Jul16

Is it Okay to Love Someone But Not Be “In Love”?

06:00 am on Jul 16th 2009 Evan Marc Katz

Finding the One Online is a comprehensive, life-changing program that covers everything I teach my clients about online dating. If you want to get your love life on track and aren't sure where to start, Finding the One Online is the best investment you can make.

97 Comments »Filed Under Dating Tips & Advice, Favorites, Sex & Relationship Advice

97 Responses to “Is it Okay to Love Someone But Not Be “In Love”?”

1. Helen Jul 16th 2009 at 06:38 am 1

   My gut instinct, upon reading Fernando’s letter about what his girlfriend said, is that she has found another man with whom she IS in love. She has put things on hold with Fernando because she wants to see if things will work out between her and this other man first (which probably will not – she would likely tire of him after a while, too).

2. Jennifer Jul 16th 2009 at 06:49 am 2

   I think you can care about someone a great deal, love them, but not necessarily be sure that you should be life partners. Chemistry can be one reason for that, but there can be a host of others as well. Maybe as time has gone on she’s seen some incompatibilities between the two of you that she’s not so sure she can live with. She still cares about you, but may not be willing to sign up for a lifetime of x. Doesn’t mean she’s chasing something elusive, she could just be sparing both of you worse pain down the line.

   The end result is unfortunately the same- it likely won’t work out for you two. Which is sad but better now than after you’ve bought property and married.

   I have to say- with all of the work that people say is needed to maintain a marriage, why marry someone you don’t at least start out feeling passionate about? It makes good sense to me to hold out for some passion- why are people so often derided for that?

   p.s. I’m glad to see the old commenting system back

3. Honey Jul 16th 2009 at 08:14 am 3

   I agree with Jennifer, #2 – while passion/chemistry is one possibility, there are also incompatibilities that surface only after a lot of time together, and you have to decide if you’re willing to deal with them – AFTER you care a great deal about the person. For example, if the BF had told me on our first date that he wanted to own numerous assault rifles, I would never have gone on a second date. Easy. Finding that out after two years in, when I’m very anti-gun? Now I have to ask myself – can I compromise in such a major way?

   Although the lack of specificity here and the specific language his GF uses…it makes me think Evan’s PROBABLY right.

4. A-L Jul 16th 2009 at 08:21 am 4

   I’m very interested to read others’ comments on this topic as they pop up, but I think a key element of Fernando’s letter is that he and his girlfriend have been together for two and a half years. They’ve gone past the honeymoon/passionate/intense chemistry phase (which researchers say generally lasts 6 months to a year, I think) and gone into the next one which is traditionally associated with married couples. Whether or not that means they should or should not get married I’ll still leave up for debate though (or whether she ever felt “in love” and has now stopped, or if she always just felt love for him).

   P.S. Jennifer, how did you get the old commenting system back, because I still seem to have the new one!

5. Jennifer Jul 16th 2009 at 09:47 am 5

   A-L, you know before I posted I was reading some of the comments from previous posts and they were numbered, like the old commenting system. Then after I commented on this post everything looks like the new system again. So maybe I just went crazy there for a second

6. Andy Jul 16th 2009 at 10:36 am 6

   I will say that with every woman i meet i go through this dilemma. I’m a person who wants that chemistry along with that “friends comfortable” feeling. Sometimes i think i might be asking for too much but it’s very difficult to hide or ignore your feelings.

   I have been reading Evan’s blogs for over a year now and do agree with most everything he says. I know it’s irrational to expect every relationship to be a movie type happy ending. It’s not that i’m looking for miss ubermodel to come knocking on my door, but i know what i want (one of the few men who do) and would like that relationship that lasts forever. I do feel better when i’m in a relationship. I do like that one on one monogamy but am finding it increasingly difficult for meet anyone i’m really interested in.

   I have taken some of Evan’s advice and dated women that i wouldn’t usually go for but that doesn’t work either. I guess the moral of the story is that some people are
   perfectly happy not having that fairytale ending. The meet someone their compatible with and build a nice life together. I just wish i was more flexible in my wants and desires but i do also need to be true to myself and not try to kid myself. It only leads to backing out of a relationship i probably shouldn’t have gotten involved with in the first place!!!

7. Eathan Jul 16th 2009 at 10:39 am 7

   Too much emphasis is put on labels. Loving someone and being in love with someone can be two different things. I’m sure after 2 yrs she has love for you and an emotional connection. She probably cares about you, is concerned with your happiness and well being. But it’s also possible that she doesn’t see you as the man she wants to build a family with any longer.

   Jennifer is on point with her comment.
   .-= Eathan´s last blog ..Dirt Bike Boy – Summer Camp Edition =-.

8. starthrower68 Jul 16th 2009 at 10:47 am 8

   Some are not going to like my response, but here it is anyway: I’ve been that girl and probably could have saved my marriage except for one thing. I was spiritually dead insided. I was looking for anything to make me fee alive. Now that I am divorced and started getting that part of my life in order (not that I have arrived, but I keep pressing on), I look for different things in a partner and I find that if I don’t have that fulfillment without a guy, I’m not going to have it with him, either. I don’t deny that there are those that are “in love” all of their life. But I think there’s more to it. They might never lose their passion for each other, but I’m sure there are days when they don’t feel passionate. Then they make the decision to stay. Love is often a decision, and they have the maturity and character to stay commited to the relationship rather than chasing after a high. I’ve experienced that high, and for me it was scary because I understood what true obession felt like and I didn’t like it. But that’s just me. I always ok to agree to disagree agreeably.

9. WithLove Jul 16th 2009 at 11:16 am 9

   Fernando….this is my take on this…just an observation but it seems your GF is not willing to take the full commitment on. She seems like you have become more of a good friend than
   romantic interest. I love my guy and girl…friends…but I LOVE
   my MAN! Love my son and family……but the LOVE I have for
   that partner is different.
   She might even not completely know what has changed. She may have met someone that turned on something inside her and inturn she is questioning your relationship. Do you want all of her or just part of her. I would rather have someone marry me that is completely into me and have NO doubts at all.
   Hard to accept sometimes but things can change on us without any real understanding. At least she is being honest.
   Clarify this for me though…..when she said she is not in love with you does that mean everything is off with you too…or is this just hanging in the balance?
   Get clarity…..you deserve and need to know. She needs to figure out whether life without you will be better or life with you. Are you in it for the long haul? Are you sure she completes
   the majority of what you need….? Just ask yourself some questions too……hang in there….we are all in progress whether we like it or not but remember does not mean life is over!!!! It’s more like a kaleidescope…always and ever changing! Wishing the best!

10. Steve Jul 16th 2009 at 11:38 am 10

    You got my hopes up!

    Postus Interruptus!

11. Isabelle Archer Jul 16th 2009 at 11:39 am 11

    Oh wow, I loved the Post-Birthday World. It was one of those intense and almost disturbing books that left me dreamy and a little upset for days afterwards. Lionel Shriver is a bit wicked. Highly recommended.

    BUT – I think you’re only half right to say that “her passionate marriage doesn’t provide her nearly as much comfort as the safe relationship she left. She just traded in one set of problems for another.” True, she loses comfort, but she gains in many other dimensions through her passionate marriage … and the comfort of the stable relationship proved to be only temporary anyway.

    I think the major lesson of the book is actually that you just can’t predict the rewards and wounds that will emerge from any relationship choice — and that ultimately, making a “moral” choice is never going to guarantee your own happiness; or that you’ll be paid back in kind; or that your supposedly moral choice will really lead to the best outcome for all involved. Shriver is essentially amoral, I think.

12. Selena Jul 16th 2009 at 11:54 am 12

    “I love you, but I’m not in love with you.”

    Very simply means, “I care about you as a person, but not someone I see spending the rest of my life as partners with.”

    Painful when YOU don’t feel the same way.

    At least it’s honest though. And less painful than someone who might lead you to believe otherwise because…uh…you’d be good at paying the bills; putting up the swingset in the backyard. Then…they actually do fall in love with someone else, or find the marriage so unsatisfying they leave “to find themselves”.

    Better she told you now Fernando. Sorry for the hurt.

13. Steve Jul 16th 2009 at 12:26 pm 13

    Fernando;

    It means she loves you like a member of her family and that she doesn’t love you like a woman loves her husband/lover/BF.

    The relationship has come to a full stop. It is time to start looking for a new GF.

    I know it sounds callous, but at least this is coming out now before you are married and entangled. You just dodged a costly and painful divorce.

    I know that isn’t any consolation.

    Be well.

14. Steve Jul 16th 2009 at 12:31 pm 14

    Amen.

    I have a friend who is in such a marriage. He pays the bills and being married to him means she doesn’t have to face her fear of being unmarried after 40 (gasp!).

    Neither of them are happy people.

15. vino Jul 16th 2009 at 12:48 pm 15

    Lucky Fernando. He got spared years of anguish and financial torment.

    I’m going to translate Fernando’s letter

    “Dear Fernando,

    It’s been a wonderful 2 1/2 years with you, but I met someone who makes my ‘gina tingle. You don’t.”

16. Miss MatchMaker Jul 16th 2009 at 02:50 pm 16

    It sounds to me like she is confusing “in love” with the feelings of a new relationship…the newness wears off and off she goes chasing the high for more newness! Very unfortunate…
    .-= Miss MatchMaker´s last blog ..The porch swing test… =-.

17. casualencounters.com/blog Jul 16th 2009 at 03:07 pm 17

    Love intoxication: overrated, and usually ends in heartbreak and disaster.

    The thing is, this shouldn’t be news to anyone. It has been figured out since as long ago as there were people around to do figuring. Why does it come as a revelation to so many? Maybe they need to start teaching EQ classes in schools.

18. girl-with-glasses Jul 16th 2009 at 03:12 pm 18

    I agree 100% with Evan, that the high one gets is usually an *illusion*. But even so, does that even matter? It may be an illusion, but the effects are very real, meaning it hits the brain where it wants it.

    It could very well be a sign of the times. A lot more women have high libidos now. For me, maybe another side of the story is that the man usually takes the woman for granted in a LTR, or what is presumed to be a LTR.

    I’m for fidelity, but it just seems men assume that ‘their’ women should be faithful, and it’s usually the woman’s role to excite her mate rather than the other way.

    Just a sign of the times, relationship between the sexes are alot more complicated now days, with alot of misconceptions about ourselves and the other party.

19. zann Jul 16th 2009 at 09:09 pm 19

    Chemistry-shmemistry. Chemistry is not passion. Chemistry is that sexually-charged little la-la land we go to when we meet someone new (“our eyes met, across the room”) and we could swear that voltage is being generated, just by being in the same room. It’s a great high, and it’s fleeting. Maybe that’s why we crave it so much. But why, WHY do people still use that tired, empty non-explanation of “I love you but I’m just not IN love with you.” As if that somehow makes being dumped so much more palatable. Not only is it lame, it’s meaningless. It’s her way of saying no thanks, while still saving face and convincing herself that she’s still a good person. Which she may be … but she’s not for you. Like Evan says, who wants to head out into life with a doubter? You deserve more than that, and maybe the best thing to do is to walk away with your head up and with the knowledge that she just forfeited something very valuable. I’m truly sorry for your pain. Be good to yourself.

20. FrogPrincess Jul 17th 2009 at 02:47 am 20

    I totally agree with Selena that this is girl code for, “I’m just not that into you.” Whether or not it’s because the chemistry is gone (or was ever there), or she’s started to see little red flags popping up everywhere is beside the point. She just doesn’t dig him, and who wants to be with somebody that doesn’t dig you?

    I do believe that love, and being in love, is a choice. I do believe that you can, and must, work to create passion and keep it alive. I do not, however, agree that you should just go for the safe, stable thing necessarily. I think there has to be SOME kind of connection, chemistry if you will, from the very beginning. Otherwise what’s the point? You might as well just grab the first person that offers to marry you.

    Compatibility is about more than just things in common and acceptable lifestyles. It’s also about being attracted to someone on a physical, as well as emotional, level. Nope, doesn’t last forever if left to it’s own devices, but it can last forever if you put some work and effort into it. I think that’s where most people screw up. Where they confuse “love” and “being in love” and “chemistry” and all that other stuff. They think that if it’s the “right” relationship (their “soulmate”… GAG!), they shouldn’t have to put any thought or effort into it. And that’s a load of, um, poo. Every relationship requires care and nurturing and most especially a romantic relationship. Even simple friendship will die a tragic death if time and effort isn’t given to it on a regular basis. It’s just that most of us do it naturally, subconsciously. I don’t get why we think romantic relationships don’t need the same attention.

    Which leaves me wondering just how much effort did Fernando really put into his relationship? And how much did his GF? Or did they just sit on their laurells and figure they didn’t really need to do anything to keep the passion going? We’ll probably never know, but it’s food for thought…
    .-= FrogPrincess´s last blog ..He’s Just Not That Into You =-.

21. Selena Jul 17th 2009 at 04:33 am 21

    I’m not convinced “chemistry”, or lack thereof, is the reason. I think it’s entirely possible that after 2.5 years together she does love him, but isn’t sure for whatever reason, the relationship will last a lifetime. Perhaps the reality of the wedding and buying a house forced her to acknowledge this. She surely wouldn’t be the first person to get “caught up” in plans for the future, only to reconsider the gravity of the commitment.

22. Andy Jul 17th 2009 at 04:55 am 22

    Zann you couldn’t be more correct. It was just a nice attempt at dumping him without feeling bad herself. Yeah it’s going to hurt for a while, but better to know now than really get entangled and then looking at a mess to try to get out of it.

23. Curly Girl Jul 17th 2009 at 06:25 am 23

    Here come the gender wars again: It’s amusing to me how when a woman says she isn’t into a guy she’s to be put down for that as if there is something wrong with her–especially if (as many are assuming here) it’s because she doesn’t feel the sparks–meaning, she isn’t feeling the hots for him. But if a guy isn’t feeling the hots for a woman, if he isn’t into her, if he isn’t attracted to her, it’s completely understood that it’s a non-starter.

    Here is my theory: I believe this double standard derives from the notion that male pleasure is more important in a relationship than female pleasure, and that women are supposed to just suck it up (pun intended) because they are getting “other things” out of their romantic relationships. Meaning, material security. I believe this outmoded belief system is still hanging around because people don’t want to put it together–to acknowledge that historically women have been in a bad situation in this regard–having to give up what they want in a relationship in order to barter for what they need to survive, given that they were barred from certain areas of accomplishment (education, work in the world) that would have led to their financial independence from men. (The reasons for this exclusion may have been/still may be justified or not; that’s another discussion.)

    This is why you get that specious “wiring” defense of male s*xual behavior. If “nature” ordains it then we don’t have to look at our beliefs about these things (or our wrong-headedness about what “nature” is), and we blog in a way that supports the idea that it’s OK for a man to dump someone because she doesn’t do it for him anymore, but it isn’t OK for a woman to do the same.

    And so the outmoded belief system gets reinforced here, and no one has to change. Except those of us who are highly motivated–those of us who believe that our pleasure is just as important as a man’s and that our work costs the same to deliver and that our minds are our own.

24. JB Jul 17th 2009 at 06:47 am 24

    @FrogPrincess this isn’t “girl code” sweetie this is everyone’s code for “I’M NO LONGER ATTRACTED TO YOU” and now you’ve been demoted to the dreaded FRIENDS ZONE. I used that line on my girlfriend 20 years ago and tons of men & women use it every day when they figure out “I care about this person’s feelings,I just have no desire to kiss them or have sex with them ANYMORE. I know it’s tough but it’s almost impossible to get someone to change their mind back again so you have to walk away and ………dare I say it………start all over again.

25. Steve Jul 17th 2009 at 07:24 am 25

    I don’t think Evan wrote that the romantic high is an illusion, only that it is fleeting ( scientists say it last 1 – 3 years tops for most of the population ). If you feel it, you feel it, its not an illusion.

    Men and women have been cheating on forever. People like to think it is a new thing or that one sex does it more/less.

    Both men and women in LTRs let themselves go, both take the relationship for granted, both claim — falsely — that they can’t control themselves.

    As the pretty blond cylon says “All of this has happened before and all of this will happen again”

26. Helen Jul 17th 2009 at 07:42 am 26

    Curly Girl – you are so right. You are so, so right. You’re awesome!

    Just this morning I was thinking the same thing (but not as articulately as you) that in sexual relationships, society emphasizes much more that the man should get what he wants, rather than the woman. Your point about women thinking they’re compensated through material gains is logical; I think your unspoken statement is that now that we can provide for ourselves, we no longer just want to make sure a man is pleased, and want to make sure we get something out of a relationship (including sexual pleasure) as well.

    This isn’t meant to be a man-hating comment, because I love men. But it is true, and society is changing, and we should change our expectations along with it.

27. Isabelle Archer Jul 17th 2009 at 08:10 am 27

    Brilliant analysis. Eventually we will provide an entire feminist deconstruction of the dating self-help industry on this blog.

28. Steve Jul 17th 2009 at 08:22 am 28

    and that is why Senator McCain got away with brazenly admitting he would not support equal for equal work during the 2008 elections.

    It is also why reproductive rights are being eroded away and the ERA is still dead after 40 something years.

    Too many women focusing on everything else.

29. Diana Jul 17th 2009 at 08:29 am 29

    While it’s typical for the “not in love” comment to signify that the “intense” passion and initially strong attraction are no longer there, assuming they were to begin with, the only real way to truly know what her statement means is to ask her.

    I believe passion in a relationship can continue to thrive for countless years beyond the stage of intense fireworks, if it is continually cared for and tended to, like seeking out new experiences in life, and growing as individuals. I have experienced this. It’s also incredible when the passion of one person ignites the passion of another, such as fulfilling a life-long dream. It makes you incredibly irresistible to each other.

    It is only natural for the infatuation stage of relationships to subside, typically between 18 – 24 months, and either real love will bloom or it doesn’t.

30. vino Jul 17th 2009 at 08:47 am 30

    Perhaps the biggest bunch of hooey I’ve read in some time…

31. Andy Jul 17th 2009 at 08:54 am 31

    I do believe that your assessment is correct. Men expect to sit around and be pleasured by their woman without the expectation of giving anything in return. What makes women any different than men? I have come to learn that women are not different than men, they have the same wants and desires and i like that. It turns me on when a woman is in touch with her sexuality. That’s why men who live in the “traditional” manner don’t do well on modern dating sites.

    But i think we all struggle with the “passion vs content” argument. It does take work on both parties and the expectation that the “fire” will die down a little is normal but it also doesn’t mean the fire has to be put out. We do live in an entitled society and everything should come so easy. Why can’t we seem to grasp the concept that the most rewarding things in our life are often the most difficult to achieve!!

32. vino Jul 17th 2009 at 08:56 am 32

    I don’t know that *more* women have high libidos, so much as the freedom (read: lack of social stigma) to pursue them.

    “For me, maybe another side of the story is that the man usually takes the woman for granted in a LTR, or what is presumed to be a LTR.

    I’m for fidelity, but it just seems men assume that ‘their’ women should be faithful, and it’s usually the woman’s role to excite her mate rather than the other way.”

    I disagree, and I’ve see a few articles to support that. I can’t remember where, but I read that 60% of both spouses in a marriage are cheating. The point being here is that women are equally likely to cheat.

    I think both sexes assume their partner should be faithful. that said, there is this myth out there that men cheat far more than women, which doesn’t seem true based upon several things I’ve read.

    It’s each partner’s job to try and excite the other.

    Also, you gotta wonder with that infidelity rate… look around. Every other person is cheating on their spouse.

33. mic Jul 17th 2009 at 09:42 am 33

    Yes to EQ. Yes to relationship skills, perhaps integrated with sex ed. Appearance management, too, of course

34. Selena Jul 17th 2009 at 09:45 am 34

    Comment by FrogPrincess
    2009-07-17 02:47:18

    “I do believe that love, and being in love, is a choice.”

    I believe this is bullshit.

    For one, love starts with attraction and I believe we have zero choice in to whom we are attracted. We have choice on how we ACT on that attraction however. We may find ourselves attracted to someone inappropriate, or at an inappropriate time in our lives. Perhaps we are in a committed relationship and become attracted to someone else. Or we are single, but become attracted to someone who is married. Maybe we are attracted to an alcoholic. Or a player. We can choose NOT to fall in love with any of these people by practicing prudent avoidance.

    Being “in love” is not the fluttery, sexual excitement of “newness” with a partner. That’s infatuation. Delightfully, sometimes infatuation leads to falling in love. Sometimes not. Being in love means feeling an emotional connection so deeply with another person, you can’t envision life without them. THAT apparently, is what Fernando’s gf is finding lacking. Doesn’t make her fickle, chasing a “high”, or some kind of heartless whore. It doesn’t mean she doesn’t love Fernando, or is *choosing* not to love him. Just means she realized she might not love him enough to sustain a lifetime partnership. Should she be stoned for that?

    If love were a choice, then we all could be happily partnered to anyone – logically. But we find it’s not possible. You don’t have to look very deeply into yourself to see this is true.

    Comment by FrogPrincess
    2009-07-17 02:47:18

    I do believe that love, and being in love, is a choice

35. mic Jul 17th 2009 at 09:49 am 35

    Women do have higher libidos these days, by all indications. And many who don’t seem to think that they should, that passion should drive them. It puts more pressure on males to look good, when perhaps there wasn’t enough such pressure before, though it needs to be said that women’s looks will always be somewhat more important due to wiring and sexual performance issues.

    Whether Fernando’s girlfriend is operating too much on chemistry or not, it seems that he is being dumped in a very murky, hurtful way and maybe should see what he can do in the future – say, improve his style and avoid immature good-looking women – to have a better outcome.

36. Evan Marc Katz Jul 17th 2009 at 09:59 am 36

    Selena,

    Sustaining a lifetime partnership IS a choice and it’s unfair of you to criticize FrogPrincess because she disagrees with you.

    I’d recommend you check out Reva Seth’s “First Comes Marriage”, an amazing book which discusses the virtues of Indian arranged marriage. You would never want to forgo Western-style choice, but I’m pretty sure that there are hundreds of men you could be married to – if you made the choice.

    Really, it ain’t that tricky. Find someone who treats you like gold. Treat them like gold in return. Somehow that gets lost in all this gauzy talk about being “in love”. Building a life together is not about that feeling, which invariably fades. It’s about your ability to be there for each other through thick and thin for 40 years.

    Our inability to see past the first two exciting years to the rest of our lives is a perfect example of short-term thinking.

    Married couples always make the choice. Sometimes it’s easy, sometimes it’s hard. But that’s what keeps them together.

37. Selena Jul 17th 2009 at 10:50 am 37

    All due respect Evan, re-read my post; I don’t confuse that gauzy feeling for being in love. I wrote being in love means not being able to envision a life without your partner. Which if you think about Evan, IS what couples do in building a life together, in sticking with each other through thick and thin for 40 years. I’m fortunate to have examples of this in my own family.

    And I don’t doubt that in all the world there are hundreds of men I could be married to – if I so chose. But could I LOVE each of those hundreds of men just by “deciding” to? Highly doubtful. And just because they treated me like gold, it doesn’t automatically follow I could love them so much as to not be able to envision my life without them. I might love some of them less, “as a friend” for example, rather than lover and partner.

    If it were possible to “choose to love” someone then it should be possible for a heterosexual to choose a homosexual as a partner. After all, if you find someone who’s smart, kind, funny, financially responsible and treats you like gold, why not? But it doesn’t work that way, does it? It doesn’t work because there is that “something is missing” factor. Something that also happens in both hetero and homosexual relationships sometimes.

    Believing you can convince yourself into loving someone is as much an illusion as mistaking the gauzy feeling of new lust for love.

38. Curly Girl Jul 17th 2009 at 12:01 pm 38

    40 years? That’s all? Way the actuarial tables are looking we’re all gonna be hitting 100. You and your wife might make it beyond 60 years, EMK!!

    Hmm…wonder what your blog would read like 60 years from now? “I’ve written a new book–First Comes Online Dating–which discusses the virtues of a more traditional approach to love and marriage, an approach that has worked for decades but has now fallen out of favor. There are hundreds of people you could be married to–if you are willing to make the choice…”

39. A-L Jul 17th 2009 at 12:22 pm 39

    Oh, dear.

    There are men (many alphas) who want what they want and always put their desires first, with less concern over what the female wants. Part of their reasoning may be that they’re paying for the predominant amount of the couple’s expenses (dating, marriage, or otherwise).

    Then there are women (high-maintenance divas, princesses, etc) who expect the man to do and buy them whatever they want, and who has to check in with them for the smallest thing. Part of their reasoning is that they have what men want and can milk the men for the pleasure of access to them.

    There are bad apples among both men and women, but I’d say that they’re the minority for each sex.
    But as Vino said, it’s each person’s job to try and excite the other (or make the other happy if excite is too sexually connotative). It’s not one gender’s fault that there are difficulties with romantic relationships.

40. jayqueue Jul 17th 2009 at 12:42 pm 40

    One thing I’ve always wondered is if we used to be concerned with such things as “true love” for most of human existence (before big cities came about).. as I understand it, for tens of thousands of years, people would marry someone from their village and that was ok.. part of me is torn between thinking that either
    1. the “dating” lifestyle has killed our ability to develop true love with someone unless they are constantly stimulating us, or
    2. the requirements we now need from our life partners has increased due to the complexities of our lifestyles, or even
    3. the (relatively) large number of partners people now have leaves them emotionally scarred and unable to be receptive to true love except in rare cases..

41. Selena Jul 17th 2009 at 12:50 pm 41

    Let me add:

    How far off is the belief “Love is a choice”, from “I can make him love me if I try hard enough – be patient – don’t give up”?

    Isn’t a premise of HJNTIY philosophy really that it isn’t about him “choosing” not to love you, it’s accepting that he just doesn’t and moving on?

    Now if you want to talk about people who are missing out on potential loves because they set their parameters so narrow…..I’m right with you.

42. A-L Jul 17th 2009 at 02:09 pm 42

    Selena wrote How far off is the belief “Love is a choice”, from “I can make him love me if I try hard enough – be patient – don’t give up”?

    When Evan’s talking about First Comes Marriage and people are talking about love being a choice, it has to be a choice that BOTH people make. If both people aren’t committed to it, then it’s more of a HJNTIY phenomenon. But if both people are intent on making a relationship work, that’s the “love is a choice” idea playing out.

43. Selena Jul 17th 2009 at 04:38 pm 43

    A-L,

    If there was a referrence to something called “First Comes Marriage” anywhere in this thread I missed it. In any case, I haven’t read it.

44. Diana Jul 17th 2009 at 05:14 pm 44

    To me, the “choice” is the action that one takes in the relationship, based on the love they feel. I don’t agree with the wording that love is a choice. It implies that you choose who you love and that is not true. But what you do to act upon that feeling is definitely a choice.

45. Selena Jul 17th 2009 at 05:22 pm 45

    Ah yes, Evan did mention that book in a later post. Did not know that was what FrogPrincess was referring to by saying she believed love was a choice.

46. Adele Jul 17th 2009 at 07:56 pm 46

    The discussions on this forum made me think of this quote

    “Marry the person that you love, then love the person that you married.”

    So love is both a choice and also not a choice. You don’t choose who you develop feelings for, but you can choose to stick with a person through thick and thin. Both of these are love, the latter, a deeper love.

47. Isabelle Archer Jul 18th 2009 at 08:55 am 47

    Ummm, what is your point? That we’re being frivolous by applying feminist analysis to dating blogs? First – you’re making a huge assumption that nobody here is involved in other areas of activism. Second – the personal is the political.

48. -NN- Jul 18th 2009 at 10:22 am 48

    I disagree

    I could have been that girlfriend – and I NEVER EVER will put myself into that situation again.

    I had a boyfriend 7 years ago, whom I “loved”, but I NEVER was “in love” with = I cared for him, but no I never lusted after him, he lusted after me… and I believed people like Evan – “that it comes with time, you don’t know”

    No it doesn’t – and he got over his lust, and made me regret for not falling for him.

    I find it irresponsible of you all to say that woman should settle. What it leads to is that there will be 2 unhappy persons in the end.

    Sex is a primal thing.. it has to work FOR BOTH partners. I may love a man – it means unsexual thing, then he is like a brother – That love will never be like I would love a man, even if he lusts after my body.

    I have been single for 7 years after my ex. I have also fallen in love after that, but it didn’t work. But I learned the difference and I will continue to looking, until someone whom I actually am IN LOVE with comes to my life, HE is IN LOVE with ME, and wants to build up a life with me. I have fun looking though, and meeting new men =).
    If that “falling in love” won’t happen, then I die “an old maid”, since I don’t sell my principles, or my sexuality to a man, just to get companionship.

49. Selena Jul 18th 2009 at 01:25 pm 49

    A-L,

    It’s the 2.5 yr. mark that also made me think this situation is about more than missing the high of infatuation. Presumably, they know each other pretty well by now (particularly if they have been living together ?), and understand what life together would be like. It’s when “the pink cloud” has worn off, you are in a better position to evaluate the relationship realistically.

    You brought up an interesting point: maybe she never felt “the high” with him at all? And is realizing she shouldn’t marry someone she thinks of more as a friend?

50. Joe Jul 18th 2009 at 09:02 pm 50

    Hey Fernando, count your blessings—at least you aren’t on the hook for alimony or child support yet!

51. JB Jul 19th 2009 at 06:41 am 51

    The sad part is sooo many spend sooo much time “looking” for something that doesn’t exist or isn’t possible that they’ll look back and realize they’ve spent thier life alone most of the time chasing rainbows they can’t catch. Who in thier right mind would want to be in relationship with someone they’re not attracted to just because they’re a good “friend” ? That’s not romantic love,that’s FRIENDSHIP. I wish I could count the number of female profiles that say “I’m looking for my BEST FRIEND”. Huh ???

52. Ruby Jul 19th 2009 at 03:01 pm 52

    Romantic love comes in many ways. Sometimes there’s immediate lust, sometimes it develops with a wonderful person or a “best friend” that you grow to love. But 2 1/2 years of dating is enough time to know. Sure the LW’s girlfriend may be throwing away an amazing partner, but then again, maybe the strong romantic feelings never really developed for her, or she hasn’t been able to sustain them.

    I say, give the girlfriend space. Maybe once she has to deal with the harsh reality outside of her comfortable relationship, she’ll realize she’s going to lose a good thing. Maybe.

53. downtowngal Jul 19th 2009 at 05:12 pm 53

    I disagree that being in love is an ‘illusion’ or a ’sign of the times’ in this case. It sounds as if she gave him a chance but is really not romantically into him.

    I know many women in Fernando’s GF’s position who meet a great guy and are told by their friends & family to stick w him & wait for something to develop because a good guy is hard to find, and instill a fear of being single for the rest of your life.

    So these women end up marrying these guys and wake up in 5 years miserable because they’ve married for the wrong reasons. And the guy’s confused & feels cheated, wondering ‘wtf’ has gone on, I gave her everything/treated her well, etc.

    Fernando, as much as this hurts, take it as a good sign now and cut your losses. If she’s not feeling it by now she likely never will.

54. -NN- Jul 19th 2009 at 08:19 pm 54

    What I believe – based on my OWN experience is, that it is the sex that doesn’t work – but how to say that to a man, when it just isn’t his fault as such (no chemistry).. or if it is, he just can’t change his ways. It is just one of those things, that is soul destroying for a man to hear, and therefore hard for a woman to say to a man. Then it is her fault again…

    But there is no way to fall in love with someone who gets his O, but I don’t.

    That is the settling you are trying to sell, and that is what I hear you say GF should do – (like 50% of women do, according to research, they never get an O with a man they are married with)
    Settle to get a “good man”, when men never ever would do that.

    That is most likely what is there in the background. Simply put you don’t leave a good man if physical side of relationship works
    - if it doesn’t then you love/care for someone, but you’ll never be “in love” with him.

55. Mary Jul 19th 2009 at 11:00 pm 55

    It seems unusual that she would have made plans, however I’ve read that the being in love stage fades after 2 years and then changes into a more stable love. So if someone is just chasing the feelings then they might have to change partners every couple years.

56. Steve Jul 20th 2009 at 03:16 am 56

    The second part of that is assumed by the context and left unwritten.

    “Im looking for my BEST FRIEND[ and my romantic interest ]

57. Andy Jul 20th 2009 at 04:48 am 57

    Yes NN you do have a point there. I have been in a relationship where the sex just wasn’t there for me and i do believe it is an important part of a relationship. I know it’s best to be honest with someone but how do you look someone you care about in the face and say “you just don’t turn me on”.

    This woman was obviously at a crossroads, getting serious enough to talk about combining finances, getting married and being together for ever, and she felt she had to do something. Yes you can love someone but not being “in love” enough to want to spend the rest of your life with them. And it is a good possibility that sex has a key role in that decision. I guess we can say that “in love” is code word for “sexual compatability”.

58. -NN- Jul 20th 2009 at 06:28 am 58

    How can you say that she has been talking, there are only his words of it – when it can be that HE has been talking about buying a place, getting married – by voicing those hopes, he has been pushing her forward towards something she feels would be a prison for her.

    You don’t realise how bad it is, when you are in the situation, because you have to live in it.. and you promised..

    My experience:

    My ex wanted to move in with me – since I was moving into a bigger place, he wanted to get rid of his flat, and move in at the same time.
    He decided it, because it would have been sensible (much lower rent) for him etc. That is how it ended, I couldn’t promise, because I didn’t want to, I felt there was something wrong.
    Then he decided that since he wouldn’t get anything out of it, there was no point for him to help me to move, and he ended the our relationship.

    In short: when I would have needed to go forward because he pushed me forwards living together, I realised that I couldn’t just let it happen.
    That is why it ended.
    Only then, I realised how suffocated I had felt – before that moment I was just not aware of it.
    I felt so relieved after he said we were over – like someone opened the prison door – the sentence I had got for my mistake, was over and I finally got out.

    And what happened in my lifecan be happening to her too. You can’t know what is in the background, and telling women “to settle” ..
    Do I really need to tell what I think of that idea?

59. Karl R Jul 20th 2009 at 09:36 am 59

    Andy said:
    “I guess we can say that ‘in love’ is code word for ’sexual compatability’.”

    That’s the way you and -NN- are using the term. That’s not the way EMK and several others are using the term. And we have no idea how Fernando’s ex-girlfriend was using the term.

    Our opinions of what she meant are biased by our own experiences. -NN- spent 7 years in a relationship with no sexual compatability, so she sees that circumstance reflected here. I bailed on a similar relationship after a few months, so to me it seems unlikely that they would have stayed together for 2 1/2 years if there was no sexual compatability.

    Regardless of what Fernando’s ex-girlfriend meant, she’s clearly telling him that she’s no longer interested in pursuing a romantic relationship.

60. Selena Jul 20th 2009 at 09:38 am 60

    For the sake of argument, suppose you do decide that “the feeling” (chemistry, whatever you want to call it) IS over-rated, and fades out within 2 years anyway. So your new search is to find someone who treats you well and will stick around for 40 years, doesn’t matter if you’re super attracted to them. AND…you don’t come from a culture of arranged marriages.

    How easy do you think it would be to find someone who feels the same way? Seems to me, it’s hard enough to find Mutal chemistry. Let alone to find someone who would be willing to marry YOU without it feeling it themselves.

61. Karl R Jul 20th 2009 at 11:50 am 61

    Selena said:
    “Seems to me, it’s hard enough to find Mutal chemistry. Let alone to find someone who would be willing to marry YOU without it feeling it themselves.”

    You aren’t getting the point. By opening yourself up to more people, you increase your dating pool … even if those people don’t relax their standards at all. This is true regardless of the standard you’re opening up about.

    For example:
    I’m sure J. Howard Marshall felt lots of lust/chemistry toward Anna Nicole Smith. I’m fairly certain she didn’t feel the same amount of attraction toward him. There are plenty of women who would refuse to date someone like J. Howard Marshall due to lack of lust/attraction/chemistry. By being willing to forgo that, Anna Nicole Smith expanded her dating pool to include J. Howard Marshall.

    J. Howard Marshall just had to accept that she didn’t find him attractive (or delude himself into believing she did).

    Just because you decide to forgo chemistry in search of compatibility, it’s not a given that you need to find someone who has done the same.

    The trouble is, most people want to find a partner who has lower standards, without having to relax their own standards. (i.e. “I’m a three and she’s a ten, but I like what I like.”)

62. Jennifer Jul 20th 2009 at 01:18 pm 62

    That’s it exactly Steve. I’d like for my significant other to be my best friend.

63. A-L Jul 20th 2009 at 01:43 pm 63

    In terms of the exact scenario you posted, I think Karl’s thinking is right.

    But also, I don’t think people on this board are saying to go for the person you’re not attracted to but treats you well and will be around for forty years. It’s saying that instead of waiting for the 10/A+ on the chemistry scale, you take the person with whom you have a B in terms of the physical aspect but who has all of the other important qualities. It’s better than average, it’s pretty good, but it’s just not a knock your socks off, house-shaking, fireworks exploding extravaganza. Sure it’d be nice to have the whole enchilada, but in this situation we’re willing to compromise, but not settle. (I’d say settling is a D or an F, or maybe even a C.)

64. Selena Jul 20th 2009 at 06:29 pm 64

    “… knock your socks off, house-shaking, fireworks exploding extravaganza”??? People actually find that? And marry it? LOL. Lucky them. Or maybe not.

    C’mon. I don’t think most people on this board are holding out for that, are they? Could be a very long wait.

    The majority do seem to want *some* passion though, rather than “ho hum”.

    Point I was trying to make is: it seems hard enough to find someone who is as “into you” as you are to them period. ( If this blog is anything to go by.) I think it might be even harder to find someone willing to marry you without “feeling it”, just because that might be a sensible thing to do.

    As far as your example goes Karl, you actually make my point. You’re assuming J. Howard Marshall did “feel it” for Anna Nicole. What if he didn’t? Think he would have married her anyway?

65. Curly Girl Jul 20th 2009 at 06:29 pm 65

    You’re suggesting that Anna Nicole Smith was doing something that we should emulate? Hmm. I have to think on that one. For about a micro-second.

    Uh, no.

66. -NN- Jul 20th 2009 at 11:56 pm 66

    I’m not talking about “knock my socks off” attraction
    - I have met a man whom I really fancied sexually, but no, I never did anything with him, since we weren’t ethically compatible (he thought he was entitled to say anything, insult and have rage fits because that is how he felt – and I don’t want to get involved with a man like that.)

    Simply I want to be attracted to an attractive wholesome man who has his act together – I don’t want to live a half of a life like this woman talks about her choice:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/19/AR2009071901816.html

    The Ann Nicole example makes an other good point, what a woman will do to get security and company..
    “to widen the search” and I’ll be a happy woman – right!

67. downtowngal Jul 21st 2009 at 02:39 am 67

    Folks, when you know you know. I don’t know how old Fernando & his GF are, but it could be her first major relationship and perhaps she’s not ready. Also, we’re only hearing his side of things.

    Bottom line: if someone tells you after 2.5 years that they’re not feeling it, it won’t happen. If the woman’s not happy in a relationship it’s doomed. Whatever her issues may be, we don’t know. Or there may not be an issue, he’s just not the ‘one’.

68. Alison Ozer Jul 21st 2009 at 05:43 am 68

    Well Fernando et al,

    We really do not know what exactly the girlfirend is feeling or thinking. If she is willing to reflect and share, Fernando could pose some of these questions for both to consider. He could also propose a break time before continuing or discontinuing their engagement. Is doubt coming from the fact that the infatuation and romantic phase has past? Is there no chemistry- or just fleeting feelings? Are there real concerns she has for long term happiness besides the coming and going of passion? Are there things he could do that could create more of a spark for her, and vice versa? Things they both could do to become better lovers together? Sometimes however the thoughts and feelings behind a decision (and act) may not be so clear. I have found that passion can die when one does not sense a satisfying future with a particular partner. This might have more to do with the actual scenario one imagines can or can’t evolve, rather than the qualities of the person. Only the two could sort this out, and that said if one partner – the girlfriend is unwilling to explore this together, then it is just time to move on. And yes, it is better to discover this now than after marriage and financial or familial attachments have grown. Marriage is really a process of growth and discovery together that requires commitment. We can love or have love and respect for many persons, but living with each other and deepening that love, having children, is a choice and opportunity for two to make.

69. Karl R Jul 21st 2009 at 04:45 pm 69

    Selena asked:
    “You’re assuming J. Howard Marshall did ‘feel it’ for Anna Nicole. What if he didn’t? Think he would have married her anyway?”

    I still think you’re missing the point. Even though we like to talk about “unconditional love” in romantic relationships, just about every relationship has a lot of quid-pro-quo in it (parent-child relationships are usually an exception).

    Anna Nicole Smith brought sex to the relationship. J. Howard Marshall brought staggering wealth to the relationship. Without looks & sex, Anna Nicole Smith was just a dumb, sloppy drunk. Without wealth, J. Howard Marshall was just an octagenarian who liked strippers. I think it’s rather obvious what attracted them to each other.

    But look at what they both compromised in order to get that one thing. J. Howard Marshall gave up on intelligent conversations, someone who shared interests with him, a partner who was an equal. Anna Nicole Smith gave up on looks, someone who shared interests with her, someone who would see her as an equal. I don’t believe either one felt that they had settled.

    And I’m sure there are other couples out there where she’s the wealthy one and he’s the good-looking one.

    But in a more realistic sense, there are any number of widows/widowers/divorcees in their 70s and 80s who date and fall in love with their peers. Somehow they manage to achieve that when none of them are particularly hot or sexy.

    Maybe they compromise.

    Curly Girl asked:
    “You’re suggesting that Anna Nicole Smith was doing something we should emulate?”

    I wouldn’t recommend emulating either Anna Nicole Smith or J. Howard Marshall. But they do serve as examples of how much you may need to compromise if you’re seeking an extreme degree of anything.

70. hunter Jul 21st 2009 at 05:44 pm 70

    The only chemistry for men is an erection, plain truth….

71. A-L Jul 21st 2009 at 06:38 pm 71

    “… knock your socks off, house-shaking, fireworks exploding extravaganza”??? People actually find that? And marry it? LOL. Lucky them. Or maybe not.

    C’mon. I don’t think most people on this board are holding out for that, are they? Could be a very long wait.

    I have close friends that are holding out for that. Heck, I’ve been in that very same boat myself. I’m getting myself out of that boat, however, into a happy but more realistic situation. But when people are posting about wanting the chemistry or not having chemistry with someone, this is what comes to my mind. And when I talk about compromise in terms of the chemistry factor, I’m talking about not holding out for the extravaganza but instead going for something that’s good and nice.

    So if people are not referring to the fireworks extravaganza when they’re talking abut chemistry (or sexual compatibility) then what are they talking about?

72. vino Jul 21st 2009 at 09:11 pm 72

    And here I thought beauty was a light switch away….

73. Ruby Jul 21st 2009 at 09:35 pm 73

    “… knock your socks off, house-shaking, fireworks exploding extravaganza”??? People actually find that? And marry it? LOL. Lucky them. Or maybe not.

    Is it a bad thing to want that? Is it always illusory? Granted, passionate feelings may burn out quickly, but they also may last last much longer than lukewarm feelings will.

    @ hunter

    “The only chemistry for men is an erection, plain truth….”

    Good point. Perhaps women are supposed to be more complex than that. If women are guilty of over-thinking whether a guy is into them or not, I think we often also over-think whether or not we’re really into the guy.

74. Selena Jul 22nd 2009 at 04:18 am 74

    Thanks for sharing the link -NN-.

    It should be posted whenever people try to rationalize how it’s a good thing to marry someone you’re not “in love” with.

75. Mary Jul 22nd 2009 at 07:03 am 75

    Usually when I meet a fireworks guy, I know that I’d be in for trouble, cause a lot of other women want them also. Competition gets old after awhile. Also some times they have a type of baggage from when other women have spoiled them and such.

76. Selena Jul 22nd 2009 at 08:23 am 76

    They’re talking about sexual compatibility that is a bit more passionate than “nice”.

    I don’t know how long people expect “fireworks extravaganza” to last, but “just nice” can become just boring in as short amount of time.

    Or shorter.

77. Andy Jul 22nd 2009 at 09:27 am 77

    Selena, you’re absolutely correct! Anyone who say sex is not an important part of relationship is kidding themselves. If that is the case then they need to find someone who feels the same way. It’s not a coincidence that sexual reasons are a big part of why relationships end. It mat not be “fireworks” all the time but both parties need to feel satisfied and happy with each other!!

78. Joe Jul 22nd 2009 at 10:32 am 78

    Then he decided that since he wouldn’t get anything out of it, there was no point for him to help me to move, and he ended the our relationship.
    Actually, you ended the relationship when you decided you didn’t want to move forward with it (by moving in together). After that, he was right—there was no point in him helping you move.

79. Mikko Kemppe Jul 22nd 2009 at 11:09 pm 79

    Jennifer, I agree with you. I believe you can love someone with all of your heart and still have a knowing that you are not meant to share the rest of your life with this person. It is a new concept that I think we are just beginning to understand.

    Jayqueue, I think you bring up a good point. Our society has definitely changed. I think people were not as concerned with finding “true love” as couples in the past were often more concerned with day to day living and survival. Marriages were formed primarily to survive, couples were loyal and there was love, but finding personal fulfillment and forming life long passionate relationships were probably not as important.

    I think the signs that we are more discern today than ever before could be also interpreted as a positive development. As most of us have had much more time to develop and learn about ourselves than ever before, in a sense we also have more love to share than ever before. Therefore, naturally we also want to take more time to find the right person to share all of our love with.

    Now while I believe this is a positive development, at the same time, of course, we are facing brand new challenges, such as our changing male and female roles. So while I strongly believe it is possible for us to find our soulmate and to be “in love” for the rest of our lives, I think it would be naive to think that this would be possible without also developing ourselves and up-dating our relationships skills.
    .-= Mikko Kemppe´s last blog ..Is Masturbation Good Or Bad For You? =-.

80. -NN- Jul 23rd 2009 at 12:27 am 80

    >Author: Joe
    Comment:

    Then he decided that since he wouldn’t get anything out of it, there was no point for him to help me to move, and he ended the our relationship.Actually, you ended the relationship when you decided you didn’t want to move forward with it (by moving in together). After that, he was right—there was no point in him helping you move.

    ……………

    That is what I said, I felt that I got out of prison =).
    Simply because it hadn’t been working – he just thought he did the deed, but our relationship had been dying for last 6 months – he just finalised it. Last 6 months every discussion we had had, had ended to the uncomfortable silence and he felt “suffocated” near me. At that situation I wasn’t ready to let him move in with me, since we couldn’t talk about anything.

    So why would he want to move in with me? The only reason what I see, was that my rent would be pretty cheap as my parents owned the flat.

    Since he wasn’t going to get that, his interest was over.

    And I felt so relieved – I still do.. and that is the reason I would never do as Evan suggests – if I don’t feel physically attracted, I don’t let that go further.

81. Andy Jul 23rd 2009 at 05:18 am 81

    Once you go down that road, it’s very difficult to back peddle. I’ve done that a couple of times and vowed i would never do that again. I did try to build a relationship with a couple of women with whom i wasn’t all that attracted to, trying something different as Evan suggested, and it doesn’t work for me. I did feel bad, kind of like i was leading those women on, allowing them to develop feelings for me and then finding myself not wanting to be in the relationship any longer. It makes for tv like drama. Not good!

    So now i have learned my lesson and stick to dating women that i have an attraction for. Sure i go on less dates than i used to but the absence of drama more than makes up for it!!

82. Selena Jul 23rd 2009 at 07:29 am 82

    -NN-
    Sounds like the guy was more into having cheaper rent than he was into you, yes?

    So it goes.

83. A-L Jul 23rd 2009 at 08:21 am 83

    Maybe this is just a semantics issue. For me good/nice/enjoyable are all interchangeable whereas passionate/fireworks/knocking-socks-off are in the same category.

84. Ava Jul 23rd 2009 at 08:38 am 84

    I’ve tried it too, and I’ve had a guy or two try it with me. I agree, it’s a recipe for resentment and guilt. Nothing worse than a person thinking that someone is into them sexually/romantically, and then finding out they really aren’t – ouch! A basic physical attraction needs to be there.

85. Selena Jul 23rd 2009 at 09:17 am 85

    A-L,

    Have you had sex?

86. A-L Jul 23rd 2009 at 09:49 am 86

    As you may be aware from other threads, I have not. But I’ve done most things in the “everything, but” category (and no, I don’t feel like going into a debate about why most but not everything). Granted, I may be speaking from a position of ignorance, but I’ve gone out with guys where I haven’t even felt like doing anything physical, to where it’s been “ick,” to “enh/okay”, to being “better than not,” to “really very good” to “dang.” I don’t think one extra position is going to change my impression of our physical relationship.

    But I was just rereading my previous post and in case it wasn’t clear I was saying that good=nice=enjoyable and that passionate=fireworks=knocks your socks off. I was not saying that enjoyable=fireworks.

87. Selena Jul 23rd 2009 at 11:05 am 87

    A-L, I wasn’t sure. I thought I had read a post of yours last year regarding that, but didn’t know if it was true or perhaps had changed.

    To me, “good/nice/enjoyable” are words I would use to describe playing minature golf.

    And sometimes sex when I wasn’t really into it, but enjoyed the connection anyway. Like morning sex when I was still sleepy, not overly motivated and my partner and were trying to spare each other our bad breath. Or we were tired, stressed, but still felt the “need.” Or were using sex in a kind of “touch base” kind of way.

    If it was always like that I would be disappointed and dissatisfied because I’ve had much better. Not “fireworks extravaganza” every time, but better – more intense, more connected sometimes almost spiritual in nature sex.
    Hard to describe, but certainly words like “nice”, “enjoyable, “okay”, fall far short. Which is why to me, someone willing to settle for just “okay” with a partner is cheating themselves, AND THEIR PARTNER.

    I don’t know whether or not you can equate “doing everything but…” with a sex life that includes intercourse as an integral part of it. Maybe some of the others have an experienced opinion as to that.

88. A-L Jul 23rd 2009 at 11:51 am 88

    I’ll let someone else who’s has the experience of sex & everything but comment about the differences.

    But I think I was right about the semantics difference. For me, describing the physical aspect of a relationship has its own standards. Good in sexual matters is not the same as good in putt-putt.

    I might say that a high school play was good. That does not mean it was anywhere near the same caliber as a Broadway play that I also described as good. I use that adjective based on what that category is supposed to be, not as a universal/means-the-same-in-every-case word. So if I say that the physical experience was good, for me that does indicate that the connection/intensity you mentioned is there, because it’s supposed to be within a serious relationship. Those just aren’t words that I would naturally gravitate towards using myself.

    I guess my teacher ways show here. But for a grading/equivalency scale

    A=Excellent=Fireworks
    B=Very Good=Really very good
    C=Average=Better than not
    D=Below average=Enh
    F=Failing/Unsatisfactory=Ick

    Does this make sense?

    P.S. I don’t know if this will work because it says it won’t nest, but yours was able to nest, so I’ll try it too. Evan, I want the old commenting system back!

89. Hot Alpha Female Jul 24th 2009 at 12:02 am 89

    I totally get what you are saying Evan. I do. I’m not sure whether I agree with it though.

    I think this guy needs to take on board that there are things he can do in that relationship to keep these fresh upbeat and sparky.

    Being in a long term relationship and having chemistry are not two things that are mutually exclusive from eachother.

    All im hearing from this chick, is that yes, she does love this guy, but feel the passion, the chemistry is no longer there.

    Basically she is bored. And dam bored and she is wondering, if she is this bored and safe NOW … what will it feel like in 10 or 20 years time.

    No doubt that when you enter into a long term relationship the dynamic changes, BUT i think its the responsibility of BOTH partners to keep the spark alive.

    If they both can’t do that … then maybe its just not the right match.

    Hot Alpha Female
    The Only Women You Should Take Dating Advice From
    .-= Hot Alpha Female´s last blog ..The "Hes Just Not That Into" Rules. Do They Really Apply? =-.

90. Mary Jul 24th 2009 at 09:53 am 90

    I agree with you in this. I think also that people have different personalities so while one might want to go out and party all night, the other might not want to go out at all. If it’s like the wrong match there’s perhaps no making it work, however if it’s close then there’s a possibility.

91. Amy Oct 2nd 2009 at 07:52 am 91

    It’s so tough. I’m 37-years-old and have been dating a great guy for 8 months but I’m not attracted to him. I feel like better for most of the guys I date than they are for me. They have financial problems, don’t have a real job, or don’t want kids. Now I’m with a real man who treats me very well. We have fun and have great conversation. When I met him, I wasn’t attracted to him. I’ve stayed with him because I know chemistry isn’t everything. Kissing him is very difficult. It simply doesn’t feel natural and I don’t have any desire to be intimate with him. My friends say to let him go, but I’ve had the chemistry in the past but most men weren’t marriage material. So, now I have the guy who would make a great husband and father, but I don’t want to kiss him. It’s not an easy choice for me.

92. Everett552 Nov 17th 2009 at 07:04 am 92

    Sounds like #91 is settling. 

93. Subtle Nov 18th 2009 at 08:52 pm 93

    I am going through the same thing with my bf.  But I am that woman.  I am only 26 and him 25.  We moved in together after a little over a year, have a child, but this child is not his biological son, but he is still his daddy.  We have been together for 4 years.  Great first 2 years and the last 2 years not so great.  We never do anything together, we work, take care of our son, have a nice apartment together, etc… but he wants to sit at home on weekends, watch hockey, have friends over who are also my friends, and drink.  I take blame for some of it, as I let it happen.  After speaking with him about this for a very long time, I have decided to call it quits.  I have opened up to him one last time, crying in the process.  Nothing seems to work.  We have even been in discussions about marriage, another thing he does not want and I would at least like to have the hope of one day having.  He truly is an amazing person and I love him, but we are just too different and we want different things.  So maybe this is how Fernando’s GF feels? That’s all I got.  It’s hard to let go, I know and I am that girl.

94. Andy Nov 19th 2009 at 05:49 am 94

    Well Subtle, as the song goes, sometimes love just ain’t enough!!

95. Subtle Nov 19th 2009 at 09:34 pm 95

    LOL so true…. but still we are finding it very hard to part.  How do you convince another that it is the right thing? I find there is a lot of denial from his point as if this isn’t happening, but from where I am it is happening.  My hope for this situation is gone, but maybe not his?

96. All Carrion Dec 5th 2009 at 10:12 am 96

    I’m also stuck in a “passion vs comfort” situation.  I’ve been with my wife for 10 years total.  Married for 3 of those.  We’ve been separated 7 months.  We did an in-home separation for a while, but she moved out about 3 months ago.
    I love her very much.  I know she is a good person and I trust her.  I know how big those factors are.  However, the passion is gone from the relationship.  She is not very aggressive sexually, but I wish she was.  I would like her to be more outgoing in general.  In fact, I couldn’t even reach orgasm over the last couple of years without thinking of another woman or having some sort of fantasy in my head.
    That’s not to say that’s she’s not attractive.  She is, but more than just looks factor in.
    It’s confusing to me why all of the sudden these issues have come up based on how long we’ve been together.  I’m a very passionate person in many facets of life.  I love discovering more about myself and trying new things and she seems content to sit on the couch and doesn’t really have many interests of her own.
    I was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes a couple of years ago and I wonder if that’s factored into the change.
    A year ago, I was on board to have a baby.  When she stopped taking her birth control, reality set in and it became clear to me that I was not ready.  I reevaluated everything.
    We tried therapy, but it didn’t make much of a difference.  I’ve taken a long, hard look at myself and seen some things that were not very easy to expose.  I guess I thought that after she moved out, it would be clear to me which path was the correct one, but unfortunately I’m still just as confused.
    Maybe that in itself says something?
    If anyone has any thoughts on the situation, I’d love to hear them.
    It’s hard to walk away from that history and comfort and into the “unknown”.  But I don’t want to be unhappy with my marriage and resent her.  I think we’ll both end up miserable.

97. Queen Dec 8th 2009 at 09:11 am 97

    I love you but not in love with you, If someone ever tells any of you that, RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that is game!

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply