Re: In Love With Potential or In Love With Reality?

[Guest guest]

I think relationships can be messy, complex and confusing things and

to be succesful require work, effort, paitence, energy etc.

Ideals versus reality. Well reality can s*ck, but better to be aware

of that rather than fool oneself and be dissapointed if one has

illusions of ideals that either not exsist or are impossible to

attain.

Sometimes I feel I idealistic at heart, but reality often and rarely

is ideal, nothing wrong with striving for things to be better, but be

realistic about such, be willing to put effort in.

Idealism of parenthood I suspect some do fall for. People saying

things like aren't bablies cute, buddles of joy etc - when in fact

that is a life that is dependent on those around to meet the babies

needs and not something that should be taken lightly or with vauge,

soppy ideas.

>

> I have been wondering of late how many people fall in love with the

> potential of a person or the potential of a situation rather than

being

> in love with how the person or the situation really is.

>

> When people fall in love with the potential of another person or

the

> potential of the situation, why do they mislead themselves to

believe

> they are being in love?

>

> I have been noticing more and more people who seem to be in love

with

> potential over being in love (i.e. they moon over the potential

> involved in being a new parent v the reality of being a new parent,

> etc.).

>

> What do you think?

>

> Raven

>

[Guest guest]

I think some may find themselves in a blissful state when spending time

in the company of a person whom they share likes and interests. To the

young and inexperienced this bliss, when both persons are on their best

behavior so to speak and behaving in ways that are cautious not to

offend, may seem like what they believe to be love. It's an ideal, not

reality.

The brain receiving chemical signals and hormones produced when one is

in an intimate relationship also has a large impact on our perception of

a person. By intimate, I refer to the physical, verbal,

action/companionship, and problem solving acts a couple engages in

together. A temporary euphoric state can be why some believe that what

they have with another person is love.

But do some learn the deeper aspects of love when a relationship

evolves? Does the potential of what " can be " lead to a bond that

becomes stronger over the passage of time? This is up to the

individuals involved.

A mother or father who looked forward to the birth of their child may

find the chore of being woken several times a night unbearable at times.

Does this mean they love the child any less? Married couples who learn

about each other after the honeymoon and discover undesirable traits

about their partner. Does this mean they love each other less?

Again, the long term results vary as do the individuals. I think those

who have hope and see potential in a future, be it a new partner or

child, do so because it is in their nature. So, I supppose what I'm

saying is that, yes, people tend to embrace the idea of love not

necessarily understanding what it is they are getting into.

Kim

>

> I have been wondering of late how many people fall in love with the

> potential of a person or the potential of a situation rather than

being

> in love with how the person or the situation really is.

>

> When people fall in love with the potential of another person or the

> potential of the situation, why do they mislead themselves to believe

> they are being in love?

>

> I have been noticing more and more people who seem to be in love with

> potential over being in love (i.e. they moon over the potential

> involved in being a new parent v the reality of being a new parent,

> etc.).

>

> What do you think?

>

> Raven

>

[Guest guest]

> I have been noticing more and more people who seem to be in love

with

> potential over being in love (i.e. they moon over the potential

> involved in being a new parent v the reality of being a new parent,

> etc.).

>

> What do you think?

>

> Raven

>

When I was married the first time i saw my hus potential(I believed

as a good jewish girl) That women were like a tomato fence.

It took 13 years before i realized that I was the only one with

untapped potential

I was 19 when i married and 30 when I left. For those doing math 17+

when we met.

Anyway The complexities of our parents burdens weighed on our

relationship and our actions. I was stubborn and headstrong and he

was waek minded and reckless

2nd time around I thought I knew better and I acceped what was

presented to me in my 2nd husband but I saw what he didn't. I knew

he was a coward and wanted others to work for his best outcome(his

definition of unconditional love)his definition not mine.

I knew deep deep( well really deep) down there was a child and a good

heart but like a child that doesn't want to admit what they had

done. he could not deal with his own fair weather behavior.

It seems the only potential I never addressed was my own.

What is my point? We learn with experience, concentrated thought,

and being truthful with ourselves.

I never wanted to be a parent. Each time it came as a shock and I

was angry at my own stupid actions. But I had made promises with

those conceptions and I had to do.

I think we can all be fooled from time to time(some more than others)

We have to choose honesty and the truth(something I find NT's run

from) as though it might burn. Living with shortcomings is ah real

life is messy

I used to say something weird to my sister whom always wanted things

she wanted a down comforter, had to have it. I told her(being all of

13 months older) That she just thought she wanted one and that when

she had it she would not feel this way

I am sure you know the rest(just wish lives were not up for the

wanting)

[Guest guest]

" To the young and inexperienced this bliss, when both persons are on

their best behavior so to speak and behaving in ways that are

cautious not to offend, may seem like what they believe to be love.

It's an ideal, not reality. "

This I not fully understand, I understand that others sometimes put

an act on 'best behaviour' so to speak, but me personally try to

practically put potential partners off; they may as well know what

they letting theirselves in for, so I rather them know my faults

pretty early on.

>

>

> I think some may find themselves in a blissful state when spending

time

> in the company of a person whom they share likes and interests. To

the

> young and inexperienced this bliss, when both persons are on their

best

> behavior so to speak and behaving in ways that are cautious not to

> offend, may seem like what they believe to be love. It's an ideal,

not

> reality.

>

> The brain receiving chemical signals and hormones produced when one

is

> in an intimate relationship also has a large impact on our

perception of

> a person. By intimate, I refer to the physical, verbal,

> action/companionship, and problem solving acts a couple engages in

> together. A temporary euphoric state can be why some believe that

what

> they have with another person is love.

>

> But do some learn the deeper aspects of love when a relationship

> evolves? Does the potential of what " can be " lead to a bond that

> becomes stronger over the passage of time? This is up to the

> individuals involved.

>

> A mother or father who looked forward to the birth of their child

may

> find the chore of being woken several times a night unbearable at

times.

> Does this mean they love the child any less? Married couples who

learn

> about each other after the honeymoon and discover undesirable traits

> about their partner. Does this mean they love each other less?

>

> Again, the long term results vary as do the individuals. I think

those

> who have hope and see potential in a future, be it a new partner or

> child, do so because it is in their nature. So, I supppose what I'm

> saying is that, yes, people tend to embrace the idea of love not

> necessarily understanding what it is they are getting into.

>

> Kim

[Guest guest]

>

> " To the young and inexperienced this bliss, when both persons are on

> their best behavior so to speak and behaving in ways that are

> cautious not to offend, may seem like what they believe to be love.

> It's an ideal, not reality. "

>

> This I not fully understand, I understand that others sometimes put

> an act on 'best behaviour' so to speak, but me personally try to

> practically put potential partners off; they may as well know what

> they letting theirselves in for, so I rather them know my faults

> pretty early on.

>

>

>

You may have never saw it wise to alter your behavior, what you see is

what you get but other types of people do in the hope that by the time a

distasteful trait is noticed the partner will overlook it as a small

defect.

When my husband and I dated he never told me the he was embarassed by my

blunt, direct manner of speaking to others. I often would commit a faux

pas

[Guest guest]

>

> " To the young and inexperienced this bliss, when both persons are on

> their best behavior so to speak and behaving in ways that are

> cautious not to offend, may seem like what they believe to be love.

> It's an ideal, not reality. "

>

> This I not fully understand, I understand that others sometimes put

> an act on 'best behaviour' so to speak, but me personally try to

> practically put potential partners off; they may as well know what

> they letting theirselves in for, so I rather them know my faults

> pretty early on.

>

>

>

You may have never saw it wise to alter your behavior, what you see is

what you get but other types of people do in the hope that by the time a

distasteful trait is noticed the partner will overlook it as a small

defect.

When my husband and I dated he never told me the he was embarassed by my

blunt, direct manner of speaking to others. I often would commit a faux

pas

[Guest guest]

For some odd reason the rest of my sentence was cut off.

> You may have never saw it wise to alter your behavior, what you see is

> what you get but other types of people do in the hope that by the time

a

> distasteful trait is noticed the partner will overlook it as a small

> defect.

>

> When my husband and I dated he never told me the he was embarassed by

my

> blunt, direct manner of speaking to others. I often would commit a

faux

> pas

>

in a social setting as determined by the company we were in at the time.

After years of marriage he did tell me that he was uncomfortable at

times by my behavior in public. My reaction was that of wonder. Why

did he wait to tell me? Ah, to save me from feeling hurt and thus

possibly ending the relationship while still in the dating phase.

Kim

[Guest guest]

The example I used was of a couple mooning over the potential

involved with having a baby together.

People who fall in love with the potential of having a baby usually

carry on about how cute the baby will be, how smart the baby will be,

how the baby will have the mom's eyes and the dad's hair colour and

such. That, to me, is not nearly enough reason to go and procreate.

Disregarding the 'potential' of it all, if these same two people can

honestly say that they will still love that child when colic sets in

and they are pacing the floors for hours in the middle of the night,

and they will still love that child if he or she is born with health

problems that lead to the destruction of either or both the parents'

careers and such, then there is common ground to serious consider

procreating.

I believe if you can see things and people for what they are, then

you are in a much better position to make appropriate choices that

will not lead to regrets.

I have never regretted having Cub even though he was an unanticipated

surprise in my marriage. Perhaps it's because he was born with

identifiable health issues that I didn't fall into the 'potential'

trap with him because I knew right from the bat that he would need a

lot of help to get to where he is going in life.

But I sometimes wonder how life would have been different for me as a

parent and for him as a child if I had romanticized what is involved

in parenting a child appropriately.

Raven

> >

> >

> > I think some may find themselves in a blissful state when

spending

> time

> > in the company of a person whom they share likes and interests.

To

> the

> > young and inexperienced this bliss, when both persons are on

their

> best

> > behavior so to speak and behaving in ways that are cautious not to

> > offend, may seem like what they believe to be love. It's an

ideal,

> not

> > reality.

> >

> > The brain receiving chemical signals and hormones produced when

one

> is

> > in an intimate relationship also has a large impact on our

> perception of

> > a person. By intimate, I refer to the physical, verbal,

> > action/companionship, and problem solving acts a couple engages in

> > together. A temporary euphoric state can be why some believe

that

> what

> > they have with another person is love.

> >

> > But do some learn the deeper aspects of love when a relationship

> > evolves? Does the potential of what " can be " lead to a bond that

> > becomes stronger over the passage of time? This is up to the

> > individuals involved.

> >

> > A mother or father who looked forward to the birth of their child

> may

> > find the chore of being woken several times a night unbearable at

> times.

> > Does this mean they love the child any less? Married couples who

> learn

> > about each other after the honeymoon and discover undesirable

traits

> > about their partner. Does this mean they love each other less?

> >

> > Again, the long term results vary as do the individuals. I think

> those

> > who have hope and see potential in a future, be it a new partner

or

> > child, do so because it is in their nature. So, I supppose what

I'm

> > saying is that, yes, people tend to embrace the idea of love not

> > necessarily understanding what it is they are getting into.

> >

> > Kim

>

[Guest guest]

>

> The example I used was of a couple mooning over the potential

> involved with having a baby together.

> People who fall in love with the potential of having a baby usually

> carry on about how cute the baby will be, how smart the baby will be,

> how the baby will have the mom's eyes and the dad's hair colour and

> such. That, to me, is not nearly enough reason to go and procreate.

>

> Disregarding the 'potential' of it all, if these same two people can

> honestly say that they will still love that child when colic sets in

> and they are pacing the floors for hours in the middle of the night,

> and they will still love that child if he or she is born with health

> problems that lead to the destruction of either or both the parents'

> careers and such, then there is common ground to serious consider

> procreating.

A distressing situation and feeling overwhelmed with responsibility when

a child is born regardless of the possible difference of what was

dreamed of does not necessarily mean that the couple will not love the

child. You can love a person even if you do not like some of the things

that they may do. Same goes for a child.

Do some parents end up harboring resentment at having a child who they

believe is not perfect or that has health issues. Sure they do. Are

they disappointed? I'm sure some are. To hope for things one has no

control over will almost always lead to disappointment and seeing as

fetal development, other than proper nutrition/abstaining from drugs &

alcohol, is one of those things, prospective parents can be in for a

huge amount of hurt.

My first child was a surprise and I was unwed at the time. I myself did

not hope for a child with specific eye color, hair color or

intelligence. Genetics gave me an idea of the possible outcome. All I

wanted was for my children to be born healthy. I can see where

listening to people talking about having a child and wishing for things

that make no difference in the grand scheme would be annoying.

Kim

[Guest guest]

>

> The example I used was of a couple mooning over the potential

> involved with having a baby together.

> People who fall in love with the potential of having a baby usually

> carry on about how cute the baby will be, how smart the baby will be,

> how the baby will have the mom's eyes and the dad's hair colour and

> such. That, to me, is not nearly enough reason to go and procreate.

>

> Disregarding the 'potential' of it all, if these same two people can

> honestly say that they will still love that child when colic sets in

> and they are pacing the floors for hours in the middle of the night,

> and they will still love that child if he or she is born with health

> problems that lead to the destruction of either or both the parents'

> careers and such, then there is common ground to serious consider

> procreating.

A distressing situation and feeling overwhelmed with responsibility when

a child is born regardless of the possible difference of what was

dreamed of does not necessarily mean that the couple will not love the

child. You can love a person even if you do not like some of the things

that they may do. Same goes for a child.

Do some parents end up harboring resentment at having a child who they

believe is not perfect or that has health issues. Sure they do. Are

they disappointed? I'm sure some are. To hope for things one has no

control over will almost always lead to disappointment and seeing as

fetal development, other than proper nutrition/abstaining from drugs &

alcohol, is one of those things, prospective parents can be in for a

huge amount of hurt.

My first child was a surprise and I was unwed at the time. I myself did

not hope for a child with specific eye color, hair color or

intelligence. Genetics gave me an idea of the possible outcome. All I

wanted was for my children to be born healthy. I can see where

listening to people talking about having a child and wishing for things

that make no difference in the grand scheme would be annoying.

Kim