Welcome to Gaia! ::


J_Goldens_Shadow
De-evolved you mean.


Actually, the modern interpretation of "love" as something that should, say, be present in relationships is a new thing, and I for one call it an improvement.

Fashionable Genius

Natas Ferret
J_Goldens_Shadow
Love today gets too confused with infatuation and twitipation. Mainly when a man says he loves the woman he's with, it's to get into her pants. Myself, I have never told a GF that I have had that I had loved her and nor will I, until I am sure that she is the one girl that I am going to marry without a grain of Doubt in my mind.
You equate love with sex? Damn, sucks for you.
Then I don't love my parents? gonk Oh man, that bites. What about my sister or my dog?
I'm honestly disgusted by the people who go from boyfriend to boyfriend and brag about how much sex they've got and how many times they kiss. I hate it when people claim to love someone, when they're only judging off of looks. So much of it just makes me really mad.

Love is definantly not what it used to be. And from all the corruption, it's become hard to recognise people's intentions. Are they getting close to you in hope of a great future together, or do they just want something from you? Sometimes it's impossible to tell, and it makes me wish mankind had more values and standards, rather than just looking for someone to give you temporary pleasure.

In this generation, I believe love is rare, but is a more common lust. How disappointing...
ShiSang
I'm honestly disgusted by the people who go from boyfriend to boyfriend and brag about how much sex they've got and how many times they kiss. I hate it when people claim to love someone, when they're only judging off of looks. So much of it just makes me really mad.

Love is definantly not what it used to be. And from all the corruption, it's become hard to recognise people's intentions. Are they getting close to you in hope of a great future together, or do they just want something from you? Sometimes it's impossible to tell, and it makes me wish mankind had more values and standards, rather than just looking for someone to give you temporary pleasure.

In this generation, I believe love is rare, but is a more common lust. How disappointing...
Hear Hear!
vpshinra
DemonNick
Quote:
Well start with the topic line. Is love love anymore? It is my opinion that love, in current society, has lost the meaning it once held. Why, you may ask? Take a look around sometime, listen closely. Love is tossed around so casually, you'll hear people one week say "oh, I just met my new boyfriend/girlfriend, he/she's so sweet, I love them", in the not to far future, typically, you will see them moping "oh my bf/gf left me, I'm so hurt" but a week later its back to "oh, I just met my new boyfriend/girlfriend, he/she's so sweet, I love them". Wait? Hardly any time goes by and they're already out of love with the person before and in love with the new one? When did it become that easy?

The modern image of love was developed in the early 20th century. Before then it was mainly arranged courtships and numerous rules. That's also not love. That's relationships. Love is something more than that.


Hm. Actually, I beg to differ. The "modern" concept of love actually can be drawn back to the days of Ancient Greece and even further to epics such as Gilgamesh and the Ramayana. However, the idea of marriage for love is modern.

The best proof of text I can give you is Plato's "Symposium" in which love is discussed at length. Passionate love is very much described, as is "pure love" or the idea that a man and a woman (or a man and a man, or woman and woman, actually) were once one being, but split and became two and you eternally search for your counterpart (I cannot remember the name of the philosopher who brought this point up...)

In the Ramayana, Rama loves Sita so much that he's willing to do anything for her. After their years of hardship he says that he cannot be with her for fear that she has been despoiled or unfaithful, and she asks he build her a funeral pyre, but she doesn't burn because she has not been. They have a concept of "pure" love that is mingled with devotion and duty to one's spouse.

However, I repeat - while the concept is not modern, marriage FOR love is.


True, but you have to realize what he is trying to say. Teenagers these days are throwing around the word Love likes its the name of a car. They associate it with everything they do. Even jokingly they say "I love you." It's a phrase that shouldn't be portayed as so easily thrown in and thrown out.

The movie Closer is a prime example of how the real world views Love. You have those people who believe that they love someone, but in the real circumstances they don't. Then you have those people that are willing to hurt themselves just to express love for someone that they don't truly love.

You need to look at society now, which is what the first author tried to do, and realize that the term Love has been modernized to fit a "on-the-go-life style".
Holy crap, this discussion is still going?
Love is one of those words that was lost in translation at some point. There are many different kinds of love, and people are only being fed one word for it. Greed, lust, dependency, submission, selfishness, and closeness are all titled love. And, it's true--they can all be kinds of love. But the word is just too broad and too shallow.
We need to educate the world on what LOVE, as we would like to define it, is. I think that's the first step to coming a little closer to a society that gets back to real love.
You gotta define.

What is this love-thing you speak of? How can you have a discussion on such a broad topic if there isnt any real solid ground for debate? Personally I think that if your talking about the kind of love that keeps people together forever... than yes it has been pretty much lost because it was never really there in the first place. If we look at what kept people togerther historically it was social neccesity not love, and if you go back really far it was a survival tactic, not to mention survival of the gene pool.
Its kinda hard to talk about something that cant be defined or proven, so isnt it ironic that I just managed to take up so much time doing so?
The word "to love" in the English launguage has indeed become more like the French aimer, both mean to love and are used for day to day things.

Examples:
"J'aime le chocolat."
Literally translated this means "I love chocolate", however this does not imply that there is a sexual or otherwise relationship with chocolate. On the other hand:
"Je t'aime."
Literally translated this means "I love you", however this merely is the same as "I care for you."
"Je t'adore." This again means "I love you." this time it carries with it strong passion as (ususally) "I love (approximated as love betwen two people in an intimate realtionship) you."
"J'adore chocolat."
This carries the connotation of "I love (as in the context of holding above other love [ex. favorite]) chocolate." with no sexual connotation whatsoever.

"Is English appproaching the time where we need another word for love?" should be the question being asked.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum