RE: 2 out of 3

RE: 2 out of 3 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive

Message

Subductrssss -> RE: 2 out of 3 (9/30/2008 4:47:27 PM)
For some reason I cannot edit my original posting but in "answer" to the question, I do fall and when I fall I fall hard and fast and to love someone without being loved in return can be okay for a time but after awhile you start questioning yourself and your womanhood and wondering......... why doesn't He/She love me.

Missokyst -> RE: 2 out of 3 (9/30/2008 6:28:10 PM)
Before I was in love I needed to talk to him. I needed to have contact, either in person, or by phone, or letters. I smiled when I saw his face, or a post mark from the FPO in SF. He became part of my life before I realised that there was no turning back for me. It wasn't until I realised that I could not see myself without him in my life, that I knew I was in love. So need for me, must come first. For me it is this: If I do not need you, I sure dont love you. Kyst quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst I have always wondered how many withold 1 and 2 for that dangling carrot of number 3. I mean.. how the hell do they get to love if they haven't gone through the "I want you. I need you." part first? Is there a door I am missing? Kyst I don't understand how you can get to need without love. For me, that's the prerequisite. But need requires enormous amount of trust and a history together to be able for me to be able to take down those walls and allow myself to need him. Without love, both giving and getting, I don't go to need. And sometimes even with love I can't go there. Need is the hardest one.

Jeptha -> RE: 2 out of 3 (10/2/2008 12:01:01 PM)
There has to be love...or something like it (!)....in place. What I mean by "or something like it": .... I'm not exactly sure. I don't mean "deep romantic love", because I think we worship that concept so much in our culture that we have sort of warped it a little. Like when you cling to something so tightly that you crush it. But I haven't come up with an acceptible substitute that can be encapsulated in just a couple of words. "Unconditional positive regard", maybe? Sounds a little too dry and clinical, though. There has to be a connection with the other person that I feel very deeply. To have that kind of rapport with someone is a pretty rare thing. But it doesn't have to be the decree of eternal undying love that you see in the movies. In some ways I feel like it is - I still feel sort of connected with all my partners, even though we're not together. They are still a part of me, in a way. So: while it doesn't have to be the classic/standard model of romantical love, it does have to be a situation where I want the other person to become a part of me, which is still somewhat of a big deal.

KatyLied -> RE: 2 out of 3 (10/2/2008 2:05:56 PM)
quote: There has to be love...or something like it (!)....in place. I like that phrase and it describes things for me. I need to have affection and attraction and compatibility, but I do not need to be in love or have someone be in love with me, in order to have a fulfilling, great relationship. I know this because I've done it. I can have an initimate relationship without love, as long as some other things are there. I'm open to falling in love, to love and be loved, whatever that means. But I like to allow relationships to take whatever natural course they will, without too much pushing or prodding.

VivaciousSub -> RE: 2 out of 3 (10/2/2008 3:35:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied quote: There has to be love...or something like it (!)....in place. I like that phrase and it describes things for me. I need to have affection and attraction and compatibility, but I do not need to be in love or have someone be in love with me, in order to have a fulfilling, great relationship. I know this because I've done it. I can have an initimate relationship without love, as long as some other things are there. I'm open to falling in love, to love and be loved, whatever that means. But I like to allow relationships to take whatever natural course they will, without too much pushing or prodding. I like that phrase too. Sir and I have an agreement to leave love out of it, but I don't doubt for a second that we care for each other very much, enjoy spending time in each other's company, and so on and so forth. It's a very intimate relationship, but love hasn't got a thing to do with it in this instance. I learned a long time ago that if I try to control the direction of the relationship through pushing or prodding, it falls apart. So, I'm doing what I do best - giving up control - and enjoying the ride for what it is, not what I think it "could" be. And giving up control has taken away all of that nasty, unattractive angst that I used to get where relationships were concerned.

yourMissTress -> RE: 2 out of 3 (10/2/2008 4:25:07 PM)
quote: Too many people need the 3 from the beginning. Love for me is wanting that person in your life, no matter what. Not being able to see a place or time where he is not a part of you in some way, that is love. Having to have all three without first doing the first 2 is not realistic in my view. Love happens over time. Not when legs open. For me, that instant stuff is just not reliable. This is it for me. I don't fall in love on day one, though I may be infatuated, I may have some gooey mushy feelings, I may even have that starry look in my eyes, but that's not love. Love grows, it blossoms and becomes through time and the stages of intimacy. It can grow quickly or slowly, depending on the person and their willingness to let go and let it happen, but it isn't instantaneous, not for me anyway. When I love someone, I want them to be happy. If at some point that means that they are no longer my lover, partner, or sub, but are my friend, then great. They are still in my life in some way. They are still a part of me, some how. The people that I have been able to let go of completely...that wasn't love, it was something else.

DesFIP -> RE: 2 out of 3 (10/2/2008 6:10:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Subductrssss For some reason I cannot edit my original posting The edit feature expires after about an hour. So check your posts for typos immediately, otherwise they haunt you for eternity!

lizcgirl -> RE: 2 out of 3 (10/2/2008 6:40:18 PM)
I can have the first two without the third. Some times I'm just not ready to love some one. I want them in my life, I need the contact and the developing emotions, but I might not be ready to hand them my heart fully. Ideally I want all three, but I don't love easily and I rather accept the first two and allow the third to grow and develop on its own. But once I have all three, there's no way I could pull back and be satisfied with only want and need. So I tend to be a little hesitant with the dreaded "L" word.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

1.171875E-02