Platonic Love,Sexual Love,Impersonal Love

Lindaland

Lindaland Central

Platonic Love,Sexual Love,Impersonal Love (Page 1)

profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 3 pages long: 1 2 3

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Platonic Love,Sexual Love,Impersonal Love
peace Knowflake Posts: 1055 From: Honolulu,HI Registered: Apr 2004	posted March 24, 2006 08:43 AM Which do you prefer?. IP: Logged
pixelpixie Knowflake Posts: 5301 From: Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 2005	posted March 24, 2006 01:07 PM Can I check all of the above, and qualify it by context? IP: Logged
peace Knowflake Posts: 1055 From: Honolulu,HI Registered: Apr 2004	posted March 24, 2006 05:32 PM Shootz! IP: Logged
amisha121877 Knowflake Posts: 1248 From: Tri-State, USA Registered: Jul 2004	posted March 24, 2006 05:34 PM of the three - impersonal IP: Logged
BlueTopaz124 Knowflake Posts: 1382 From: Portland, OR Registered: Jan 2004	posted March 24, 2006 10:16 PM If I can't have Personal, all emcompassing, dying for each other passionate love, I'll take Platonic love IP: Logged
fayte.m Knowflake Posts: 9809 From: Still out looking for Schrödinger's cat. fayte1954@hotmail.com Registered: Mar 2005	posted March 25, 2006 02:50 AM If I had to pick one.... Platonic. IP: Logged
sue g Knowflake Posts: 8591 From: former land of the leprechaun Registered: Sep 2004	posted March 25, 2006 06:03 AM I will add my own Soul love and then sexual love Five planets in Scorpio needs the deep connection of sexual and soul love.....the closest thing to connecting with the Divine.... IP: Logged
fayte.m Knowflake Posts: 9809 From: Still out looking for Schrödinger's cat. fayte1954@hotmail.com Registered: Mar 2005	posted March 25, 2006 09:46 AM Thanks Sue! By that token my preferred order would be: Soul Platonic I do not equate sexual union with love. Sex can be used to express love, to share, but can also be done for fun... like is all that is needed. And for some like or love is not required. Sex is not love. But can be used in the expression of it. But if sex comes first...it is lust not love. Intense physical attracion, or even Karmic...but not love. True love takes time to grow and deepen. Yes.... Some folks can go from that sexual attraction..then on to true soul love in time. But rarely does it lead to true love unless there are other factors involved. Many a vibrant rose has been put to the trash bin when the petals dry up and fall off. Time will kill lust "love". But passion survives lust when the love is true and the passions for each other has many avenues of expression. Not just sexual. True love transecends the requirement for sexual union. Be the reasons for transcending the sexual, a choice or by circumstance. There are people out there who are unable, due to some infirmity or disease or handicap...who are unable to "use" sexual union to express love. Yet these relationships are true and strong and whole. And the still sexually fit person is not out getting it on the side. These folks totally enjoy each others company and are very much in love and love each other. Yes..one can love someone and not be in love. One can love but not actually like a person. Love is a word that has too many interpretations and shadings. I really wish there were better words to express the different types of love. Even saying "soul love" is iffy. I have had soul love with many. But they were not my soulmate. It can be soul love with vast differeces in ages, a 5 year old to a 105. It can be someone you never met in person, someone you only write to. Physical expression of a sexual nature is not required. I hope that made sense. ------------------ ~I intend to continue learning forever~"Fayte" ~I am still learning~ Michangelo The Door to Gnosis is never permanently locked...one only needs the correct keys and passwords. The pious man with closed eyes can often hold more ego than a proud man with open eyes. Out of the mouth of babes commeth wisdom that can rival that of sages. In the rough, or cut and polished..a diamond is still a precious gem. -NEXUS- IP: Logged
sue g Knowflake Posts: 8591 From: former land of the leprechaun Registered: Sep 2004	posted March 25, 2006 10:22 AM For you maybe Faye But for ME, the physical union is very important.....it brings me very close to that person and God. But I am me and you are you.... All different hey? xxx IP: Logged
fayte.m Knowflake Posts: 9809 From: Still out looking for Schrödinger's cat. fayte1954@hotmail.com Registered: Mar 2005	posted March 25, 2006 10:40 AM Oh Sue! I did NOT say that it is not important! But how many could/would continue "loving" another if they were unable to engage in sexual union with each other? Look at the late Christopher Reeves and his wife. Or Stephen Hawking and his What if your beloved were to become a paraplegic? Would you leave him? Or the reverse? In a healthy relationship..of course SEX is important! And desired! Even those who cannot have it..want it! But can most folks live in a relationship that due to circumstances beyond their control...made sexual union impossible, or even took it away from them later? I am NOT against sexual expression of love... By all means...if you both can..WONDERFUL! But some cannot..and not by choice. Sometimes it is just how things work out for some people. And as I said above... "Even saying "soul love" is iffy. I have had soul love with many. But they were not my soulmate. It can be soul love with vast differeces in ages, a 5 year old to a 105. It can be someone you never met in person, someone you only write to." Where on earth did you get the idea that I "prefer" no sex? That was a weird thing to say, unless you are again(as you have done before) referring to my being disabled. ------------------ ~I intend to continue learning forever~"Fayte" ~I am still learning~ Michangelo The Door to Gnosis is never permanently locked...one only needs the correct keys and passwords. The pious man with closed eyes can often hold more ego than a proud man with open eyes. Out of the mouth of babes commeth wisdom that can rival that of sages. In the rough, or cut and polished..a diamond is still a precious gem. -NEXUS- IP: Logged
WaterNymph Knowflake Posts: 2276 From: London, UK Registered: May 2005	posted March 25, 2006 10:49 AM Sexual What? IP: Logged
TINK Knowflake Posts: 3831 From: New England Registered: Mar 2003	posted March 25, 2006 11:15 AM Platonic all the way. It's the most transcedent. They didn't name it after that crazy Greek for nothing. IP: Logged
sue g Knowflake Posts: 8591 From: former land of the leprechaun Registered: Sep 2004	posted March 25, 2006 01:52 PM Where did I get the idea you prefer no sex.....???? I didnt....did I...say that......did !? You said that not me..... (am a little confused again) ??? IP: Logged
26taurus Knowflake Posts: 13411 From: * Registered: Jun 2004	posted March 25, 2006 02:10 PM What Tink said. IP: Logged
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 11943 From: Pleasanton, CA, USA Registered: May 2005	posted March 25, 2006 03:48 PM I'm with Pix. IP: Logged
fayte.m Knowflake Posts: 9809 From: Still out looking for Schrödinger's cat. fayte1954@hotmail.com Registered: Mar 2005	posted March 25, 2006 05:00 PM Sue.... I NEVER said I did not value sex! It sounded like you thought I did not think sex as important. What I meant was that I would still love my beloved even if sex were impossible. I would not need to find sexual release with another for my sexual gratifition if my beloved were unable. Of course I would miss it. Sexual union is wonderful! But masturbation works too. Fortunately for me he is quite able. I however am not some times. But when I am able... I enjoy and participate with great passion.So we go for quality over quantity, Sure..we both wish my nuerological troubles were not a hinderance at times. But we make do. That is not the same thing as being a non sexual person. The desire is still very much there. But even if we were both somehow unable to have sex...we would still love each other. Many folks WOULD leave their so called loved one, or at least screw around if circumstances were to befall them as I illustrate below.... I have known personally a paraplegic man whose wife did leave him because sexual union was more important to her than their long relationship, supposedly of love. This woman bragged how he was a major studmuffin. And he certainly was! But once MS.sexy pants was faced with living with a good man who could not give her sex...he was no longer a real man in her eyes. He revolted her. True love would not act that way. To each their own priorities...but do not call it love unless it can weather the storms of life and the the physical loss of ability to have sex..if that should happen. If love does not survive the storms of life that can happen in the sexual arena... Sorry...but that is not love. To any who consider sexual love the most important or a must have no matter what.....pray you never lose the ability to engage in it....nor your partner lose their ability. What would you do then? IP: Logged
Isis Knowflake Posts: 1922 From: CA Registered: Jan 2004	posted March 25, 2006 05:27 PM quote: But for ME, the physical union is very important.....it brings me very close to that person and God. I can totally relate Sue...5 planets in Scorpio here too, all in the 5th. I don't have a preference, however like Sue said, "Five planets in Scorpio needs the deep connection of sexual and soul love.....the closest thing to connecting with the Divine.... " I've never met someone else who related to that concept, but that's me all the way. I think Platonic love is stronger and more long lasting only because it's less emotionally driven IMHO. It's also much easier to come by than the kind of connection Sue and I are talking about. I would also add self-love to the list - I think that love is the most important because it's the point from which all other forms of (healthy) love generate. IP: Logged
sue g Knowflake Posts: 8591 From: former land of the leprechaun Registered: Sep 2004	posted March 25, 2006 05:53 PM Isis How wonderful to be understood by another !!! Thankyou I really needed that...... IP: Logged
fayte.m Knowflake Posts: 9809 From: Still out looking for Schrödinger's cat. fayte1954@hotmail.com Registered: Mar 2005	posted March 25, 2006 06:00 PM From Sue g: quote: For you maybe Faye But for ME, the physical union is very important.....it brings me very close to that person and God. I assure you, love, true love transcends that! You sound like you would commit suicide if you were suddenly unable to have sex. Or would leave a mate or lover if they were suddenly unable to have sex. How sad. Then you said: quote: Where did I get the idea you prefer no sex.....???? I didnt....did I...say that......did !? You said that not me..... (am a little confused again) ??? You did and you changed your post. You also said it on other threads. quote: I think Platonic love is stronger and more long lasting only because it's less emotionally driven. Perhaps that is true for some. But not for all. I was speaking of Platonic love not a Platonic buddy thing. quote: But for ME, the physical union is very important.....it brings me very close to that person and God. Of course it is important. But what about those who cannot? That implies that sexual union is the best and only way to being close to one's lover and God. That anything without sex is worth nothing...whether it is little to no sex, by choice or circumstance. And platonic or non sexual love not being as intimate or emotional? THAT IS TOTAL BULLCRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!! Again that implies that only sex matters. Without sex there is no real or meaningful or deep soul love. BULLCRAP!!!!!!!!!! I have experienced both. But sex without love or a Tantric connection is just sex. Fun yeah! But just sex. But love....real love can and does exist without sex. to have both is great...but do not demean the relationships who can only have love. IP: Logged
sue g Knowflake Posts: 8591 From: former land of the leprechaun Registered: Sep 2004	posted March 25, 2006 06:04 PM Isis I dont think what you write is BULLCRAP.....this is your opinion and I honour and understand it even if others dont. Faye, Please do not speak to others like this.....it is offensive and rude....Isis is just giving her opinion....it is not BULLCRAP ...... it is her truth....please honour that..... You belittle when you speak this way,cant you see that? Thankyou... IP: Logged
Isis Knowflake Posts: 1922 From: CA Registered: Jan 2004	posted March 25, 2006 06:05 PM quote: To any who consider sexual love the most important or a must have no matter what.....pray you never lose the ability to engage in it....nor your partner lose their ability. There are many ways that one can engage in sexual love. It doesn't necessarily require the ability for marathon physical activity. But I think I know what you're getting at, and I don't think either Sue nor I would leave someone because of a physical inability to participate in sexual activity. The original question was, "which is most important to us"...that form of love is very important to us. It doesn't mean that we're shallow or all we're about is sex - not to mention, we're not talking about just sex here, this is very different, and I can't think of a better way to express it to you than Sue already has. IP: Logged
Isis Knowflake Posts: 1922 From: CA Registered: Jan 2004	posted March 25, 2006 06:07 PM Fayte, why are you getting all defensive and [edit] angry [/edit]? This is about what is important to us. Personally. Not about right or wrong. Nobody is telling you you're wrong, backwards, you don't like sex, you don't know how to love, etc. I don't understand why you're getting all up in arms - over people's opinions in a post whose title is about LOVE... IP: Logged
WaterNymph Knowflake Posts: 2276 From: London, UK Registered: May 2005	posted March 25, 2006 06:15 PM I picked sexual because I’ve never been hurt by someone I’ve slept with. However, it’s only too easy to be harmed ( emotionally ) by someone I care about, hence why I didn’t put platonic love. IP: Logged
fayte.m Knowflake Posts: 9809 From: Still out looking for Schrödinger's cat. fayte1954@hotmail.com Registered: Mar 2005	posted March 25, 2006 06:16 PM Isis.. quote: There are many ways that one can engage in sexual love. It doesn't necessarily require the ability for marathon physical activity. But I think I know what you're getting at, and I don't think either Sue nor I would leave someone because of a physical inability to participate in sexual activity. THANK YOU! But the point I was trying to make is that sex is not necessary for true deep intense love. Personally I prefer to have both. And I have and do! Truly a wonderful thing! But love is more important to me and sex is an expression to augment it, not replace it. I hope that made sense. Sue...I was not insulting Isis. But I felt my views were being belittled by you. You have insulted me before on this issue. You know what I am talking about. Cut it with the sly digs please. Not funny. I think the air has been cleared a bit. IP: Logged
Isis Knowflake Posts: 1922 From: CA Registered: Jan 2004	posted March 25, 2006 06:24 PM quote: But the point I was trying to make is that sex is not necessary for true deep intense love. I can't speak for Sue, but it would be difficult for me to make a soul connection w/ a romantic interest that I couldn't "commune" with at that level, at least in the beginning. Once the love bond is formed, no I would not leave them because they were unable to have sex, however I would personally find it very difficult to form that bond in the first place if sex were an impossibility. If that makes me a bad person or shallow in some people's eyes, so be it. But try having a extremely Scorp heavy chart and viewing sex and sexual communinion as something trivial...not as easy as it sounds. LOL IP: Logged

This topic is 3 pages long: 1 2 3 All times are Eastern Standard Time	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com