home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky alt.polyamory:1802 alt.romance:14126 alt.sex:36411 alt.callahans:13702
- Newsgroups: alt.polyamory,alt.romance,alt.sex,alt.callahans
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!munnari.oz.au!uniwa!newsman!possum!keulen
- From: keulen@possum.csu.murdoch.edu.au (Mike van Keulen)
- Subject: Re: Why I don't use the word "Love" very much
- Message-ID: <keulen.721967402@possum>
- Sender: news@newsman.csu.murdoch.edu.au (News Man)
- Organization: Murdoch University
- References: <1992Nov15.114740.783@midway.uchicago.edu> <00963A4C.3DA2BFC0@Msu.oscs.montana.edu>
- Date: 17 Nov 92 02:30:02 GMT
- Lines: 26
-
- oopcv@Msu.oscs.montana.edu writes:
-
- >In article <1992Nov15.114740.783@midway.uchicago.edu>, mbr2@quads.uchicago.edu (Curious Of All Natures) writes:
- >> This is very important to remember! People do not mean the same
- >>thing by "love" that you do. If someone asks "Do you love me?" and you
- >>answer "yes" without elaboration, they will walk away thinking you feel
- >>what "love" means to _them_ and they won't have learned about your own
- >>unique feelings and desires and beliefs.
- >>
- >Okay, so the next time someone says "I love you," should they get the third
- >degree? Shall I respond with, "What do you mean by _that_?" or "How do _YOU_
- >define love?"
-
- Of course they shouldn't get the third degree (removes some of the romance
- of the situation, no?); I think what COAN was trying to suggest was that
- we should perhaps be aware of the possible misunderstandings that can
- arise from such a glibly used phrase as "I love you".
-
- Splash!
-
- --
- ***************************** Michael van Keulen ***************************
- * Snail: School of BES - Biology e-mail: keulen@murdoch.edu.au *
- * Murdoch University phone: ++ 61 (09) 360-2843 (work)*
- * Murdoch WA 6150 AUSTRALIA ++ 61 (09) 417-3902 (home)*
- *************************** "To Love is to _LIVE_!" ************************
-