Tuesday, April 29, 2008

My Inconvenient Truth

It's easy to say we love someone when things are going our way... when our schedules line up perfectly and our days are spent without conflict.

But I've always felt that love isn't about the easy and fun.

Love is putting someone else before yourself at times when you may not want to.

Love isn't making dinner because you get home before your mate.
Love is making it even though you get home afterward.

Love isn't staying up late on Saturday night because you don't have to work Sunday.
Love is staying up late on Thursday despite your early work schedule because your mate needs your company.

The truth is that love is putting someone else first when other priorities loom. A truth that shows selflessness and compassion.

And yes, it's a truth that's inconvenient.


Chrissie said...

this post came out a lot cornier than i intended, but sometimes when your on a tight schedule, you must post what comes to mind first.

what i want to know, is if you agree with the idea that "love is inconvenient."

and if you do, should it be or are we forcing something?

vanessa said...

hmmm... I'm going to have to do some thinking on this one.

"The truth is that love is putting someone else first when other priorities loom."

Like putting off a job search because you feel you have to cook, and clean, and do laundry for him first. Then you're too tired to do anything else.

So when does the "inconvenience" of love become too much?

vanessa said...

I think sometimes we do things we feel we should or need to do to keep our mates happy, but in reality they may love us just the same if we dont cook dinner every night.

We're just afraid they'll stop loving us if we stop doing things for them.

jovial_cynic said...

Some guy a long time ago said this: "What great love is this, that a man should lay down his life for a friend."

I think it's an ideal, and it's largely impossible, because we are wrapped up in the psychological ego. As vanessa said, there's another side to it too -- there are folks who pour out their love... as a way to meet their own emotional needs. Co-dependency and all that.

I think it's easier to think about love when it's out of the context of the emotional and biological arena. Take the love of a man caring for his dying mother, tending to her every need through her last few months of life. Think of the mother who puts her life on pause to care for a baby that's wholly dependent on her for food, warmth, attention... these are example of true love, and those examples certainly are inconvenient, in that they require sacrifice.

I think that "young love" is largely emotional and dependent... and less service oriented. And when it is service oriented, it's done with the hope of service returned. But the examples of the man and his mother, and the mother and her baby require no return service. None is possible, none is expected. And that is real love.

vanessa said...

"But the examples of the man and his mother, and the mother and her baby require no return service. None is possible, none is expected. And that is real love."

Well put JC.

sarah said...

Hasn't the man already been given his return service in advanced? And doesn't the mother hope someday the child will be full of gratitude?

Seems like "real love" is a return on an earlier investment, no?

Perhaps you can say "real love" is a child who continues to forgive a parent that has made many, many mistakes. But even that has some selfish qualities attached to it.

Am I just going off on a tangent? I'll stop.

Anonymous said...

i think chrissie's point isn't about objective inconvenience, but rather subjective inconvenience.

putting yourself out, sacrificing yourself in any form, from an objective point of view, is clearly "inconvenient".

but the person in love, in real love, does not feel inconvenienced.

tending to their mate, or their child, or their mother, is what they want to do.

but when it isn't, when they agree subjectively with the statement, "love is inconvenient", then are they really in love? or are they a member of a forced companionship?

something like that...

Chrissie said...

ah! where to begin...

i think, as it pertains to your first comment vanessa, you're assuming that i meant a person should always put someone else first... and that's not what i meant.

it's not indefinitely putting off a job search to cook dinner or quitting school to spend more time at home...

i meant doing things that inconvenienced you, not things that put your entire life on hold forever.

so yeah... maybe don't work on your resume for the 10th day in a row if he needs some company, but it's never good to give up your passions for someone else.

and JC, your comments hit the nail on the head for me... that was the kind of love i was alluding to.

and oddly enough, as i was writing this post my sister emailed me and asked for a favor... she finished by saying, "if it's not too much of an inconvenience for you."

and that's the thing, the favor involves rearranging a schedule, leaving a prior engagement early... but i'll still do it for her. no return service necessary:)

Chrissie said...

...they require sacrifice.

another great point JC.

it's all about sacrificing... whether they are little or big things. it's when we give up something to give something that it shows real love.

and it doesn't have to be this HUGE theatrical sacrifice, it could boil down to giving him/her the last french fry when you're still hungry... or canceling a night out with friends when someone needs you to nurse them through a crisis.

Chrissie said...

i have nothing more to say... anon said it for me:)