Wednesday June 9, 2004

On Love

Category: Opinionated | 10 Comments | Posted 17:12

So I thought it was about time to do an entry about this whole love thing, since many people seem to be so confused about how I feel about it. I won't deny I sound contradictory sometimes, but I'm not really, well not to me anyway. I think the main problem people have is that I say I don't believe in love but I can still admit to being in love myself.

When I say I don't believe in love what I actually mean is that I don't see it as this all-transcending, utterly fulfilling and desirable "‹ber-Thing", the only thing worth striving for that should be given priority over everything else and so on and so forth. Love, as a feeling, exists of course, but feelings are treacherous and should not be trusted - they certainly shouldn't be glorified.

Love (and feelings in general) have a raison d'Ítre of course, they determine human relationships, they make people stick up for each other, live with each other, help each other out, most importantly make babies with each other and look after these babies until they're big enough to make their own babies... but that's all there is to it. There's nothing mystical and nothing permanent about love. No one is "meant to be" for each other - it's fickle and dependent on whims and outside circumstances and primitive subconscious instincts. If some couples stick together for their whole life and still love each other at the end of it it's not proof that true love exists, just an example of the correct mix of circumstances, a whole lot of hard work and quite a bit ot luck.

What irritates me most about the way most people view love is their naive idealism, nay their incredible blindness in the view of what is so blindingly (!) obvious! How can you, after the 5th break-up, still believe that No. 6 is The One for you? You can feel it, of course you feel it - that's why feelings are treacherous! Their whole purpose is to give you the illusion of something that just does not stand up to harsh reality (or you'd be running off with the first person you fancy). But it can't be that hard to look beyond that and infer from previous experience that it is well possible to be madly in love with someone now without staying with them for the rest of your life. (NB I am aware of the "Mr Right Now" concept and that many people have relationships because they want someone in their lives. That is different - still it is alien to me. *lol*)

Now I don't have a problem with people being in love and being in a relationship, don't get me wrong (as long as they're not too in-your-face about it cuz then they just annoy me). But personally I don't desire a relationship (or kids) and therefore love serves no direct purpose in my life. Now that won't prevent me from occasionally falling victim to the feeling - so I can be in love and still not believe in it, because ultimately it changes nothing except mess up my head a little (and make me act crazy sometimes).

That is also why (in my case) the terms "obsessed" and "in love" are readily interchangeable. When I'd finally decided to "admit" that I was "in love" (rather than just "obsessed") with a-certain-someone, everyone asked "so what are you gonna do now?" (right after saying "that was so obvious anyway.") The answer of course was "nothing" - why would the fact that I'm using a different word to describe the same feeling suddenly completely change my actions?! So I've gone back to "obsessed" now cuz it makes it easier for people apparently (for myself too).

I very much doubt this is ever gonna change for me. Some may argue that the whole thing is a carefully devised thought construct that I have created only to protect myself (from whatever)... some may say that I just haven't found "The One" yet (oooh how that makes me wanna :-&). But this is who I am and cynical as it all may sound, it works perfectly well for me and I don't feel the need to overcome anything or adapt to the common way of thinking. If I really felt I was lacking something I'm sure I would reconsider. (oooh and I just know this is gonna set off a whole bunch of people on "you're totally missing out on the essence of life" sermons! *lol*)

PS Another clarification to preclude any argument: I am talking about "in love" here, which has nothing to do with the way I say "I love Mon, I love LJ, I love Lo." And "I am in love with squiZZ" is not the same thing as "I love squiZZ".

  Comments

but you ARE "in Love" with Squizz...

Posted by: Kid Kal at Wed June 9, 2004 19:56

ja but so what?

(why are you so bent on making me admit it anyway? )

Posted by: Clarissa at Wed June 9, 2004 20:05

singing "love is oooooonlyyy a feeliiiing"

Posted by: tris at Wed June 9, 2004 20:34

you know what, that Darkness dude is sexy *drooolll*

Posted by: tris at Wed June 9, 2004 20:39

he is kinda tasty

Posted by: Clarissa at Wed June 9, 2004 20:41

I agree with most of what you say in this entry. I actually think that we have the same attitude towards the notion of "love" but we just live it differently You know how much I love men but I'm not particularly keen on having a boyfriend...

Posted by: Val at Wed June 9, 2004 22:16

Ja but you're after something else!

Posted by: Clarissa at Thu June 10, 2004 0:05

Posted by: Val at Thu June 10, 2004 0:41

*sigh*

Citzy... you're, like, TOTALLY missing out on the essence of life!!!!

Posted by: Mel at Thu June 10, 2004 0:47

Posted by: Clarissa at Thu June 10, 2004 10:41