TheApple

 Dear debo,

"But, then, a man and a woman would know this about one another before marrying...if they communicated their ideas about what a future together would look like...which would be a logical and sensible thing to do....don't intelligent people, who love one another, talk about a home and children down-the-road?"

Logical? Sensible? In my experience, love is most often neither of these. So, if you loved a guy and you wanted children but he didn't, would you marry him anyway or seek someone else?

I'm not sure what you call it. All I know is that I went out with a girl on Thursday, sent her flowers on Friday, went out with her on Saturday ... and have seen her everyday for the past 35 years. We 'moved in' together a year after we met...when we got married.

1. About love at first sight: Like some of you have said:  it depends on your personal definition of "love".

I for one, being very spiritual and believing in re-incarnation and soul-mates (note that we have many soul-mates and it is not restricted to a romantic relationship), I have to say that it would take more than just one look to realize you have a deeper connection with someone else. Unless there is a tremendous amount of spiritual connection and you are deeply in tune with these energies....I don't see how someone can "fall in love" from mere sight. I met my first "husband" (lived together for 7 years, had a daughter-but never "legally" married) through a car( I was in one car and he in another) and I was instantly "drawn" to him. I'll say that I felt there was something that impacted me...but I did not fall in love until later.

Now, my new husband (this time is a "legal" marriage- I use "legal" lightly since it's only a signature and a seal that differentiates it) I met him, did not care, or feel anything special at first. Then , on the course of 3 months of friendship, one day I saw him through a different glass, and we were married two months later..... 

2.  I have to say DEBO that I totally understand you, but I have to admit that I saw in my new husband "a good father for my children"  and I think he saw the same qualities in me....although it is TOTALLY up to me to want to be a MOTHER, and NOT up to my partner ; )

3. I am SURE what FER said is "directly translated" from the Hispanic culture. From my experience, it is a big part of what becoming a couple, and then a family, entails. People still don't see it as a good thing that a woman may choose not to have children. So please take FER's comment with a grain of salt, don't get upset at him.... BUT please, DO enlighten him with your views and opinions.

LOVE IS IN THE AIR!!!!!

QUERIDISIMAS DEBO Y MAJETA:  I have always respected, admired and even envied women.

*  I respect women for their effort of fighting in a world that is dominated by men. I respect women for the effort of waking  up everyday and prepare their children to go to school and they prepare themselves to work for their family. I respect and suport the right of single women to dicide when and with whom they to share their lives.

*   I admire women not only for their beauty but also for their intelligence besides thier capacity to deal with many things at the same time and   their corage to reach their goal in places where their goals seem to be imposible.. Personally, I have writing my best poems to them. 

*  I even envy women for their capacity to have a child when ever they want. (I've decided  the same but I don't  have that ability)

   when I was younger  I love some women and respect all their decision as their respect mine. some times I was hurt some times they were but this is life. I met a woman who broke my heart into154789653 pieces because she had  other plans to her and I respected it. I  was deeply in love with her. (she broke my heart because I was in love and not becuase  she didn't  share my feeling for parenting.) in the other hand ...

I never feel a strong  necessity of raising chldren because  I had the chance to raise some of my nephews and nieces. now that they are in their early 20's and studying university and one of them is now a doctor (i'm about to cry) I think I did a good job. I've seen them growing and reaching their goals now they don't need me.

the other day SAMANTHA posted a topic related to father's day and how do you handle when there is no a father in the family and I replied saying " I'm a father with no children, imagen how I feel " That day one of my  nephews came to me and gave me  a hug saying "it's father's day" (I'm about to cry again)

AMIGAS DEBO AND MAJETA:I am looking for a woman who wants to have a child as much as I want.

DEBO,AMIGA If I met a woman and we fell in love and she couldn't have children I would love her more because we'd share the same feeling, same pain.

DEBO, AMIGA, you call me Chihuahua  I think nobody likes to be compare with a dog.  but I respect it  because maybe you don't know that we , mexicans don't like to be known for a dog, we have many thing , and you know, in Mexico to share to the world wonderful places beaches, land scapes, rivers, beautiful piramyds many different civilizations Mayan, Aztec, Olmec, etc.

imagen I didn't write all that is above.

do you think that a person who has defened the right of women to keep their maiden name when they get married and the right of the women to have their maiden name as the second last name for their children, as I did, can be what you suspect  I am?

I'm sorry I couldn't say what I wanted to say. remember that this is not my first language and I can  comit mistakes.

Please, don't crucify me I'm just a human being as you. 

thanks to the ones who tried to help me  explaining what I wanted to say.

thank you john

johnslat says ...

 Dear debo,

"But, then, a man and a woman would know this about one another before marrying...if they communicated their ideas about what a future together would look like...which would be a logical and sensible thing to do....don't intelligent people, who love one another, talk about a home and children down-the-road?"

 

Logical? Sensible? In my experience, love is most often neither of these. So, if you loved a guy and you wanted children but he didn't, would you marry him anyway or seek someone else?

Hey John,

  Yep. If I loved him I'd hold onto him.  Together we'd find a way to work it out...if he loved me, too....allow me to say that predicting the future is a tricky business, so I won't attempt it... but, if the love is strong people work things out....compromise is part and parcel of any long-term relationship.  

  Yes, love can be fickle.   Maybe part of the "flying fickled finger of fate" is that you dream of the future together, trying to envision the sweetness, capture the fullness of life together in your mind's eye..."how many children do you want? boys or girls?" isn't an unreasonable stretch... do you think?

  With this said, I want you to know that I do understand your point ~ I'm just not sure that whether or not "the capacity to have children" should be a qualifier as to who you love.... do people actually choose who they fall-in-love with????

gooseymom says ...

Debo,

I am stepping up and saying that I do not mind being defined as a mother. I am extemely happy that I am adorned with that extraordinary title. I think that being a mother is a powerful job. It compares to teaching, but with less public exposure. I have been a mother for over twelve years now and I know that it is just only one of my many titles, but one that requires the most amount of my sweat and tears. I cannot see myself not being a mother.

I think that if Fer wants a woman that will love his children and want his children that is his perogative. I think he is expressing a very honest concept in such a feministic world where women do not want to address the issue in such blunt terms.

I am not trying to offend or defend any position. I am expressing my own philosophy.

Hello Gooseymom,

    Maybe you've misunderstood my position:  I love children, I believe being a "Mom" is one of the Great Miracles of Life, and I agree that it is FER's perogative to be with a woman who also wants children.  

    Will you answer John's question?   If your husband did not want children and you did...would it have been a deal breaker?  What if you were deeply in love with him, and he decided that you were not the right one because you couldn't have children?   What if you were already married and it turned out he couldn't have children ~ would you get a divorce?  

   I am saying that whether or not a person can procreate is not a factor when you fall-in-love...though, listening here to the thoughts of others, it sounds as if many believe it should be a factor when considering who you will marry.   So, what if you are in love with someone who will not marry you if you will not provide them with children?    Doesn't that sort of reduce you to one thing>>> a brood mare....????

   There is more to love and marriage than children... there is more between two people than producing children...if there is not, then all the children in the world will not hold the relationship together... children are not glue.

   I appreciate your 'philosophy', and your 'motherhood'.... thanx for your point of view !

FER says ...

                        Thank you John.

I meant what John said.

FER... I am not trying to attack you....to the contrary, I basically like you very much...it is this "attitude" that bothers me... it seems that you are putting this "qualifier" on who you will fall-in-love with.... do we choose who we will love?   Can those emotions be so easily turned-on and turned-off?  

If you fall-in-love with a gorgeous woman who takes your breath away with the tenderness and desire you feel for her ~ and miracle of miracles ~ she loves you, too... and you begin to discuss marriage...but she says : "I do not want children", or even, "I cannot have children"... what will you do then?   Will you just walk away?  What happened to all that love you felt for her? 

Do you see my point?  

Yes... John has a clear, succint way of putting things... but I think I'd rather you said what you meant.....I'm smiling now...

Mac~   you and I are on the same page.    Please know that I am not angry or upset with FER.  

It is this concept that seems to be: "children are the reason for loving".... when I see it as "children are the product of loving"  ....(and I don't just mean sexual "loving")  ... I think we do not actually control whom we fall in love with... but, when we do, it is a "gift"...and should be treasured... if children do come, it is a blessing...if they do not, it will be an issue you deal with together.

Whether or not a woman will produce babies for you is not a reason to love her or not love her... you love her FIRST, then together you take whatever life throws at you....

....that's my thinking...

I also believe in a soul-connection...    I believe that there are powerful soul-connections which last beyond Life (as we know it, on this plane)...

Smilin' at you,

~debo

DEAR DEBO: No, I don't  choose (I think nobody does) who to fall in love with. I do choose ( I think everydoby does) who I can start a relationship with. Women do everyday if one  is not a candidate  that can get more good point than bad (according to her purposes) they say "next".

first question.

Love  can not be turned on or off. I suffered from that more than six years. I loved her, eventhough she knew that ...she said "good bye"

I spend many years trying to find a place where to put all the love I felt, all the good thing that our love made, all the wonderful moment we had, where to save all those years because I didn't want to put all that in the trash can.No. love can not be turned on or off as a lamp.

second question.

first , let me tell you that it made me laugh the part ""miracles of miracle she love you too". Do you think that a gorgeous woman cannot love me?

 If this gogeous woman loved me  and she could not have (or didn't want to) have  children, I would love her anyway because love is not  that lamp we said in question one.

johnslat says ...

 Dear debo,

From your posts

 

"Would you have loved her even if she didn't provide you with children?  Would you have married her if shecouldn't have children?   Was your love for her based on whether or not she would provide you with offspring?"

I'm getting the perhaps mistaken impression that you are "loading the dice" in this - for some, probably, the capacity of being able to or wanting to bear children might well be ONE very important issue. It could even be a "deal-breaker" for some. And, if that IS the case, that it's of prime importance to someone, then - AND ONLY THEN - do I think that such a person would be foolish indeed to take as a spouse one who either could not have or would not want children.

And finally a question: Just what is "love at first sight" based on? Well, the phrase is rather self-explanatory: it must be based on sight. So, then, after "falling in love at first sight", you get to KNOW much more about this person, and what you discover is very disturbing. Do you still remain in "love" with him/her? Do you marry him/her nonetheless?

 

HEY John,

 

   Well, I wasn't trying to "load the dice"...I was just attempting to clarify the intention behind my statements.   My intent was not to say that everyone doesn't have the right to their own opinion, or to say that people do not enter into relationships for differing reasons.   My intent was to clarify WHAT about FER's statement that bothered me.   So, you see, it isn't so much about FER's right to his own decisions, it's more about the way I heard what he said, and the reaction it gave me.

 

Also, about "Love At First Sight"....perhaps I just heard that differently, too....remember at the very beginning when I said it was "semantics" ...that we needed to define the type-of-love more carefully before entering into a conversation dealing with the idea of whether or not it actually happens????    I do not necessarily think that "Love at First Sight" is the real, ever-lasting, 'let's get married' kind of love...though, in some circumstances it could turn out to be...  but, I think, generally speaking, the very phrase "Love At First Sight" is a light-hearted conotation of love... like having an intense crush...

Now, an intense crush could develop into the deeper, longer-lasting type of love, or it could, like the wave of emotion it flew in on, as quickly disappear.  

 

So, if "Love At First Sight" means the marriage kind of love...then it probably doesn't happen all that often (if ever).   But, if it means an overwhelming flood of sensual awareness, and an immediate, unique commiseration with someone you see but do not know....then yes, it happens frequently....to many... and less frequently to others...but YES it happens.

 

Is that better?   More clear?  

 

Thanx for your consistent detailed analysis.... it proves you're paying attention (!)....and I quite like it.

 

~debo

 

John,

I want to respond to this:  "This seems to imply that there ARE qualifiers - do you think so? And if you do, what would they be - would they be different for different people? Or do you think there should be NO qualifiers?"

Hmmmm.... okay, let's separate "First-Sight Love" from "Ever-After Love", for the sake of this conversation.... there are qualifiers for marriage-type-love...but "First-Sight" type-of-love is like a hammer...no qualifiers, no preparedness, no expectation ~ SLAM, BOOM! ~ it just happens... the 'dreamy'-side-of-me says you revel in it, you may pray it will last, you may spin-out dreams of who you are together...but, it takes time to know how lasting it will be...it takes getting-to-know-one-another time.    If, after you've come to know the other and you are still in-love, then, perhaps marriage.  

While you are getting-to-know the other person there may be "issues" (qualifiers) that alter your original impressions.   Sometimes the feelings are strong enough to overcome the issues: ie. he snores, he's messy, he picks-his-nose-in-public...whatever....these are things one might overlook for the sake of your deeper inner-feelings.   However, there are some 'qualifiers' that one may not be ready or willing to over-look, ie:  he's a cheat, he's critical of your every move, he wants a slave rather than a partner, he hits women, etc... these are "deal-breakers' as far as I'm concerned. 

So, on some level, I sense that we are in agreement.   I think, in the beginning of this conversation, we were thinking two separate and diverse ideas when it came to "Love At First Sight".   I believe you were thinking of Deep, Everlasting Love.....while I was thinking of the Flirtatious, Quick-Impact type of love.  

Semantics ~ yes?

Yes John...it would seem the English Language is rather lame when it comes to descriptive words....I once heard that the Eskimos have 144 words for different types of snow.   

I often find that "like" is not a strong enough term for the way I'm feeling.... I did not merely "like" my dog, I loved him.   But, it wasn't the same as loving my family... still, it was strong.   In some ways he was me....the part of me who could run and jump and get muddy and eat with abandon... do you understand?   

I also hope you know that I was at NO POINT trying to be rude to our new friend FER... the only way I ever plan on being 'cold' to another on this website is if I've exhausted all other options and I have to leave the conversation (like with MagPro).   

Please tell me that you understand this....because for a few minutes there it started feeling "heavy" as if you had to defend him against me... which was never my intent.

~debo

Gaaaawwww!    Not That Too!

Chihuahua!   (oops....not 'dog')

It seemed so logical that the Inuit would have an expansive vocabulary with re: snow.  

So, John, how many words for snow dooo they have?    I can only think of 5 or 6 in English.

I don't suppose it is important.... but, honestly....I think I may have to tie up my tongue and lock the door to my mouth... is Mercury in retrograde or something?

HOLA DEBO:  When I started to studying  English language, I found difficult to understand the way the verb to love is used. 

In the  Spanish language  (at least in Mexico), there are some verbs that mean love but in different level:

QUERER means to feel love but in a medium level. when one has a relationship feeling love, it's possible to say "Yo la quiero" that means  I love her  (but not very much) . Even when a person loves a lot (is in love) this person says "la quiero mucho" "estoy enamorado" that means "I love her " "I am in love".  It's very difficult to say "la amo" "I love her" . Amar (to love) is a strog feeling (and word) that is very difficult to say. there is a very famous song, in Spanish, that says "everybody knows how to love(querer) but a few knows how to love(amar)" then..

AMAR means to love intenselly  somebody or a place but not to animals. so you can say "quiero a mi perro" I love my dog (correct)  also "amo a mi  esposa" I love my wife(corect)

ENCARIÑARSE means to feel love but in a very low way.  "me estoy encariñando" means I'm strarting to love (querer).

FER

 Dear debo,

Yup. you're right about the different tribes. Those are the two MAIN ones, but there are others.

Good heavens no - I'm not a Fudd (Ph.D). I have an M.A. in English Education, but language has always fascinated me.

This reminds me of when my Saudi students would call me, "Dr. John."

"I'm not a doctor", I'd tell them.

"What we call you then?" they'd ask (with the usual grammar mistakes.)

"Well," I'd say, "I have a Masters, so why don't you just call me Master."  (And then I'd have to explain how that was a joke.)