. . . the fools who poisoned Eros,
who pronounced that the Divine was synonymous with love,
then shook their fingers and said "but not that kind,
not that sort that speaks to blood and bone and gasp of breath,"
who denied that this was love at all, but merely lust,
not only something lesser but something opposed . . .
who pronounced that the Divine was synonymous with love,
then shook their fingers and said "but not that kind,
not that sort that speaks to blood and bone and gasp of breath,"
who denied that this was love at all, but merely lust,
not only something lesser but something opposed . . .
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 08:11 am (UTC)I must say that, while I agree with what I think you're saying here, love and lust ARE different feelings. Sometimes platonic love can be the most powerful emotion. Sometimes lust is just the kick you need. Let's celebrate them both, each to their particular qualities.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 06:49 pm (UTC)Mmph. Love and lust are different things in the same way that the hand and the wrist are two different things; there's no clear boundary between them save the one we make by naming, and the same blood runs through them both, even if there is a joint in between. As I've mentioned before, "Platonic love" does not, in fact, exist for me; I have familial love and sensual love, but nothing dry that bears the name.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 07:44 am (UTC)I also have intellectual crushes (like the close workplace friendships like those I've written about lately), which I seperate from lust (that hot looking woman I saw at the Mall during lunch.) Intellectual crushes can often conflict with feelings about my wife (I.E., who would I rather spend time with tonight). Lust has never gotten in the way. I can bring those feelings home.
perhaps this is because sometimes I'd rather have a great conversation than sex. (I've never found a way to have a good conversation without a partner!)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-13 12:14 am (UTC)You just need to practice talking to yourself more! ^_^