SecretMethod70

I wanted to quickly address some things regarding definitions of the language within this thread.

Billege seems to be coming at the thread with the viewpoint that I am asking about a person loving more than one person in a "spousal" way. Or, in his Ladies' Lounge thread example, loving more than one person "equally."

I think a better word to describe what I'm getting at, instead of "equally," is "similarly." He is right that I do not consider the strong love for a friend that does not include acted-on, or at least wished-to-be-one-day-acted-on sexual attraction to fall under the discussion of amorous love. If you're best friends with someone of the opposite sex and find that person very attractive, but would never seriously consider acting on that attraction, at least not while in another relationship, I do not consider that amorous love. That, in my mind, falls under the definition of platonic love. However, I am also not meaning to discuss only "spousal" love. Just like both the love for a very close, best friend and the love for someone who is just a good friend can be described as platonic love, I do not think one need be interested in a spousal relationship for love to qualify as amorous love. Take a loving relationship which ends quite amicably because the couple realizes that, while they love each other, they are not compatible as *spouses* - would you say the love is not truly love? No. Would you say it is just platonic love? Most certainly not. Spousal love, I would say, is the highest degree of amorous love, but certainly not the only one. As for the question of whether it is possible to have *spousal* love for more than one person, I don't know about that one. While not married, I would qualify my love for onodrim as at least "pre-spousal" and I can't imagine sharing the same love for another person simultaneously. *That* I am not sure is actually possible. But I also do not think that negates feelings of amorous love for another person. It is the difference between the ex-girlfriend with whom you break up because, despite your love for one another, you would not work as marriage partners, and the woman you marry. Both certainly qualify as amorous love.

So, what I mean to discuss is the idea that one can have amorous love, as I have outlined above, with more than one person at a time. Primarily, I take this to mean having "spousal" love for one person while also having non-spousal, amorous love for another. (Both amorous love, but different forms of it.) SAM821, I think, expressed what most people in society believe. True spousal love is viewed to be inherently exclusionary and consumes all energy for amorous love. When I ask if love is a limited resource, it is this viewpoint that I wish to assess. I do not believe spousal love is exclusionary any more than I think the love for one's closest, best friend is exclusionary of other friendships. Generally speaking, I agree with sweetpea's second most recent post (#33). But, most of society seems to hold this belief that spousal love is exclusionary and I am interested in hearing explanations as to why people do or do not believe this.

I'm pretty sure I have other things to respond to, but I'll have to do that at a later time.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling