The Perfect Relationship | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

The Perfect Relationship

I want to know someone for 5min, act like we've known each other for 5yrs and, spend 5 lifetimes together. Soul Mates. I don't know how else to describe it.
 
I feel I have as perfect a relationship as anyone could hope for, even after 12 years of marriage. It's not easy, I don't think marriage ever is, but we still consider each other our soulmates and best friends. I would never be with another if our relationship should end, which I don't expect to happen till death etc. etc.

We met online in April 1996, and fell in love within days with no idea what the other looked like (luckily we were both delighted with each others' physical appearance when we did meet). He was in England, I was in the US. We met in person the first week of May, and were married on May 31st. There were NO doubts. We both felt a sense of destiny about it. We still do.

For me, it was HUGE that somebody fell in love with my mind and my soul from my words on a screen and my voice on the phone, without my (previously cute) ass factoring in. That makes it - for me - the perfect relationship.

I had dated a lot of men, and had been divorced for 12 years when Tom and I met. I had a pretty good idea what most men loved about me, and it wasn't my mind or my soul.

In all honesty, I do not believe a romantic relationship really can be "unconditional" (in the way some parent/child relationships can be) but I do believe it can be deeply committed, nurturing and uplifting, even over time. I believe we can be "family", but "unconditional love" just isn't something I've seen around me or experienced with another living being myself, other than my beloved dog.
 
Contrary to the belief of mainstream media, true love is highly conditional.
 
Mainstream media would have you believe that it is best to love your significant other unconditionally. On an intrinsic level it is perfectly OK to love somebody unconditionally, in the same way you may love your favorite color or food, but in the context of a serious relationship loving somebody unconditionally has the potential to be hazardous and highly unhealthy. It is abusive to yourself as well as the other person to love them unconditionally. You must have expectations(conditions) of them as well as yourself that will be met with consequence if not met. These are conditions which you agree upon when entering a relationship, or develop as the relationship progresses.

If there are no conditions, there is only chaos.

The primary condition is that the other person must love you in return. The amount of that love is to be determined and defined throughout the relationship, but it is required and if it is not met, then you are being abusive either to yourself or to both parties involved.

Hollywood and so forth would have you believe that it's ok to love somebody even if they don't love you in return because you know, it's cool and righteous and things will work out.
 
Wyote said:
Mainstream media would have you believe that it is best to love your significant other unconditionally. On an intrinsic level it is perfectly OK to love somebody unconditionally, in the same way you may love your favorite color or food, but in the context of a serious relationship loving somebody unconditionally has the potential to be hazardous and highly unhealthy. It is abusive to yourself as well as the other person to love them unconditionally. You must have expectations(conditions) of them as well as yourself that will be met with consequence if not met. These are conditions which you agree upon when entering a relationship, or develop as the relationship progresses.
Click to expand...

How can loving someone be abusive?

If there are no conditions, there is only chaos.
Click to expand...

Love has no ryhme or reason, it just is. It's an almost entirely irrational and instinctive feeling and attempts to conciously control "true love" are unlikely to succeed.

The primary condition is that the other person must love you in return. The amount of that love is to be determined and defined throughout the relationship, but it is required and if it is not met, then you are being abusive either to yourself or to both parties involved.

Hollywood and so forth would have you believe that it's ok to love somebody even if they don't love you in return because you know, it's cool and righteous and things will work out.
Click to expand...

The very nature of love means it cannot be abusive, I'm in no place to say which kind is the "best" love but I do think unconditional love is a beautiful thing.
 
I would agree that theoretically, ideally, love in and of itself should not be abusive, and loving someone should not be abusive. But in actual practice - although I consider myself a romantic - I believe it can be.

Ask someone who has ever been romantically obsessed with another if they "love" the object of their obsession and they will say yes. They believe this is love, whether or not the feeling is returned. Ask someone who has been the object of romantic obsession (unreturned) if they feel certain behaviors (i.e. stalking) the "lover" exhibits are abusive, and sadly I believe most of them would agree they are. Ask a woman who's husband/boyfriend routinely physically abuses her if she loves him, and if he loves her. Statistics would seem to show that they do believe there is love between them.

Because love has so many faces, so many possible interpretations, to so many people, I think it's really impossible to declare all love to be wholesome and nurturing. Even the deep, committed love I share with my husband is not unconditional. People change over time, and their needs can change. Expressions of love that I need, or he needs now may not be identical to what they were when we first met. If either of us feel we can not meet all of those needs, then "conditions" have arisen, making "unconditional love" an impossibility. This doesn't mean the love is over.

I think there is a rhyme and reason to love, in almost every case. It isn't always logical, and we may not be able to determine what it is at the time, but there's definitely a reason, be it chemistry, fascination, fondness, necessity, etc.

There is always the possibility for love; deep, committed love. But as mentioned before, I personally can not envision a successful romantic love without conditions.
 
Stone, you like many people seem to have a disconnect between the concept of love and love in the context of relating to one another. Love as a concept just is, love in relation to anything becomes conditional.

And thank you for writing all of that ZenCat. I wasn't sure how to word things but you've said it quite well.
 
Stone said:
How can loving someone be abusive?
Click to expand...

Unconditional love means a love that exists soley because it can. It requires nothing from it's object, even and especially love in return. Nothing can change it, either. Therein lies the potential and reality of abuse.

I've actually been here, btw. Many a friendship had to die b/c I was hurting myself, slaving away over someone who, really, was just taking advantage of me. Just imagine, then, how much greater the abuse when you love someone romantically and expect nothing from them in return. It's the abused wife type of love, the Stockholm syndrome kind of love, but only because people are not perfect. If they were, unconditional love would be more than just an ideal.


Love has no ryhme or reason, it just is. It's an almost entirely irrational and instinctive feeling and attempts to conciously control "true love" are unlikely to succeed.
Click to expand...

Perhaps chaos was a bit strong, but I think there can be rationale behind it. Would motivation be a good enough reason? People love because they enjoy the feeling. Maybe the feeling doesn't make sense, but they love it, and people like to feel good!

You are correct in your basic presupposition that attempting to control another is wrong and will fail miserably. But what of boundaries? Doesn't every relationship need these? And we all see areas where other people need their weaknesses strengthened, and bad habits eliminated. It is how we choose to go about it that marks the difference between a love and tyranny.

The very nature of love means it cannot be abusive, I'm in no place to say which kind is the "best" love but I do think unconditional love is a beautiful thing.
Click to expand...

Love is intrinsically perfect. People are not. We are the extrinsic factor that corrupts true love and requires conditions on what ought to be conditional. I wish this were not as it is, because love should be a beautiful thing. The problem lies in the human heart. We make love what it ought not to be.
 
ZenCat said:
I would agree that theoretically, ideally, love in and of itself should not be abusive, and loving someone should not be abusive. But in actual practice - although I consider myself a romantic - I believe it can be.
Click to expand...

I think it's my Fi talking. :D

Ask someone who has ever been romantically obsessed with another if they "love" the object of their obsession and they will say yes. They believe this is love, whether or not the feeling is returned. Ask someone who has been the object of romantic obsession (unreturned) if they feel certain behaviors (i.e. stalking) the "lover" exhibits are abusive, and sadly I believe most of them would agree they are. Ask a woman who's husband/boyfriend routinely physically abuses her if she loves him, and if he loves her. Statistics would seem to show that they do believe there is love between them.
Click to expand...

In the first instance the love and the obsession are two different things, love does not equal obsession, therefore it is the obsession that is unhealthy and abusive not the love itself.

Loving the person who has abused you does not equal allowing the person to abuse you, once again the abuse is seperate. The woman can leave the man and get out of harm's way but still love him.

Because love has so many faces, so many possible interpretations, to so many people, I think it's really impossible to declare all love to be wholesome and nurturing.
Click to expand...

I agree on this one, and my interpretation of love is probably very different from others.

Even the deep, committed love I share with my husband is not unconditional. People change over time, and their needs can change. Expressions of love that I need, or he needs now may not be identical to what they were when we first met. If either of us feel we can not meet all of those needs, then "conditions" have arisen, making "unconditional love" an impossibility. This doesn't mean the love is over.
Click to expand...

...and that is a perfectly reasonable and sensible approach to love but not necessarily any "better" than unconditional love.

I think there is a rhyme and reason to love, in almost every case. It isn't always logical, and we may not be able to determine what it is at the time, but there's definitely a reason, be it chemistry, fascination, fondness, necessity, etc.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have said "there is no rhyme or reason to unconditional love". It doesn't make sense at all but it is still beautiful.

There is always the possibility for love; deep, committed love. But as mentioned before, I personally can not envision a successful romantic love without conditions.
Click to expand...

So the words "I love you" should always be followed by "as long as you <insert condition>"?
 
I have unconditional love for a great many people. Once I give it out it stays out there unless someone sets out to destroy it utterly. Even then an act of contrition and apology can restore it almost fully.

But then I fall in love with so many people far too often for the meaning to be equal to yours. I'm currently in love with more than eight of the forum members here, male and female. It's unconditional in the sense that I don't require anything back from them, but it's not abusive because I'm not in habit of doing anything for anybody that I'm in love with unless there's a profitable motive there for me. I've no desire to have my emotions ripped from me, so they're separate from my thoughts and actions.
 
Wyote said:
Stone, you like many people seem to have a disconnect between the concept of love and love in the context of relating to one another.
Click to expand...

So what is wrong with that way of thinking? The relationship can end, if it must but the love can carry on, I think that is beautiful.
 
Stone said:
So the words "I love you" should always be followed by "as long as you <insert condition>"?
Click to expand...

That's a lot of debate for me right now, on 3 hours sleep last night, but this last question seems easy enough... the answer is "Of course not".

In a true, deep, intuitive, mutual loving relationship, you should not need to insert the conditions as payment for or a requisite of the love. But you should be able to present them, in a loving way, and expect that they will be considered with respect.

Having needs develop or emerge over the course of time which are not met can change the experience of loving, I think. If one person in the relationship were to dismiss changing needs, this would seem to me to be the opposite of unconditional love. It sounds more like another case of love being interpreted differently by two people.

I'm picturing it in 3D this way:

Love sits on a table. It is a perfect, unconditional, and beautiful thing sitting there all alone (next to a single tulip. with surf crashing in the background and a slant of sunlight across the table). As soon as someone picks that love up, and it becomes "their" love, it becomes infused with their own personal needs, desires, perception. Some of these people's needs will be noble, others will not.

Love as a concept is just how you imagine it to be, I think. Put it in the hands of a human being... well... it's like they try to convince me:

Guns don't kill people. People kill people. (Which I don't actually agree with, but it seemed like a reasonable analogy, especially if you consider that the gun became a deadly object only after it was picked up by the person)
 
Kwistalline said:
I've actually been here, btw. Many a friendship had to die b/c I was hurting myself, slaving away over someone who, really, was just taking advantage of me. Just imagine, then, how much greater the abuse when you love someone romantically and expect nothing from them in return. It's the abused wife type of love, the Stockholm syndrome kind of love, but only because people are not perfect. If they were, unconditional love would be more than just an ideal.
Click to expand...

Loving someone and allowing someone to abuse you are two entirely unrelated things. Like I said before you can break the relationship, remove yourself from harms way and yet still love that person.

But what of boundaries? Doesn't every relationship need these? And we all see areas where other people need their weaknesses strengthened, and bad habits eliminated. It is how we choose to go about it that marks the difference between a love and tyranny.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how this relates.



Love is intrinsically perfect. People are not. We are the extrinsic factor that corrupts true love and requires conditions on what ought to be conditional. I wish this were not as it is, because love should be a beautiful thing. The problem lies in the human heart. We make love what it ought not to be.
Click to expand...

I think it is entirely within the realm of human capability to feel unconditional love without bringing harm to yourself or others.
 
I also want to add that I think our understanding of love evolves as our life goes on, so that my understanding of what is possible with regard to love could be very different to yours.

I'm speaking from the perspective of a woman on her second marriage, with considerable prior relationship experience.

In fact, I don't doubt that I too believed in unconditional love or loved others unconditionally at some point, but that my own life experiences have caused me to believe that this can be harmful to me, or convinced me that it doesn't really exist or that it is so rare that most of us will never experience it.

And now I find myself uncomfortable trying to convince anyone against their own interpretation of love.

Go to it, guys. There can never be enough love out there :)
 
*hopes his naive bubble isn't gunna burst any time soon*

I think my interpretation of love would be hard for me to explain but it is very different from the hollywood version and it seems different from what you guys have expressed also.
 
I'd have to agree with Stone on this one. Though I kind of understand what some of you are talking about with his seeming disconnect with the concept of love and love in the context of relationship, unconditional love by its very nature is relational so it couldn't be experienced or described outside the context of relationship with others. I think that is what he is getting at (correct me if I'm wrong Stone). With that said, I think an argument could be made for both sides, i.e.- if unconditional love is possible in a relationship and not lead to abuse or "chaos", or if it isn't possible. But I think we are starting to get slightly off the topic of this thread. Perhaps a separate thread can be started in regards to how to define unconditional love or what it means to you. Maybe not necessary. I'm just trying to keep us focused here and on topic, which was how we would define the perfect relationship.
 
I'll just reiterate my points because I think we all actually feel the same way but are having communication problems.

-unconditional love is entirely possible
-in a continuous, healthy functioning relationship, unconditional love must be accompanied by conditional love

I think I meant that it is abusive to only love them unconditionally because that gives them all of the power and control and if you give anyone complete power and control of yourself then you simply do not respect yourself. It may seem very caring or noble to do so, but it's mostly just foolish. There are far too many unknowns, out of yours and their control.

How does that sound?
 
Last edited:
Unconditional love with conditional love as well for romantic relationships would be the perfect combo.
 
So we're all in agreement? WOOT! I love this forum!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back