions.

<small>[ May 21, 2004, 10:11 AM: Message edited by: sufdb ]</small>

Sufdb.......one of the best definitions I have read. Thanks for taking the time to write and post it.

This is certainly a well developed definition of love. You often hear of chemistry, compatibility, clicking personalities,etc. To love is to be the best one can be for that person one says to profess love. A perfect definition of love is the book of Chorinthians, Chapter 11. Unfortunately, very few realize that or practice it that way. The shocking thing is that many self professed "Christians" who have read the Bible for years, also forget that and fall into situations that hurt the people they say they love.

Love is not a simple choice, it is a feeling that grows from mutual attraction, respect, admiration, and trust. People confuse love with possessing something and as a result act in controlling ways. They may say they love the dog, but kick the dog, let it go hungry and ignore it for lengthy periods of time, but want the dog to come to them when they want it. They love their partners in much the same manner.

Why me...what you write is true. Yes...some say they love and subsequently "fall into situations" and , yet, sometimes we fail to understand why the fall happens. It is as you write:

"People confuse love with possessing something and as a result act in controlling ways. They may say they love the dog, but kick the dog, let it go hungry and ignore it for lengthy periods of time, but want the dog to come to them when they want it. They love their partners in much the same manner."

And they wonder why the dog runs away....or follows the first person who has food. It is trying to survive. The passage you referenced states that love is not possessive. We were never meant to own another...not even our kids. It goes on to explain that love is patient and kind...it does not demand its own way...and does not keep records of wrongs. Eph 5 also witnesses to this "fitting" thing. It explains how it should work in the heart of both the man and the woman...and then calls that union a mystery. It is not about one person or the other doing all the work to keep the relationship alive. It has to be a synergy....and it is either there or it isnt. When it is...it is a mystery...and neither owns or coerces or manipulates........or gets to run on auto pilot....it works as a unit. And each gets fed and nourished so that no one runs away.

I think that the decision to be made in marriage is a decision to care. When you meet each other's emotional needs for a sustained period of time, then you are in love.

I have printed out what you wrote on love to look at it further.

sufbd,

It appears that we agree on something else...I have no argument with anything you have written here.

Hi Sufdb,

I like it. I've thought the same for quite a while. I see these sad people 'in love' with emotional abusers... I know that isnt love. It's something, but it isnt love.

I had to think on the temperment thing a minute. On the surface, my ex and I were closer in temperment and current H & I; exH was an organized thinker, very logical. But for all his protest, he didnt love me. Baba posted about 'loser boyfriends/men' this week and I was a little taken back to see so much of that in my ex. It was worse than I thought.

My current H is very different than me, on the surface. Thoughtful, sweet, kind, quiet (I'm a bit of a brassy, ballsy chick <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> ). But our overall life goals are the same: have a quiet, simple life with each other. exH was a drama queen, and liked to keep things stirred up all the time. H & I can sit and read or cook together and be so happy. H & I want pretty much the some things out of life and marriage. I enjoy his character, probably because it is so different than mine. He give me goals to work towards; be more kind, more considerate of others, being quiet and enjoying the natural things, and to have some fun!... he's something else.

Thank you for the post. Have some fun this weekend! - Dru

Subfd:
I have felt a special interest in you and appreciation of your posts -- and that was before I learned that you have been severely abusive and unfaithful like my H.

I recommended "Buyers, Renters, and Freeloaders" to Faith4me as well. I talks about how the basis of a happy marriage is a commitment to care that is made by both husband and wife. Care means that every decision is made with the interest of both spouses in mind. There is no fighting because either husband or wife can veto any decision, whether to go to Florida for vacation, re-finance the house, have another child, or have hamburgers for dinner.

What the ability to veto means is that one option is eliminated, and then other options are explored. For example, say I don't like hamburgers and you love them. I veto hamburgers for dinner, and then we discuss what meal we could have that both of us could enjoy.

The Renter relationship is one of taking turns. We'll have hamburger tonight, and I sacrifice. Tomorrow night, we'll have a veggie burgers, and you'll sacrifice. After a while, it becomes a "chit game". Both people feel like they are victims because their spouse has not been fair. In our relationship, I got to stay home with the kids, so Tom felt like he should do what he pleased, and I pretty much agreed because I was happy with staying home with the kids, even though I was unhappy that he was gone all the time -- until he was openly having an affair and denying it. I may not have known that he was sexually involved but it was clear that he cared more about her feelings than mine.

If you follow the Policy of Joint Agreement, then there is no basis for a fight. On top of that, Harley's program has us spending 15 hours per week together trying to meet each other's emotional needs. The feeling of love comes from a sustained meeting of each other's emotional needs.

I was very much in love on the day we married, and before dinner on our wedding night, he wanted to have sex. No foreplay. We were both virgins. That was the start of hell for me, and I held on out of Christian duty until the affair was exposed.

I bet many people would be upset with reading this, but I think you and Faith4me could reconcile and have a great marriage if you were willing to go through Harley's program.

The decision in marriage is a decision to care. By each of you showing care (trying to meet the other's needs, following the POJA, spending 15 hours per week together alone), you can be in love again.
Cherished

Thx for the comments, and I will add some more thoughts, it is an important subject IMO. Cherished, you mentioned poja, I had intended to include relevant comments re that concept and love, but forgot....I will later. As for your other comments, I have never mistreated or abused anyone, and certainly not my exwife..... But I have no control over misrepresentations, and/or outright lies, posted about me by whoever feels the need displace anger.....all I can do is grit my teeth and endure such things....While I continue to be the responsible, decent man I have always been. As for f4me specifically and her exh, from what I know (her exh posted quite a bit about their life, very little she posts is accurate...and she seems to have a lot of difficulty with other family members as well, suggesting she is as much the problem in her life as anyone else....and is most assuredly not a victim. Frankly I think she would be much happier if she stopped blaming everyone but herself for her circumstances, and gave up the self-serving anger she has had all her life and finally drove pretty much everyone away from her. She is not a bad person, but she is very unsafe emotionally...and she is very very good at denial as evidenced by her own writings on this forum.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> ...efforts to love such people are a complete waste of time, and sacrificial in nature...that is decideing to "sacrifice" not decideing to love. Love is not present unless both people are being nurtured.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I disagree. We are told to love our enemies ( those who do not love us ) expecting nothing in return. We are told to exchange love for hate.

Love is never a waste of time. It is costly. It is a sacrifice. The people you described who are incapable of giving love, need to experience love, from us, from God through us, imo.


It is a happy situation if our needs are met by our spouses- if it is a mutual exchange of love- (and yes, that would be the basis for a healthy marriage) but ultimately we are to look primarily to God for our needs to be met, to be nurtured. Then we will have the capacity to extend his love to others.

I do see love as a decision, an intentional act of caring for another.

Shul

Aren't you Faith4me's exH? I had learned from someone on the forum that you were.

As for Faith4me being part of the cause of her own problems, I would say that she and I have a lot in common, and I have come to appreciate just how much my willingness to sacrifice led to my expecting sacrifice and being unwilling to meet my H's needs. It's a downward spiral.

No one is a long-term victim of domestic violence, at least in this country, without tolerance on their part. I thought I was forgiving, as a Christian is required to do, when in fact I was tolerating which led to even more abuse.

You are obviously a very smart guy. I really enjoy your perspective. It gives me a lot to consider. I still think that love isn't a matter of luck. It comes from the decision of both to care, and that means not to sacrifice so that care is sustainable. I care for Tom but not at my expense, and he cares for me but not at his expense. Over time, we meet each other's emotional needs in a way that is enjoyable for both of us, and we fall in love. That's the theory of Harley's program. I can't say we've made much progress, but we have a big deficit in the Love Bank to dig out of.
Cherished

shul, I am talking about marital love, you may love your enemies, but you sure don't marry them...sacrifice is not love...it is sacrifice, a different animal alltogether. There has to be a reason to marry, and that reason cannot be sacrifice, that is nonsensical....if that were the case then we shouldn't even date or consider who to marry at all, just marry the first person that crosses our path...and if they are an ememy, or harmful to us, all the better...right? That is senseless of course. Love makes no sense at all unless it contributes to the well-being of both parties, otherwise why be married at all?

cherish, some think so, but I will not disclose my real life identity, it is not required, nor do I feel a need to do so...most here respect that...a few don't...suffice to say I have posted or lurked here for a very long time and am familiar with the circumstances of f4me and her H since both posted together as their marriage failed....the reasons it failed are clearly evident in their posts for anyone who is interested...and one clear fact is snl (her exh) did not abuse or mistreat her in their marriage, and has not done so since their seperation/divorce either. But what is clear is f4m has a lot of anger, contributed substantially to their marital failure, refuses to own that, and continues to use her exh as her personal whipping boy, maybe someday she will realize what such behavior has cost her, and finally start her personal healing/growth, that is up to her, she refuses any advice that does not validate her victimhood...and instead embraces and cultivates "advisors" who feed her obsession. It is a shame really, and so unnecessary.

<small>[ May 22, 2004, 06:20 PM: Message edited by: sufdb ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> and one clear fact is snl (her exh) did not abuse or mistreat her in their marriage, and has not done so since their seperation/divorce either. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">ahem, huh? Unfortunately this is not a clear fact to almost anyone who was there when it happened. SNL was banned from this board because of his abusiveness. sufdb....how would saying you are NOT snl reveal your identity in any way?

However, cherished....if you wish to know why some here persist in thinking that snl and sufbd are one in the same....here is an interesting post. It was written by snl and it is entitled oddly enough LOVE IS NOT A DECISION!!!!

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by star*fish:
<strong> However, cherished....if you wish to know why some here persist in thinking that snl and sufbd are one in the same....here is an interesting post. It was written by snl and it is entitled oddly enough LOVE IS NOT A DECISION!!!! </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You know, I had a strong sense of deja vu when I read this post... thanks starfish, now I know why. Must also explain the shaking of my head, the instant headache, and the total lack of desire to post a response. My forehead is now healed and I no longer wish to bang it against any brick walls.

Cali

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">sufbd wrote:
and one clear fact is snl (her exh) did not abuse or mistreat her in their marriage, and has not done so since their seperation/divorce either</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Not to be dedundant here, but like star*fish responded, how has this been determined a "FACT"?

This is so bizzare, it's like watching the Wizard of Oz, the part where the Wiz tells Dorothy and her buds "Don't pay any attention to the man behind that curtain".

IMVHO, I also think that speaking/defending of one self in third person may indicate some deeper unhealthy issues.

You have my prayers, sufbd.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by sufdb:
<strong> In reading posts recently the notion love is a decision popped up again, as it regularly does, something I contemplate often myself....that is far to simplistic a notion....


Love is NOT a decision....but neither is it a feeling. Love IS a grossly overused, misused, abused word which unfortuneately carries a lot of psychic "weight" (which is why it is used inappropriately so much). IMO it is impossible to specify one "love's" something (or someone) without a lot of qualifying clarification due to the inexactness of the word.

...</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hello S,

Long time no C! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

As partially quoted above, you have once again explained what love is not. Even generalized your explanation.

But what is love to you and for your?

Inquiring minds are patiently waiting. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

L.

<small>[ June 12, 2004, 07:04 AM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]</small>

LME,

Of course not all here know all. Some are more familar with their history than others.

For some it is easier to tell than to practice. S, is a good writer and his posts have helped many in the past. At a certain point though the posts can become hypocritcal if one says one thing and does another.

S does raise valid questions through. For those that have read his posts over the years, it is a familar pattern.

I for one would like to see S grow along with his knowledge. Facing reality is key critical for all of us.

Lack of self application is a hard place to be. It keeps many in an unhappy state. S is a smart person but more than intelligence is needed to mature in this world. Knowledge is good but wisdom is what gives life. Wisdom is the ability to apply the knowledge in a beneficial way.

Simply put, love is a choice. Many recognize it as a God-given one.

I wish that for S, his X, his family and the rest of us here @ MB.

My Motto is to: take the good and discard the bad.

JMHO,
L.

<small>[ May 23, 2004, 01:16 AM: Message edited by: Orchid ]</small>

<small>[ June 12, 2004, 07:05 AM: Message edited by: LoveMyEx ]</small>