This whole "percent" non-sense (continued) ...
Prof, it seems you missed the point, and it's such a simple one. But maybe you're just in the mood to argue, or wander off on unrelated tangents? Simply put, the varied percentages are merely symbols for varying levels of emotional committment. Is that clear enough?
I know that you were using your percentages as a visual representation, but...
How is it possible to sort of love somebody? :dunno: You either love them or you don't. 0% or 100%, nothing in between.
That was my point, and I'm sorry bodie missed it.
I understand what he meant in response to the other poster.
But it's all arbitrary bullshit, kinda out of the movies, or that "give 110%" non-sense.
Chef hit it on the nose, and the whole "holding back" v. "not holding anything back" is something I really never understood.
Would I feel like shit if my wife was killed or left me? Dumb question, it's obvious.
But do I have to debate whether I love her only 90% in case she cheats on me, or 100% to the point that ... ?
Again, doesn't make any sense to me in any case.
I'm not sure that it is :dunno:
But I do know that millions of people try to love less than completely, just as Facetious suggested they should. They try to hedge their bets. They try to hold back from giving their heart entirely in fear thier heart will be destroyed entirely. By holding back they think that if/when the heartbreak comes the pain will thereby be commensurately less. Ironically (or not) that kind of defensiveness and withholding is exactly the thing that insures they'll get dumped, because they aren't entirely present to be loved.
I don't think it's that at all.
In fact, you're over-simplifying it just like the whole "percentage" non-sense.
By "holding back" do you mean ...
- They expect to be dumped at some point? And they are just ready at any time?
Or, possibly ...
- They don't treat them as nice as they would at ... well, "100%" or whatever?
Or something else?
If you want to get all "mathematical" on it, then what you're saying it that there's only variable "x".
The reality is that any realtionship, and how people approach it, is more than just one variable.
And the variables change based on the person, experiences, their lovers, etc...
That's why this is all non-sense in my book.
"Holding back," again, means what?
No one defined that!
To some, it's purposely preventing themselves from being as attached as in the past.
For some people, they attach very tight, more than others, so their "90%" might be different than others.
And that's just 1 variable.
And from other angles, "90%" might mean they "don't care" to bother with the person or their feelings 10% of the time.
Is that unhealthy? It depends on what that means.
Does it mean that they have 1 or 2 days a week where they "go out without them?"
Or does it mean, "hey, she's irrational on this 10%, so I have to ignore her."
Honestly, as someone who has been with the same woman for 15 years, that 10% is
real.
If my wife didn't and I didn't just take 10% of our reactions and just see them as "over-reactions," oh hell, we'd fight far, far more!
So, I could easily define my dedication to marriage as only "90%" plenty of times.
My wife could do the same, and that's why I don't really care about the "quantity" without the "quality" in the definition.
Doesn't mean I'm not honest with my wife 100% of the time.
Doesn't mean I don't care about how something would affect my wife 100% of the time.
But sometimes I'm not dedicated 100% to my wife in everything I do, because it would drive her nuts if I did, and vice-versa.
I agree.
If you go into a relationship with emotional 'limits' then you are limiting the relationship. Especially if you are doing it out of fear of rejection and ESPECIALLY if you don't tell your partner you're 'limiting' your commitment.
What do people mean by "limiting" a commitment? That's what I don't understand.
Not everyone's "values" are the same. In fact, the
worst thing someone can do is be less than honest about what they, themselves want in a relationship. I'd much rather a guy or gal be honest about that, and not give into the peer/parental/whatever pressure of, "oh, but you have to agree to do this" as some absolute value.
If someone doesn't want to commit to something, then either decide if they are worth it or not. If not, then so be it. It wasn't meant to be. People want open relationships? So be it, leave if you don't like it. Values and commitments aren't "absolute," they only need to be "understand" and put forth "honestly" from the get-go.
Honesty is far more important. Not merely for the consideration of the other person, but so you don't wake up one day and say, "you know honey, I really never wanted this."
And what if she wants to give her all to you? If you won't reciprocate, she probably will dump you to look for someone who will. In love, as in many things, you get what you give.
True. That's the one true thing. At the same time, different people have different values. Sometimes they are compatible. Sometimes they are not.
There is no "right" or "wrong" to any relationship other than honesty in my book. And the absolute worst thing is to be dishonest to yourself, because it destroys everything else, including the people you care for most.