Do people STILL believe in love?

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Fri Jul 26, 2002 2:37 pm

I agree with much that has already been stated here, but I want to point something out to those people who argue that love is not sex. I do support this, IMO they are two very distinct components of human relationships, and, further, it could be argued that they serve two very different functions.

However, I strongly believe that sexual attraction, along with a healthy sex life, is one of the most important elements of a relationship. Certainly, companionship, mutual support and emotional bonds play a vital role and I do not want to downplay their importance. Nonetheless.....friends also provide these needs.........

Dottie · Post by **Dottie** » Fri Jul 26, 2002 4:11 pm

@DW: So what is in your opinion the difference between sexualized friendship and love?

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:15 pm

Originally posted by Dottie
@DW: So what is in your opinion the difference between sexualized friendship and love?

The difference is very difficult to define.... I would say that in the case of sexualised friendship the two elements of sex and friendship remain fairly distinct, despite existing between the same two people.

In the case of love there is often (ideally anyway) a melding between the emotional and the physical.

And sometimes it is this latter that leads to tensions and misunderstandings because some individuals equate sex specifically with love, whereas for others it is merely simple gratification.

Ode to a Grasshopper · Sat Jul 27, 2002 2:08 am

Originally posted by C Elegans

You are correct, I have a special bond to Dottie - he is my pet peeve And know he is tyring to infilitrate my house with manga by convincing my husband it is good

Go Dottie! Show him Ghost in the Shell, if that doesn't work then nothing will.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sun Jul 28, 2002 5:14 pm

Originally posted by dragon wench
However, I strongly believe that sexual attraction, along with a healthy sex life, is one of the most important elements of a relationship. Certainly, companionship, mutual support and emotional bonds play a vital role and I do not want to downplay their importance. Nonetheless.....friends also provide these needs.........

I very much agree with DW here, sexual attraction and a sex life is the main difference between our "couple relationships" and other relationships like friendship, sibling or child-parent relationships.

I also agree with DW regarding the difference between sexualised friendship and a "romantic" loving couple relationship.

Destio · Post by **Destio** » Sun Jul 28, 2002 11:01 pm

I do believe in Love but I think there can never be a a true definition of it because everyone sees it differently. Everyone can love whether they beleive they can or not. I was surprised that noone mentioned anything about trust, I thought trust was a big part of a relationship and if you don't trust they person how can you love them?

BTW, I have learned a lot by reading this thread(though it took me like half an hour

)

Logic IsAThreat · Post by **Logic IsAThreat** » Mon Jul 29, 2002 12:22 am

i'm kinda confused on what love is. i know that i should love my family and everything, but i don't really know what that is supposed to mean, and really how i feel for them. i really don't get it, i guess i'll just have to wait and see.

Gwalchmai · Post by **Gwalchmai** » Mon Jul 29, 2002 9:46 am

Originally posted by C Elegans
I very much agree with DW here, sexual attraction and a sex life is the main difference between our "couple relationships" and other relationships like friendship, sibling or child-parent relationships.

I disagree. Sexual compatibility is not a necessary defining ingredient in couple relationships. For some, it may not even rank up in the top ten reasons to be together!

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Jul 29, 2002 10:54 am

Originally posted by Gwalchmai
I disagree. Sexual compatibility is not a necessary defining ingredient in couple relationships. For some, it may not even rank up in the top ten reasons to be together!

Whereas I am sure that many couples are happy in their relationship without sexual compatibility, I personally fail to see how such a couple relationship differ in nature from other types of relationships, like close friendship? If there is no sexual loading between them, what is the motivational force to be together as a couple rather than being close friends? How does non-sexual love differ from friendship-love?

It can be argued that sexual love is not the best way to keep a couple together for a life time, if life long couple relationships are something we should strife for. Certainly sexual love is not enough to keep any relationship well functioning in the long run, but IMO it is a very important part.

Virgil57 · Post by **Virgil57** » Mon Jul 29, 2002 1:15 pm

Originally posted by Destio
I was surprised that noone mentioned anything about trust, I thought trust was a big part of a relationship and if you don't trust they person how can you love them?

Trust is a big part of a relationship, but it is not love. In any good friendship/relationship there should be the element of trust. I guess one way of trying to describe love would be a greater from of friendship.

As far as the sexual thing goes, I believe that once a couple has reached the level of extreme close friendship/bonding that is characteristic of love, sexual desire/companionship will naturally follow. This being the sexual desire that is more motivated by love and closeness with the person rather than pure sexual desire/lust.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Mon Jul 29, 2002 3:02 pm

Originally posted by C Elegans
It can be argued that sexual love is not the best way to keep a couple together for a life time, if life long couple relationships are something we should strife for. Certainly sexual love is not enough to keep any relationship well functioning in the long run, but IMO it is a very important part.

I think this is very true.... In my longterm relationship (15 years) there have been some significant jolts...... My partner and I have always been friends, but I very much doubt that alone would have held us together for so long.......

Obsidian · Post by **Obsidian** » Mon Jul 29, 2002 3:32 pm

As far as the sexual thing goes, I believe that once a couple has reached the level of extreme close friendship/bonding that is characteristic of love, sexual desire/companionship will naturally follow. This being the sexual desire that is more motivated by love and closeness with the person rather than pure sexual desire/lust.

Call me a young hormone bomb, but I disagree with this. Strong friendships, loving friendships are entirely devoid of any form of lust. Most of my friends that are that close are male, but the female ones, many of whom I have dated at one point, but found it wrong to have any sort of physical relationship with because we were such strong friends to begin with.

I think the opposite is true. A feeling physical desire for someone from the beginning, which starts you talking and then into becoming good friends is key. At least in my experience. There are those rare people who you meet, and never want to let leave. It is just there, physically emotionally and mentally where you are attracted to each other physicaly and are fast friends. What I'm getting at, is the lust comes before love imo. Love can exist without lust, and lust can exisit without love. A long term relationship will need both.

Beldin · Post by **Beldin** » Tue Jul 30, 2002 3:04 am

Originally posted by C Elegans

Certainly sexual love is not enough to keep any relationship well functioning in the long run, but IMO it is a very important part.

Correct. It couldn't work WITHOUT the sexual part for long...

Sex might not be enough, but without you'd be missing a lot of the fun that can be experienced together.

No worries,

Beldin

Virgil57 · Post by **Virgil57** » Tue Jul 30, 2002 11:56 pm

Originally posted by Obsidian

Call me a young hormone bomb, but I disagree with this. Strong friendships, loving friendships are entirely devoid of any form of lust. Most of my friends that are that close are male, but the female ones, many of whom I have dated at one point, but found it wrong to have any sort of physical relationship with because we were such strong friends to begin with.

I agree that having a sexual relationship with just a good friend would be odd. I was trying to say that I think that if two people fall in love (the love associated with a relationship, not platonic/friendship) that a sexual relationship will often develop from that love. IMO love creates a bond that has transcended above and beyond that of friendship. I do agree very much so that a strong relationship/loving relationship will be devoid of lust. I do not consider the sexual desires between to people that are in love to be lustful in anyway. Lust is a motivation for pleasure, sexual pleasure, that does not have any other motivations or cares in the world. The sexual bond between two people in love is very different in my mind and far to hard to try and explain. You would think love would be an easier topic to identify with, but it is so hard to get feelings into words sometimes.