Hi all,

I'm wondering what your thoughts are regarding love in marriage (or relationships in general). Are you looking for "the one", for some ideal?

I have also seen the movie, The Wedding Planner, with J.Lo. It's a terrible movie, but there's a line in there that stuck with me. J.Lo's father (in the movie) said he married her mother in an arranged marriage and the two didn't like each other for they were in love with someone else each. But slowly, he developed an appreciate for her taking care of him when he was sick, that appreciation turned to respect, that respect turned to like, and that like turned to love so deep that he never thought possible.

What are your thoughts on this, especially to guys out here who are married? Did you marry your wives on the fairy tale-like love, a type of love from the movie above, or some other type?

Eugene

 

Views: 317

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I was taught that love is not the same as infactuation.  I was taught is something you decide to give to another person.  So, I am married 17 years to one person, the only person I ever dated.  I was also taught that love is like a canopy held by four poles staked into the ground.  Each person must bring the two poles of respect and trust over which love is draped.  Without these two love will not be able to stand over the two.  These principles shaped a lot of how I approached my choice in marriage and even my on-going approach to sustaining it.  It may seem less "romantic," but it has been what has worked for us.

I agree with what Rockeman wrote. And congratulations for your 17 years; may you enjoy many more together.

++Are you looking for "the one", for some ideal?

That sounds like a dangerous idea. It's not because of some special, magical quality that some "one" possesses. If that were so, then the "relationship" is doomed, because people change. And that belief does, indeed, doom a lot of marriages. One person says "You've changed. I've changed. It's time to move on". Then the ugly divorce and the kids are all messed up.

"Relationship" is a noun by the rules of grammar, but it's not something real. You can not put a "relationship" into a basket. Relate is a verb. It's something you need to do, and if the "relationship" isn't working out, that means you haven't been doing it. The primary components of the action of relating are talking (preferably amicably) and taking care of each other. I'm sure there are a lot of other actions you can do as well, to relate and relate well.

You need to appreciate your spouse for her highest potential of this very moment, rather than rueing what she is or isn't, or what she used to be, but isn't anymore. You need to be receptive to her value as it may be in this moment, accept that it might change, but remain receptive to the new values that she can grow into as she continues developing a a person.

And help her do the same for you.

Passion by the way is not a bad thing. Enjoy it while you can, and rekindle it on a regular basis. You won't find an ideal in a person, but you can find it in your own values and behaviors. Keep the honeymoon going forever. ;-{)

Similar to relate and relationship - quit looking for love and start loving already. Love is not a possession, your wife is not a possession, everyone are really free individuals. What makes the relating work is to actively love each other. Practice Dāna.

You're right, love is not a possession it is something you choose to give but the more you give the more you have.

At first it was the 'honeymoon'.  Once that is over each day you make the choice, the decision if you will that you love your spouse.  Somedays that is the only 'love' you feel.

RSS

Latest Activity

Will replied to James Sullivan's discussion Strange sexual dreams?
"My thought exactly.  Except that if thoughts mean nothing, that one does too... ...still, I think we can get what Rick was saying."
3 minutes ago
Regular Joe replied to Bryon Perona's discussion The Masculinity of Jesus in the group Christian Men
"What was the purpose of the sermon?  I guess I've never really been concerned about the degree of Jesus' masculinity. And I've never gotten the impression from reading the Bible that, in terms of masculinity, Jesus was anything…"
5 minutes ago
John Muir replied to Will's discussion What's going on in those heads in the group The Great Debate
"Titus, you really don't know anything about unemployment in the US and how it works, do you? "
6 minutes ago
Regular Joe replied to James Sullivan's discussion Strange sexual dreams?
"Thoughts mean nothing? "
15 minutes ago
Regular Joe replied to James Sullivan's discussion Strange sexual dreams?
"I'd be interested in learning more. My wife was into it when she was a kid. I've had a ton of recurring dreams throughout my life and I'm interested in how Jung uses myth / symbols / alchemy as a parallel for psychology and the human…"
16 minutes ago
Regular Joe replied to James Sullivan's discussion Strange sexual dreams?
""I had one of those once, and eventually did tell my wife as the subject was a good friend of hers." "
17 minutes ago
Regular Joe replied to James Sullivan's discussion Strange sexual dreams?
"As Frank Underwood says: "Everything is about sex. Except sex. Sex is about power.""
18 minutes ago
Regular Joe replied to James Sullivan's discussion Strange sexual dreams?
"No. Never ever ever more. I hate those things. Made me crazy. Turns out I was taking the same ones that made the (disbanded) Canadian Airborne Regiment crazy.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia_Affair"
19 minutes ago

© 2014   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service