I was dispensing with advice on a post elsewhere and hit the following question which I wanted to put to you all*:
The saying is if you love somebody set them free, if they come back they are yours.
Do you agree, is there value in the broken hearted waiting by the window for he or she to see the error of their ways and return, or should it actually be if you love somebody set them free, if they choose not to leave they are yours?
In my humble view it is the latter...
(* Out of pure interest; 'Gnac and wifey are fine!)
Monday Message Board
-
Another Monday Message Board. Post comments on any topic. Civil discussion
and no coarse language please. Side discussions and idees fixes to the
sandpits,...
6 days ago
24 comments:
My dear boy, if anyone ever wants to abandon you for something 'better' then you should help them on their way with a boot up the arse and don't EVER take them back.
You're worth more than that.
Robert.
Put children in there instead of lovers and it makes sense except for cat lovers. Cats will never set you free while you hold the can opener.
As a friend put it
'if you love someone set them free. if they come back, fuck them, if they don't come back, fuck 'em'
why would you want to take someone back after they've gone in search of supposedly more glamorous pastures. insulting, n'est pas?
I know it's better to let go - or become angry, but I find that I just feel sad (disappointment) or happy (hope).
However as time goes on, I am improving and the pain is lessening. Yes, I must not want him back, think about him, the times we had together or any prospect of a future. I am trying to control the obsessive compulsive behaviour that results from rejection, referred to in the Times:
"The changes in the brain, demonstrated in MRI studies, disappear once the lustful, romantic stage has waned. Indeed, a rejected ex-lover has a quite different batch of brain responses — areas associated with obsessive compulsive behaviour, controlled anger and pain are activated, hence the observation that rejection can superficially heighten love and alter its nature."
I am looking for the next person. I went to a ball on Saturday night and it was great fun.
Forget the bit after the comma, it should be if you love someone set them free full stop(.) I've always assumed it to mean that you should let them be who they are - that's what you love, isn't it. Or do you love having someone there? Why does love suddenly want to make people hem each other in - in all different ways?
Wow. Heavy.
Thanks bridgegirl: my OCD is another gift from The Homewrecking Slag huh?
splatterbottom knows: 'The whole idea of 'setting free' is just another tawdry expression to sugar-coat some underlying nastiness'.
If your partner says they need some personal space, the give them a real lot of it.
on armaniacs question: 'if they stay, they are 'yours' - nobody is ever anybody else's since slavery was abolished. Maybe the wedding ceremony should no longer ask 'do YOU TAKE this' (person)...
Miss Brownie you're just being literal; if someone's not yours they're somebody else's: his wife, her husband. There's no harm in that.
Maybe the marriage ceremony could ask do you ACCEPT this person, but there'd be objections to that too. Language is imperfect
The latte set think language can fix anything. They're out of touch.
Anyone like myself who's beginning a career as a poet realises quickly that language is a rough tool.
But anyway, people will always disappoint you, let you down. Spending your whole life being shocked about it is pretty stupid.
People aren't possessions, there not ours to let go & if they're treated that way then it would be no wonder that they need to 'be free'.
Besides, most of the interpretations here have connoted that other sexual partners are alluded to in the phrase, it may not be the case - some people are more clingy and some need more space, there isn't anything inherently sexual in it. Are you all referring to some specific incident, or something???
Good heavens.
No one is talking about possessions! The saying is metaphorical, that's all. A Hollywood slogan. And complete rubbish!
But why are women always ringing up clairvoyants and saying, "Does he really love me?"
Why is that the biggest question these frauds ever get asked?
And why are women so bloody obsessed with romance. They never shut up about it, never stop snooping; forever rummaging for something to get all dramatic about. -Some little mis-doing. Anything at all, until menopause sends them complete bananas.
What's wrong with romance? It has inspired great art (think Rodin's sculpture 'The Kiss'), poetry (think W H Auden), novels (think Goethe) and gives you the energy to get out of bed everyday.
Yes, some people don't need or want it and that's fine. However I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting a bit of romance in one's life. Many of my friends (girls and guys) feel the same way.
I am not talking about really silly stuff, such as red roses. I am talking about spending time with someone you share common values with, going to parties together and talking about the conversations you had with other people on the way home, taking photos, making mix tapes, checking out little bars, reading the newspaper out aloud to each other, going on picnics, drinking good wine, walking along the beach, watching movies and philosophising about life. That's romance in my book.
Have to say, this is funny....
="The latte set think language can fix anything. They're out of touch.
Anyone like myself who's beginning a career as a poet... "=
While this is an excellent definition of romance:
="spending time with someone you share common values with, going to parties together and talking about the conversations you had with other people on the way home, taking photos, making mix tapes, checking out little bars, reading the newspaper out aloud to each other, going on picnics, drinking good wine, walking along the beach, watching movies and philosophising about life"=
Well pardon me!- laugh all you like, but my career as a poet is TAKING OFF!
So how do you like that!
Just shut your stupid GREAT CAKEHOLE Armaniac.
You BLOODY MADMAN!
Now that is a first indeed
poet doesn't like critique
nor for him behaviour meek
as he vents his verbal seed.
'Twas a misconceived attack
my words sprayed at irony
latte left and poetry
usually cop the same old sack.
Armaniac
Has gone to pack
Matrimony
Broke his back!
No lawyer was ever a poet, except for silly old Baron Field.
But as they said at the time, it was a barren field indeed.
RH, no being nasty to others on the thread, that one's out I'm afraid. A bit of sensitivity! And being romantic is not unintelligent!
I agree about lawyers, that's why I'm in the process of extricating myself from said profession!
Acknowledge a superior poet Armaniac.
Oh. You deleted me. I didn't notice.
If it's reasonable I don't mind. But in this case it's not.
Okay?
You're Honour?
I won't bother appealing.
Golly you people make me laugh. Honestly.
This is just absurd. Who on earth could be offended by that comment you deleted? No one's name was mentioned. It was directed at no one at all. It was critical of Romance, that's all.
For goodness sake!- and you're so loud about Free Speech! Well let's see what you're made of. Put the comment back and let other people judge!
R h, it was flaming and it was directed at someone in particular. It is permanently deleted. No further correspondence entered into.
I reckon I'm pretty good at leaving comments up, but when it comes to making the call, I care not a toss for others' opinions.
I left all your digs at me, so don't complain! Or else I'll start writing amateur poetry again...
Jokes aside, I'm genuinely astounded by this. Tell me what was offensive, email it if you like.
The menopause comment is offensive.
Definitely. But I just cannot understand why you deleted the other one.
But that's okay.
Your credit's good.
Then again, this is really a bit much.
I'll tell you what, I've been deleted on trivial grounds in the past, but this beats everything. You've approved a very offensive comment I made about menopause, and deleted something I never intended to be offensive at all. Who do you think the comment is directed at? I'd like to know. Because I've absolutely no idea.
Yeah rh, to try to attribute the expressing of emotions and pursuit of loving relationships as 'menopausal'is a bit of a far reach, and offensive, but at leat you are open about your offensiveness.
I for one am more jaded than the tender souls here, but in my experience, guys are way mushier than any girl I've ever known, but it might be the case that the more that people feel you keeping your distance the more they try to reach out, creating an illusion of clingy-ness, (applicable to either gender).
Try to read carefully, it's very important; I didn't say the pursuit of loving relationships is menopausal.
If I've ever loved any woman I've clung to her. And if I've had to go away somewhere I've thought of her about five hundred times a day, and especially around sunset. That's all.
Post a Comment