The Art of Loving
Erich Fromm, 1956
In the 1950s, there was a significant amount of social criticism of the “American way” of life. Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the “Military-Industrial Complex,” books like “The Organization Man” and “Man in the Grey Flannel Suit” questioned life in corporate America, and thousands of books both fiction and non-fiction questioned the ways that Americans pursued personal relationships, marriage, and love. Erich Fromm, in particular, questioned whether love was something to be acquired, as most Americans seemed to think, or something to be practiced – an art, a skill – and whether the experience of love was gained by loving or by being loved.
I agree with Fromm’s formulation that love is a verb, not a noun. Here is the first chapter of his 1956 work on the subject. Since this is a non-commercial venture, I think reproduction of this comes under fair usage and does not violate copyright laws, particularly since I encourage everyone who wants more love in their lives to buy this book.
Chapter 1 – “Is love an Art?”
IS LOVE an art? Then it requires knowledge and effort. Or is love a pleasant sensation, which to experience is a matter of chance, something one “falls into” if one is lucky? This little book is based on the former premise, while undoubtedly the majority of people today believe in the latter.
Not that people think that love is not important. They are starved for it; they watch endless numbers of films about happy and unhappy love stories, they listen to hundreds of trashy songs about love–yet hardly anyone thinks that there is anything that needs to be learned about love.
This peculiar attitude is based on several premises which either singly or combined tend to uphold it. Most people see the problem of love primarily as that of being loved, rather than that of loving, of one’s capacity to love. Hence the problem to them is how to be loved, how to be lovable. In pursuit of this aim they follow several paths. One, which is especially used by men, is to be successful, to be as powerful and rich as the social margin of one’s position permits.
Another, used especially by women, is to make oneself attractive, by cultivating one’s body, dress, etc. Other ways of making oneself attractive, used both by men and women, are to develop pleasant manners, interesting conversation, to be helpful, modest, and inoffensive. Many of the ways to make oneself lovable are the same as those used to make one-self successful, “to win friends and influence people.” As a matter of fact, what most people in our culture mean by being lovable is essentially a mixture between being popular and having sex appeal.
A second premise behind the attitude that there is nothing to be learned about love is the assumption that the problem of love is the problem of an object, not the problem of a faculty. People think that to love is simple, but that to find the right object to love–or to be loved by-is difficult. This attitude has several reasons rooted in the development of modern society. One reason is the great change which occurred in the twentieth century with respect to the choice of a “love object.” In the Victorian age, as in many traditional cultures, love was mostly not a spontaneous personal experience which then might lead to marriage. On the contrary, marriage was contracted by convention–either by the respective families, or by a marriage broker, or without the help of such intermediaries; it was concluded on the basis of social considerations, and love was supposed to develop once the marriage had been concluded. In the last few generations the concept of romantic love has become almost universal in the Western world. In the United States, while considerations of a conventional nature are not entirely absent, to a vast extent people are in search of “romantic love,” of the personal experience of love which then should lead to marriage. This new concept of freedom in love must have greatly enhanced the importance of the object as against the importance of the function.
Closely related to this factor is another feature characteristic of contemporary culture. Our whole culture is based on the appetite for buying, on the idea of a mutually favor-able exchange. Modern man’s happiness consists in the thrill of looking at the shop windows, and in buying all that he can afford to buy, either for cash or on installments. He (or she) looks at people in a similar way. For the man an attractive girl –and for the woman an attractive man– are the prizes they are after. “Attractive” usually means a nice pack age of qualities which are popular and sought after on the personality market. What specifically makes a person attractive depends on the fashion of the time, physically as well as mentally. During the twenties, a drinking and smoking girl, tough and sexy, was attractive; today the fashion demands more domesticity and coyness. At the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of this century, a man had to be aggressive and ambitious–today he has to be social and tolerant– in order to be an attractive “package.” At any rate, the sense of falling in love develops usually only with regard to such human commodities as are within reach of one’s own possibilities for exchange. I am out for a bargain; the object should be desirable from the standpoint of its social value, and at the same time should want me, considering my overt and hidden assets and potentialities. Two persons thus fall in love when they feel they have found the best object available on the market, considering the limitations of their own exchange values. Often, as in buying real estate, the hidden potentialities which can be developed play a considerable role in this bargain. In a culture in which the marketing orientation prevails, and in which material success is the outstanding value, there is little reason to be surprised that human love relations follow the same pattern of exchange which governs the commodity and the labor market.
The third error leading to the assumption that there is nothing to be learned about love lies in the confusion between the initial experience of “falling” in love, and the permanent state of being in love or as we might better say, of “standing” in love. If two people who have been strangers, as all of us are, suddenly let the wall between them break down, and feel close, feel one, this moment of oneness is one of the most exhilarating, most exciting experiences in life. It is all the more wonderful and miraculous for persons who have been shut off, isolated, without love. This miracle of sudden intimacy is often facilitated if it is combined with, or initiated by, sexual attraction and consummation. However, this type of love is by its very nature not lasting. The two persons become well acquainted, their intimacy loses more and more its miraculous character, until their antagonism, their disappointments, and their mutual boredom kill whatever is left of the initial excitement. Yet, in the beginning they do not know all this: in fact, they take the intensity of the infatuation, this being “crazy” about each other, for proof of the intensity of their love, while it may only prove the degree of their preceding loneliness.
This attitude–that nothing is easier than to love–has continued to be the prevalent idea about love in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. There is hardly any activity, any enterprise, which is started with such tremendous hopes and expectations, and yet, which fails so regularly, as love. If this were the case with any other activity, people would be eager to know the reasons for the failure and to learn how one could do better–or they would give up the activity. Since the latter is impossible in the case of love, there seems to be only one adequate way to overcome the failure of love–to examine the reasons for this failure and to proceed to study the meaning of love.
The first step to take is to become aware that love is an art, just as living is an art; if we want to learn how to love we must proceed in the same way we have to proceed if we want to learn any other art, say music, painting, carpentry, or the art of medicine or engineering.
What are the necessary steps in learning any art?
The process of learning an art can be divided conveniently into two parts: one, the mastery of the theory; the other, the mastery of the practice. If I want to learn the art of medicine, I must first know the facts about the human body, and about various diseases. When I have all this theoretical knowledge, I am by no means competent in the art of medicine. I shall become a master in this art only after a great deal of practice, until eventually the results of my theoretical knowledge and the results of my practice are blended into one–my intuition, the essence of the mastery of any art. But, aside from learning the theory and practice, there is a third factor necessary to becoming a master in any art–the mastery of the art must be a matter of ultimate concern; there must be nothing else in the world more important than the art. This holds true for music, for medicine, for carpentry— and for love. And, maybe, here lies the answer to the question of why people in our culture try so rarely to learn this art, in spite of their obvious failures: in spite of the deep-seated craving for love, almost everything else is considered to be more important than love: success, prestige, money, power-almost all our energy is used for the learning of how to achieve these aims, and almost none to learn the art of loving.
Could it be that only those things are considered worthy of being learned are those with which one can earn money or prestige, and that love, which “only” profits the soul, but is profitless in the modern sense, is a luxury we have no right to spend much energy on?
Subscribe to The Spearhead Newsletter for a free copy of the Book of Zed
{ 5 trackbacks }
{ 59 comments… read them below or add one }
Are you going soft?
One must be soft where the opponent is hard, and hard where the opponent is soft.
Being able to love and take the risk of loving is anything but soft. Especially when one takes the risk of loving the wrong person. That’s when one sees how tough he truly is. Anyone can build wall and keep everyone out. I have yet to see anyone who lives in this manner as happy.
“one must be soft where the opponent is hard, and hard where the opponent is soft.”
Zed, you are a wise man.
A lover is like a kamikaze.
But his only victim is himself.
Interesting article. Question is, are modern Western women truly capable of heterosexual love? I get the distinct impression that most want to *be* loved, but are not so good at loving back. Note that I’m not talking of infatuation or sexual attraction, which are not a good foundation for a long-term relationship anyway.
It seems to me that for political and commercial reasons, women’s narcissism has been greatly stimulated. And a loving a narcissist is just painful, it’s like a black hole. Reality is distorted till the very fabric of your existence is torn apart. Maybe we should stop feeding it.
If you want to further love between the sexes, then don’t love women too much.
Sad Geek knows the score. Perhaps when women and men alike learn what love truly is instead of being programmed by the mega-stupid romantic hollyweird fantasies, true love and understanding between the sexes will be possible.
Loving narcissists is a formula for relational and life failure. No thanks.
Great post, Zed.
I would personally posit that to truly be able to love, one must learn to have compassion for humanity, to know, understand and feel a spiritual love which is selfless, uplifting and genuine, to forgive the petty hurts and awful wrongs that people are apt to commit, and to give as much love as one can to the world.
A union of two individuals who are both loving in this manner is a beautiful thing.
“Could it be that only those things are considered worthy of being learned are those with which one can earn money or prestige, and that love, which “only” profits the soul, but is profitless in the modern sense, is a luxury we have no right to spend much energy on?”
If we have no right to spend energy on seeking and perfecting love, then what obligation are we falling short on by doing so?
Great post.
I think as a complement to the genuine love of a union, one should also feel compassion for humanity. A person who has learned, felt and understood a spiritual love, who forgives the petty wrongs and ignorant transgressions that humans are apt to commit, and who accepts the imperfections of humanity itself while continuing to give love, is truly able to love.
Erich Fromm was a member of the anti-Western/anti-White ‘Frankfurt School’ — nothing they write should be taken as constructive, but only rather as destructive: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-WheatlandI.html
The art of loving.
I got the doctorate.
5 year long distance still going strong.
Being able to have woman fall in love with you and keep them in love can actually help with your financial goals.
Just plan to be together forever with the woman you choose and let them know that you will be together forever.
They like that stuff.
Then actually apply it in your life.
Actually makes it easier to grow love when there is no other option than moving through whatever challenges come up with the other person.
Thet had it right before marriage till death do us part.
No breakup no seperation just you will work with what you have.
Ooooh, good insightful question.
I started to write a reply to Sad Geek above, but it quickly got too long for a comment and so I think I will save it for a follow-up post.
The short answer to your question, Zombie, is that as an Ethical Sociopath, I have those rights I choose to have – within limits, of course. I believe that my obligations to become proficient in the Art of Loving begin with myself, extend through my family, and finally to my culture as a whole.
If I can convince men that while they have the “right” to chase after money, or prestige, or power, they do not have the obligation to do so except to the extent that they cave in to social pressure, then that is one key to their freedom. And, if that social pressure leads only to emptiness in their own lives, and the lives of those around them, then only a fool would swallow it – and they really need to spit that shit back out on the plate and re-evaluate what is important to them and the people they really care about.
Men are happier today than they were 40 years ago, and happier than women are today. There are reasons for that. One of those reasons is that now men have been freed from the tyranny of the provider role, some of us have had more time to spend mastering the Art of Loving. I find it very personally satisfying, and I think many other men would too.
That of course leads to working together as a team vs the world in the best interest of the other since they are gonna be with you for life.
One who discards good ideas because he does not like the source forever blinds himself to potential wisdom.
But really zed enlightened people should be able to move past the money and bla bla posessions stage and get to the love stage fairly quickly as a team.
“I believe that my obligations to become proficient in the Art of Loving begin with myself, extend through my family, and finally to my culture as a whole.”
I think to that end then the biggest pill for a potential convert to swallow would be to acknowledge up front and transparently that to pursue the Art of Loving may have no other reward than personal satisfaction… and strangely (sadly?) that might not be enough in this day and age if it ever was.
If you were to frame the pursuit of love in terms of rights and responsibilities, how would you go about it?
That if we were to frame the only true difference between human beings and lower animals it is our capacity for higher consciousness. Among all animals, we alone have the capacity to recognize and appreciate the existence of God. We have both the right, and the responsibility which goes along with our ability, to seek the transcendance of our brutal pasts and natures.
@ Talleyrand
“Are you going soft?”
@ Zed
“One must be soft where the opponent is hard, and hard where the opponent is soft.”
A very interesting exchange. Very.
My thought was that Zed was not “going soft” but simply “going male,” which I also get from the rest of his material. The selection from Fromm was quite apropos but understandably rare in the modern discourse of MRA’s, IMO.
Not that I would make it my mainstay. I wasn’t even so enamored with the Mythopoetic affinity for focusing on the emotional realm. But Zed gives us a reminder here, as he could with a thousand other sources, that it has always been men who have been the intelligentsia of the emotional world, including love.
Sure, in most of us is the ruling pragmatist, and in some of us reason and logic are practiced like tyranny over our own hearts. But throughout history it has been man, not woman who has most aptly penned matters of the heart in all their complexities. For it is men that possess the innate balance that the healthy connection of heart and mind requires.
From Shakespeare to Byron, Keats to Voltaire, loves bliss and anguish has been captured and chronicled by the masculine mind; by the male heart.
And in this age of insanity, where men are tagged as emotionless and hollow, those lies are eviscerated by the lyrics of Henley and Kristofferson, among the timeless works of a thousand other masters throughout history.
This was never “soft,” any more than the warrior-poet is effeminate. It is just another part of the deeply complex and sophisticated creature that is man.
So even despite Zeds words otherwise, I don’t see this post as being soft when the opponent is hard, but just a good reminder that soft and hard are matters of perspective better left to those with the ability to comprehend their meaning. And those that do are usually men.
I believe that few American women have the ability to reciprocate in the context of dating and relationships.
One only has to view womens’ online dating profiles to see true selfishness in action. There are many words asking – no, demanding – what qualities are to be expected in men. But there are few, if any, words stating what a woman will bring to the relationship. Many women hem and haw around that issues by stating things they she likes. Only one profile I have read (out of thousands) that specifically stated a list of reasons of why she would make a good girlfriend.
“as an Ethical Sociopath, I have those rights I choose to have”
There is no such thing as an ethical sociopath. Not that I have a problem with being a sociopath in this rabbit hole world.
“men who have been the intelligentsia of the emotional world, including love.”
That is because romantic love are male notions, not female. Female love is vastgly different than male.
That is because romantic love are male notions, not female. Female love is vastly different than male.
QFT
Yes, there is. When a person goes in the face of social pressure because that social pressure is wrong, and he is responding to a higher set of ethics, then he is an Ethical Sociopath – e.g. Atticus Finch.
Results of functional MRI brain scans of people in the early intense stages of falling in love:
Men, on average, tended to show more activity in two regions in the brain: one was associated with the integration of visual stimuli, and the second was with penile erection.
Conversely, women in these early stages exhibited increased activity in several regions of the brain associated with memory recall.
Memory recall
Yea thats not scary at all.
Simple allegory:
Enjoying music does not make you a musician. You could be the pickiest, most demanding consumer of music alive, and yet a child banging on his Fisher Price xylophone would be more of a musician than you.
Similarly, enjoying romantic things does not make you a romantic. No, getting moist because your boyfriend prepared a surprise candlelight dinner or took you to a walk in the moonlight does not make you a romantic.
It makes him a romantic. He’s the one playing the music, you are just listening. How often do we hear of women doing romantic things for their partners out of their own volition?
You can have brain scans and medical journals coming out the ass, they do not invalidate millenia of empirical evidence.
What kind of “object” they are looking, no wait, “shopping” for.
“Results of functional MRI brain scans of people in the early intense stages of falling in love:
Men, on average, tended to show more activity in two regions in the brain: one was associated with the integration of visual stimuli, and the second was with penile erection.
Conversely, women in these early stages exhibited increased activity in several regions of the brain associated with memory recall.”
I also love the simplicity of this “argument.”
No shit Sherlock? Men fall in love more readily with women they find attractive? Somebody stop the presses, the world will be a different place tomorrow.
Could it be that romantic behavior is not a purely instinctive reaction but rather the result of emotional and rational interaction which has to be measured in a time span much broader than the time it takes for a guy to see a hot chick and his sergeant to stand at attention?
My, how complex, let’s rather just take research out of context (a debating favorite among the progressive crowd) and then quickly deliver a hit-and-run response so the slower ones among the herd will come around.
That’s because men find women who are doing sexual things for them to be romantic. It’s improper for a woman to talk of such things in a public forum!
Unless cooking, cleaning and doing the laundry for a man because she loves him count as being romantic.
Ah, I guess when I try to be playful with Tupac and guns, it backfired on me in a company of strangers.
Please read this, a piece I addressed to other women a while ago on the subject of loving men.
”””””How often do we hear of women doing romantic things for their partners out of their own volition?”””””’
I’ll mention a few then hope.
When my woman shaves me that is romantic.
When she feeds me at the table in a nice resteraunt romantic.
When she cuts my hair again romantic.
When she cooks and serves me the food on a blanket she placed down romantic.
When she holds my arm while walking romantic.
When she sews a hole in my pants sitting there on the floor in front of me while I lay on the couch watching tv that was hot as fuck.
When she washes my body in the shower yea romantic.
When she cleans the house I do find that romantic.
When she gives me awesome advice and dispenses pure truth to me yea that is romantic.
When she used to handwash my clothes every day so they would be ready for the next day that was ludricus hot makes me want to take away her washing machine he he he
Actually, all three of these activities can be incredibly sexy (laundry least so, if only due to duration), done by women for men (I have no real qualification to talk about the other direction, but I tend to doubt it).
The ability to express love is something to be learned, perhaps easier to some. The feeling of caring, warmth or affection for someone seems to me separate from the actions expressing the same. The act of loving someone is a conscious decision and a choice: you take the feelings and choose to act upon them. Necessary to this is removing your thoughts and perspectives from your self and empathising with what would make the other person’s life easier or happier. Necessary to this is placing their overall happiness above the ‘little things’, your pride, your freedom of will. Necessary to this is gaining a full understanding of who they are, what they want, what they need. Necessary to this is a choice to commit to them through periods of hardships. Necessary to this is a degree of constantly remembering them: in grand gestures or in little ones, in the overarching priority you give them in your life.
A privileged position in life has shown me how valueless materials are without love: love represented in either the family, spirituality or both. There is much happiness and contentment to be found in a gift freely given, without expectation of reciprocation, except perhaps that it is — in some small measure — appreciated or needed in the receiver. Loving and being permitted to love can be in itself be a privilege and soul enriching.
Place the art of loving above all else and perhaps therein is the greatest happiness in life. Who is the happiest: the person who loves or the one whom is loved? Well, perhaps, the one who is lucky to be both.
Nice piece, Hope.
I think I just came fuck. Ok maybe it is in that part of the brain lol
Traditional cultures that still utilize the arranged marriage system know that love is something to be cultivated over time through action/practice.
Hope, most of your piece is–to at least some degree–accurate, but I have a problem with the following:
Playing those games, or, more accurately, Game, is exactly what creates the chemistry and back-and-forth. When it happens “naturally”, that is just natural Game. By setting that as a requirement, you’ve invalidated most of the rest of your advice (which basically tells women to ignore Gamers and pick a Nice Guy, then behave reasonably towards him).
Opening up is an inherently awkward thing; when a person really does it, it will be in bits and pieces, through earned trust, and will essentially never seem like effortless back-and-forth, or natural chemistry. If you wait for both openness and chemistry to occur simultaneously, you will either be lied to, or will wait forever.
zed- This was another book I purchased after reading your website and one I most enjoyed.
Hope-That’s because men find women who are doing sexual things for them to be romantic. It’s improper for a woman to talk of such things in a public forum!
Unless cooking, cleaning and doing the laundry for a man because she loves him count as being romantic.
These domestic duties certainly could be romantic, in and of themselves, but also if one takes the opportunity to do something a little more. If one’s partner is in the shower you can take a moment to throw a towel or terrycloth robe into the dryer to give them a nice cozy towel when they step up. If you know what time your partner is coming home from work a hot or cold drink (depending on the season) and snack can be ready and waiting for them when they walk in. Love notes and poems can be tucked into pockets, messages written on the mirror in lipstick, and many more.
I personally am not of the belief that sex and domesticity are the only ways to show a man you care. When my husband left for his last deployment, I raided my daughter’s craft closet for construction paper and made 365 little hearts. On each one I wrote a reason why I loved him, one for each day he’d be away, and tucked this box away secretly into his bag, along with a “paper hug” from our daughter and some other little goodies.
Another time, before he left for a fishing trip, I packed the usual picnic basket for him and his buddies, but also slipped into his car a little gift I had made. I bought a tackle box, filled it with some lures and other goodies he had mentioned needing, and then filled up the rest with gummy worms and little chocolate fish. I made a card with a picture of a boat and a little fishing guy on the front and inside put the message, “you’ve caught my heart and reeled me in”. Very cheesy perhaps, but he liked it.
Hestia
NOT cheesy !!!
Really, really, really cool !!!
Yea hestia thats cool stuff.
When in bosnia girlfriend wrote a letter every day and care package every few days. I got mad respect from the other guys for that plus she earned a spot in the inner circle.
Yea being away for time periods can destroy or it can make stronger.
But really though try jumping in the shower with him and washing him up. Its not a bad thing he he he
@Arbitrary:
I do feel a tremendous love when I prepare his breakfast, pack his lunch for the day, present his dinner to him and afterward clean away the dishes. But I fail to see the “sexiness” in such activities. They are more nurturing than sexual. Energetically speaking, the love is felt as a warm fullness in one’s chest, rather than in the groin.
@guns:
Yikes. I would be so afraid to cut him!
Holding his arms, washing his back, and giving him back/shoulder/neck/head rubs are safer ways of expressing my love.
That is very sweet, and the circumstances so difficult as well. I cannot imagine being away from the one I love for so long, and with such risks involved.
It is inspirational to hear about your gestures of love. The expression of love can bring out the artist in all of us. It also reminds me of this sad but incredibly touching story of a little girl who, as she was dying of cancer, wrote love notes to her family.
””””’@guns:
When my woman shaves me that is romantic.
Yikes. I would be so afraid to cut him!
”””””””””’
Its hot though. Sure you may cut him sometimes but probably not. How often do you cut yourself shaving?
Have him lie down in your lap. Get a bowl with some warm water and go to work. Take your time though and do it slow.
On the haircuts doesn’t matter if you fuck it up first few time just go crewcut for a while till ya get the hang of it.
Lot of guys were getting shaved in kuwait because it feels good to have someone else do it. It was being done by a dude though barber type. Not me had a woman not with the ghey
I will admit one thing occasionally I will shave a few areas on her to reciprocate but not all the time he he he
And no I have never cut her.
Hope, I’m sorry, I should have been more clear. As a male, I find that there are a variety of household duties that, imagining a woman doing them, are actively sexually arousing. I doubt I am particularly unusual in this, given the prevalence of sexy maid costumes. I personally don’t have a good enough definition of “romantic” to assess whether or not that fact makes them romantic. Certainly sexual arousal is not the only positive feeling I would have towards such an event.
To Hestia:
Cheesy is good, as long as it’s thoughtful.
And, from your posts and our other correspondence, it appears to be one that you understood and really learned from.
Thank god feminism has not ruined every woman in North America.
“Unless cooking, cleaning and doing the laundry for a man because she loves him count as being romantic.”
In that case I hope you also consider it romantic when your boyfriend has a job, fixes the piping when it breaks down, and goes downstairs with a baseball bat when you hear a strange noise at night.
I consider romantic acts those which are not of themselves necessary for basic cohabitation. Going the extra mile and doing something which may not at all tangibly and materially benefit you, but which you commit out of sheer devotion to your partner, that’s what I consider romantic.
Now your suggestion of sexual acts being a way for women to be romantic raises and interesting question: Does something which physically benefits you (better sex in this case) constitute a romantic act?
I think it is fair to ask that, as popularly women who do such things for men they barely know are not thought of as romantic, whereas (once upon a time, at least) romantic acts were regularly engaged in by men during the initial stages of courtship (and beyond).
Of course one could argue that romantic acts by men have the agenda of extracting sex, but that results in a chicken-and-egg question: Do men do romantic things for sex, or does the fact that their partner enjoys having sex with them cause them to do romantic things for their partner?
What constitutes a romantic act is very subjective I guess.
Hestia gives a good example for a romantic act. Completely selfless, just to show her husband she cares and thinks about him, even when he is far away and has no way of immediately reciprocating. Bravo, I wish there were more people around who knew how to cherish their spouse instead of concentrating on their shortcomings.
”””””’In that case I hope you also consider it romantic when your boyfriend has a job, fixes the piping when it breaks down, and goes downstairs with a baseball bat when you hear a strange noise at night.”””””
Yea almost everying I do my wife gets hot he he he
Wife made it so I can retire and chill.
Now that is some romantic stuff.
Tore down walls in the house so it is like a luxary hotel room now for bedroom so I would be less inclined to stay in luxary hotels he he he
I think really all she expects in return is for me to keep making love to her so she can have my kid.
It’s like the matrix I am trying to wake up from the dream. It is too good it is freakish.
Perhaps a decent working definition of a romantic act is simply: “Displaying, expressive of, or conducive to love.” A romantic act need not be a completely selfless act.
“Making love” is romantic as it fits the above definition of expressing love and being conducive to love. But casual sex does not involve love, and is therefore unromantic.
Doing something for a loved one out of feelings of love is a romantic thing as it expresses love. The loved one’s happiness also multiplies and comes back to the person performing the romantic gesture. That person’s happiness becomes in essence a part of your own, wrapped and woven intricately together.
By a different token, a person who feels no love but who goes through the motions of displaying what are typically viewed as romantic actions, such as setting a candlelit dinner or writing love notes, is not being romantic.
And to spend time with her. I mean wtf this shit crazy or what. It totally goes against everything I have ever fucking seen in my life in relationship dynamics. I mean she understands life like I don’t know.
I think my brain is gonna explode.
Hmmmm, I might need to buy this book
Hope,
What an enlightening, beautiful piece. I should check out your blog more often
gunslinger-When in bosnia girlfriend wrote a letter every day and care package every few days. I got mad respect from the other guys for that plus she earned a spot in the inner circle.
Yea being away for time periods can destroy or it can make stronger.
I often wonder if my husband and I would share the strong bond we today without having had the military experiences to shape us. If you have the right attitude and are ready to do hard work, the times apart are still a burden of course but can come with their own unique blessings.
I’m sure I appreciate my husband and all he does a lot more since I know what it’s like to live without him for a long period of time. I know well all he does do at home as I have to carry this extra work on my shoulders when he’s not. I’ve realized what issues are worth arguing over, which are precious few, and know if something isn’t worth whining about on an overseas phone call that it’s not worth whining about at all. Military life affords a unique perspective with many lessons, that is for sure.
My daughter and I did the daily letters and weekly care package too. She would be thrilled to bits to mail a letter to “wait” everyday and told everybody she had an important job . hehe.
We also did what we called “the morning report” which consisted of filling out a daybook entry about our plans for the day, what the weather was like, a thought about daddy, and then a picture drawn by my little one. We then snapped several pictures throughout the day to print out and bundled up a weeks worth of “morning reports” to send in the care package every week. This was my husband could keep up with his daughter’s days and also see how she grew and changed throughout the years.
And she and I baked cookies for my husband’s unit to send off once a month. When my husband and I first married, I would make these big batches of cookies with my cheap hand mixer and regular cookie sheets and this project would take ages so I could only do it every few months. Now I have a nice stand mixer and have learned that wrapping oven racks with foil can make a great cookie sheet for bulk baking, so I was able to send cookies and other goodies for my husband and his soldiers at least once a month, if not more. Still a bit of work, but a lot of fun and everybody seemed to appreciate our cookie and baked goods packages. I also bottled homemade hot sauce to send to be shared as well.
It sure sounds to me like you have mastered the Art, Hestia.
Feels great, doesn’t it?
“No man has greater love than he who lays down his life for his friend”…a little book called the Bible.
I can find no evidence that women are actually even capable of loving as us men understand it. None. I can find plenty of evidence that women ‘love’ what men provide. But the man himself? He’s immaterial.
If you stop and think about it for a while, you will see this is necessity.
A mate of mine says “Want love? Buy a dog.”
If there was ONE thing I have learned in the last 2 years it is that women do not love men as us men understand love. Sad, but true.
If there was ONE thing I have learned in the last 2 years it is that women do not love men as us men understand love. Sad, but true.
QFT
”””””””And she and I baked cookies for my husband’s unit to send off once a month. When my husband and I first married, I would make these big batches of cookies with my cheap hand mixer and regular cookie sheets and this project would take ages so I could only do it every few months. Now I have a nice stand mixer and have learned that wrapping oven racks with foil can make a great cookie sheet for bulk baking, so I was able to send cookies and other goodies for my husband and his soldiers at least once a month, if not more. Still a bit of work, but a lot of fun and everybody seemed to appreciate our cookie and baked goods packages. I also bottled homemade hot sauce to send to be shared as well. ””””””””””’
Yea appreciation is not the word. When the old lady gave us a cooler with a watermelon in it in the field. One idiot was so excited he sliced his open and bled all over the watermelon. We still ate the shit out of that watermelon he he he
But yea she used to make homebaked cheese pretzels. They where the bomb I used to share all my shit but those pretzels where the to good so fuck that. But yea dude got sent some shit from the store he cried. Homebaking is where its at to really feel the love.
””””’If there was ONE thing I have learned in the last 2 years it is that women do not love men as us men understand love. Sad, but true.”””””’
Some do current wifes whole family was down to the death for me before.