The Rationalization of Love and Our Palatable Truths
Posted by: Michael in BEST OF..., Dumbest Phrases, Relationships, tags: RelationshipsLanguage has been constructed and reconstructed since the beginning of time as a means for humans to communicate with one another and also a medium for our brains to think through and manage problems.
It’s my belief that we can only grasp a situation fully if we have the mental capacity to form the thoughts and the words around the presented concepts, otherwise we pull from what limited information we have and often make poor judgments. Language also allows us to engage in semantic arguments with ourselves for the purpose of rationalization. When we wish to save ourselves from the truth of a matter we use words as a cushion to sometimes avoid pain and reality.
One popular saying that gets tossed around like the Olsen twins in a wind storm is the, “I love her/him but I am not IN love with her/him”
Ridiculous.
This saying has recently come to mind because I heard a girl describe her current relationship in this fashion and then went even further to add, “I mean, I know I love him, I just can’t feel it”. I really felt bad for this person as this is obviously a stressful subject in her life at the moment, but I did nearly laugh out loud at the latter comment. It just amazes me at how often we (myself included) speak without even listening to what we’re saying at times. No one is immune to the autopilot mouth syndrome but when it comes to love and relationships, the rationalization factor can reach the stratosphere.
If we really break it down, what is the difference between loving someone and being IN love with someone? When you take the time to think about it, a completely different conversation must begin regarding the categorization of love, or perhaps the different stages. In any case, it would certainly result in a better working definition than the juxtaposition of love, and IN love.
The word love itself has become diluted into a million categories for the purpose of defining language and our emotions. Platonic love, friendship love, family love, brotherly love, the love for an object or a feeling, the love for a song, and my personal favourite… ‘Luv’, the granddaddy of semantic love. You will see people substitute “from” at the end of letters with ‘Luv’ to heroically take that imaginary defining step between “from” and “Luv.” Our varieties of definitive love become a way for us to show affection without having to step too far out of our comfort zone.
But within language lies rationalization. Nobody wants to face the truth until there is no other option. No one wants to admit that they are in a relationship with a girl they love like their sister or mother because that’s not an acceptable thought; especially when you come to realize that and you have to get into bed with the person later that evening (Calling Dr. Freud, Dr. Freud to the office please). So it’s merely easier to say, well “I really do love her, I’m just not IN love with her”.
Love has so many faces and facets that it has been twisted to fit into more situations than two acrobats from Cirque du Soleil working their way through the Kama sutra.
I’ve had a past relationship that was overflowing with rationalization, even from before we became exclusive there were so many red flags and warning signs. Friends and I still recall all the cons that were associated with this girl pre-relationship, but since she was always around, she was “nice enough” and I felt it was time to grow up (whatever that means) and get a girlfriend, voila King Rationalization. Even after a year when I was very unhappy and tried to end things, she lobbied the court to keep the relationship going and again I said to myself, “Self, she’s a nice girl and she’s probably right, you’re probably just scared of commitment. Be a man (whatever that means) and stick it out” Three years and a messy whirlwind breakup later, we were both forced to face the harsh realities we had been running from through language and utter denial.
There is a saying I heard once upon a time, and though I am sure to butcher it I will try to recreate it:
“Anger and sadness can subsist forever in confusion and deceit, but it cannot survive in the truth.” I very much believe in this. Once you look at the truth you are forced to see life as it is, not how it might be. Within confusion breeds the possibility of change and surprise, but within truth is meaning and acceptance.
In my opinion, “I love him, but I am not in love with him” is the equivalent of giving your love life the silent treatment. It is a suspension of any real action in favour of the status quo. The sentence itself has little meaning and is much more fashion than function. It does nothing but prolong us from taking action, addressing the problem(s) or moving towards the difficult decisions that are now inevitable.
I’ve always taken love as a very special mystery, and one that should not be sullied and confused with semantics, categories, and triple meanings. It takes away some of the magic. I wish we could speak in definitive terms. Speak to our experiences and frustrations so to face reality, take it from someone who didn’t.
Dealing with issues head on does not mean your relationship is automatically doomed, but it’s easier to cure a cancer when you’re not pretending it’s a cold. When we speak to facts and situations that exist and can be evaluated through language the answer becomes clear and all that is left to do is take action. Yes, the hardest part.
The word love used to be held as a member of royalty within the English language, that only if you were lucky enough, be honored to sit with the Queen. Somewhere along the way we decided to turn love into the court jester. In my opinion, for someone to say, “I love her, but I’m not IN love with her” denigrates the beauty behind the mystery of love, and further more gives precedent to others to do the same. I feel we’re all capable of better.
What Do You Think?
Entries (RSS)
I’ve read the article numerous times and have just spent an hour discussing it. A lot of good points Mike and you certainly touched on many different aspects of a subject.
What I guess I’m confused about is why you believe (if you do) “I love her/him but I am not IN love with her/him” to be ridiculous. Maybe I’ve missed something (I am a bit tired) but do you not believe that it is possible to love a person without being in love with them? I’m not referring to the love of a family member, friend or pet etc., but a person with whom you are in a relationship. With one whom you go to bed, hold hands and spend together time with. A girlfriend - boyfriend relationship (or the alternative(s))
To be IN love means something different to everyone, although the general idea is probably the same for all. I (me!) believe that women have a tendency to fall IN love much quicker then men and that the process of falling IN love and loving is at times reversed.
Using myself as the example, if I am interested in a woman then I pursue and can grow love for that person based on their behaviors, character and personality traits. Notice how physical attraction was not part of the criteria! Then, over time, I can develop stronger feelings which cause me to fall IN love. It is my understanding, from having discussed the subject with both sexes, that this is the process for males.
If I (me!) do not like you then I will not fall IN love with you. This is a fact and I’m very aware of it. Loving you does not mean that I like you and I am quite capable of loving without liking. A female’s behaviors, character and personality traits, along with everything else, I have to like…….good AND bad. Otherwise there will never be that feeling of mushy, slushy emotional mess inside that would make me consciously jump in front of a speeding train in order to prove my being IN love.
To get back to my question, do you believe that it’s possible to love without being IN love.
I’ll try to answer the various points you made as best as I can and eventually I’ll hopefully answer your final question along the way
I don’t see there being any difference between the speed of “falling” between the sexes, its a matter specific to each person and not each gender. Males or females don’t have a specific process for falling in love as it is not a quantifiable and measurable science. There are those out there that claim to have love at first sight, or be deeply in love within weeks and off to vegas to get married, and you can’t tell those people what they feel isn’t real because your definition of falling is gradual and progressive
Love is what it is to every person at the moment, in the moment. For example, there are those couples that are deeply in love when they get married (or at least they “feel” like it) and then a year later they’re getting a divorce, love is as arbitrary as one’s love for music, its a personal thing.
There’s no way to quantify if you are or are not in love, or when you fell in love etc. I know a lot of people that after a relationship ends they begin doubting if they were ever IN love in the first place, I can personally attest to this at one as well. We’re all meant to believe that love cures all, love makes the world go round, and all the other Valentine’s Day diatribes, so when something you thought was love turns out to fail, you’re left thinking…wait a minute, how did this happen?
And you for example had your own version of how you fall in love with someone in regards to your liking and loving someone. Having to like someone before you can love someone may sound like a “duh!” concept to some but I understand your perspective and what you’re trying to say. But again, it is your own arbitrary theory based on descriptive language to help you define your own tendencies.
I was actually thinking about your exact question today before you asked it. I’m not saying its impossible to love someone and to be IN love with someone I just think its rather redundant. The difference again just funnels the conversation into the different categories of love. So lets say for example you love a sibling, why are you not IN love with them? Isn’t it possible to fall out of love with a family member, I’ve seen it happen. So then how do you define that in terms of language? It all just runs in endless circles.
I’m just saying that typically when you hear someone play the “i love them but I am not IN love with them” card its just filler language masquerading as a more useful conversation.
Very interesting entry Mike. Something I hadn’t really ever thought deeply about …
I agree that the “i’m not IN love” card is filler language, something to talk about or use to avoid taking action in a situation. I think as humans we are cursed with the ability to rationalize just about anything - you and I are testament to this fact given our similar, exhaustive bouts of it with our recent relationships. Like you said, confusion breeds all kinds of crossroads that we constantly analyze the crap out of. And why do we do this? Because in some twisted way, it’s easier than doing what we know needs to be done. Whether it’s a difficult thought, conversation, or heart break, we never seem to be able to take the direct route. The SIMPLE, but damn hard route.
And there’s that word that got me grounded again after thinking about your question. Decluttering my thoughts & therefore my language has been a recent quest of mine. I find that when I stop and search for the simplicity in things, I seem to avoid a lot of grief that I would usually create for myself. The topic of love is not immune to this process. Being a girl, I’m genetically wired to over-analyze and rationalize EVERYTHING. I automatically did this with your question Mike, racking my brain for some past experience with it or rational answer. Then I just stopped.
I believe that love is above language and is different for everyone so it’s hard to articulate any hard truths around it. But, we try all the time. It’s our innate thirst to learn and understand everything about everything. So, maybe we can try the opposite for once? Can we try to preserve the beautiful mystery of love by putting down our weapons of words? Perhaps if we just simply let love exist, and deal with it head on when it changes, we’d all be a lot less wordy - with ourselves and each other.
@Pam
I agree as far as preserving the mystery that you mentioned. That’s why I have tried not to analyze love too much, well, lately at least
There is also something to be said about love acting as an addiction similar to nicotine or drugs or any such crutch. I mean humans are by nature very habitual creatures and isn’t being with the same person for a significant amount of time more or less a habit? Therefore if this habit is broken there can be a large amount of withdrawal involved. Some can go cold turkey, some need to be slowly weened off, and other need Lohan-style rehab.
You’ll notice some people go from relationship to relationship swinging from one to another like vines in a jungle whereby defining themselves through their relationship du jour. i called these people relationship junkies, now I don’t endorse or condemn this (to each their own), I just assume it must be challenging if not impossible to define yourself as an individual if you’re constantly within the relationship dynamic.
Also admittedly I think the fact that the “exhaustive bout” that you mentioned is firmly behind me allows for a significantly more subjective view towards the topic. I imagine I would have difficulty coming to these conclusions while in the midst of any sort of emotional struggle as it usually clouds my more rational judgment.
I absolutely agree with you Mike that love is an addiction. Being a recent victim of it, it has come to my attention the mismatch between the amount of hurt I feel and what I’m missing, which is not much in hindsight. So, the only thing I can chalk up my deep ache to is withdrawal from a powerful habit. I believe it’s also the reason I stuck around rationalizing the last few months when I should have been cutting my losses. But, like you, I’m trying to stop analyzing it so much … trying to put my exhaustive bout behind me and just move on.
These relationship junkies, or serial monogamists as I like to call them, perplex me. I guess b/c I’m practically the opposite (dirty connotations can stay out of this please!) and have always focused on the most important relationship - the one with myself. So I share your sentiments - I do think it’s better to grow into yourself a wee bit before you try to blend in with someone else.
Complete scatter-brain thoughts - you have been warned.
That very phrase has escaped my lips - “I love him but I’m not in love with him.” I think it’s a very legitimate comment. It’s not a reason to stay together, but a great reason to break up!
Do you think people are really addicted to love, or are they addicted to having someone to lean on? Relationships junkies, serial monogamists = people unable to stand on their own. People like this lack the emotional strength - it is much easier to lean on someone. It’s the reason 90% of men only leave their wives if they have another relationship on the go already.
It’s funny though, it’s pretty easy to slip into this mind frame without even realizing it. I think when you are together with someone for quite a long time, it’s hard to differentiate where you end and they begin. What thought is really yours and what thought is really theirs? This brings me to the question…are you ever your true self when you are in a relationship, or do you have to be alone in order to be real you? I have thought about this question time and time again. I know that when I have been in an extended relationship and come out of it, I find that I do have to work on ‘getting back to self.’ When does compromising in a relationship develop into compromising yourself?
But is that the beautiful thing about love? You meld and mush into one? Personally, I don’t find that very appealing, but at the same time if you are unwilling to lose even a tiny bit of yourself your relationship will fail.
Is it easier to be alone? For sure – but definitely not as fun.