Spending your life with someone you're not in love with...
Options
Comments
-
missbiggles1 wrote: »I think that's just being tactile - lovely but separate from being in love.
There is no definition of 'in love' though, or 'love'. FWIW, I don't think 'in love' is a thing! I think there are different types of love - I love my parents, my cat, my partner, dairy milk, all in different ways. But I think 'in love' as a concept is quite recent and tbh, often used as an excuse for cheating or to end relationships.
Relationships (romantic or otherwise) can be hard work, and over the years will require compromise, communication, etc. Sometimes it's easier not to bother... often with the excuse given of not being in love with that person anymore.0 -
Brighton_belle wrote: »So what is your definition of being 'in love' Miss B?
In the immortal words of Joni Mitchell,
"Moons and Junes and Ferris wheels
The dizzy dancing way you feel
As every fairy tale comes real
I've looked at love that way"
Both Sides Now0 -
There is no definition of 'in love' though, or 'love'. FWIW, I don't think 'in love' is a thing! I think there are different types of love - I love my parents, my cat, my partner, dairy milk, all in different ways. But I think 'in love' as a concept is quite recent and tbh, often used as an excuse for cheating or to end relationships.
Relationships (romantic or otherwise) can be hard work, and over the years will require compromise, communication, etc. Sometimes it's easier not to bother... often with the excuse given of not being in love with that person anymore.
I agree with you to a great extent.
Unfortunately there are people who are in love with being in love and prefer the "dizzy dancing way you feel" to truly loving and caring for someone. They're often doomed to hopping from one "romance " to another rather than having a loving, lifelong relationship with all that entails.
Although being "in love" isn't that recent a concept as it goes back to medieval times. What's more recent is thinking that it's a good (and even necessary) basis for marriage and family life.0 -
Brighton_belle wrote: »So what is your definition of being 'in love' Miss B?
Its a bit of a wooly term isn't it? I expect everybody who uses it will have their own perfectly valid definition.0 -
Er, yes? That 's why I was asking what the term meant to Miss B as everyone who was saying they considered themselves to be 'in love' she felt were not by the way they described their relationship. So I was curious to know if she had a particular definition for herself.Person_one wrote: »Its a bit of a wooly term isn't it? I expect everybody who uses it will have their own perfectly valid definition.I try to take one day at a time, but sometimes several days attack me at once0 -
I'm in love with my husband, he drives me mad at times but I can honestly say I'm still in love with him. We've only been married for 3 years though, so I do expect it to fade. I love going out with him, spending quality time out for a meal etc, I still get butterflies at times if we haven't each other for a while.
This is exactly how I feel.
OH and I have been together 6 years now. We've had our ups and downs, and our relationship progression would be considered unusual to most but it works for us. We kiss, cuddle, laugh multiple times a day. Sometimes he's lazy and makes noise when he eats, and sometimes I nag or leave a trail of mess behind me
We live with, accept and welcome each other's faults. We've done more than survive the mundane daily stuff, we've enjoyed it because we're together for it. To me that's love.
My interpretation of 'in love' is the butterflies and the heart beating faster moments. It's amazing and I'd be sad to never have felt it... but if that's all you have I think the relationship can be prone to fizzling out when day-to-day life kicks in.0 -
Brighton_belle wrote: »Er, yes? That 's why I was asking what the term meant to Miss B as everyone who was saying they considered themselves to be 'in love' she felt were not by the way they described their relationship. So I was curious to know if she had a particular definition for herself.
I understood your post!0 -
Some people have a totally screwed idea of what being 'in love' means. My friend's sister, who's stunning, only ever falls 'in love' with men who treat her like dirt. Because her idea of being 'in love' seems to be being with someone totally unpredictable, so she never knows what's going to happen next.
She says she doesn't 'get butterflies' with reliable men. She thinks that's somehow essential to being 'in love' and she only gets that feeling if she doesn't know what's going to happen next, whether he'll turn up or not, whether he'll treat her like dirt or like a princess, whether he'll ditch her or not.
I know the feeling because before I met my wife I went out with a woman who treated me in a similar way. On a date she'd often stand me up. Phoning her she'd sometimes be very off and talk to me like I was something she'd trod in and other times be very loving and warm and make me feel like a million dollars. It was strangely addictive, every interaction was like a gamble, when it was good it felt brilliant, probably because of the possibility of it being bad.
It was a bit like being addicted to gambling. The great feeling when you win is only there because of the possibility of a loss. It's not the same as eg getting a paycheck which you knew was coming.
With my wife it was different. I fancied her like mad, but rarely got butterflies. Because she was reliable. I knew if I arranged to meet her, she'd turn up. I knew if she was off with me it'd be for a good reason.
I went on a long holiday shortly after I met my wife (without her - booked before I met her). That's when I figured out what being 'in love' meant. Nothing to do with 'butterflies', or that 'gambling' feeling of unpredictability. It's when you miss someone like mad when you're apart, and when you honestly say that no other person in the entire world could take you away from them.
That's when I decided to propose though I didn't do it till many months later. We're still 'in love' now! At least I am, not so sure about her 0 -
I feel it is a definition of "in love". Lots of couples after a few years don't seem to cuddle or kiss much and lots of people remark on the fact that me and OH hold hands when walking down the street.
As I said, I love my parents, siblings, nieces, nephews etc but I am not a touchy feely person in the slightest and only ever give my parents a kiss and a cuddle. The fact that I love touching and kissing my OH and love the fact that he wants to touch and kiss me means, to me, we are in love
thats interesting because I'm kind of the opposite - I'm more touchy-feely with my close friends and daughter than I am with my husband (in public). But as another poster said, I do get the butterflies when I see him after a short absence.
Touching and kissing your partner etc - thats physical attraction, lust, no? For me thats certainly one part of what I need in a happy relationship, but its by no means the whole of it, and I wouldn't assume just by the amount of kissing and touching a couple does in public that they're happy and in love, or not.0 -
A few people I work with who are older than me (i.e.: 40-50, Im 29) have said to me it was the done thing to get married in 70's/80's and they see their relationship as more "friendly" now than being in love... i guess you can't keep that feeling forever but it still seems quite sad that so many people seem to be in a relationship they don't actually like, just for convenience? Id rather be on my own.
but being in a "friendly" relationship isn't necessarily the same as being in a relationship they don't like, surely?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 248K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards