I don't like this "L" word. I think it's confusing, convoluted, and is given way too much importance in Western societies. Love isn't a feeling or an emotion. It's a pattern or a way of life that two people who know each other completely and honestly fall into. It's based on shared values, dreams, memories. Essentially, love takes a lot of time to build, and it's not something you magically "feel" every second you are with your beloved. Love is something you know.
To make things worse, this "L" word is often mixed together with the other "L" word...Lust. Lust is an incredible concoction of euphoria-producing hormones that run amok and cause us to do crazy things when our bodies see and/or smell a potentially prime mate! And as supposedly rational creatures, this chaotic state doesn't seem to be a good foundation for us to make decisions upon that could potentially make or break our lives...
Yet people do it all the time under the disguise of "Love." "We got married for Love and now, three years later, we're divorced." "We're broke because we spent all our money on movies and popcorn for Love." "We had sex because we were in Love!" And because people attach the "in Love" part to these scenarios the larger culture goes, "Oh that's OK, we understand. You're still a good person." But what happens when we take away the "in Love" excuse? We're left facing a culture that's overly critical and a self that wonders what in world we did all those stupid things for!
However, there are the few who realize this L&L distinction, and take responsibility for their ridiculous behaviors. The culture tends to look down on these individuals, if for no other reason than they reflect the hypocrisy back to the hypocrites. And when it comes to sex in particular, the culture can be all-out brutal to those who defy it and say "Actually, love and sex don't have to go together...I had sex just because I wanted to!"
Now don't get me wrong. Real love is fantastic and wonderful and one of the best things about being alive...but should it be a cultural necessity that validates your right to have sex with someone? NO! If I had to pick one emotion for people to base all their sexual decisions upon, it would be an emotion that's much closer to the act of sex itself...Lust!
Despite what I said before, this is an "L" word I like. When separated out of "love", it can be viewed a little more realistically. No one says you have to be together forever because you are "in lust," or that "being in lust" is the only thing worth living for. Nope, instead Lust is often portrayed as the emotion we should run away from. It is bad! It is trouble!
Actually, it's often the first stage of our highly exhaulted Love! (Shocking I know!) So why do I think Lust is a better decision-making barometer even though it can make you do crazy things? Firstly, because if you realize that Lust is Lust and not Love, you've a much better chance of having reasonable expectations for your relationship after the sex than if you go into it thinking you're already in that all mighty state of Love.
When you first meet someone and the sparks start to fly, you want to have sex with them as quickly as possible. That's just how it is biologically. But since our culture dictates that you should be "in Love" before this happens, people skip through the "I'm just in Lust" stage of thinking and run head long into the "Yep, we're in Love so we can have sex now without feeling guilty or wrong...Even if we did just meet at the bar an hour ago!" Now you're just lying to yourself, and the possibility of you getting hurt increases.
Secondly, a lot of people, especially young women, have sex for reasons other than their own internal lusty desires. She may have sex to progress a relationship, or because everyone else is doing it, or because her partner is pressuring her. I think sex should be enjoyed and expressed freely, not as a duty or obligation. So, if you use your own feelings of Lust as a decisions-maker, you will only have sex when you honestly WANT to...and this is very important for one's own self-respect and esteem.
In the end, what will I teach my daughter? I'll teach her to have sex only when she really wants to, only when she feels that incredible desire to merge herself fully with someone else, when her skin tingles and her vision blurs...
Only Have Sex When You Are Truly In Lust.
1 comment:
The distinction is probably easier to make in this era. Years ago sexual intimacy was often linked to love. I've had many female friends my age (in their thirties) still confuse the two, kind of equating a man's lust for sex, or need (and extents they'll reach to attain it) with love. It took me a while to see it, and I caught on but would engage in the usual debate with friends disagreeing. While it's not as simple as saying 'guys' will do anything to get laid, social standards also promote two different sets of behaviour for heterosexual people. The double standard still exists, and while love is the highest accolade in a relationship, it's often difficult to assess.
At least with lust, you know what you're going for, why you're doing it, and you also know that you may not get anything more out of it, and accept it for what it is.
Post a Comment