love or passion?

[rimbaud]

Well that seems to be the choice: eternal, spiritual or whatever love or earthy passion. According to all the teachers I have ever got.
But what I have come to realize is: I don't want that kind of love! Not if passion is excluded!
I mean, you love your dad, your friends, your siblings, but the feelings for your lover should be different. I am all for connecting in emotional way, you know, you love him and all that, but it seems that the earthy and physical is treated like something filthy.
Well, falling in love should be with body and soul, right, and even if it doesn't last forever, or a life time, it doesn't mean it wasn't love.
So why are my teachers separating the one from another? Like passion only does damage, and so if it does! Love does damage too, life does damage, it doesn't mean we should stop living, no you learn from it!
So what I'm saying is: I want both, and there is nothing wrong with that. I don't know how it was in the old times but as men, love is changing!
Well that's my opinion, and I would love to hear what some of you have to say.

[DanielBenoit]

What your teachers may be talking about are the different catigories of love. Of course love transcends catagorization, but when they talk about things such as earthly love, they are usually reffering to a sexual relationship, if they are talking about spiritual love, then they are probably reffering to a celebacial relationship.

In my opinion, passion is love, and the two are inseperable from the other. As far as different types of loves/passions go (love for books, love for a girl, love for a parent) is where catagorization come in.

[rimbaud]

"Eternal love for a woman(in my case for a man) infected by passion, young people are more passionate that they should be..." and so on... you get the idea

I'm not really an expert, but hey, tell me who is?
Love and passion should coexist, they must, otherwise they are just feelings, but combine, they are a state of the whole being. OK, if, I'm not making myself clear just disregard all I've said :D

[JBI]

Because Western culture has divided the two. It's as simple as that - other cultures, for instance, put the bodily over the "spiritual" whereas others still do not distinguish.

[JuniperWoolf]

There's a scientific approach to love. It's long and complicated, but one aspect is the idea that passionate love always eventually fades to companionate love. Passion doesn't last, ever.

[mtpspur]

Passion is rarely used with discretion--it's the nature of the beast. It is BEST when (somewhat) equally shared but usually one partner is shall we say more inspired then the other. The danger then becomes that of the one with the passion turning the expression of love into that which pleases THEMSELVES rather then attempting to accomodate it to the receiver of this wonderful feeling and activity. You can get away with for just a little untiul you start hearing phrases along the lines of "It's always what YOU want". Just a thought. But I suspect you are young so this comes from a person of some years and just a bit of experience. One man's experience --hope this helps somewhat.

[blazeofglory]

Love and passions are inseparable if not indistinguishable; for you need a passion for love. When you do not have a passion for someone how can you love. This is more explicit when it comes to loving your girl friends.

[The Comedian]

One of the best things about love is that its as varied and beautiful as flowers: sometimes delicate and slow; sometimes fragrant and short-lived; brightly colored, camouflaged, sexualized, idealized, abundant and rare.

If you want love and passion together, then seek that line. You'll likely find it.

Do I want passion or love? Like you I think that they can be had in unison, but, honestly, I don't want my relationship to be always be a passionate flurry. Sometimes I do; other times the simple comfort of hearth and home is as strong an emotion as I can muster.

I think the best relationships allow for the natural ebb and flow of emotional intensity and calm. And anymore, I think of passion like a fine spice: great to have in dashes here and there, thrilling when unexpected, but meal after meal of it will make you sick.

[rimbaud]

One of the best things about love is that its as varied and beautiful as flowers: sometimes delicate and slow; sometimes fragrant and short-lived; brightly colored, camouflaged, sexualized, idealized, abundant and rare.

If you want love and passion together, then seek that line. You'll likely find it.

Do I want passion or love? Like you I think that they can be had in unison, but, honestly, I don't want my relationship to be always be a passionate flurry. Sometimes I do; other times the simple comfort of hearth and home is as strong an emotion as I can muster.

I think the best relationships allow for the natural ebb and flow of emotional intensity and calm. And anymore, I think of passion like a fine spice: great to have in dashes here and there, thrilling when unexpected, but meal after meal of it will make you sick.



"She didn't make me miserable, or anxious, or ill at ease. You know, it sounds boring, but it wasn't. It wasn't spectacular either. It was just good. But really good. " - High Fidelity

something like that?

[Virgil]

Well that seems to be the choice: eternal, spiritual or whatever love or earthy passion. According to all the teachers I have ever got.
But what I have come to realize is: I don't want that kind of love! Not if passion is excluded!
I mean, you love your dad, your friends, your siblings, but the feelings for your lover should be different. I am all for connecting in emotional way, you know, you love him and all that, but it seems that the earthy and physical is treated like something filthy.
Well, falling in love should be with body and soul, right, and even if it doesn't last forever, or a life time, it doesn't mean it wasn't love.
So why are my teachers separating the one from another? Like passion only does damage, and so if it does! Love does damage too, life does damage, it doesn't mean we should stop living, no you learn from it!
So what I'm saying is: I want both, and there is nothing wrong with that. I don't know how it was in the old times but as men, love is changing!
Well that's my opinion, and I would love to hear what some of you have to say.
At the risk of arguing with an 18 year old over love (which I know I should not do), I have to say where in heaven's name do you live that physical passion is depicted as dirty? Everywhere I turn it's absolutely glorified, in the movies, on TV, books, magazines. The overwhelming preponderance of emphasis in today's society is on the physical. Sex is everywhere. You can't turn around and not see a comercial or an advertisement, or read a story without it being there. Perhaps there was a time when it was depicted as dirty but I can't recall it. And I'm way older than you. If anything spiritual love has been completely forgotten. Soul, do 18 year olds today even believe in a soul? Does anyone even know what spiritual love is? Well, I've had my say. Sorry if the old geezer in me is coming out. :D

[rimbaud]

Yeah, in advertisements, but what put the last drop in the glass was actually my lit prof. She was saying that young people are over passionate and was all against movies and sex, and that we don't even care about morals and love, against the 60's youth revolution and all. In the old times, apparently you didn't even touch a girl's hand, and the bride was shy to look at the eyes of the groom at their wedding.
all that aside, what got me the most is that she said we could never get REAL love and REAL joy because of that.


I know she's wrong, but still, it got to me.

Oh, and we do believe in soul :) and in spiritual love, and that is some way you can just click with someone :), well at least my close friends and I believe so

[grotto]

Passion is not sex, It is not lust! although both of them can be passionate.

[Virgil]

Yeah, in advertisements, but what put the last drop in the glass was actually my lit prof. She was saying that young people are over passionate and was all against movies and sex, and that we don't even care about morals and love, against the 60's youth revolution and all. In the old times, apparently you didn't even touch a girl's hand, and the bride was shy to look at the eyes of the groom at their wedding.
all that aside, what got me the most is that she said we could never get REAL love and REAL joy because of that.


I know she's wrong, but still, it got to me.

Oh, and we do believe in soul :) and in spiritual love, and that is some way you can just click with someone :), well at least my close friends and I believe so

Oh that's good. :) I can be pompous in my attitude and I'm glad you took me with a wink. ;) As to your teacher I probably side with her, though I would not go as far as "never." You know what she is saying is the central theme of Tolstoy's Anna Karinina. Read it one day if you haven't. If love is built only on the physical, it will surely fall apart over time. Over time people become familiar, the physical becomes routine, the spark becomes customary. If there isn't real love to sustain it, then the hardships and problems of life overwhelm a relationship. The relationship will fall apart, no matter how physically attractive they are. Anyway, those are my thoughts. :)

[rimbaud]

Oh that's good. :) I can be pompous in my attitude and I'm glad you took me with a wink. ;) As to your teacher I probably side with her, though I would not go as far as "never." You know what she is saying is the central theme of Tolstoy's Anna Karinina. Read it one day if you haven't. If love is built only on the physical, it will surely fall apart over time. Over time people become familiar, the physical becomes routine, the spark becomes customary. If there isn't real love to sustain it, then the hardships and problems of life overwhelm a relationship. The relationship will fall apart, no matter how physically attractive they are. Anyway, those are my thoughts. :)

yeah, I started reading that one, got to half of it, and didn't really like it
I respect Tolstoy and all, and by me he is immortal, if he stood next to me I would kneel :) but still, not my kind of thing, prefer Dostoevsky and Pushkin. (regarding to the russians)

If love is built only on the physical, it will surely fall apart over time. Over time people become familiar, the physical becomes routine, the spark becomes customary. If there isn't real love to sustain it, then the hardships and problems of life overwhelm a relationship.

Ok, here I might be seeing it like a youngster would, enjoying the youth, loving everything the world has to offer never wanting to change :)
But still, why can't passion be eternal too? Or last as long as the love does, sometimes even more?
What I'm getting at is: I would like to believe that one cannot exist without the other, when it comes to a couples love. I'm not discussing family or friendship love

[Virgil]

Ok, here I might be seeing it like a youngster would, enjoying the youth, loving everything the world has to offer never wanting to change :)
But still, why can't passion be eternal too? Or last as long as the love does, sometimes even more?
What I'm getting at is: I would like to believe that one cannot exist without the other, when it comes to a couples love. I'm not discussing family or friendship love
Oh sure. One has both throughout life. But the emphasis just swaps. I'm afraid it's part of aging. The hormones change, the nerves decay. I wish I could be 25 forever, but I can't stop that dreaded time from moving. ;) Plus I think the familiarity alters the way you see the opposite person. That's why people cheat, or at least one of the reasons. They're striving to reach that physical high that they can't get any more with the spouse.

[OrphanPip]

"Dull sublunary lovers' love
—Whose soul is sense—cannot admit
Of absence, 'cause it doth remove
The thing which elemented it.

But we by a love so much refined,
That ourselves know not what it is,
Inter-assurèd of the mind,
Care less, eyes, lips and hands to miss."

- John Donne

;)

The physical is definitely a requirement of romantic love. Through the physical we are not just satisfying a basic pleasure, but we are also making an implicit statement of trust and intimacy which can't be achieved through the intellectual alone. Once, the capacity, and the willingness, for that physical pleasure is gone, at least the knowledge of that experience will last forever.

Edit: Or at least until the senility kicks in.

[rimbaud]

"Dull sublunary lovers' love
—Whose soul is sense—cannot admit
Of absence, 'cause it doth remove
The thing which elemented it.

But we by a love so much refined,
That ourselves know not what it is,
Inter-assurèd of the mind,
Care less, eyes, lips and hands to miss."

- John Donne




wow, this is great, I love it!

[OrphanPip]

wow, this is great, I love it!

It's only two stanzas of the poem, I thought it was appropriate though haha.

[rimbaud]

It's only two stanzas of the poem, I thought it was appropriate though haha.


you thought right
mind sending it the whole? :D