Is eLove purer than IRLove ?

[IDLEchild]

no...it's all lust and daydreams...there's no reality in it.

Well the lady nailed the coffin shut....

.but it's not the same thing really...so it tends to fall back to people being attracted to each other through their 'selves'...that is...who they are beneath their skins.

No...one's personality is just as easy to fake and hide. People are more open and daring over the internet but most are still not their true selves.

Elove to me is a disturbing concept of sociolization and I am not even against shallow plastic surgery (Booooooo *ducks FROM TOMATOES*).

Ofcourse one must realize pure love barely exists anymore and takes quite a while to surface even in a strong relationship.

The little nuances, the little details, the nitty gritty is what one must accept and appreciate in a lover when all has been said, all ideas have been shared, all the amazing conversations have run dry. To me real love when you two can sit together with nothing to say and still feel amazing just being in each others company or hella appreciative of it.

Maybe it is me but e-love solely doesn't offer that. Once a meeting takes place is another story.

 

[Camelyn]

then how do you explain us millions who have fallen for someone who we met online? it doesnt take so much being together in real life to FALL in love. it takes meeting to VERIFY your love. But I dont see how you can broadly sweep away any notion of emotional attachment simply because of the medium involved.

I agree with you on this, even though my rational brain really doesn't want me too.

IRL, I tend to fall in lust pretty readily. It usually follows that I am disappointed that the lust isn't backed up by anything more substantial, like the ability to have long, thoughtful conversations, or to share common ideas, ideals and interests. (not to mention IQ levels).

Online, I have met, or just gotten to know better, some amazingly interesting people over the years, some of whom have become my dearest friends in real life. This text medium forces you to relate to someone on an intellectual level first, without any physical distractions.

As I get older, I am finding that what's in someone's head is much more attractive to me that what's under their clothes (no comments from the peanut gallery ). I can easily see how you could fall in love with someone in this medium, and no I'm not talking cyber nookie here, I mean a love of the spirit of whom that person is.

Whether or not this love would carry itself into a real life encounter....I couldn't say, as I have never had that experience. Much as we might like to think ourselves above it, there *has* to be a physical attraction and compatibility on some level in order for a true romantic relationship to develop. Otherwise, you have what could potentially be a loving, caring friendship, but nothing more.

And there in lies the crux. IRL, you are sure of your attraction to someone before you begin a relationship. You may discover that the physical is all you've got, but not too much gets invested emotionally at that point. If you fall for someone online, chances are you have spent a lot of time talking, getting to know them and letting them get to know you. When the spark isn't there when you meet, how much more hurtful would this be than the real-life scenario? Of course there is always the chance that you've got that spark too, just as the chance exists in real life to be attracted to someone physically and then discover that they are your match emotionally and intellectually as well.

Then there is the long distance online relationship. This one is much fuzzier in my head. I just can’t wrap my brain around the concept of calling it a relationship. Love yes, as I explained above, but not what I would define as a living breathing relationship and all that entails. I have a girlfriend who met and fell for someone online almost 3 years ago. He lives in the UK, she in Montreal. He has visited here 3 times and she has visited him once. They are getting married this summer. Happy ending, right? Well, I've watch my friend struggle with loneliness for three years, in a pseudo-relationship that gave back nothing in the tangible sense, and at the same time prevented her from finding that tangibility in someone closer to home. Now they are getting married, he is moving here, and yet they have still not spent more than 3 consecutive weeks together in real life. I'm not going to throw bad luck at them, except to say that their new marriage and yes, new long-term relationship is most definitely going to have it's challenges, and I sincerely hope that they are both up to meeting them.

 

[Leslie]

then how do you explain us millions who have fallen for someone who we met online? it doesnt take so much being together in real life to FALL in love. it takes meeting to VERIFY your love. But I dont see how you can broadly sweep away any notion of emotional attachment simply because of the medium involved.

I beg to differ, especially with the doesn't take so much bit. To fall in lust absolutely takes very little being together. Love is a whole matter altogether...it's a process over time...this is not something accomplished over a few weeks, it's far more than that. And I'm not sweeping away any notions of emotional attachment, but I am highly loathe to call it love in the same sense that a longterm loving relationship is love. It may very well become that, but it isn't that yet.

Camelyn's friend for example...may have a great deal of feeling for this fellow, and he in turn for her. But is this the kind of love, the love, appreciation and understanding of everything about the other which one finds in more traditional dating scenarios? The one which takes into account all the little nuances and personality quirks which aren't self-evident on the net, or even on brief meetings? It's (hopefully) super that they've met, and they've come a long way and if it works, more power to them. But - as Cam said, they have an awful lot of challenges to face, and I would venture to add that one of those challenges is going to be being married to really a virtual stranger, and trying to develop a love out of what can only be at this point some really good convo plus a bunch of lust and daydreams about what it 'COULD' be, while at the same time adjusting to married life and trying to create a future together.

 

[Vortex]

Personlly... I think I-Love: tends to be fake... sorry if that offends anyone.
Likewise with other interpersonal relationships.
So yes, they might be pure, but with out being a little dirty or imperfect, I don't believe that they can be considered real.

 

[Camelyn]

Love is an emotion, like hate. Both are subjective. You can't say to someone they are not in love based on your own personal criteria. Developing the emotional attachment that I would call love would not in my mind require that I physically meet the person. I love my cousin in Greece, whom I have spent my life talking to on the phone, in letters and now e-mail, but have never met. I don't think someone can tell me that my love for him is somehow less real than a love for a cousin whom I see IRL on a regular basis? You can't say "I don't think it's real love" because you can't define love for another person.

The emotion of love is connected to, but not synonymous with having a relationship with someone. Love is an emotion, a relationship requires much more than that and the two shouldn't be confused. Yes, one can fall in love with someone, or their perception of someone on the net. And yes, you can call it love, because it has all the same warm fuzzy symptoms you feel when you fall in love in real life.

But you have to understand in your own mind that the emotion you are feeling does not construe a true romantic relationship, which can't be had over cables and wires. This involves tolerance, acceptance, sacrifice, commitment, compromise and mutual support, while still *maintaining* the emotion of love, unconditionally and despite any and all obsticles. And that ain't easy baybee

 

[chcr]

How can you possibly know someone you've never met well enough to be in love with them?

 

[Gato_Solo]

I see...daydreams are all about nekkidness eh?

They wouldn't be if you'd return my towel...

 

[tonksy]

They wouldn't be if you'd return my towel...

where's the fun in that?

 

[Oz]

I see...daydreams are all about nekkidness eh?

Only the good ones

 

[MrBishop]

How can you possibly know someone you've never met well enough to be in love with them?

That depends on how you define the 'love' part of a relationship. If it's the "this guy/gal knows me so well, we get along, we can talk for hours etc..." part of love, then I don't see any real difference between falling for someone online whom you've never seen any more than I see an issue with a blind man saying that his GF is beautiful.

 

[Professur]

*looks around*

In this day and age? What's the diff. Most people talk love, and think hormone. Good ridance to the lot.

 

[Inkara1]

Quick! How do you make a hormone?

Don't pay her.

 

[Thulsa Doom]

I beg to differ, especially with the doesn't take so much bit. To fall in lust absolutely takes very little being together. Love is a whole matter altogether...

no no no yer confusing my meaning because of my grammar (and thats not surprising considering how i verbitige things uncorrectly sometimes...). Im not saying it doesnt take much to fall in love. Im saying its not JUST about BEING together that allows humans to love. Its about being together that VERIFIES love. Several people have already said love can happen through any medium. Love isn’t brain surgery. It doesn’t take magic powers. It just takes a connection. But there needs to be in person interaction to verify this and reinforce this. And don’t forget sustained long term love is different from new love. People often forget this. I think Camelyn touched on this very well in her example.

Speaking of which:

You can't say "I don't think it's real love" because you can't define love for another person.

Bingo! Well said. Im pretty sure I know what lust is by now thanks Leslie. Basically my first motivation (as horrible as this sounds) when dealing with girls I meet is simple lust (I think just about all guys would say the same thing if they are being honest and they aren’t in denial). Sorry about that . I don’t ever pretend theres anything else going on. I haven’t for years. Especially with girls ive met through the internet. Im a pig like that. But ive also experienced love once. So it was easy to tell the difference. And the feeling didn’t instantly fade after I met her in person. Or after the tenth time we got together. Or even the most recent time. It seems to have settled into something familiar for both of us. I’ll be honest. I often think im a massive dork for letting myself fall for someone over the internet because when I hear other people tell stories about that I instantly think of them as pathetic losers and I want to puke. I guess I need to get over that somehow… But anyway back to the point: let each person (and each couple) decide what love is for them. No sense ruining the party for everyone even if the party is headed for an early death.

 

[IDLEchild]

How can you possibly know someone you've never met well enough to be in love with them?

In this day and age? What's the diff. Most people talk love, and think hormone. Good ridance to the lot.

 

[tonksy]

people will always put the stink on meeting people online....just like people always put the stink on meeting someone in a bar...but for all the sex-riddled short dalliances that occur there is bound to be a handful of cases where people meet, like eachother, work at it, and love is a byproduct....and i say get it while (and where) you can.

*mutters of singing janis

 

[Camelyn]

people will always put the stink on meeting people online....just like people always put the stink on meeting someone in a bar...but for all the sex-riddled short dalliances that occur there is bound to be a handful of cases where people meet, like eachother, work at it, and love is a byproduct....and i say get it while (and where) you can.

What she said. Life's to short for missed opportunities.

 

[PT]

I think Elove can happen, but it's rare. I think the biggest single attraction to the internet and message boards like this are the anonymous nature of the medium. You can go online and be whoever you want to be, and try to be someone else completely if you want. I think there are people that are completely honest, and especially on here, I like to think that for the most part the people here are honest about their feelings and thoughts. And that is another part of the anonymous nature, you can be honest without worrying whether the person will rebuke you for it, if they do, you just don't come back.

 

[PT]

What she said. Life's to short for missed opportunities.

So is it cynical to say that life is too short for opportunities without some guarantee of return on investment?

 

[tonksy]

So is it cynical to say that life is too short for opportunities without some guarantee of return on investment?

depends on what you consider a return...i mean, a life long relationship that fulfills you as a person is a return...but so is a vigorous roll in the hay.

 

[Professur]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Until people stop thinking me and start thinking us they can meet wherever they choose. It won't matter a damn. It won't be worth piss all.