Comments on: “Love” HNT

By: Elle

Elle — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 03:25:25 +0000

Great HNT, lovely, sexy picture, interesting explanation.

PS: LOVE the shoes :P

By: Mojo

Mojo — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 02:32:36 +0000

Damn, I just had this conversation this afternoon with someone by email. We’re faced with a couple thousand years of societal programming that tells us (one one hand) “you must be very, very deeply in love with someone before you have sex with them” and (on the other hand) “don’t equate sex with love”.

Am I the only one who sees the contradiction here? Doesn’t the first argument pretty much do what the second tells us not to do? Maybe it’s just me.

But contradiction or not, those puny 2000 years of programming are trying to fight 65 million years of evolution. Physical contact/intimacy with others of our species is a fundamental human need. It’s born of the evolutionary imperative for the survival of the species. But what makes us unique is that we can — and do — incorporate an emotional component into sex, and can — if we will — enjoy it as something more than simply a means of procreation.

Where the line got drawn that said “if it feels good, it must be evil” is open to question, but it wasn’t always there. The ancients had no such inhibitions, and viewed sex as a vital part of humanity. In India, there are ancient temples dating back 3000 years (or more) featuring all manner of erotic sculptures and freises. But only last year, they pilloried Richard Gere for kissing a woman on stage during an awards ceremony. These are the people who brought you the Kama Sutra, folks. When that was written, sex brought humans closer to God (and not in the Trent Reznor kind of way).

But “love” as it’s popularly defined these days has more to do with Hallmark than the heart. And if that’s what it’s become, they can have it.

Oh… did I forget to say I love your photo? I think I did.

Love your photo.

Sorry ’bout the rant.

By: Ansley

Ansley — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:39:55 +0000

I love your photo. <3

By: Cinful

Cinful — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:50:34 +0000

I agree. Love is not a limited resource we need to hoard for just a few. It truly is a case of the more you give, the more you get back. As long as we accept love in return we’ll always have an unending supply to spread around, lavishly!!

Love the photo, very fitting for the post.

By: Safo Garcia

Safo Garcia — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 18:04:45 +0000

I agree, I think it’s a widely shared goal here to craft a world in which everybody is free to love whom and how they want.

Those shoes *are* damn sexy. I’m so glad I discovered your wonderful blog.

By: Amalthea

Amalthea — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:34:18 +0000

I love this post. And I mean it, I do. I got a squishy warm feeling deep inside when I read it. It reminded me why people sometimes get uncomfy with me, I try to be unstinting in my praise when I feel it. I am overly demonstrative in most people’s eyes. Not physically either, but I like to leave little notes, buy random little gifts, send a random card, or even just randomly say: thank you for blank. It makes people uncomfortable sometimes, but I just can’t live with not telling them. Life has always felt somewhat short to me, and I want them to know, NOW. Lovely post dearie, thanks for sharing. The world would be a better place if we could all just get more comfortable feeling what we feel and expressing it.

By: Pagankinktress

Pagankinktress — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:03:32 +0000

I gotta say, I really enjoy when you share your thought processes and philosophies like this. It doesn’t matter who agrees or disagrees, but rather, the insights you share with us help us to look at our own…or at least, I’m prompted to take a look at myself and what I believe. You get me thinking. Which I *love*. ;)

There is a difference between being in love and having love for someone. Love also has a myriad of forms. Does anyone remember this from Psych 101: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_theory_of_love

And I totally believe you can love more than one person at the same time.

Love is a funny phenomenon, and I guess that’s why we tend to get all wonky when trying to define what it is and isn’t. But that’s the way it goes with emotions…they’re never really right or wrong. They just are. We just sometimes complicate stuff because we have a need to define and categorize everything.

Thanks for sharing! And yes, the shoes are smokin’! ;)

By: lady brett

lady brett — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:29:35 +0000

yes. love, love, love! i’m getting a bit better, but i’ve always been one of those people who breaks out into a sweat with the “i love you”s. funny ’cause i can gush to other people about how much i love my family, but i can’t tell them. also funny ’cause i love so much (but then, verbalizing my feelings has always been my weak spot)! i’m a bit better with friends, and finally mostly over it with the girlfriend =)

i also came to a stunning realization recently – i am in (platonic) love with some of my friends. i always thought “in love” was inherently sexual, but i think now it’s more about rationality. like, love is rational – the sort of thing you can detail in a “warm fuzzy” email (btw, you’re so cool), whereas being in love is not rational (also sometimes know as unconditional) – it is “i (would) love you despite [xyz].” leastwise, that’s my new take.

By: Roland Hulme

Roland Hulme — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 13:11:11 +0000

Awesome picture!

By: Ms.Lily

Ms.Lily — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 12:42:05 +0000

I agree, I am totally in love with my hubby, yet there are others I love completely as well. My children. I have many friends that I love, some in non-sexual ways and some that I would love to have more with.

Great photo, you look so cute and coy, yet a bit mischievous and the shoes, OMG, I sooOoOoo love those shoes.
HHNT