Does true love actually exist anymore?

[Anonymous]

They ended it in the Fall of 1969. Turns out the Summer of Love was a going out of business sale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve had my doubts but I loved this article and curious what others think, is there such thing as true and unconditional among partners?

https://www.spiveyblog.com/posts/does-true-love-exist

I doubt if a true and unconditional love ever existed. When a person feels/claims to love someone, its usually based on their looks or personality or a mix AND there is a wish for it to be reciprocal and to materialize it, as in having a relationship or in marriage.

There's True Wuv in the Princess Bride.

To blave

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stupid question, OP. Your title asks if true love exists "anymore".

I would posit that until modern time, true love never existed. Women were sold like chattel, and virtual slaves to their husbands. None of those relationships had true love, under any understanding.

I think you have a whitewashed version of what love and relationships look like.

Even a more stupid post. You think every woman was sold and live somehow is more societally or genetically advanced in a few thousands years? lol sure you were around in before “modern time” typical insecure poser masking as a know it all.

Whlie your post is utter gibberish, the post you're responding to is valid. The post is acknowledging that until very recent times, for tens of thousands of years of human history, women didn't have the same jobs, education, legal rights, and assets as men. By necessity, they transitioned from a child to being a wife because they had zero ability to live independently. Their choice of partner was tied to "true love" about as much as a 14 year old dating a teacher. The power imbalance that all women had for all of history means they none of their "romantic" decisions were made freely and for true love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem with most women (and some men) is they date to marry. It's a bad way of looking at relationships.

Marriage is a RESULT of getting to know someone over a long period of time and realizing both of you would be able to live together forever. This means truly understanding that person's real self, but the fake person they present during dating.

The issue is most women say they will only date men they "will marry". Here's the issue. You have to be in a relationship long enough to see that. Dating someone 1-5 times and thinking you know the person is naive. You're not seeing 75% of the real person in one month or even a couple months.

I have always pushed for the thinking of dating to be in a relationship. Now, if that relationship leads to marriage - great. If not, then you move on. And yes, time matters but that's not something you can control. If you're sole goal is to date only someone you will marry you will likely be alone. I guarantee many people dated people and discarded them well before they got to know them...and a portion of those people would have made great spouses.

TBH I think you may be looking at the message the opposite way.
For me, when I say that I dated only men I would consider marrying, it was a tool of elimination/de-selection, not a tool of selection.
In other words, I conced that at the beginning, I couldn’t possibly know a guy long enough to truly know if he is my life match—but with a marriage mindset, I could easily eliminate guys who are not in that small pool by knowing in advance that—in addition to someone who makes my heart skip a beat (yes, the chemical/physical attraction needs to be there on some level), I want to marry a college-educated and/or career-driven non-smoking Christian who has a good sense of humor, is kind to old people and restaurant waiters/waitresses 😁, and is maybe the occasional social drinker who loves to travel. Love of sports and outdoor hiking completely optional….but if his affinity for these two requires my enthusiastic participation, we would not be a good match.

This was my basic blueprint. And most of these things can be know-able pretty early.

IMO, when women are in the mindset of knowing what they want in a marriage partner, then they are less likely to “fall for” someone who does not meet this criteria. How? You just resolve not to date or spend significant time with men who don’t meet it. That’s all. And it doesn’t need to be so specific that you immediately box yourself in. But yes, having a basic idea that your values, background, and goals align—before getting so deep into dating that you are looking for ways to ignore that they don’t—is helpful in building a life with someone.

The heart wants what it wants, but marriage is more than infatuation. And you can guide your heart.

[Mike_Spivey]

Anonymous wrote:I like that article, especially because it pushes back against the idea that so many of our feelings and actions are mere evolutionary adaptations. And I think it is very sweet that he said he would drop everything and help out his first love. I always thought I stopped loving people with time and distance, but maybe I don’t.

Thanks for sharing, OP.

Hello and happy Monday.

I wrote the article that was linked here — when the analytics to your blog go from 10 visitors a day to a specific post to 800, you tend to notice the traffic source which, of course, was this website.

I didn’t comment then but I wanted to share an update to your touching post and those that commented. You mentioned where I wrote I’d drop everything to help out my first love. We both have done that many times for the other, which is what brought me here. This is from last week, when either of us is having challenges we have always being there for the other. Which, to me, was a driving reason I wrote this blog and which I’m currently writing about in my second book.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/gCQpHrmhG9rMEno9/?mibextid=WC7FNe

Love changes, of course. Even in romantic relationships dopamine seeks novelty, the “honeymoon stage.” When that wears off, 3-12 months usually, it shifts to content love versus the early spark where we have experienced being lit up by oxytocin, seratonin etc. Love is also indeed conditional. No partner stays is a 0% them 100% the other person relationship forever. But true love is permanent. I can’t state that strongly enough. The person in the picture I linked I’ve known since about ~12 and have loved as a human for 35 years. Despite a long period of time where we weren’t in touch because we had our own lives, I’d do anything for her. I’ll love her (and a few others) until the day I die and if there’s something after that, until the very last star blinks out I will still love them. As cliche as that may sound, I’m also absolutely sure of it.

Thanks for finding this and for the touching posts.

Mike Spivey

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Being a parent to a child who purposefully hurts you is one of the worst situations in life.

Being a child of a parent who purposefully hurts you is THE worst situation in life. You did not ask to be born, you had no choice in the matter, and for all of your existence you will have to live with the fact that your primary caregiver was your tormenter. Infinitely worse.

You get to grow up and have your own family so there is hope. When your own child has the issue, there is no hope you are committed for life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the whole article yet, though the opening intrigues me so I will.

But just by quick reply to your posited question; I am 53 now, I have seen through the window into dozens of marriages by nature of the work I do, and quite a few much closer by family and friendship connection.

No, there is no such thing as unconditional love - not between partners, nor between parents and children. Some grandparents come close, but many do not.

Animals love unconditionally.

The human mind, I believe, is too complex for unconditional love.

Therapist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Being a parent to a child who purposefully hurts you is one of the worst situations in life.

Being a child of a parent who purposefully hurts you is THE worst situation in life. You did not ask to be born, you had no choice in the matter, and for all of your existence you will have to live with the fact that your primary caregiver was your tormenter. Infinitely worse.

Yeah I’ve never experienced either one but obviously being the child receiving this treatment is worse.

Can we get some perspective here? Having a child you love die is the worst thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:True love exists. Unconditional love does not.

I would say the opposite. True love is a fairytale meme - a thing that "happens." Unconditional love is divine and very hard for humans to achieve, but a real thing to aspire to.

[Anonymous]

Of course true love exists though not for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Love is an emotion, like all other emotions. You can love someone forever. You can also hate someone forever. You can love someone after they die, you can also hate someone after they die. Emotions are just things that help us to experience the world around us.

I think the key is whether you let the emotion control you, or whether you are able to acknowledge the emotion and let it tell you what it it needs to tell you, and then let it go and make the decision you want to make clearly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True love exists. Unconditional love does not.

I would say the opposite. True love is a fairytale meme - a thing that "happens." Unconditional love is divine and very hard for humans to achieve, but a real thing to aspire to.

What's the difference between unconditional and true love?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes

Rare

Agree. That true love — real love — never ceases. The relationship can end, but your love for someone does not. Very rare.

+1