What is not love? | INFJ Forum

What is not love?

Trifoilum

Trifoilum

find wisdom, build hope.
Dec 27, 2009
6,503
1,921
380
MBTI
INFJ
Enneagram
6w5
We..have a lot of threads talking about love and its shape and how it relates to us people; INFJs or not...

so time to ask for the reverse.

What is not love, for you? What ideas / ideals do you find to be ineffective / inadequate / just plain wrong, as far as your love is concerned?

Please do be respectful though. I recognize this topic can be very contentious. People can very well see different things under different consideration and believe different things and still talk peacefully, live a happy and meaningful and respectable life, especially concerning these fundamentals such as the concept of love.
 
Much easier to answer.

Setting conditions upon what one must do to maintain love (materialisms rather than something as fundamental as being a good Father for example), withholding affections until acts of service are fulfilled, blaming-excessive criticism-shaming cycles that show one is not attempting to communicate acceptance, expectations upon another (such as your own happiness, never having debts or that someone will resolve all issues for you), making important decisions alone (such as a vasectomy or having children with another), thinking for others all the time without seeking opinions, 'rewarding' a partner for meeting your needs while ignoring theirs, superiority seeking over another person and not being willing to consider a person's happiness over your own i.e. what's in it for me' and how can I use someone as a means to an end.

In short the Getting and Protecting behaviours noted in Real Love by Greg Baer that show you care more about your own needs: lying to get attention or manipulate others, aggression to control or 'get needs met' rather than discussing them clearly, running away from issues expecting others to solve them for you and playing the victim in life expecting others to care about you (I tend to agree with these when one cannot be completely loving when they are looking out for their own needs only...).

What is not self love (self compassion or acceptance): blaming others for your issues, using dishonest personas to manipulate or influence others, refusing to accept oneself or others efforts, giving support or respect with conditions (what can this person do for me alone), pretending to be something you are not to please others, needing constant validation from others, the absence of positive introspective self awareness, criticising others needlessly, G+P behaviours, not challenging insecurities or fears while expecting others to solve them for you only, negative self talk and never being wrong.
 
Last edited:
anything that denies the rights and freedoms of the one being 'loved'
 
o_q said:
I think you just deprecated marriage and procreation >.>
Click to expand...

Not necessarily..... cause both individuals would have to make the personal choices to get married and procreate... so they are choosing to have some of their freedoms and/or rights taken away.

Unless it's an arranged marriage or something similar.
 
bionic said:
Not necessarily..... cause both individuals would have to make the personal choices to get married and procreate... so they are choosing to have some of their freedoms and/or rights taken away.

Unless it's an arranged marriage or something similar.
Click to expand...

I don't see how this changes either of their freedom. This argument is no different from our current issues with the NSA. Yes, it's the same. Yes I introduced a completely different topic, and yes, it's still the same.
 
I've learned we can make something out of nothing.
 
I've never connected with the idea of love as always reciprocal or equal. Love is not really about half n' half. That sounds more like financial arrangement where each person's contribution must be split evenly, no more or no less. Love is something where you will give as much as you can or have because you want to, and the other person does the same. This doesn't mean you should give your all to someone who never gives back. Love wasn't meant to be "if you love me half way, then I will meet you half way". If you love someone, you are making a choice to feel that way of your choosing. You have to at some point, take responsibility for that choice. In the words of that song "I can't make you love me if you don't." That person has to choose to love in feeling and action voluntarily. There's a difference between having standards and having conditions in love. You can have guidelines for qualities you may want a partner to have, but when you put conditions on whether or not you love someone because they do not meet high standards, then it sounds as if the conditions are more important than whether or not you and this person love each other. Personally, being concerned about standards and imposing conditions on someone based on who and how I think they should be has never worked. On the other hand, love is not helpless. The idea that love is not a choice and you have no control over who you love contradicts the idea that we have the right to choose who we are drawn to. Many people can inspire love in someone for different reasons just as someone can choose to leave the relationship because it's not inspiring enough love for them. Or this other myth, that if you love someone, you will accept them completely. I think I wrote that in the other thread about love but that's questionable. Expecting partners or loves to accept really bad habits and put up with whatever you give them because they love you and they "should" just accept it no matter what is misguided. It means no compromise and it's an unhealthy approach to relationships.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back