Friday, October 01, 2004
Love and its definitions
Tonight, I gave advice to a young woman about love. I, who am suffering from this acute disease, gave her advice from my own experience.
She had needed her man, but her man was not to be found. Her man was busy about their future, but she had needed him for the present. One day, her mother issued the wake-up call.
Not only was she awakened. She also had, apparently, lost her love for her man.
As we talked at the foot of the stairs, I asked her, "How do you define love? When you stop missing him, does that mean you do not love him anymore?"
She answered, tears slowly leaving her eyes, "In the past, it was effortless on my part to love him, to express my love for him. But now, I take extra effort to love him. Why?"
"Uh... it's for you to define," I said, doubts clearly evident in my reply.
How do we define love between a man and a woman? Do we treat relationships like legal contracts--the conditions clarified, the responsibilities listed, the penalties agreed upon?
I don't want to categorically say that to love someone is to be happy. To be just simply happy. However, it appears like that--that to love is to be happy. Not to be serious. Not to be hurt. Not to be a sadist. And certainly, not to be a masochist.
I often say, love makes people grow. That's what's supposed to happen, right?
However, more often than not, people in a relationship eventually find themselves in a rut--a mire that they cannot seem to get off.