Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Love, for me, is based on depth and substance, neither of which are shallow. Love develops when a connection is made, and how that connection is made varies from couple to couple. Other posters have clearly stated that love, for them, is not based on one's hotness and/or wealth.
Love is like a friendship caught on fire. In the beginning a flame, very pretty, often hot and fierce, but still only light and flickering. As love grows older, our hearts mature and our love becomes as coals, deep-burning and unquenchable. --
Bruce Lee
I think I am in love. We haven't said that to each other yet though, but I think it. He started off as a friend, so there was already that strong bond and then we both became single and things changed. I can honestly say my priority is his happiness. In fact, before we became a couple (and I was interested in him, but didn't think he had a romantic interest in me), I tried to encourage him to go out and find someone, fall in love, etc. It would have stung, but I would rather see him happy (even if it meant he loved someone else) than see him lonely like he was. Turns out he fell for me
Anyway, I found this, thought the OP might like to read it. And to be fair, it supports his point. Although this kind of love is more passionate. I think people do settle into a slow burning love later in life when they've been a couple for a long time. Maybe similar to family love, but with sexuality thrown in. But truly passionate love, is more rare over time.
Quote:
Scientists discovered true love in couples they studied. Scientists showed via brain scans that a small number of couples have as much passion after 20 years as they had when they fell in love for the first time.
Previous studies have found that after the first stages of love, there are ups and downs in their mood swings and obsessions, what the psychologists call “limerence”. This limerence begins to fade after 15 months and after 10 years it is gone. You may have heard the term "seven-year itch", which refers to this limerence.
But this new study has found out that in some of the long-term couples, the limerence is still as fresh as when they newly met first because of their “intensive companionship and sexual liveliness” according to the scientists from Stony Brook University. The scientists wanted to prove this theory via experiments through brain scans. The team scanned the brains of couples who had been together at least for 20 years and compared them with those of new lovers. The team found that about one in 10 couples exhibits similar chemical reactions in the brain when they were shown photographs of their loved ones in the early stages of relationships.
A very rare occurrence indeed. The majority of couples are not in love.
I actually wanted to set out to prove you wrong because I think (feel) more people do love each other. But the findings only show 10% of people in that passionate (what they call true love) long-term. So it is rare. Although I still argue that a lot of couples do love each other--but it's different. Maybe it's more like the way you love close family... but with a touch of romance. It's the difference between the couple that acts like an "old couple" and the old couple that "acts like newly weds."
I actually wanted to set out to prove you wrong because I think (feel) more people do love each other. But the findings only show 10% of people in that passionate (what they call true love) long-term. So it is rare. Although I still argue that a lot of couples do love each other--but it's different. Maybe it's more like the way you love close family... but with a touch of romance. It's the difference between the couple that acts like an "old couple" and the old couple that "acts like newly weds."
I don't really think that sides with the OP. You are talking about "acting like newly weds." Even though a couple's love for each other might change - that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. And it also doesn't mean that if it doesn't exist in the same way that it does in the beginning that it's more like familial love.
The OP sought out to prove his premise, and when that didn't work he veered off in another direction. What he started to argue was that most relationships are not based on "love," rather; they are based on shallow requirements (e.g., looks and/or money). Then when others chimed in and stated their relationship is not based on such shallowness he sought to change his argument, however subtle, to that of love being conditional vs. unconditional.
He confuses his own argument. It starts off as being about shallowness and then turns into a separate issue.
Expectations for most relationships:
Mutual respect
Equity/equal partnership
Trust
Open communication
In short, follow the Silver Rule. Once the connection has developed between the parties involved the above expectations must be kept in order for it to be sustained. (generally speaking) The vast majority of relationships are conditional. "Conditions" are not synonymous with shallowness. Conditions, by and large, serve an important function in a relationship. Love can be quite intense, passionate and powerful, but relationships take work. It is not "shallow" for me to be disinterested in a person that is mentally, emotionally and/or physically abusive. It is not "shallow" for me to not desire a man who is misogynistic and/or moralistic. It is not shallow for me to not desire a man who is dishonest, through omission or otherwise. There are important characteristics and attributes that make for better relationships overall. An individual who lacks these attributes is not ultimately desirable to the individual who expects them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewdrop93
I don't really think that sides with the OP. You are talking about "acting like newly weds." Even though a couple's love for each other might change - that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. And it also doesn't mean that if it doesn't exist in the same way that it does in the beginning that it's more like familial love.
Exactly.
There can be different phases or stages of love. It evolves, matures and grows overtime. It is not static, just as we are not static (well, some of us, at least). We change, our lives change, and so does the love that is shared between a couple (or people for poly folks). Sure, the honeymoon phase may only last 9-12 months for most couples, but that doesn't mean the love shared ceases to exist. It changes with the relationship. It may start off intense, passionate, magnetic, electric, and full of fire, but then it mellows into a strong, vibrant, intimate love that can be sustained. The level of passion and excitement, the rush and high, can not be sustained very long term for many couples, and it doesn't need to. I think it's key to understand that love has many phases and stages, just as individuals do throughout life.
I don't really think that sides with the OP. You are talking about "acting like newly weds." Even though a couple's love for each other might change - that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. And it also doesn't mean that if it doesn't exist in the same way that it does in the beginning that it's more like familial love.
I did add that caveat... there is still something there after the passion fades for a lot of people. At least, it's what I see. But if you are talking about passionate love, that fire at the beginning, I think it fades in most but becomes the burning embers of love later.
I love my husband but I have to provide evidence and prove it to you? You're making the claim... why don't you have to prove that I don't love him?
You may think your smart, but ALL your doing is posting your opinion and basking in perceived glory... in your own mind.
Where are the peer reviewed studies? Is this your field of study? What is your hypothesis based upon? Friends? That's hardly a good way to take sample data.
Everyone has opinions, that does not make them facts.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
I did add that caveat... there is still something there after the passion fades for a lot of people. At least, it's what I see. But if you are talking about passionate love, that fire at the beginning, I think it fades in most but becomes the burning embers of love later.
I don't necessarily think that the passion that you feel at the beginning is always indicative of love. I'm not saying that you can have real love with out lust - but I'm saying that oftentimes, people mistake that beginning lust for being love. It's when you stop needing to have sex ALL THE TIME that you realize that you either have lasting love or that it's time to move on.
Location: where people are either too stupid to leave or too stuck to move
3,982 posts, read 6,688,188 times
Reputation: 3689
its lust..with jealousy
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
