[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/adv/ - Advice



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




I have a few questions that I’ve been considering for a while now. My whole life, really. Now before I begin, I’ll immediately say that I’ve been in relationships of different kinds and am relatively sexually experienced. I also worked at a place where I help a lot of couples plan engagements. But despite those things the questions are in my mind, in a philosophical way.
> is love real?
> what does it mean to romantically love somebody?
> is it truly possible to love somebody for your whole life?

When I think of monogamy, it seems like a good idea on paper, but seems to hardly ever reach the standards of all the romantic stories that people hear. People are always looking for another person to love, just look at the posts here for example. But statistically, how many people actually find it? Is love maybe just a chemical reaction and the instinctual need to reproduce? Why are humans so engrained to find their “one true love”, but often “cheat”. Sometimes I feel strange seeing how couples have rules for eachother like they can’t talk to the opposite sex and such.
The question of Love pertains mostly to romantic love but we should consider other definitions of love as well

TL;DR
General discussion about whether Love is real and if you have experienced it in your life time
>>
File: reksio.jpg (22 KB, 453x362)
22 KB
22 KB JPG
From a philosophical perspective, it can be whatever you want. I don't find metaphysics particularly interesting.

From an evolutionary perspective, it's a hormonal overload of oxytocin and vasopressin evolved to facilitate long term relationships. Usually lasts about a year.

I've loved two women romantically in my life. The experience was emotionally intense, but not quite to the degree described by popular media, and certainly not without its ups and downs. It's not magic, but it's about as close as we can get.
>>
>>20451077
What do you specifically think made the experience different? What made you know it was love?
>>
Well, whenever I start to doubt the existence of love, I like to think about my grandparents. They were together for 50 years until my grandpa passed away, and they were still totally enamored with each other. I think they’re proof that love is real. I haven’t really experienced love for myself, but I think that they would be a good example that love exists and you CAN love someone your whole life.
>>
>>20451119
What made it different? The intensity and intimacy of the relationship. I cared deeply for these individuals. They were constantly on my mind. When we spent time together, I felt satisfied and at ease. The connection between us was palpably stronger than a crush or casual date. There is some truth to the notion of “chemistry” and feeling a “spark”.
>>
i think love is real, and sustainable

the key is to change... its like falling in love with someone over and over when you and someone else change together.

love can make people soft... or... it can make people pleased with themselves. thats what i think the failing of monogamy is. we aren't enough for other people, or vice versa, because love makes us feel safe to stop trying..

but, i don't know. the only love i've ever really been in was a manic 6 month ride with a girl who feel in love with me and turned my life into an acid trip.... twice.... and, you know, that's not sustainable. the insane passion of it all comes and goes.... but i think when you really love somebody, romantically... you love them as a friend, as family, sexually, communally.... it takes so many forms, and, yeah, i really think you can have one person fulfill all of that, if you guys are really, really good at it. \

tl;dr, i guess, is that our failure to love is our failure to be realized, actualized people.

>you can't love somebody if you don't love yourself, or whatever
>>
>>20451038
> is love real?
Not really.

> what does it mean to romantically love somebody?
Brain does its approximate thing that apparently worked best for us humans in our ecological niche: Procreating in pairs or small groups. It probably has to do with wholly unromantic concepts like food, illnesses, rate of genetic change, success of raising offspring, housing, [...]

But you surely don't get the real rational reason presented to you - you just want to bond and that's that.

> is it truly possible to love somebody for your whole life?
You quite possibly want to stay bonded with someone your whole life. The whole head-over-heels-must-hug-and-fuck-and-spend-as-much-time-as-possible-together thing isn't 24/7 until you die.
>>
Of course love is just a chemical reaction. Everything that humans are and experience is the culmination of chemical reactions in the brain.

>People confuse infatuation and love.
Infatuation leads into romantic love, and romantic love always has that element of infatuation - but 'love' as a concept is basically pack bonding.
You love your family for your entire life because you're pack bonded to them. Lifelong, loving romantic partnerships occur when you pack bond to that person - make them a part of your family.

I think that a lot of people, when the initial infatuation tapers down, think it's the end of that 'love' and panic. They don't consider the simplicity of loving that person as family.
>>
>>20451077
>From an evolutionary perspective, it's a hormonal overload of oxytocin and vasopressin evolved to facilitate long term relationships. Usually lasts about a year.
>Biological determinism from a field that has only existed for 30 years whose main research is conducted via technology we still don't fully understand
Anyone who says that love is a few a chemicals has absolutely no idea what they're talking about. You're using a shaky understanding of neurology to justify your failed relationships my dude.
>>
Love is an invention to sell greeting cards chocolates and flowers and mortgages and keep the labor force going
>>
>>20451038
>It seems like a good idea on paper, but seems to hardly ever reach the standards of all the romantic stories that people hear.
Notice the board is called “Advice”, not “Romantic Success Stories”. There are plenty of happy, successful marriages in this world, if you would open your eyes.

But romance, love, and marriage are not the same thing. Romance and love are subjective experiencred which can’t easily be qualified as either success or failures.

>Is love maybe just a chemical reaction and the instinctual need to reproduce?
By ‘love’ are you referring to the boost in interest and affection that usually happens between two people who have sex? If so, the answer is obviously yes. Thinking that this means ‘love’ is worthless is Rick-and-Morty tier cringe, because whether or not love is chemicals has nothing to do with it being worth anything.

>Why are humans so engrained to find their “one true love”, but often “cheat”?
Humans are monogamous very often. The idea of “one true love” comes from when someone is with a romantic partner they find to be irreplaceable. When this person finds their romantic partner (or ex) to be irreplaceable over the course of their entire lives, it can be said for sure that was their “one true love”. They never loved anyone like they loved the one true love.

Not everyone has a “one true love”, and there’s a strong case to be made that having a “one true love” is more like a curse or a chronic disease (hence the manosphere/4chan meme “oneitis”).

As for cheating, that’s complicated. If you’re asking how a person could do a bad thing, that’s fucking easy.

We’re told by Disney and everything that people are all intrinsically good, except for the antagonists, and that everyone will love their One True Love and be with them forever after. That’s a lie.

cont
>>
>>20451377
>>20451038
>General discussion about whether love is real
There’s not a valid debate as to whether love is real or not, unless you want to have a delusional or semantical one.

fin
>>
>>20451377
forgot the image
>>
>>20451038
> is love real?
Don't care, it's still nice to show you care for someone and recieve it back.
> what does it mean to romantically love somebody?
To build a house of shared experiences with them and live inside it.
So in a sense, you can say love is the basis of any relationship, because even with co-workers you must have a tiny shed.
> is it truly possible to love somebody for your whole life?
Who cares? Even if it doesn't last that long it's still nice to have a kick ass roommate.
>>
You misunderstand romance if you think it should last forever. You misunderstand love if you think it’s a game to win or lose. Marriage, on the other hand, has a strong practical purpose for many people.
>>
>>20451344
>30 years
Is biology really that young?
Shieeet
>>
>>20451038
Love is strange but I believe it’s real.
>Dated a girl for 2 years. Started off in high school and had that stereotypical high school romance shit.
>We met on the bus because she took my seat next to my friend and I was tired to the point where I didn’t care and sat with her
>Left her phone on the bus, walked all the way to her house and gave it to her
>Was dating some dude but she would leave him and come talk to me almost everyday
>Last day of junior year we ran into eachother and asked for each others # at the same time
>Fell head over heels for her
>Date for 2 years, her dad makes us break up
>Was fucking destroyed over it, she moved on within a month right in front of me
>Last words she said to me was “I love you, please take care of yourself.”

Love can be one sided, mutual, or non existent. Take what you want from my post.
>>
In this day and age, no. I believe love was that thing that people had when they latched onto the best thing that fit them within 5 miles. With modern technology and social media. You’re 5/10 gf would leave you because 8/10 chad 70 miles away sent a dick pic.
>>
>>20451038
I think it is real. I mean, there's so many married couples that worked out who didn't have any moral/whatever issues with divorce that it has to be, surely.
>Statistically how many people actually find it?
Hm... I wish I could find that book again. There were a lot of arranged marriages that worked out which goes against the popular meme conception of MUH SPESHUL SOMEONE and the author was saying it was statistically significant.

Remembering that evolution/genes/whatever isn't NEARLY as perfect or without mistakes as people act like it is and does NOT determine moralism despite what your ingrained expectations may be, I've read that human reproductive patterns exist on an awkward middle of the road between polygamy and paired bonding, where long term relationships can exist, but cheating can also happen at least for some couples.

I've also been browsing LGBT a lot lately as I've been wondering about my sexuality of late. There's a lot to be learned from that community if you ignore the T shitposting. It was actually pretty interesting; turns out human sexuality is far more complex and mysterious than you might imagine.
There's a real chance, going off my experience there and that UK poll about half of young people being at least somewhat bi, then looking into myself as well, that everyone or a significant portion of the population is bisexual in some capacity. It may even be possible for someone who is less frequently interested in a particular sex to fall in love with certain people of the same sex.
But I can't really tell everything about that yet.
Its all very strange and actually thinking about how young biology is, it kind of spooks me out how much it brings into question.
>>
>>20451421
Neurobiology is, yeah.
>>
>>20451469
>Neurobiology
O-oh I knew that.........
>>
>>20451466
>>20451477
H-haha...
>>
>>20451452
that’s not true. if she could get commitment from a chad, she wouldn’t be with your beta ass.
>>
>>20451170
You would increase your credibility with capitalization.
>>
>>20451466
>browsing LGBT
*browsing /lgbt/
I shouldn't really call it a "community" either; there's some good reasons a lot of them/us hate that.
>>
>>20451487
actually, i wouldn't, and i don't care because this is an anonymous message board
>>
>>20451677
i'm not entirely sure you understand how it looks when a person like you or i types like this. i don't find a post like this to be easy to read and i feel like when i see it i can't take the poster as seriously any more because they're posting like they don't care and in fact that's the exact reason you cited for it. it makes the whole post seem less thought out depending on what i specifically say plus it come off childish in my head and i can't control that reaction entirely.
>>
>>20451377
Not the anon you responded to, but I was with you until the one true love meme. Actually, I kind of lost you at the boost in affection part because that's not when the whole love sickness thing starts nor is it necessarily dependant on that phenomenon.
"""True loves""" have been proven to be replaceable time and time again with people who have experienced death of a partner, possibly poorly thought out career decisions, extreme personal situations that entered into the relationship fucking it up beyond repair, and so on. They move on and often do find another partner. Arranged marriages disproportionately result in """true love""". too. Its not that you are doomed without the other, but that you'd have to start over again and leave someone you... well, very literally love and want to be around, out to dry. Jealousy also plays into this mechanic.

The true love narrative is dangerous hogwash that results in failed marriages where people think they should not divorce.
Love is real, but you completely misinterpreted it.
>>
>>20451412
>strong practical purpose for many people.
Explain my father says that he loves my mother then. My father is not religious and had absolutely no intrinsic reason to feel the need to deny love if he felt some other type of bounding than it after well over 50 years of marriage.
>>
>>20452031
Also explain childless couples. Explain gay atheist marriage that has happened many times with people who seem 'otherwise' rational.
Explain how people can not have children for decades and stay together happily.
>>
File: oxu8itpyu0f01.jpg (41 KB, 662x466)
41 KB
41 KB JPG
Probably, but not for everyone.
>>
>>20452135
neck yourself reddit, that same character attempted suicide after he got his ass dumped.
>>
In my experience the love isn’t real but the pain is
>>
I've never been in love and never really like someone, I feel so dead inside because of it. I want experience that feeling, even pain if love isn't mutual. Idk. Love is the most important feeling in the world and I don't even know what it is and how it feels. Fuck
>>
File: 1396087349643.gif (1.4 MB, 400x400)
1.4 MB
1.4 MB GIF
>>20451038
Love is not a state of being, it is a contract. It is a continual set of choices and compromises that sustain a relationship. It is physically impossible to simply exist in a state of "love" for years on end. "Love" doesn't sustain relationships. "Love" is merely a word used to describe the multitude of choices that comprise the length and integrity our relationships. Relationships are hard work. Loving someone is exciting, painful, fulfilling, distressing, draining, wonderful and tedious. "Love", in our current day, is used so flippantly and to describe so many things it has become difficult to pin down exactly what it is. The short answer is that "love" isn't anything. Without the work, love is simply a boat without a paddle. I've found that "love" is often used to describe the fantasy people have of each other and relationships but it quickly dissolves once they realize that it isn't some place you arrive to. External forces are constantly tugging and picking at the weak spots of your relationship and when they exciting, electric buzz of "love" has worn off what you are left with is an inherently flawed human being. Overcoming these odds, accepting your partner for the fucked up carbon based organism they are, constantly challenging your own ideas, thoughts and comfort for the sake of another person, now THAT is love. Don't overthink it. Find someone you're willing to fight and bleed for. When you've found that, you've found love. It may not be the forever kind of fairy tail bullshit love you want but it is love, for however long it lasts.
>>
>>20451170
Well put, good grasp on what may actually be a considerable idea for what love is
>>
>>20451038
>is love real?
That depends on what you mean by that question.
Evolutionarily and biologically speaking, love or the sensation of it is a chemical reaction in your brain that drives people to want to breed. You know, keep the species alive.
However, our intelligence (complex brain) lets us romanticize basic shit into more complicated concepts. For example, you meet a hot girl and she likes you. You both want to fuck. That should be it.
But instead you might go "She is my soul mate. It was destiny that we would meet. I need to abide by certain rules because thats what love is supposed to be."

Nothing in this world is supposed to be anything. It's all made up. The feeling of love is real. Its measurable.
The rules and stories we added onto it? No. Its not. Soulmates arent real. Love doesnt mean monogamy. Love is not eternal.

>What does it mean to romantically love someone?
This goes with what I mentioned above. To "romantically" love someone is an idea that we as humans made up to give the feeling more puprose than just the desire to fuck.
Still, it all boils down to something pretty simple which is to be in the company of the one you love and do certain things to make them happy. Unfortunately, this shit is tainted also because instead of doing things you WANT to do to make them happy, society turned those wants into obligation. A lot of relationships, most anyway, fall apart because they believe they are obligated to do xyz for their partner(s) when no, theyre not.
So it all depends on how you feel or want to show your love to someone youre shagging.

>is it truly possible to love someone your whole life?
Yes and no. Again, this depends on what you define as love.
People change every second of the day. Even down to a cellular level. That means personality changes, values, beliefs, ideas, etc. 1/2
>>
>>20452494
2/2
If by "loving someone your whole life" you mean being in a monogamous relationship your whole life, its possible but it is on a person to person basis.
Some people stay together because of their strong religious beliefs.
Some stay because of the pressures of society and what people will think.
Some do it because of their own beliefs that they follow strongly.
And others, few others, stay because they genuinely enjoy the company.

Im no expert but I believe that doing something because of external pressures (religion, societal pressures, personal beliefs, etc) is wrong and is the reason for why so many relationships end. Even why some end on a murderous or violent note.

If youre with someone that you dont love anymore or don't care for or is abusive, and you have any of those beliefs/pressures you hold strongly, you wont want to leave. You might not leave at all and only end up losing the thing that matters most. Your happiness.
Married men and women murder their spouses because divorce or opinions of friends and family are far worse.
Men and women murder their spouses because instead of just leaving, they decide to cheat and to hide that, murder is the best option.

All these things are superficial(?) and I think archaic. The best relationship of any kind is one where all members WANT to be there. Youre not together. If one of you dies the others arent going with you.
You choose to be where you are with whoever. Just like they choose to stay with you. You both need to make the other want to stay, not obligate them to over some made up set of rules that you werent around to agree to.

Monogamy is a whole other thing that I wont get too into but it's damaging to a relationship than helpful. At least from the start. I'll get into it if youre interested in hearing but for now i gotta clock out of work.
>>
OP here, excellent discussion. Thank you, it makes for a good read



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.