Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-03-2013, 02:24 AM
dulci dulci is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1
Lightbulb Definition of love

How do you define love within the perameters established by polamory "multiple loves" or are polamorists rationalizing a spectrum of emotions and lumping it into terms to lend stability to a notion that does not exist in a pure state? I am of the opinion that this verb is very much in over use!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-03-2013, 02:51 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 8,441
Default

Love has always been hard to define, but just because polyamorists recognize the ability to love more than one person simultaneously does not change or water down its meaning, impact, or importance. For me, love is an unconditional and deep appreciation and recognition of someone just as they are. When I love someone, my defenses melt away, I am warmed by their presence, and in awe of the person in front of me.

Of course, this all starts with loving oneself!
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "

An excellent blog post on hierarchy in polyamory:
solopoly.net/2014/10/31/why-im-not-a-secondary-partner-the-short-version/

Last edited by nycindie; 10-03-2013 at 02:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-03-2013, 06:17 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,508
Default

I'm good with Nycindie's definition.

I have heard a lot of.... heated discussion over this topic.

For me-sex has nothing to do with love per se.
That includes romantic love and romantic sex.

I could have sex with someone I love-or not.
I could love someone and have sex with them-or not.

I am a very sexual person and I PREFER to have sex regularly.

Currently (and for many years now) I have gotten sex regularly from the two men who I am also madly in love with.

But there was a time when I had sex with people I wasn't in love with and that was ok. It's not ok for me now-because I don't like the extra headache and responsibility that goes with having casual sex. So, I don't have casual sex.

But-I don't see as how being poly has anything to do with the depth of my love.

I also think that "commitment" really has nothing to do with love per se. I could love someone and never have a commitment with them. I could have a commitment with someone and never love them.

I happen to have a commitment with two men who I am also madly in love with.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-03-2013, 12:56 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 1,352
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dulci View Post
rationalizing a spectrum of emotions and lumping it into terms to lend stability to a notion that does not exist in a pure state?
Love is a word used to describe a seemingly infinite spectrum of concepts, assumptions, emotions, or actions. Philosophers and anyone with a care to have been haggling over this concept since the first person uttered it.

It is a profoundly subjective concept and always has been.

"Pure state" of love made me chuckle.
__________________
Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-03-2013, 11:47 PM
wildflowers wildflowers is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Boston area
Posts: 201
Default

I think this chart is a good illustration of why people get confused, in that a lot of concepts do get included within it. And probably most individuals are not even consistent in how they use the word.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tr...ry_of_Love.svg
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-04-2013, 12:11 AM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 1,352
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildflowers View Post
I think this chart is a good illustration of why people get confused, in that a lot of concepts do get included within it.
Trying to map out what love is can be a fun exercise, just so long as the person doing it realizes that they are mapping out what *they* think is included in love. The link you included, for example, lists commitment as one of the three key factors in quantifying love and assumes that this "consummate love" is the end goal - all of which I think is total crap.

Love is a catch all term which can mean practically anything.
__________________
Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-04-2013, 03:55 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,508
Default

Wildflowers-I saw a similar (not identical) example in one of my psych classes last semester.


There are pros and cons to trying to figure out a "set definition".
The issues are that different people have different things that they feel need to be included in love and different ideas of where the lines are drawn between (for example) "like" and "love".

I find it most useful to ponder randomly in group settings, and discuss more specifically with partners. With partners I want to ensure that we understand each others expectations. But in the bigger group discussions, I don't think it matters if everyone has different ideas/definitions/expectations.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-04-2013, 05:34 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 8,441
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
Trying to map out what love is can be a fun exercise, just so long as the person doing it realizes that they are mapping out what *they* think is included in love. The link you included, for example, lists commitment as one of the three key factors in quantifying love and assumes that this "consummate love" is the end goal - all of which I think is total crap.
Yeah, that "Triangular Theory" - what a load of BS.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "

An excellent blog post on hierarchy in polyamory:
solopoly.net/2014/10/31/why-im-not-a-secondary-partner-the-short-version/
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-04-2013, 07:29 AM
Eponine Eponine is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
Trying to map out what love is can be a fun exercise, just so long as the person doing it realizes that they are mapping out what *they* think is included in love. The link you included, for example, lists commitment as one of the three key factors in quantifying love and assumes that this "consummate love" is the end goal - all of which I think is total crap.
Very true. Not everyone considers the "consummate love" as the perfect love and all other forms of love as incomplete. For me, addition of the "passion" component doesn't make a love better than another love with only the "intimacy" component at all.
__________________
Heteroromantic asexual female, sex-positive, childfree, relationship anarchist.
Married to G, and in a partially non-romantic, completely non-sexual and long-distance triad with A and L.

Last edited by Eponine; 10-04-2013 at 08:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-04-2013, 07:56 AM
InsaneMystic InsaneMystic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 223
Default

I find Lee's model of the six "colors" of love much more interesting and fitting than the Sternberg triangle.

I'd find my own idea of love mostly within storge, with some measure of ludus and agape strewn in (Unlike Lee, I don't think the latter two are contradictory at all). "Staunch friendship, unconditional respect, acceptance and support, while remaining independent and open for others" just about sums up my personal ideal of what love means.

I abhor pragma and mania about equally (and can't see either as real love)... and I don't fully trust eros, but I guess the latter may well come with the territory when you're asexual. *shrug*
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:35 AM.