Relationship Ideas

When I got dumped last year, I thought long and hard about what I was doing and what was going on around me. I made an endless journey into my own soul. Along the way, I joined picked up a few books and wrote and wrote as much as I could on discussion boards.

Here are a few entries ...

Speaking of spark ...

Food for thought here. I don't know if I'm completely sold on everything I write here, but it's the current state of mind. Do you know anyone who can keep "this spark" going for a long time? How much should a person truly expect from another, in terms of keeping this elusive "spark"?

My ex seems to burn through his relationships quickly. I'm a little uneasy about the whole frivolous landscape of romance and love. Seems like people like him just go on tromping through women's lives. There's something in my gut that tells me this is wrong. We're not dealing in shoes or merchandise here, but with people with souls and feelings.

People are spinning, changing entities. A guy may have an image in his mind of what he truly wants. He may meet a woman with all those qualities and fall in love with her. But the transitory nature of life is such that both will inevitably change, and if change causes a person to not "love" another person anymore, than is this really love? Maybe the bond could more accurately be described as a "fun, convenient, sexual, temporal partnership."

Everyone seems to be searching for a committed long-term relationship. Yet it just seems like a cosmic joke that the thing holding it together is this elusive "in love" state.

In my life, I don't know what it's like to dump someone. Blissful moments came and went and came back again, but I was able to delight in who my partner was underneath all the layers. I could find myself "in love" with their existence, having made the decision to stay with them. I always saw them as gifts from God, so I loved and delighted in who they were, despite all the changes. For some reason or another, they decided they weren't "in love" with me as time passed. To be discarded is so very painful. You do end up feeling like a shoe.

Perhaps there would be less pain if the following were true:
(1) People were realistic about long-term, committed relationships. Understanding the transitory state of love and feelings, to expect lifelong commitment is self-deprecating. Perhaps there should be an acceptance that the world of feelings and being in love is always transitory, so expecting things to last a lifetime is not realistic.
OR
(2) People changed their philosophy on what holds a relationship together for a lifetime. Once people decide to be in a serious relationship, they should decide that they will make an endless journey into their lover's soul. I can't imagine choosing a life partner and suddenly being bored with him in two years. He has an infinite inner space to explore.

Who knows, maybe I'm being completely naive. It's just that I see too much devastation, and it makes me sad that this much hurt goes on in the world.

Re: How do u define cheating?

No expert, but here's my perspective:

Acts of cheating (conversations, flirting, having long talks, kissing, having sex w/ "other" woman) are all relative. Personally, I don't place much weight on specific physical actions, but on where the person is on the inside.

Emotional detachment from a partner can happen way before any sort of action or series of action takes place. The act of cheating (as seemingly harmessless as flirtatious conversation all the way to a sexual affair) are mere symptoms of a deeper problem.

Sometimes guys will say, "It was nothing. We just _____ (fill in the blank)." And the blank could be practically anything. The most innocent acts can still contain the most emotional investment on his part. It's where his heart and soul is, and his actions may (sometimes may never get to the point of) play itself out in the physical world.

The moment a person truly "cheats" is when his heart wanders from you to the point of not valuing you. If long-term, monogamy and one-to-one commitment is what is agreed upon by both partners and he wanders, he is not being truthful to the partnership. (If he is true to his emotions and is "in love" with you in the morning but that night has sex with another woman on a whim, "as a mistake," you probably have more on your hands than you bargained for, and despite what he says, he is not ready for commitment. Or, if you two decide on a more "open" or "free" approach, then the rules are a bit different - that's a different discussion entirely.) Once his heart and mind begin to lose sight of your value in his life, the field is wide open for various acts of intimacy between another partner to occur.

If or when a partner makes an internal shift away from me is where I pinpoint the problem. When my ex started to become emotionally detached from me, I could immediately imagine how easy it would've been for him to "cheat." If he did, it would have been no surprise since in my gut, I knew he had already divested himself from me. The point at which he divests has no material evidence. I could never bring this up in a court of law. But if we know and love our partners enough, we just *know.* Call it intuition? A partner should not ask us to produce material evidence for his cheating - placing the burden of proof on us. Sometimes we just have an honest question ("are you falling in love with someone else?" or, probably more accurately, "are you getting horny for somebody else?) and we just want an honest answer ("yes"). He's an ass if he presses us to lay out the evidence in front of him. If he is not cheating, he should still respect our anxiety and questions and be willing to address why the question even comes up.

If a partner wanders from you emotionally, he is responsible for being up front with this information. If he doesn't tell you what's taking place inside of his heart and hides it, therein lies the problem. He may keep trailing down the path toward other acts of dishonesty. And time and various acts of dishonesty compound just how hurtful it can be for the other partner in the end. I can actually handle a man who tells me "I need to pursue this other relationship" rather than someone deceitfully hiding things behind my back.

All the above rambling basically comes to this simple notion. He knows where his own heart is, despite any action he's taken. And chances are, you know where his heart is, too. That, not the actions per se, is where the problem needs to be addressed.

I'm really sorry for all the pain you're going through. It makes me drown inside to know that you experience this degree of pain. Hell, you don't deserve this. First things first is to get all your feelings out. Everything - don't let any negative feeling get trapped inside of you. Yell, kick, scream, journal, have long talks with friends, go get counseling. As Deana constantly recommends, get angry. Really angry. Once you get angry, then you can later accept this and move on. So, getting feelings out is the first and most important step. Nurture and care for yourself the same way you get nurtured after recovering in the hospital from an accident. At this point, it's all about you. Be open and honest with how you feel.

One book that has helped me is "Surviving the Loss of a Love" by Peter McWilliams. Excellent for getting through the grieving process - it is a process with specific stages. Please ask other people (either on this board or friends or a counselor) about how to address the turmoil you feel regarding betrayal. This feeling alone has a weight and issues of its own.
At one point, you'll actually accept that this has happened to you and be able to move on. Doesn't seem like it now (seems damn impossible), but trust the healing process. The body and soul can and will heal. You will heal and become strong. Trust the process.

God and romance all a myth?

I have nothing against atheism. Instead, having agnostic leanings myself, I'm more curious about the way an atheist moves through life. I have some exposure to atheism/naturalist logic from various Web sites, including atheism.org, so I do understand some basics.

I am curious how an atheist proceeds through a completely natural world, void of anything supernatural.

Suppose the following is true, based on lack of evidence, and, as you say, logic: There is no God.

Then, using the same reasoning, we can also say this: There is no love.

We have no evidence that love truly exists in this world. Instead, couples and the coupling process are fueled solely upon the instinctual force to protect and survive. Same holds true for family and friend relationships. (Then again, what is "instinct" per se, since it is still a humanly created concept that allows us to mentally encapsulate this force or energy that seems to propel animals to survive.) Love is just another fairy tale, like Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. It's a multi-layered concept that when broken down is truly vapor.

Perhaps when we get dumped by someone, we should just tell ourselves the truth: "He just didn't think I was a suitable partner to pass along his genes." Why should I come to this board to lament the loss of "love," when love does not exist? Snap out of it. This "love" baggage weighs in a bit too heavily in the healing process ...

Likewise, if I do find myself drawn to someone, I should also tell myself, "It's my coupling instinct kicking in." It's the truth, isn't it?

In the natural way of thinking, there is no need to believe in "love" or "romance." Any such concepts are crutches, used only if we are so weak as to deny the truth of this natural world.

I'm not certain just how my next partner (not "love") will be naturally configured. I hope he has the perfect balance of meat, hair and bones. That means, of course, that his cerebral makeup will have to be perfectly balanced, too, having also accumulated enough data over the years to project what can be perceived as sophisticated humor within the human interaction.

Hmmm ....

I'd never deny others from thinking that way. It may make perfect sense for some. But I refuse to live that way.

I understand why secular humanists are striking hard against organized religion - it has caused so much harm and damage in society through the centuries. The dogma, the killing in the name of "God," has been cruel, horrific, devastating. I, for one, oppose institutionalized spirituality (or lack thereof, since I often think that the institutionalized approach to atheism has its problems, too).

However, faith is a precious thing. And if faith in God or gods brings to this world beauty - not harm - then let's allow for this pursuit.

Humans are creative beings. And faith is what binds our creativity. If I'm in love with a guy, I know that he very well may have the perfect balance of meat, hair and bones. A wonderful study in human anatomy. But I still want to believe that he is greater than the sum of his parts. Much greater. My creativity would allow me to venture into the possibility that maybe, just maybe, my partner has a soul, and that maybe he is a gift from the Universe or "God" or "gods" - whatever, or whomever. And, my faith would sustain this creative notion.

And if I go through life thinking I am endowed with such a gift, I am more likely to take care of it, value it. Concepts like god or love may not necessarily exist according to natural law, but at the very least, they are products of human creativity. Like art, these concepts can enrich our lives and bring about more beauty into what could other be mundane.

If having faith is an illogical way to approach living, then call me an idiot.

Posted by ruth at June 05, 2002 07:06 PM