And I’m talking about Love in truth, not this version of Love from culture, or “man” (society). Because the “Love” that society has curated and pushed is not only destructive but normalized. Part of me almost wants to say that we aren’t actually equipped to handle what real Love means because subsequently…we’d crumble to dust.
So before you read this post, you must know that this one is not for the faint of heart. As a *Believer, this truth is destined to bring out the ick and opposition in people, but that’s part of the point, and I’ll unpack that one in this post as well. The goal of this post is merely to allow an open-minded perspective on the very aspect of life derived and driven by human connection, which makes it all the more vital.
8 Lies ABOUT LOVE society has made you to believe
Love means feelings supersede facts
There’s a whole lot of denying and suppressing of the truth [facts] going around in order to affirm people’s feelings these days. Unfortunately truth can bring about more displeasure to others than comfort these days, so instead we’ve twisted truth to suit people’s emotional capacity (what they can and can’t manage, handle, or “accept”). People’s feelings have become more important than the truth, while tip-toeing around people’s feelings and minimizing truth actually isn’t Love at all.
That’s not to say feelings aren’t valid and important, but that they shouldn’t be glorified to the point of clouding our judgement, minimizing rationale, advocating *evil*, and suppressing the truth in order to ensure everyone’s *comfort*.
Not only is this a dangerous approach (especially those, for instance, in abusive relationships), it really sets us up for failure in what it means to truly Love everyone – not just a select or singular person. To touch on the abuse part – if in Love, feelings supersede facts, then those would genuinely default to feel, when their partner abuses them, it’s because they “love” them. When the fact is abuse is not Love. *Nor is Love tolerating abuse, but we’ll get to that one.
Or, think of it like this: sometimes you feel like you have to fart, but after releasing some of that pressure the fact is you just pooped yourself.
Love is based on feeling
While Love brings about and results in [many] feelings, it is actually based on choice. Isn’t that why Love is a commitment? A commitment is a choice. Hm, maybe that’s why Hookup Culture is running rampant these days, because it’s the polar opposite of Love and commitment.
And, yet, those will say, “I Love my friends but I’m not committed to them.” Really, are you not? Sure, you are not *bound* to your friends, but you are certainly, and willingly, committed to them. Everyday, when you wake up, you’re given the option to choose [to] Love (that friend). But what about when they do something to hurt or disappoint you – will you still [choose to] Love them? *Are you able to extend mercy, grace, and forgiveness? Are you [committed to] choosing to Love them, regardless if they hurt you or not? Or do you only Love them (conditionally) for as long as they don’t hurt your feelings and disappoint you?
If Love is a feeling, then that would mean the feeling of Love (its intensity, fondness [for others]) differs for certain people – the Love you have for your partner versus the Love you have for a friend, family member, or even a stranger. Yup, Love is not just based on affection for someone if we can also Love others we’ve never met. Double yup, because that means you can whole-heartedly Love a complete stranger AND your partner equally – the point is you value the Love for your partner differently [*more*], so it’s easier to prioritize some above others, in terms of who receives it [deserves it]. Anddddd, as individuals, we determine [choose] that, no?
If Love is based on a feeling, it’s a no-brainer that you would die for your partner over a complete stranger (especially if it came down to the option), and that’s where we’re at as a society when it comes to the definition of Love. You might say there’s also a moral approach to Love (again, referring to Loving others whom you never met or have zero relations to). I can want/have the best interest of a stranger the same way I do for my spouse. That, there implies that Love is deeper than just feeling. Because you don’t need to feel that “romantic”, mushy Love with a friend or stranger to know you Love your friend or that stranger.
If we base Love solely on a feeling, then we are doomed emotionally. We will never Love anyone or feel Loved, nor will it be possible to. Love, at its core, must be based on choice because it’s not always easy.
Love is without consequence or admonition
Your parents Love you – that’s why they only want *what’s best* for you. Granted, in our eyes their best isn’t always our own idea of our best – it’s the principle. Loving parents want to [do whatever they can to] set up their children to succeed, thrive, and survive. And through this usually comes wisdom, discipline and guidance – whether it be solicited or unsolicited. *Yes, I understand this may not be everyone’s parental circumstance, but those who Love you want “the best” for you – period.
For instance, you like to party because you’re young, everyone’s doing it, and it’s your time to *live it up* un-regrettably and unapologetically. You have the take it or leave it approach to anyone who disagrees or is displeased, and you believe that someone who Loves you will simply support and enable you to continue this so-called *passion* in life. Now let’s say your parents express concern over your partying and drinking habits, exposing the ways this pattern has had a negative impact in your life. They’re concern, or lack of support for your lifestyle is not unloving. Society has conditioned you to believe so.
Your friend Loves you – that’s why they tell you the bold-face truth, even when sometimes it hurts or you don’t always get your way. Maybe it’s advice you don’t want to hear (but need to), or something not going in your favor. They Love you enough to be real with you when everyone else simply tip-toes around you with *nice* words, and false hope or promises. For instance, your friend expresses difficulty getting along with you when you struggle to allow space for differing opinions by mocking those who don’t agree with you. You think your friend is being unloving by not prioritizing your comfort (by dishonoring themselves).
Your partner Loves you – that’s why they hold you accountable or “correct” you when you slip. This can often feel like a gut punch to our ego, and even if executed in a Loving manner it is often received unlovingly. In fact, we always tend to view and presume this as a personal attack. While we’re each responsible for our own behavior, we’re also called to hold others [our partner] accountable as well – lovingly. For instance, your partner warns that your work ethic (overachievement to the point of burn out or inbalance) has compromised priority in the relationship – by you choosing to stay late, picking up extra shifts unnecessarily, failing to communicate, attending to work-related conversations outside of work, a lack of work and personal life boundaries, etc.
Point blank, if we cannot receive direction, correction or honesty (that isn’t sugar-coated) then we inevitably will struggle receiving Love. Love does not mean “I can do whatever I want and everyone should let me – they can either join me or leave.”
Love is without hurt or discomfort
Yeahhhhh, I know I’m probably in for this one. But, really, we’re in deep because society struggles to differentiate between inevitable (or mistakable) pain and inexcusable pain. Abuse = inexcusable pain. We also need to remember we’re all human.
BTW, pain is discomfort and discomfort can be painful. We also struggle to not only recognize but acknowledge a relationship that is consumed by discomfort – that’s not Love, either. Yet Love doesn’t mean, guarantee or promise we won’t experience it.
The reality is, Love in and of itself is not free from disappointment, offense, anger or even hurt. Tell me there hasn’t been a single instance where your parents haven’t said or done something to irritate you (like when your world was *rocked* because they took your phone away as a teenager). That doesn’t mean they don’t Love you.
The thing is, your partner may tell you something in the kindest way humanly possible, and still end up hurting your feelings. “Honey, thank you for busting your butt to cook dinner – I’m just not a fan of spaghetti,” when all you hear is, “You couldn’t even cook me a meal I actually like,” so you respond with, “Wow, would have been nice to know beforehand after I went through all that work for you not to even eat it. Thanks for the insincere appreciation.“
If we think Love means without pain, that’s a Utopia definition of Love that is unachievable in this life. Discomfort, in Love, is unavoidable.
Love is unconditional
Many want [to find/to have] unconditional Love while they themselves Love others with conditions – [Unconditional] “I’ll Love you regardless of what’s on the outside!” to [conditional] “If you stop caring for your body and gain the weight, the stretch marks, etc., then I’ll stop Loving you.” Justify this comparison all you want.
Unconditional Love simply means to Love someone no matter what and for who they are (*past, present and future). But that’s sounds pretty unrealistic, right, because how can we Love every, single, minute, old and new, unpredictable and uncontrollable thing about our partner? Can I Love my husband even if he, say, murders someone? In unconditional terms, absolutely. That means there would be no effect or influence on my feelings for/connection with him, but that just isn’t realistic now, is it?
Hm, so do we have the whole Unconditional Love thing all wrong? I think it’s easy to say that when you Love someone you care about them and their wellbeing, right? So you only want the best for them, too, correct? You have their best interest at heart (in your heart)? I think it’s already possible to do all that…REGARDLESS of *what* and *if*. Technically, then, it’s far easier for us to unconditionally Love total strangers because of fewer “conditions”. Wouldn’t you agree???
Love means tolerance
Today’s culture would never dare say, “Just because he cheated on you, if you Love him you would forgive him, give him another change or just stay with him.” *AKA you would simply tolerate his unfaithfulness to you. And that’s a fairly extreme example to get my point across – that Love doesn’t mean enduring or permitting unfair treatment.
YET, we also have the toughest time understanding that we can still Love someone even if…[one extreme] they cheated or [the other] they share differing opinions. But here comes the pierce ringing in majority’s ears: we can still Love someone and not tolerate everything about them.
I mean, real talk: are we just supposed to *tolerate* [be “okay” with, unaffected by, accepting of] living in a world of murder, r*pe, abuse, ETC.? Tolerate, as in, “Live and let Live“. Tolerate, as in, silent opposition. Tolerate, as in, blind enablement. Tolerate, as in, back-door *normalize* it. Tolerate, as in, participation in the name of indifference. *PSA, I’m not talking about people, I’m talking about man’s evil ways.
Um, no, of course we’re not supposed to tolerate the evil in the world we live in – that would mean we’ve made FRIENDS with it – peace with it – by surrendering to it. So why is tolerance in this world so heavily mandated when it comes to Love?
I am finding that is the very motto and message being plastered across today’s biggest face – digital media. And that advocating or standing for anything else is considered hateful. We have reached a point where we are essentially introducing something [a type of *Love*] that is Universal at the expense of taking away, demonizing or minimizing what real Love is entirely. Society is slyly preaching that Love means tolerance, which is silently promoting the opposite of Love.
[mailerlite_form form_id=23]Love is without sacrifice
Love actually requires denying the self to serve others. Therefore, it will require you to be more mindful about the way you live your life, and how you carry yourself, that may be detrimental to others. For instance, out of Love, you are willing to prioritize more time with your partner instead of taking it to the bar with your friends on the weekends. Meaning, you will *sacrifice* where, when and how your time is spent in a way that [positively] aligns with the health, safety and security of your relationship (and your partner’s best interest).
Since true Love is not boasting, that means it is done in secret. It is not showy or arrogant, and without personal gain. Love’s purpose is to give and serve – to Love someone without recognition or reciprocation, period. This not being an easy pill to swallow these days, since society wants a world full of self-reliant, hyper-independents with the aim to self-serve because “they don’t need anyone else”.
Love requiring sacrifice has an itchy feel for many, I think, due to the remaining, unanswered question, “What comes first, the chicken or the egg?” The, “Who makes the first move?” – “Who makes the change first?” – “Who gives up something to prove their *worthiness* and *trust*“? We all know Love requires sacrifice, yet so many are resistant to this (by adhering our identity to our personal trauma in life) at the expense of real human connection and Love. The “Love hurt me real bad so I’m going to use that pain to avoid it or sabotage it from now on,” or “If that’s what Love *is*, then I don’t want it, and I’m going to curate my own definition of Love that suits *me*.“
Society wants us to continue to have that tight grip (*focus on Self) because for as long as we do we won’t know what it means to truly let Love in, to receive it, and in time we won’t even be able to recognize it, in order to show [give] it.
Love means involuntary support and approval
This one can be very tricky because there are quite the number of circumstantial shoulds that can be fairly subjective. For example, should a (unmarried) partner continue to “support” their partner who is terminally ill? Now define that “support”, and should it be involuntary (expected of)? This is a pretty extreme-sided example, when I much prefer to focus on the involuntary support and approval of, say, one’s beliefs, opinions, choices, and lifestyle.
The truth is: I can certainly Love and care about someone without having to agree with, validate or *celebrate* their way of life. Do I need to repeat myself?
Not agreeing with, giving approval of or supporting the way someone lives their life does not make me unloving. Or “Anti-Love”. Respect has no place in this argument because I can respect someone and still not agree with, approve of or support something [of someone].
We often cherry pick scenarios like this: Love is when you absolutely despise punk rock but attend the concert with your partner/friend anyway because you know they Love it. First off, we’re missing the point if we’re only comfortable tickling the surface. Second, other than religious reasons, going to a punk rock concert – despite my distaste for the music – has little to no negative, direct impact on who I am and my life (*Of course there’s exceptions to this). And thirdly, I already mentioned that Love requires sacrifice…but not at the expense of dishonoring autonomy, individuality or sense of self. Many will find (on the surface) this is totally acceptable and, frankly, expected while others will not. That, basically, those who believe Love means involuntary support (approval, acceptance) are willfully against or opposed to sacrificial (self-denying, [serving] “others”-focused) Love.
Therefore, surely I can Love a friend and not support when they drink, whether socially or to the point of black out and belligerency. By not supporting them may mean avoiding interacting with them around the presence of alcohol – yup, even if its their birthday and their throwing a party. This doesn’t mean there’s an outcry of, “How dare you invite me to a party where there’s alcohol – what kind of friend are you?!” But if that friend continually asks why I reject their invitation to outings, I can still [Lovingly] honor my personal boundaries and reasoning – “I prefer to hang out with you not in the presence of alcohol.”
I can Love my husband and not approve of him making an expensive purchase without prior discussion. By not approving I can deem this behavior (or habit) within our marriage as “not OK, not acceptable” because it has a direct impact on communication and trust. I can Love my parents and still not agree with their high-end lifestyle when they can hardly pay their bills. By not agreeing with their spending, I can offer aid in other ways besides enabling their existing problem by giving them money.
The problem is people are so bothered by disapproval because self-validation simply isn’t enough. If involuntary support or approval is Love, there are far too many unhinged doors we risk opening. Besides, that’s a slippery slope to be on when we anticipate others to overlook the things we do, or expect others to dismantle their sense of self to advance or exemplify our own (by emotionally and psychologically abusing them for their approval and acceptance), and then define that as being Love.
It’s a rather CRAZY concept, I know, but I can Love a person and not agree with, approve of or be in support of something they do…and that not be an attack on them and their value as a human being.