New topic
PrintableJustErin said: FunkMistress said: 
I knew I was in love less than twelve hours after meeting Chris for the first time. Almost two years later, it has only grown. Don't misunderstand me. I am not saying that I believe that an immediate attraction or infatuation, or whatever I labeled it can not lead to something amazing where someone truly loves someone. It's "grown" as you call it as you got to really know him well as a person. I'm definitely not going to argue with you about when or whether I fell in love with my husband.  The Normal Whores Club | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
FunkMistress said: mdiver said: Yeah but lets be honest, when you interact with someone and talk alot either online or on the phone etc and do the long distance thing then the first time you actually meet IRL is very different than a "normal" first time meeting. That wasn't really our situation, though. We interacted a bit in a friendly way on here, but there was no "relationship" at all before we met, nothing romantic whatsoever. Ahhhhh, kewl. I guess Val and i were a bit different. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: Anxiety said: i agree with erin. i think it's really pretty and beautiful to think about the romantic, idealistic notion of "you look across the room and you see them and...you just KNOW." 
but come on, now.
i'm sorry, but i'm at a point in my life where i've had enough BS and i've suffered enough fools, and romantic idealism didn't help me one bit. i think it's possible to still hold romantic ideals and let yourself have standards. if i meet someone who's incredibly breathtaking and sweet and i come to find out they're a junkie and a foie gras enthusiast, then you know what? time to throw him back in the pond. i'm confident enough that there are other fish to catch, and one of them will be better suited for me. fortunately, i'm at a point where i think that mentality has worked out pretty well for me.  I personally think that the whole love at first sight ideal is naive and well, immature. No offense to anyone who feels that's how it should be. As I have gotten older I have come to realize that love is actually nothing like I thought it was or was supposed to be. I think many people confuse lust, infatuation and obsession with love. I'm not saying that those things are wrong to feel, in fact, I think it's normal to go through those stages. For me I think those stages are really what people call being "in love" but I do not think that this is what love is. Those stages tend to be when people close their eyes to everything and except the shitty things about someone because they are infatuated with them. It doesn't matter if they treat them badly, if they create stress in their lives, etc....cuz…ya know...they "love" them. I love a lot of people in my life, some I have been with romantically, some I have not. I have grown to love these people over time, after getting to know them, after deciding whether their little quirks are things that I could comfortably overlook, after seeing that they were good for me and I am good for them. A strong bond forms, I care for them deeply. I think that the only real true love at first sight that exists (for most) is the parent child love and that serves a real biological purpose. But maybe that's not even love, but just an instinctive immediate bond. I don't know maybe you are right maybe it's immature and naive, but how to define love anyway . There are so many different forms of love and everyone values it different anyway.With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkMistress said: JustErin said: Don't misunderstand me. I am not saying that I believe that an immediate attraction or infatuation, or whatever I labeled it can not lead to something amazing where someone truly loves someone. It's "grown" as you call it as you got to really know him well as a person. I'm definitely not going to argue with you about when or whether I fell in love with my husband. And I'm not even trying to argue with you about it. I'm just saying what you just said. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkMistress said: JustErin said: I personally think that the whole love at first sight ideal is naive and well, immature. No offense to anyone who feels that's how it should be. As I have gotten older I have come to realize that love is actually nothing like I thought it was or was supposed to be. I think many people confuse lust, infatuation and obsession with love. I'm not saying that those things are wrong to feel, in fact, I think it's normal to go through those stages. For me I think those stages are really what people call being "in love" but I do not think that this is what love is. Those stages tend to be when people close their eyes to everything and except the shitty things about someone because they are infatuated with them. It doesn't matter if they treat them badly, if they create stress in their lives, etc....cuz…ya know...they "love" them. I love a lot of people in my life, some I have been with romantically, some I have not. I have grown to love these people over time, after getting to know them, after deciding whether their little quirks are things that I could comfortably overlook, after seeing that they were good for me and I am good for them. A strong bond forms, I care for them deeply. I think that the only real true love at first sight that exists (for most) is the parent child love and that serves a real biological purpose. But maybe that's not even love, but just an instinctive immediate bond.
I knew I was in love less than twelve hours after meeting Chris for the first time. Almost two years later, it has only grown. i'm not saying it's impossible. i'm just saying it's improbable. and preparing for the improbability has been more valuable to me than allowing the lucy van pelt of romance to yank the football away every time i've tried to make a running punt. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: JustErin said: I personally think that the whole love at first sight ideal is naive and well, immature. No offense to anyone who feels that's how it should be. As I have gotten older I have come to realize that love is actually nothing like I thought it was or was supposed to be. I think many people confuse lust, infatuation and obsession with love. I'm not saying that those things are wrong to feel, in fact, I think it's normal to go through those stages. For me I think those stages are really what people call being "in love" but I do not think that this is what love is. Those stages tend to be when people close their eyes to everything and except the shitty things about someone because they are infatuated with them. It doesn't matter if they treat them badly, if they create stress in their lives, etc....cuz…ya know...they "love" them. I love a lot of people in my life, some I have been with romantically, some I have not. I have grown to love these people over time, after getting to know them, after deciding whether their little quirks are things that I could comfortably overlook, after seeing that they were good for me and I am good for them. A strong bond forms, I care for them deeply. I think that the only real true love at first sight that exists (for most) is the parent child love and that serves a real biological purpose. But maybe that's not even love, but just an instinctive immediate bond. I don't know maybe you are right maybe it's immature and naive, but how to define love anyway . There are so many different forms of love and everyone values it different anyway.That's cool. I understand that people interpret things in different ways. But I don't think it's fair to say that you 'value' it more than say I do. Or maybe that's not what you were saying and you were just speaking in general terms. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anxiety said: FunkMistress said:
I knew I was in love less than twelve hours after meeting Chris for the first time. Almost two years later, it has only grown. i'm not saying it's impossible. i'm just saying it's improbable. and preparing for the improbability has been more valuable to me than allowing the lucy van pelt of romance to yank the football away every time i've tried to make a running punt. I hear you. It's definitely not something I expected to happen, or a even a basket I put a significant number of my eggs in. I kept my eggs in the refrigerator. I was a cold-hearted snake. What the hell am I talking about again?The Normal Whores Club | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: Serious said: I don't know maybe you are right maybe it's immature and naive, but how to define love anyway . There are so many different forms of love and everyone values it different anyway.That's cool. I understand that people interpret things in different ways. But I don't think it's fair to say that you 'value' it more than say I do. Or maybe that's not what you were saying and you were just speaking in general terms. No I was not saying that I value it more than you do, I was saying that it's different for everybody what they think love is. And everyone has other priorities and they may change as well. For some it's important that their partner is attractive, has a god job and money, the same hobbies or whatever. I just know that I fall in love with so few people in my life that it is very special when I do as I know it may not happen again for a long, long time. With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
FunkMistress said: Anxiety said: i'm not saying it's impossible. i'm just saying it's improbable. and preparing for the improbability has been more valuable to me than allowing the lucy van pelt of romance to yank the football away every time i've tried to make a running punt. I hear you. It's definitely not something I expected to happen, or a even a basket I put a significant number of my eggs in. I kept my eggs in the refrigerator. I was a cold-hearted snake. What the hell am I talking about again?i kept my eggs painted in pastel colors and hidden around the yard. i think that's how i attracted darin.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: JustErin said: That's cool. I understand that people interpret things in different ways. But I don't think it's fair to say that you 'value' it more than say I do. Or maybe that's not what you were saying and you were just speaking in general terms. No I was not saying that I value it more than you do, I was saying that it's different for everybody what they think love is. And everyone has other priorities and they may change as well. For some it's important that their partner is attractive, has a god job and money, the same hobbies or whatever. I just know that I fall in love with so few people in my life that it is very special when I do as I know it may not happen again for a long, long time. Right. I agree. For me the person must be attractive (to me) - and that's about it to get me interested initially. Then my list of deal breakers comes into play as I get to know them. But I'm like you. To use the same terms you used - I don't "fall in love" with many either. I can be attracted to many, but that doesn't mean that I want to be with them in a committed relationship or that I even want to be intimate with them. I too consider the person that I want it all with and that relationship to be special. I just no longer get caught up in infatuation or the whole "love is blind" trap. And I am not worried that it may not happen again for a long time. I'm no longer afraid to just be alone. I'd rather be alone and wait til I'm in something awesome than be in a relationship that's unfulfilling. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
i've had those visceral feelings of "love at first sight" with people before, and those feelings are so strong and intoxicating and undeniable in every way.
but i think what i've had to learn throughout my life is to just enjoy those visceral feelings for what they are and savor the moments and ride the love buzz as long as it's there and strong, and not try to automatically go into "okay, we have to be together forever and you're THE ONE and let's figure out how we can be together forever and you're MINE now you hear me? MINE MINE MINE!!!" ieee! no. what's wrong with just savoring the intensity of that attraction and letting things fall into place (or not) as nature and fate may intend? i've always failed miserably when i've tried in the past to force things or to rush into some kind of defined relationship too soon. and it sends me packing when i've dated people who have started going into that mode way too soon. that's just how *I* operate. forcing things to move too fast isn't sexy to me. taking the time to make sure we want to go to the next stage is all kinds of a turn on. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Yeah, but all those traits you deplore in others, are you sure you dont have them yourselves? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LleeLlee said: Yeah, but all those traits you deplore in others, are you sure you dont have them yourselves?
no. i have other failings and shortcomings. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: Serious said: No I was not saying that I value it more than you do, I was saying that it's different for everybody what they think love is. And everyone has other priorities and they may change as well. For some it's important that their partner is attractive, has a god job and money, the same hobbies or whatever. I just know that I fall in love with so few people in my life that it is very special when I do as I know it may not happen again for a long, long time. Right. I agree. For me the person must be attractive (to me) - and that's about it to get me interested initially. Then my list of deal breakers comes into play as I get to know them. But I'm like you. To use the same terms you used - I don't "fall in love" with many either. I can be attracted to many, but that doesn't mean that I want to be with them in a committed relationship or that I even want to be intimate with them. I too consider the person that I want it all with and that relationship to be special. I just no longer get caught up in infatuation or the whole "love is blind" trap. And I am not worried that it may not happen again for a long time. I'm no longer afraid to just be alone. I'd rather be alone and wait til I'm in something awesome than be in a relationship that's unfulfilling. I am totally the same. uUt I think that my deal breakers have been the reason why I didn't get involved with people who I loved and I don't want to make these mistakes again. Especially as I am so damn picky anyway. I am not even attracted to many . And IMO love is blind. Things may happen that we have to end it or not even start it, but initially it is blind.With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anxiety said: i've had those visceral feelings of "love at first sight" with people before, and those feelings are so strong and intoxicating and undeniable in every way.
but i think what i've had to learn throughout my life is to just enjoy those visceral feelings for what they are and savor the moments and ride the love buzz as long as it's there and strong, and not try to automatically go into "okay, we have to be together forever and you're THE ONE and let's figure out how we can be together forever and you're MINE now you hear me? MINE MINE MINE!!!" ieee! no. what's wrong with just savoring the intensity of that attraction and letting things fall into place (or not) as nature and fate may intend? i've always failed miserably when i've tried in the past to force things or to rush into some kind of defined relationship too soon. and it sends me packing when i've dated people who have started going into that mode way too soon. that's just how *I* operate. forcing things to move too fast isn't sexy to me. taking the time to make sure we want to go to the next stage is all kinds of a turn on. Ya man, I'm totally with you on this. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: JustErin said: Right. I agree. For me the person must be attractive (to me) - and that's about it to get me interested initially. Then my list of deal breakers comes into play as I get to know them. But I'm like you. To use the same terms you used - I don't "fall in love" with many either. I can be attracted to many, but that doesn't mean that I want to be with them in a committed relationship or that I even want to be intimate with them. I too consider the person that I want it all with and that relationship to be special. I just no longer get caught up in infatuation or the whole "love is blind" trap. And I am not worried that it may not happen again for a long time. I'm no longer afraid to just be alone. I'd rather be alone and wait til I'm in something awesome than be in a relationship that's unfulfilling. I am totally the same. uUt I think that my deal breakers have been the reason why I didn't get involved with people who I loved and I don't want to make these mistakes again. Especially as I am so damn picky anyway. I am not even attracted to many . And IMO love is blind. Things may happen that we have to end it or not even start it, but initially it is blind.Ok, but all I am saying is that (I believe) the "blind" part is actually not love at all. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LleeLlee said: Yeah, but all those traits you deplore in others, are you sure you dont have them yourselves?
Yes, I am. I have other stupid things about me that I'm sure bother others and therfore are deal breakers when it comes to being with me.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: Serious said: I am totally the same. uUt I think that my deal breakers have been the reason why I didn't get involved with people who I loved and I don't want to make these mistakes again. Especially as I am so damn picky anyway. I am not even attracted to many . And IMO love is blind. Things may happen that we have to end it or not even start it, but initially it is blind.Ok, but all I am saying is that (I believe) the "blind" part is actually not love at all. IMO it is. It may or may not stand the test of time, but it is. Even if I find out that somebody isn't the right person for me I may still love that person, maybe a lot more than someone who is in a 20 year marriage loves his husband. Like I said for everyone love is different. With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I think what's being debated here is sort of like friendships. There are friendships that develop over time, and then there are folks you immediately 'click' with and you stay friends for extended periods (or forever).
Those who have had this immediate 'bond' of love probably could never describe it to the rest of us for us to fully understand. It's probably like trying to describe color to a colorblind person. He'd be able to understand the shades and texture--but not EXACTLY what is being discussed. I've never experienced the immediate 'the one' feeling. Like, ever. And most of my closer friends here know that I am head over heals falling for someone right now, and I'm certain at the very least, that I have found a friend for life if nothing else works out. But, it was a process of growing to like the person , respecting the person, then realizing all the feelings I had translated to love. My sister and Brother-in-law, on the other hand, knew in about 1 hour (no joke), that they'd end up together forever. THAT has never happened to me. But I know it happens. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JessieJ said: FuNkeNsteiN said: I'm none of the things you listed 
  Well, you know, I am single again, 
 It is not known why FuNkeNsteiN capitalizes his name as he does, though some speculate sunlight deficiency caused by the most pimpified white guy afro in Nordic history.
- Lammastide | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: JustErin said: Ok, but all I am saying is that (I believe) the "blind" part is actually not love at all. IMO it is. It may or may not stand the test of time, but it is. Even if I find out that somebody isn't the right person for me I may still love that person, maybe a lot more than someone who is in a 20 year marriage loves his husband. Like I said for everyone love is different. It depends on your definition of blind. Blind as in does not see.....no, love means you know that person intimately, everything that makes that person what they are....you see the flaws. Blind as in i can love this person despite their flaws.....of course...love stands that test. Does that mean they wont grate with you?.....hell no Does that mean you won't argue ? .....hell no But if you love them despite that.....when you are pissed and you still cant stop loving them...when they infuriate you and you still smile.....that is love | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mdiver said: Serious said: IMO it is. It may or may not stand the test of time, but it is. Even if I find out that somebody isn't the right person for me I may still love that person, maybe a lot more than someone who is in a 20 year marriage loves his husband. Like I said for everyone love is different. It depends on your definition of blind. Blind as in does not see.....no, love means you know that person intimately, everything that makes that person what they are....you see the flaws. Blind as in i can love this person despite their flaws.....of course...love stands that test. Does that mean they wont grate with you?.....hell no Does that mean you won't argue ? .....hell no But if you love them despite that.....when you are pissed and you still cant stop loving them...when they infuriate you and you still smile.....that is love  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: JustErin said: Ok, but all I am saying is that (I believe) the "blind" part is actually not love at all. IMO it is. It may or may not stand the test of time, but it is. Even if I find out that somebody isn't the right person for me I may still love that person, maybe a lot more than someone who is in a 20 year marriage loves his husband. Like I said for everyone love is different. Every guy I have had a serious relationship with is someone that I will love forever. Actually, I get along with them and even keep in touch. To me, love does stand the test of time. It's not fleeting...lust, infatuation and obsession are. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mdiver said: Serious said: IMO it is. It may or may not stand the test of time, but it is. Even if I find out that somebody isn't the right person for me I may still love that person, maybe a lot more than someone who is in a 20 year marriage loves his husband. Like I said for everyone love is different. It depends on your definition of blind. Blind as in does not see.....no, love means you know that person intimately, everything that makes that person what they are....you see the flaws. Blind as in i can love this person despite their flaws.....of course...love stands that test. Does that mean they wont grate with you?.....hell no Does that mean you won't argue ? .....hell no But if you love them despite that.....when you are pissed and you still cant stop loving them...when they infuriate you and you still smile.....that is love Pretty much. And the deal breakers that people mention are flaws that they are just not compatible/comfortable with. It doesn't mean that they want to be with some genetically, tailor made for them person.
Everyone has flaws, I don't think people are saying they want a flaw-free person. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anxiety said: LleeLlee said: Yeah, but all those traits you deplore in others, are you sure you dont have them yourselves?
no. i have other failings and shortcomings. Yeah, me to. I dont like sulkers and skulkers. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LleeLlee said: Anxiety said: no. i have other failings and shortcomings. Yeah, me to. I dont like sulkers and skulkers. You misspelled "too". | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: Serious said: IMO it is. It may or may not stand the test of time, but it is. Even if I find out that somebody isn't the right person for me I may still love that person, maybe a lot more than someone who is in a 20 year marriage loves his husband. Like I said for everyone love is different. Every guy I have had a serious relationship with is someone that I will love forever. Actually, I get along with them and even keep in touch. To me, love does stand the test of time. It's not fleeting...lust, infatuation and obsession are. So when infatuation doesn't go away is it love then for you? Or only if you were in a relationship with that person? With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Imago said: I think what's being debated here is sort of like friendships. There are friendships that develop over time, and then there are folks you immediately 'click' with and you stay friends for extended periods (or forever).
Those who have had this immediate 'bond' of love probably could never describe it to the rest of us for us to fully understand. It's probably like trying to describe color to a colorblind person. He'd be able to understand the shades and texture--but not EXACTLY what is being discussed. I've never experienced the immediate 'the one' feeling. Like, ever. And most of my closer friends here know that I am head over heals falling for someone right now, and I'm certain at the very least, that I have found a friend for life if nothing else works out. But, it was a process of growing to like the person , respecting the person, then realizing all the feelings I had translated to love. My sister and Brother-in-law, on the other hand, knew in about 1 hour (no joke), that they'd end up together forever. THAT has never happened to me. But I know it happens. I have experienced both and for me they are two different forms of love. It is "magic" if you see someone and though you cannot immediately comprehend why you somehow feel there is a special connection with that person. And you wish to be together forever with that person within the first minutes. It's total attraction and that person feels like a soulmate without even knowing him/her. With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Imago said: LleeLlee said: Yeah, me to. I dont like sulkers and skulkers. You misspelled "too". Yeah, dont forget to bring a raincoat. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: JustErin said: Every guy I have had a serious relationship with is someone that I will love forever. Actually, I get along with them and even keep in touch. To me, love does stand the test of time. It's not fleeting...lust, infatuation and obsession are. So when infatuation doesn't go away is it love then for you? Or only if you were in a relationship with that person? To me, infatuation has nothing to do with love. Two totally separate things. Just like sex has nothing to do with love. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |