53 replies to this topic

[annasea]

<snip>

A woman I know only casually came over to me and said she was divorcing her husband. She gave me her phone number and said we should get together for a movie night (she likes foreign films as I do). Never would have imagined this happening so I'm not sure how to feel about it. I thought she and her husband had a great relationship from what I could see. I never ever imagined her as a possible date since they were married.

<snip>

Hmmm... something tells me she doesn't want to *date* you, Bill...

[Walter]

In Love = Lust as far as I'm concerned.

Perhaps love combined with lust? I know I've felt lust without being in love.

[Dennis]

Interesting thread. I have for sure felt lust at first sight. Many times. I'm not sure about love at first sight, since non of the lust things ever lasted. I will admit that there is one woman I met that when I was near, my heart and breathing rate went up, among other things. And no, this wasn't Donna, it was before Donna. I chalked this one up to pheremones. I let the lady know I was interested, but she wasn't. End of story. It was an interesting feeling.

I knew and was friends with Donna for two years before she picked me up at a dorm party at The University of Florida. I had always thought she was cute and extremely smart. The first time we met, in 1975 I was interested, but, she let everyone know at that time she had a boyfriend. She also was a Co-op Student at NASA Langley Research Center, so every quarter (Florida was on the Quarter system then.) she was off to Virginia for 3 months. Not a good way to start a relationship. We dated and then after I graduated, I traveled from Louisiana to Florida and to Virginia when I got the chance to visit and keep our relationshio going. After about a year, I thought that this love thing with me for Donna was a permanent fixture for me. I didn't know if it was for her or not, so I asked her to marry me. It's a crap shoot guys, every time, so I don't have the answers. After six months, she gave me a yes. Before that, she said she would think about it. And yes, I thought our relationship was worth the anxiety of waiting as long as it took. Turns out she absolutely didn't want to live in Southern Louisiana. Can't say I can blame her. I told her no sweat, I'll quit and find a job where ever she wanted to go. She got a job designing avionics for Collins radio and I got a job with Harris Semiconductor, the rest is history.

Edited by Dennis, 21 January 2007 - 09:01 AM.

[BeachBunny]

A wise man told me infatuation amounts to an obsession with another person, a desire to possess them. He defines love as thinking about another person (and their needs) more than you think about yourself, perhaps you think of this person at the oddest times and you smile. You can't wait to see them again because they make you happy....they make your heart sing...they are truly your best friend and you want to share yourself with them, not out of obligation, but because they make you a better person.

[drbill]

Sigh, I often want to "possess" a woman (in the nicest way of course).

As for thinking more about your love interest's needs than your own, I've been guilty of that. But in doing so I was also satisfying my own needs since it made me happy (and eneared her further to me). I think in the long term it is best to think about one's own needs as well as one's lover's to establish a balance.

[pocahontas]

I think i learned alot about love from my job. And I agree that the definition of real love is putting the other person before yourself. "In love" is really a nicer way to say obsessed with. How many guys have stalked girls that they were "in love" with? Maybe a better way to describe it would be that "in love" is lust masquerading as love. I know it is possible (especially for men) to have lust without any love at all.
I had an epiphany a year or so ago. My then captain who I was really attached to (not in any sexual way - he is happily married) was taking the deputy chief test. I have a friend from another department who gives classes on how to do well on the chiefs test. Knowing this, alot of guys who I don't usually pal around with were all sorts of sucking up to me trying to get me to hook them up with classes. As soon as I realized this my first reaction was to immediately call my captain and tell him that I had made arrangements for him to have classes to prepare him for his test. Was this at all good for me? No - not at all. Here was the captain who has taken the first and only woman on my department and given me a chance, believed in me, trusted me above lots of the other guys. And why? Not because he wanted to get into my underwear but because he has two little girls and thought I was a good roll model for them. Did I want to lose a captain like that? Not really. This is a guy who I have trusted my life to on more than one occasion and who (more importantly given my situation as a female minority) I truly believe had trusted his life to me. But I knew that he had two kids to put through school and he really wanted to get promoted. I cried on our last shift together but not a single part of me didn't want him to get promoted because he is truly as a brother to me and I love him. What was good for him was more important to me that what was good for me. It was then that I realized that there were times that I may have thought I was in love with someone but what I was feeling at that time really had nothing to do with love. Real love is what a mother feels for her child. I have seen couples who truly love eachother but they are few and far between.

[drbill]

Pocahontas and BeachBunny... I know what you mean when you talk about putting the other person's needs above your own. It is a case of altruism that could just as easily be applied to a mother's love for her children (as Pocahontas said)... or when a fire fighter risks their life for someone caught in a burning building, or a soldier falls on a hand grenade to save his (or her) fellow platoon leaders.

These acts of altruism are admirable. However, I don't think such altruism is always the best thing to have in a love relationship that involves a true partnership. Yes, accepting some "sacrifice" (compromise?) to ensure your partner's happiness is required in a real relationship. But to constantly give priority to your partner's needs over your own is not entirely healthy IMHO. In fact it could lead to hostility later in the relationship. Both parties need to give and take.

I know when I feel what I consider to be love, I do want to do my best to ensure the happiness of my partner. However, I still have needs that may "require" my partner to put my priorities above hers (and vice versa).

But then what do I know? I do know that I have some absolutely fantastic women who buddy with me and love me as a very close friend (without "benefits"). I am blessed by those friendships.

[pocahontas]

Pocahontas and BeachBunny... I know what you mean when you talk about putting the other person's needs above your own. It is a case of altruism that could just as easily be applied to a mother's love for her children (as Pocahontas said)... or when a fire fighter risks their life for someone caught in a burning building, or a soldier falls on a hand grenade to save his (or her) fellow platoon leaders.

These acts of altruism are admirable. However, I don't think such altruism is always the best thing to have in a love relationship that involves a true partnership. Yes, accepting some "sacrifice" (compromise?) to ensure your partner's happiness is required in a real relationship. But to constantly give priority to your partner's needs over your own is not entirely healthy IMHO. In fact it could lead to hostility later in the relationship. Both parties need to give and take.

I know when I feel what I consider to be love, I do want to do my best to ensure the happiness of my partner. However, I still have needs that may "require" my partner to put my priorities above hers (and vice versa).

But then what do I know? I do know that I have some absolutely fantastic women who buddy with me and love me as a very close friend (without "benefits"). I am blessed by those friendships.

I hear what you are saying but by my definition of love, if your partner truly loved you then she would be looking out for you as much as you were looking out for her. And if you really love someone, the things you are doing for them make you happy.
When I first got my job it was a big deal. I was the first woman and lots of guys were totally freaked out. Some were total jerks. The crew I work with have always been good to me from the beginning. I know these guys totally trust me and have my back at all times. So somehow I became the house mother. This involves getting the the supermarket by 7am every morning before work to buy food for the troops (and you should see how much these guys can eat). And me totally not into mornings. Why do I drag myself out of bed at such an ungodly hour to haul tons of groceries and subsequently cook them? Because I love those guys and I'm happy to do it. And because when we have to do something I hate (mow the lawn etc) all the guys make sure it gets done without me because it makes them happy to watch out for me. Now that is what real love is. I think it is easier see it in this case because nobody is worried about owning anyone else and there is no sexual tension involved.

[cmt489]

I agree with Heidi - what makes true love is that both people want to do things for the other person. Because both are giving, no one feels used or comes out "ahead". We sacrifice and do things because the other person wants or needs something. Similarly, that person will do the same for us. Where the imbalance comes in is when you have one person doing all the sacrificing and the other person taking. This is not true love or a partnership, but rather, someone taking advantage of another person's love.

[drbill]

I hear what you are saying but by my definition of love, if your partner truly loved you then she would be looking out for you as much as you were looking out for her. And if you really love someone, the things you are doing for them make you happy.

No question that this would be ideal in many respects. I just don't think it can be 100% of the time in a real relationship. And as cmt489 said, there has to be a balance of giving (and therefore receiving). I've had what I would consider to be a few such relationships and they are truly wonderful. However, this is southern California where people (of both genders) take, take, take...

When I first got my job it was a big deal. I was the first woman and lots of guys were totally freaked out. Some were total jerks... I think it is easier see it in this case because nobody is worried about owning anyone else and there is no sexual tension involved.

You are in a very physical occupation. I would expect (although not agree with it) the men to have questions about your being in it. I emphasize I don't think the questions are valid, but I would expect them. We had a hard time getting women to even apply to be firefighters here because the ex fire chief was such a male chauvinist. Fortunately things are different now. My housemate Iris wanted to be a volunteer firefighter but the ex chief would have nothing to do with it. Now she is an honorary member of both the City and the County fire departments and they love her to death (in a non-sexual way).

I spent most of my high school and college years with women as equal competitors since my focus was on my academics rather than my sports (which I also enjoyed). It was natural for me to see women as equals (or as better than me, especially in college) due to that experience. I dive with women buddies who are equal to me (or perjaps even better) in dive skills.

In the arena of physical competition (sports, etc.) male egos can be very fragile if they are bested by a woman. I know a few women here who are better athletes than I am (Olympic class in discus, javelin, hurdles) so I avoid competition with them to ensure my fragile ego remains intact!

Edited by drbill, 24 January 2007 - 01:35 PM.

[pocahontas]

I hear what you are saying but by my definition of love, if your partner truly loved you then she would be looking out for you as much as you were looking out for her. And if you really love someone, the things you are doing for them make you happy.

No question that this would be ideal in many respects. I just don't think it can be 100% of the time in a real relationship. And as cmt489 said, there has to be a balance of giving (and therefore receiving). I've had what I would consider to be a few such relationships and they are truly wonderful. However, this is southern California where people (of both genders) take, take, take...

When I first got my job it was a big deal. I was the first woman and lots of guys were totally freaked out. Some were total jerks... I think it is easier see it in this case because nobody is worried about owning anyone else and there is no sexual tension involved.

You are in a very physical occupation. I would expect (although not agree with it) the men to have questions about your being in it. I emphasize I don't think the questions are valid, but I would expect them. We had a hard time getting women to even apply to be firefighters here because the ex fire chief was such a male chauvinist. Fortunately things are different now. My housemate Iris wanted to be a volunteer firefighter but the ex chief would have nothing to do with it. Now she is an honorary member of both the City and the County fire departments and they love her to death (in a non-sexual way).

I spent most of my high school and college years with women as equal competitors since my focus was on my academics rather than my sports (which I also enjoyed). It was natural for me to see women as equals (or as better than me, especially in college) due to that experience. I dive with women buddies who are equal to me (or perjaps even better) in dive skills.

In the arena of physical competition (sports, etc.) male egos can be very fragile if they are bested by a woman. I know a few women here who are better athletes than I am (Olympic class in discus, javelin, hurdles) so I avoid competition with them to ensure my fragile ego remains intact!

Very true statements.
I would like to point out for the record that the test that women take to get on the job as a firefighter in NJ is the exact same test as the men. People seem to think that the reason I got the job was due to some sort of affirmative action. Also, prior to getting the job I was earning my living as a professional athelete (figure skater) while the guys I got hired with were selling stereos, running a t-shirt business, a cop, landscaper, bank teller, selling appliances, bartender and auto mechanic.

[drbill]

Our test for fire fighters here was the same for men and women (I think it still is). I think it is a little unfair to expect a woman to carry the same dead weight as a man who may be twice her mass. However, that was what the chief set as the standard. No wonder only a few women could pass that test, and if they did they were "discouraged" in other ways. Glad to say that chief is long gone.

[drbill]

Reading the posts in this thread has me REALLY discouraged about ever falling in "love." Heck, if we can't agree on a definition, how are we going to "know" it when it hits us? I guess I'll just have to be satisfied with lust... I think there is much more agreement on what that is!

[BeachBunny]

Reading the posts in this thread has me REALLY discouraged about ever falling in "love." Heck, if we can't agree on a definition, how are we going to "know" it when it hits us? I guess I'll just have to be satisfied with lust... I think there is much more agreement on what that is!

Ahhhh.....don't give up! You will know it when it hits you like a truck! Until then, just enjoy all the lusty days!

[drbill]

Ahhhh.....don't give up! You will know it when it hits you like a truck! Until then, just enjoy all the lusty days!

I thought you wrote "dusty lays."