I believe when male and female realize there is a mutual attraction, lust heavily tips the scales. If the relationship turns out to be compatable and the couple continues to see each other, love, as defined by JB, gradually tips the scale in its favor leaving lust a smaller and smaller portion of the relationship. Finally, when love is extremely dominate, a marriage will usually take place.
Lust has never disappeared. It is still there to enjoy and has finally come into the proper balance with love. It is the reason the couple brings children into the world to share their love.
|It is the reason the couple brings children into the world to share their love.|
Websters Dictionary defines lust in different ways good and bad. The definitions I like are pleasure, delight, intense sexual desire, an intense longing, enthusiasm, and eagerness. It seems most people think the word lust is a bad word. I have felt all these feelings at one time or another with, and for my very dear wife from the day I met her until the present. I feel love and lust go hand in hand.
Those words can be connected to love too save that there would be additional words that describe caring. It seems that your definition makes lust a state of mind while love a state of actions. Although with love the mind is already compelled to act and thus you do, but with lust you need not do anything.
Lust to me is only bad when you have no intention or inclination to take it any further.
Maybe I can come to terms with the question better if some one can put a name on the first feeling you have upon meeting the opposite sex. It cannot possibly be love, because "love at first sight" is to me not possible. Love comes with time. Love is something that grows. Love is all the things that have been described by most of the posting on this subject. Real lasting love is too complex to be instantanious.
I never heard of anyone who meets some one new thinking, "I think I'm going to learn to love that person." So what word do you use to describe that first exciting feeling of attraction?
Edited: mousetrails on 29th Apr, 2006 - 12:50am
That is the point, the topic is not "What do I feel first or second when I meet someone", the topic is the differences between love and lust. No one is disputing what you may have first and what it may evolve into, what we are concerned with is making the two distinguishable so that there is no doubt when something is lust and when something is love. In the seven pages of this Topic we trashed it out considerably did you take a look over it?
This conversation has become rather convoluted to me. But I am beginning to see that some view lust as something bad. Is that because society makes lust sound so evil? If my wife is wearing something sexy that gets me aroused, my first thought isn't god I love her. No, its something much more base that love, its desire for her body, its lust. That same emotion that comes to me even though I have been married 9 years keeps some spice in the relationship. I do indeed love her and would die for her if needed, but that love is not what arouses me. Its pure unbridled lust for her body, more the body of my wife, which is indeed a part of love, but exists outside of it. The reason being is that when that strong attraction isn't there, I still want to please her in other ways. It isn't love that turns me on, its lust, physical attraction in my eye. On the other hand, it isn't lust that makes me stay up all day after I get home from work and take care of her when she is sick, its love. Love involves loyalty.
Love and lust, in my opinion, should exist in a relationship. Lust for other women? No. Lust for your wife? Yes. There is nothing wrong with having a strong sexual attraction to your wife, I don't know why so many people have to say that lust disappears when you love someone. It doesn't have to, it becomes part of that love, yet still outside it. Lust is not, its how it is acted on.
Konquererz, any more descriptive and I would have to move your comment to the Mature section. Again, I would like to emphasize the purpose of this Thread - it is to distinguish the two as opposed to say which one should exist when. As a for instance and at the same time commenting on what Konquererz said about lust being seen as 'wrong' - lust in itself may not be wrong for some people, but in my opinion it is wrong when it is interpreted as love and herein is the absolute reason for this Thread. Love as simple as it is said by everyone is understood a thousand different ways by many. I will give you a short example to illustrate my point and I am sure you may have seen this too. How many times have you seen a guy that has lust for a girl. You can see that he is only interested in how far he can 'play' her and then move on, but for the girl she claims he 'loves' her - why - because he says pretty little things to her that make butterflies inside her little tummy. See what I mean? If this girl truly knew what love is she might know the difference and be able to detect. Of course some guys go further... "If you love me you will...", and the girl feels obligated because he 'loves' her rolleyes.