The Death of Devotion (Why Relationships Don't Last Part 2) - Love ...
MetalMax Hummingbird
Joined: Oct 12, 2012 Age: 23 Posts: 20
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 10:57 pm?? ?Post subject: The Death of Devotion (Why Relationships Don't Last Part 2)
I had a revelation today. Not only have people become so spoiled by technology that they must always seek the best and newest of everything, and it bleeds into their love life, turning their lovers into disposables.
The major part that I have missed is Devotion. Which means to give it all to someone, and to always stand by them no matter what.
The reason relationships don't work anymore is because people have no devotion. They expect to have the perfect relationship that requires little or no effort.
The very second things get tough, its easier to leave than it is to stand by them and work through it.
If people would learn not to take for granted the loving bond they have with another person; devote themselves. Things would be different.
We have been taught to demand so much perfection, and little do we know that its what makes us imperfect is what brings us all together.
Like this site, our imperfections have brought us together.
To me, perfection is just a pretty word someone made up. It has mislead the masses and its destroying mankind slowly, more and more every day.
Perfection killed Devotion, the death of devotion killed true love.
Anyone else has any thoughts?
Back to top
2wheels4ever Phoenix
Joined: May 04, 2012 Age: 40 Posts: 923 Location: Orangeless County, Calif.
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 1:39 am?? ?Post subject:
*PPR forum-related alert
If you believe people are here in the world as a result of a Creator then the natural conclusion is that the Creator himself is Perfection, and as a conclusion of that he requires Devotion. But it's not a slave-to-master form of obedience, but rather to be looked at in a sense that delicious food requires to be eaten.
With that in mind, you are correct, nobody is perfect, but the entity that brought us into being is, BTW I'm not trying to soapbox, merely attempting to demonstrate not only the reasons for our existence but most importantly on-topic, the reason we even have a desire to love and be loved - could that logically be a result of random asteroid collisions?
In that same vein, a friend of mine concluded from studying the Old Testament that the context of Devotion is giving away something you highly value with the stipulation of never asking for its return. I reckon where that plays in with us humans is when we 'give them our heart". It should go without saying that we want to give Devotion to trustworthy parties.
You bring up some valid gripes, modern relations do seem to be a lot like materialism. Pardon the theological monologue, I felt compelled to sound off and give my take on your keywords _________________ Not one to shrink from helping humankind/ Brother one other thing that you might keep in mind/ The coordination of the eye and hand, it's not my strong point/ But I make do with what I have/ Pure Rock Fury the solution is so clear
Back to top
again_with_this Phoenix
Joined: Jun 14, 2012 Age: 29 Posts: 692 Location: New Jersey, USA
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 3:51 am?? ?Post subject:
2wheels4ever wrote:
You bring up some valid gripes, modern relations do seem to be a lot like materialism.
To play devil's advocate (AND DON'T TAKE OFFENSE AND ASSUME THIS IS A CONDEMNATION or A JUSTIFICATION FOR THE BEHAVIOR OF OTHERS) Is it possible that what we're seeing now isn't just the result of changing attitudes, but rather a greater freedom to act upon those feelings?
That is, people weren't necessarily all that different in the past. If they had the freedom and luxury to end relationships on a whim, they would have....but most of them didn't, so it didn't happen as much. It's not that they were more ethical/moral/family-centric, it's that they didn't have the ability they would in modern society.
I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying what you're witnessing today is what you would have witnessed 100 or 200 years ago if it was socially permitted and feasible. Although its a modern manifestation, I don't believe it's a modern attitude. In the past, there were less options and less ability to do so.
So it's not just about the time we're living in, it's a greater question of human behavior.
Back to top
blue_bean Merry Wench
Joined: Apr 14, 2006 Age: 28 Posts: 7219 Location: on a sinking ship
Joined: Feb 27, 2012 Age: 23 Posts: 3064 Location: the place I'm from doesn't exist anymore
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 6:19 am?? ?Post subject:
Personally I think you have failed to account for a very simple and essential factor: people often choose the wrong person for a relationship.
Previously, partners were carefully considered as social expectaions were somewhat high and iit was difficult to get a divorce, which encouraged people to carefully consider but also made it more difficult for those who made legitimate mistakes to seek a marriage to be absolved.
With that no longer being the case, people simply do not consider carefully enough their choice of partner.
It's something that was true before divorce was widespread and it's just as true, if not more true, now. You're just seeing it in the open much more now that the consequences have been removed (I'm not implying that consquences were good, just stating how their removal changed the dynamics).
I'm not saying it's always intentional but people often choose what they want rather than what they need, or settle for what they need and constantly wish after what they wanted, few manage to make an extremely compatible match in this regard. This factor alone probably accounts for a majority of failed relationships. _________________ Diagnostic Tools and Resources for Women with AS: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt211004.html
Staying together is so old fashioned nowadays.
Last night I could have gone home with a married Russian woman.
Russian couples that migrate to NZ divorce at around 75% with the first 3 years.
Kiwi guys are just more modern....
Seriously though, I've been socialising with geese this last month.
Mate for life geese.
Loyalty was an evolutionary strength for humans, now it may be a weakness.
In todays modern world....
A female can achieve better for her young.... without the assistance of a male
Especially males with skid mark undies, sweaty balls, snorers, or mouth breathers.
_________________ "I shall never be fool enough to turn knight-errant. For I see quite well that it?s not the fashion now to do as they did in the olden days when they say those famous knights roamed the world."
Plus the economy performs better when the house gets sold, lawyers get paid, dating sites get money, hairdressers, fashion, sex aid pills, gym memberships................
follow the money.........
staying together is not good for the economy ---- short term
but thats how the thinking is nowadays, short term gains only
Personally, I'm more like a goose
[did not go home with the Russian beauty] _________________ "I shall never be fool enough to turn knight-errant. For I see quite well that it?s not the fashion now to do as they did in the olden days when they say those famous knights roamed the world."
One of the best studied populations of geese: Individually marked Greylag Geese Anser anser were studied during 1959-1994 in Utterslev Mose (UM), a park and lake area in Copenhagen, Denmark.
And for reference: I am a goose but the gander left! _________________ you are either a loyal friend or you aren't my friend at all
Trust thyself only, and another shall not betray thee
Back to top
DogsWithoutHorses mockingbyrd
Joined: Apr 06, 2012 Posts: 1124 Location: New York
BTW In New Zealand divorce law changed in 1975 allowing half of the property and assets to go to both the man or woman. In the following 6 months, my parents and 2 best friends parents all divorced.
I think lawyers were real busy that year....
Before that time the woman walked away with nearly nothing.....
But usually stayed and suffered their unfair state sanctioned husbands domination _________________ "I shall never be fool enough to turn knight-errant. For I see quite well that it?s not the fashion now to do as they did in the olden days when they say those famous knights roamed the world."
Last edited by Surfman on Tue Oct 16, 2012 6:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: Jul 20, 2012 Age: 33 Posts: 416 Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Back to top
Kjas On?inha
Joined: Feb 27, 2012 Age: 23 Posts: 3064 Location: the place I'm from doesn't exist anymore
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2012 9:43 pm?? ?Post subject:
Surfman wrote:
BTW In New Zealand divorce law changed in 1975 allowing half of the property and assets to go to both the man or woman. In the following 6 months, my parents and 2 best friends parents all divorced.
I think lawyers were real busy that year....
Before that time the woman walked away with nearly nothing.....
But usually stayed and suffered their unfair state sanctioned husbands domination
The law here changed in 1975 too and the divorce rate skyrocketed since there was such a backlog of people who were previously unable to get divorced.
See graph here: http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/images/rr20-fig5.png
DWH: I agree that it is better to be able to get a divorce.
But there are consequences to both being able to and being unable to, which I was simply commenting on in my previous post out of fact rather than opinion. _________________ Diagnostic Tools and Resources for Women with AS: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt211004.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.