Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Is it true that love is only a form of need?

It seems that all relationships exist based soley on the needs of each counterpart. Does everyone have a hidden agenda? These are all blanket statements that have a technical answer of ';no,'; but where is the real proof? I feel like people (girls epsecially) are just beings built on conniving, using nothing but their own interests to propel them through so-called ';love'; and everything else in life. Is there no right and wrong as they say, just what is beneficial to me and what is not?Is it true that love is only a form of need?
Just as people can lust after someone for their body, they can also lust after emotional highs. The idea of love that books and movies bring to people gives them a taste for this emotional high which is mistaken as love. If one is searching for the emotional highs then they desire lust and the conniving hidden agenda shows up.





Love is not about the self but about the other. It is about caring about the person and not the high. Lust is to put value in a feeling while love is a choice to value the person themself.





There is love between friends that seems to be higher than the so-called love between boyfriend/girlfriend and even at times that of husband/wife. When a friend feels your hurt and sits silently by your side throughout the night during a hardship you are suffering, this is love.





The truth is that few people grasp the true concept of love because they want the feeling without the work. It is not easy to think of the other's feelings above your own. With so many people bottling up to protect themselves from hurt it is hard to find those who are willing to put themselves in the midst of the battle to protect others. But when people see that someone is taking the risk to help them, they will be more likely to begin taking risks to help others.





Love is risky and it's hard. People want it to be easy so they choose the easier definition of so-called love. The question is are you willing to work for the real thing or will you settle for the fake stuff?Is it true that love is only a form of need?
No true love is Giving. It's not needing or expecting anything in return. That is REAL love.
This is not love, just ';ego merchandising.'; You're describing females totally identifying with their learned (programmed) egos. Realize this and you will connect with someone real - who has a deeper awareness of Self and purpose.





In its truest sense, we are WHAT we love and who we attach ourselves to OR love demonstrates that. You obviously want a more satisfying like-minded relationship of shared interests. Accept it.
I think all relationships are, in a sense, a matter of convinence. If two people who are in a relationship could not be there for each other, do for each other, and depend on each other to get through all the details that life throws at you then what would be there use for one another. Life kinda makes it like that, I don't think we have agendas. Well I'm sure some do.
Need is not love





need is LUST





Love is holier than lust











Love is one's unstoppable quest


to


emotionaly %26amp; physicaly


explore, donate %26amp; depend


on another
Casey,





Love takes many forms. You have to define your concept of love for yourself... what is it that you are looking for? Love is not taking it is giving. Yes, there are people out there (male, female and trans gender) that are out for what they can get and will use every trick in the book to screw you over. If i read between the lines it appears that you were recently conned, hence your post. Do not be bitter about these things as it will poison future relationships. Most people just want someone to love in the purest sense of the word.





Yes it is true ';all is fair and love and war';. Steer you life with an open heart and if your expectations of a perfect love are not based on material or physical attributes I can almost guarantee that love will hit you out of the blue... and you will not be able to stop it.
Even GOD is after human love. Why not girls?

No comments:

Post a Comment