Platonic Love and Other Myths

[monk222]

♠
Disraeli knew of a lady who asked a gentleman if he believed in platonic friendship. He replied, “After, but not before.”

-- George F. Will for The Washington Post

Yes, this was the answer, Dee. Too late now, but I suppose it doesn't matter.

xXx

Comments

[queensugar.livejournal.com]

Platonic love is absolutely not a myth.

[miss-next.livejournal.com]

Agreed. The vast majority of my close friends are men.

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

You and Shelta are an example?

Hi, I've been missing you.

[queensugar.livejournal.com]

Not him, that's an unusual case, well at least from my perspective. However from his, he'd probably agree that it was indeed platonic.

I have a lot of close (straight) male friends. I love them deeply. Sometimes there's just people who you KNOW there's nothing there, no chemistry, no spark, nothing. But you adore them like brothers.

Haha. I have this friend Ray who is so awesome. I remember getting drunk at a party once and telling him, "You know, sometimes I wish we had sexual chemistry of any kind, because you are totally hot." He just laughed and was like "you know, thanks, and likewise." But making out with him would have been like making out with my brother.

[miss-next.livejournal.com]

I find it works well for me.

Possibly too well, in fact.

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

*chuckling* That "too well" sounds like a little strain. But, yeah, it's an exaggerated proposition, fueled with some bitterness - more emotional than philosophical.

[miss-next.livejournal.com]

Well, let's just say that it has a good and a bad side. I am good at forming close platonic relationships, and I sometimes think that gets in the way of my ability to form romantic ones. On the other hand, I am either very close or rapidly getting closer to a number of extremely wonderful men who would run a mile if I were actually attracted to them, either because they're already attached or because they don't find attachment possible at this time.

And, while I'm on the subject of men, perhaps you as a man can shed some light on this little puzzle; I can't put this on my journal as the gentleman in question may be identified by the lady. There is a chap on my friends list who is hopelessly in love with a lady also on my friends list. I am not sure whether she knows, or whether she reciprocates; certainly she likes him as a person, which is a good start. I have advised him to send her a valentine, and then if she asks him whether he sent it, that would be a good indication that she hopes he did.

So far, so good, but I also reminded him that the last time someone made it clear that she really did love him, he panicked and ran away. I asked him what he would do if she did turn out to reciprocate his affections: would he run again? He replied, quite honestly, that he might.

Can you relate to that, or explain it? Bear in mind he is completely smitten with her, and thinks of almost nothing else.

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

Yes, I can relate to that. A man can believe that he cannot rise to the dream, even if the big hurdle of her reciprocating his affections is overcome. I imagine the Internet makes this a more likely scenario. One can be afraid that attempting to make a reality of the flirtations and expressed feelings will only prove disastrous, so as to be worse than if his feelings were not reciprocated in the first place. Although loneliness is hard, a man gets used to it and even becomes comfortable in it, and one can prefer to keep the dreamy longings rather than seeing the hopes and dreams be made a mockery of by one's own shortcomings and inadequacies.

I don't know if this is accurate of your friend, but this is how I relate to your (pointed?) question.

An Addendum

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

I should also express that one can also be concerned that the other will not live up to the fantasy - and if one is any good at fantasizing, that is almost certainly likely. It's the same theme: being concerned about the inability to cope with the difference between the fantasy and the reality, and rather enjoying the longing and dreams.

Re: An Addendum

[miss-next.livejournal.com]

Thanks for that. It still doesn't make emotional sense, but I suppose it does make sense intellectually, in a weird kind of way.

It also raises a further question. Why would you expect someone to live up to your fantasy? If you truly care about them, isn't your prime objective to make them as happy as possible?

Re: An Addendum

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

isn't your prime objective to make them as happy as possible?

Heh, you see, that strikes me as a schema that may be intellectually sharp but wanting in emotional perceptiveness. Part of the problem may be the gender difference. At the risk of shortchanging men, I believe that men are more fetishistic when it comes to the objects of their affections, so that it's less about the idea of wanting to make the other happy, and more like regarding the other as more of an object for one's own happiness. Mind you, I'm not talking about love, but only where no real relationship has been formed and the other is in significant part a projection of one's dreams and lust.

Re: An Addendum

[miss-next.livejournal.com]

Ah... well, I am talking about love, you see.

Re: An Addendum

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

I'm not going to doubt you. I'll just make what might strike you as an interesting quirk of my thinking, and that is I don't really see how a relationship can be love without first going through earlier stages, such as interest and curiosity and then infatuation and then a lot of interpersonal dealings - learning how to negotiate for what each wants and learning how to fight and make up. I know it's easy to speak of love, but I confesss to hearing this as an expression of high infatuation. I'm not debating you, Miss Next, and I am limited in worldly and personal experience, but I'm sharing because you might find my thought processes interesting.

Re: An Addendum

[miss-next.livejournal.com]

I do agree with that, and I don't actually believe that what my friend is feeling at the moment is love in the true sense, but, as you put it, high infatuation. Love, at least of that sort, has to be a two-way process. I think the area where we disagree is not about the destination, but how one gets there; does one start with lust, or does one start with the kind of basic level of caring that happens in any friendship? Or would either of them work equally well?

It is natural to want to make other people happy, I think - at least, for those of us who are not outright psychopaths, and neither of us falls into that category. As love deepens, and it is as you say a gradual process, it becomes more and more natural to put the happiness of the other person before your own. But I do wonder if love can develop at all if there is no initial inclination to do that, if all that is wanted from the other person is the immediate gratification of a desire. It seems to me to be entirely the wrong foot to start off on.

What do you think?

Re: An Addendum

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

Sorry for the delay. I was thinking. Very hard. And I think it is true that I am not an outright psychopath. ;)

I would agree that it is a healthier start for a relationship if it begins with a substantive concern in the welfare and happiness of the other. However, I believe that relationships that begin in lust can and do become more, perhaps even surprising the parties themselves. I even think that the sexual interest, and hence the sexual attraction, predominates in the initial stages, especially for the young - the teens and the twenty-somethings.

Respect to agreeing on the destination, this is true with respect to the particular case that you raise, as I take your word on it. I also take that to be the healthier destination in general - love beyond animal gratification. However, it is not unusual for people just to "hook up" and want nothing more from each other than sexual gratification. I understand that you don't accept that destination, but I recognize it.

[roughsex.livejournal.com]

i guess i am a whore.
there have been very few times i didn't consider being the slut for my male friends. even the platonic ones. but sex can be platonic. for me anyway.
that's more the norm than an exception.

i think women are wanton.
they all wanna compete for the bull in the end.
even the dykes.

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

You sound like a great friend to me!

Alas, women are inclined to be platonic toward the non-bulls...