Comments on: What is love anyway? http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/ my narcissistic self indulgence and analysis of my Second Life experience Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:35:20 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Mike http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-375 Mike Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:40:47 +0000 http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-375 The phenomenon you describe of "reacting differently" to the attentions of your long-term love - even if they are exactly the same as the attentions from a new lover - sounds to me like what my psych classes called "attenuation". (Well, I could swear it's a different word than "attenuation", but for the life of me I've always mis-remembered it as "attenuation" for the past 20 years. Probably some complex psychology term behind *that* phenomenon as well.) As I interpret it, it helps account for why the intensity of your reaction to the repeated incoming stimuli (even those as pleasant as attention from a partner) wanes over time. It's apparently a healthy adaptation in most circumstances, but it's hell on a LTR. I find that the attentions of someone new can not only resurrect long-dormant feelings and thoughts in myself, but they also help re-calibrate the attentions from an existing partner. It's almost like the attention from new loves helps me understand and "turn up the amplification" on existing attentions (not just a partner, but even from friends). I guess it's a way of reinforcing the "truth" of things that (when heard from people you've known for quite a while) get 'old' - helping to scrape off the barnacles of doubt that inevitably accumulate. The phenomenon you describe of “reacting differently” to the attentions of your long-term love – even if they are exactly the same as the attentions from a new lover – sounds to me like what my psych classes called “attenuation”. (Well, I could swear it’s a different word than “attenuation”, but for the life of me I’ve always mis-remembered it as “attenuation” for the past 20 years. Probably some complex psychology term behind *that* phenomenon as well.) As I interpret it, it helps account for why the intensity of your reaction to the repeated incoming stimuli (even those as pleasant as attention from a partner) wanes over time. It’s apparently a healthy adaptation in most circumstances, but it’s hell on a LTR.

I find that the attentions of someone new can not only resurrect long-dormant feelings and thoughts in myself, but they also help re-calibrate the attentions from an existing partner. It’s almost like the attention from new loves helps me understand and “turn up the amplification” on existing attentions (not just a partner, but even from friends). I guess it’s a way of reinforcing the “truth” of things that (when heard from people you’ve known for quite a while) get ‘old’ – helping to scrape off the barnacles of doubt that inevitably accumulate.

]]> By: Just me, nothing more http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-20 Just me, nothing more Tue, 07 Aug 2007 15:12:18 +0000 http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-20 I am glad to see you are questioning what love really means. Since you have confessed you have loved many. I question whether you know what love is. And just to clear the air, I am not sure I really know either. All I know is that to me, love is sacred. It is not something that will come and go with the night. Anyone that can love someone after only a couple hours/days of discussions or someone that has "loved" several in the period of a few months loves to easily, in my opinion. As I said previously in a post, I think people are mixing up loving an idea versus a person. Not that this would ever happen (lol), but I could write all this and someone say...."He is a thinker, I would like to get to know him better." Well words are a great start in getting to know someone, but there is more to a person and alot of times you cannot learn about those other things unless you spend time in real life with that person to undertand their mannerisms, their habits (good and bad) and how they react to reality. Just remember......We are all unique, just like everyone else. :-) I am glad to see you are questioning what love really means. Since you have confessed you have loved many. I question whether you know what love is. And just to clear the air, I am not sure I really know either.

All I know is that to me, love is sacred. It is not something that will come and go with the night. Anyone that can love someone after only a couple hours/days of discussions or someone that has “loved” several in the period of a few months loves to easily, in my opinion.

As I said previously in a post, I think people are mixing up loving an idea versus a person. Not that this would ever happen (lol), but I could write all this and someone say….”He is a thinker, I would like to get to know him better.” Well words are a great start in getting to know someone, but there is more to a person and alot of times you cannot learn about those other things unless you spend time in real life with that person to undertand their mannerisms, their habits (good and bad) and how they react to reality.

Just remember……We are all unique, just like everyone else. :-)

]]> By: argyleboi http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-12 argyleboi Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:35:23 +0000 http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-12 I think your friend Antoine has just about got it. Of course, I have much more to say... More on that at http://virtualargyle.wordpress.com/2007/08/03/love-did-you-say-what-is-love/ I think your friend Antoine has just about got it.

Of course, I have much more to say…

More on that at http://virtualargyle.wordpress.com/2007/08/03/love-did-you-say-what-is-love/

]]> By: Love? Did you say, “What is love?” « VirtualArgyle http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-11 Love? Did you say, “What is love?” « VirtualArgyle Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:33:26 +0000 http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-11 [...] A friend asks this question. As it happens, I’ve been thinking about this one a good bit, too, kinda parked at the intersection of sl and rl. So this is a response, but it’s mo’ n’ dat, too. If you hate to wax philosophical, just quit reading now. You should prolly also quit if you love to wax philosophical but are put off by incoherence, because coherent I ain’t. At least not always… [...] [...] A friend asks this question. As it happens, I’ve been thinking about this one a good bit, too, kinda parked at the intersection of sl and rl. So this is a response, but it’s mo’ n’ dat, too. If you hate to wax philosophical, just quit reading now. You should prolly also quit if you love to wax philosophical but are put off by incoherence, because coherent I ain’t. At least not always… [...]

]]> By: Ero http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-10 Ero Thu, 02 Aug 2007 03:34:16 +0000 http://cindykesey.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/what-is-love-anyway/#comment-10 While I delight in the idea that having a new lover helps bring one back to themselves in such a was as to make new what has become old and stale--to make alive what had been dormant, it stands to reason that if this is the only benefit of a second love, it is a high price to pay insofar as the newness can't last and the self seeking affirmation shall once again, in time, have to find another to make things new leaving two old loves to contend with the brilliant light which must, by definition, now be shining on and from the new chosen one. Wouldn't it make more sense to imagine that a new love, rather than bringing one back to the self (which is certainly a part of it) actually brings out of the self new things? Hence, it might not be about completion and wholeness as much as it is able spontaneous generation and increased surface area. I so agree that a new love can't stay new. This is perhaps the crux of the whole multi-lover gambit. Unless one is a serial monogamist, having multiple loves at various stages maturity poses geometric problems over time. Yet with all that said, I would like to go on record as saying that love is possible in SL especially if one sees this in line with Ronny Cammareri (Nick Cage in Moonstruck) : Loretta, I love you. Not like they told you love is, and I didn't know this either, but love don't make things nice - it ruins everything. It breaks your heart. It makes things a mess. We aren't here to make things perfect. The snowflakes are perfect. The stars are perfect. Not us. Not us! We are here to ruin ourselves and to break our hearts and love the wrong people and *die*. The storybooks are *bullshit*. Now I want you to come upstairs with me and *get* in my bed! While I delight in the idea that having a new lover helps bring one back to themselves in such a was as to make new what has become old and stale–to make alive what had been dormant, it stands to reason that if this is the only benefit of a second love, it is a high price to pay insofar as the newness can’t last and the self seeking affirmation shall once again, in time, have to find another to make things new leaving two old loves to contend with the brilliant light which must, by definition, now be shining on and from the new chosen one.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to imagine that a new love, rather than bringing one back to the self (which is certainly a part of it) actually brings out of the self new things? Hence, it might not be about completion and wholeness as much as it is able spontaneous generation and increased surface area.

I so agree that a new love can’t stay new. This is perhaps the crux of the whole multi-lover gambit. Unless one is a serial monogamist, having multiple loves at various stages maturity poses geometric problems over time. Yet with all that said, I would like to go on record as saying that love is possible in SL especially if one sees this in line with Ronny Cammareri (Nick Cage in Moonstruck) : Loretta, I love you. Not like they told you love is, and I didn’t know this either, but love don’t make things nice – it ruins everything. It breaks your heart. It makes things a mess. We aren’t here to make things perfect. The snowflakes are perfect. The stars are perfect. Not us. Not us! We are here to ruin ourselves and to break our hearts and love the wrong people and *die*. The storybooks are *bullshit*. Now I want you to come upstairs with me and *get* in my bed!

]]>