Love vs. In love - some questions

[SleepyOwl1969]

Hi everyone 👋

I'm 53 and my partner is 52 we have been together for a year and a half. No major issues, our sex life is great, communication is wonderful, but I have a few questions. 😊

1. How do you differentiate between being "in love with" and loving someone (in a romantic relationship)?

2. How important is it to be "in love" with your partner?

3. Can you see yourself being with a partner long term without being in love? Assuming that the physical attraction is still there. 

Many thanks in advance. 

[Cherylyn]

For me, the gush of being 'in love' was during my courtship with my husband or our dating phase which was 3 months before he proposed, during our engagement for less than a year and then we married the following year.  I wouldn't call it infatuation either.  I knew he was "thee one."

I think it's important to be in love with your partner.  Granted, we're no longer starry eyed but we are still smitten toward one another.

It's easy to become too comfortable with a partner once they're yours for keeps.  However, I still very much love my husband and vice versa.  It's an enduring love and care which to me is real, true love without dissecting and psychoanalyzing love vs. in love. 

I can't imagine being with my husband if I wasn't in love with him.  It's also mental attraction as well.  What's in the brain matters very much. 

Love is responsibility, empathy, respect, treating each other and others with consideration and grace.

[Wiseman2]

27 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

I'm 53 and my partner is 52 we have been together for a year and a half. No major issues, our sex life is great, communication is wonderful

Do you live together? The real question is are you happy? Otherwise you would not be trying to make these distinctions between some romcom ideal vs. just sorta love someone like a brother.

[bluecastle]

30 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

1. How do you differentiate between being "in love with" and loving someone (in a romantic relationship)?

This is one of those things where my gut is to say, "If you have to ask..." In other words, you know, and I say this as someone very prone to getting in my head, creating knots, and making myself needlessly dizzy. But as I tell my girlfriend plenty, I know I am in love with her the same way I know the earth is round or a 98 degree day is scorching. It's just an emotional fact that eclipses analysis.

Generally speaking, I think there is the period of "falling" in love, which is all sorts of hormonal and pheromonal, and which (if strong) leads to a rich, expansive feeling where you remain captivated both by all you know about another person and all you still have to discover. I say "I love you" when that falling period has given way to something, but the fundamental feeling remains potent. On the other hand, to love someone without being in love is to deeply appreciate them at a lower octane, as one does a friend. A very beautiful thing, no doubt, but maybe not the foundation of an expansive romance. 

33 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

2. How important is it to be "in love" with your partner?

I would say this is critical, kind of like asking, "How important is it to be full after a meal?" If you're still hungry, you're likely not satisfied, and when you're not satisfied you get antsy, curious for something more sating, and become prone to not being kind to the server.  

34 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

3. Can you see yourself being with a partner long term without being in love? Assuming that the physical attraction is still there. 

No. I've probably done a version of this, hoping for a click, hoping certain thoughts and questions just vanished when, in fact, they only grew more sharper over time, and eventually realizing that (for me) it wasn't a fair thing for the other person or myself. 

That's me, in a nutshell. What's going on with you to bring up these questions? 

[Andrina]

49 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

1. How do you differentiate between being "in love with" and loving someone (in a romantic relationship)? You will often grow to love someone if you consistently spend time with them, in the sense of caring. Just like when you work with a co-worker for a lengthy amount of time, and they are pleasant, you would care if they were hospitalized and be happy for them when they share news of their good fortune.

Being in love is wanting to jump their bones now and then, missing them more than you would anyone else when apart, and your heart gives an extra leap when seeing them dress up for a special occasion or looking great in a bathing suit, etc., and you're a bit jealous if waitstaff is a little too flirty with your partner. Stuff like that. That extra spark you don't feel with a relative or friend.

2. How important is it to be "in love" with your partner? Why settle, when you only have one precious life on this planet? And it's not fair to a partner, who should be freed to find the one who will be crazy about them instead of having vanilla feelings.

3. Can you see yourself being with a partner long term without being in love? Assuming that the physical attraction is still there. No. Chemistry isn't a given when you find someone attractive. There are men I have found to be attractive, but the chemistry, which is biological, is missing. Or, their personality sucked.

 

 

[SleepyOwl1969]

1 hour ago, Cherylyn said:

For me, the gush of being 'in love' was during my courtship with my husband or our dating phase which was 3 months before he proposed, during our engagement for less than a year and then we married the following year.  I wouldn't call it infatuation either.  I knew he was "thee one."

I think it's important to be in love with your partner.  Granted, we're no longer starry eyed but we are still smitten toward one another.

It's easy to become too comfortable with a partner once they're yours for keeps.  However, I still very much love my husband and vice versa.  It's an enduring love and care which to me is real, true love without dissecting and psychoanalyzing love vs. in love. 

I can't imagine being with my husband if I wasn't in love with him.  It's also mental attraction as well.  What's in the brain matters very much. 

Love is responsibility, empathy, respect, treating each other and others with consideration and grace.

Thank you so much for your reply and your comments. It certainly sounds like you're in a great, stable, happy relationship. 😊

I think for me, I'm questioning the definition of being in love versus love. I've had relationships in the past where I thought I was in love but I think it was more of the rush / infatuation stage and I never really got so far as to experience love in those relationships. They never lasted long. 

I never really had that rush that you speak of with my current partner. However, this is the healthiest relationship that I've had to date. It's been one of those slow and steady relationships. I liked him from the start and it grew to being in love with him.

I'm very attracted to him and him to me, and we have a great / amazing relationship.

He on the other hand, says that he's not in love with me although he loves me. Now, by nature he is an EXTREMELY cautious person when it comes to relationships because of his past. So it takes him a lot longer to get to certain places in a relationship than I would. 

That being said, I'm actually wondering if he does feel these things but just doesn't admit it to me out loud. So I'm not sure if he's actually not feeling it or if he feels it but it's just afraid to say it. 

He has introduced me to his parents I know all of his friends and I just recently introduced him to my children.

I guess what I should be asking him is what his definition of being in love is. From my recollection I think he said he has only been in love once in his life. 🤷‍♀️

 

[SleepyOwl1969]

1 hour ago, Wiseman2 said:

Do you live together? The real question is are you happy? Otherwise you would not be trying to make these distinctions between some romcom ideal vs. just sorta love someone like a brother.

Hi Wiseman, Thank you for your reply.

No, we don't live together. I am extremely happy in this relationship. The happiest I've been in a very long while. 

For me, everything is there. The communication, the physical aspect, the trust etc. And it is the same for him. He's very attracted to me etc etc. 

I have been in a relationship with someone for 15 years who I was not in love with. So I know what that is like. There was rarely if ever anything physical in that relationship. He was like a really good friend / roommate. Ironically, it was my ex-husband. He is an amazing man a great father and we have a good relationship today. However, there was no physical chemistry at all with him on my part. 

This is definitely not like that relationship at all. So to sum up, I feel like I'm in love with my partner. He does everything to show that he is in love with me but says that he isn't. So I guess that has me a little confused. And as I stated in response to an earlier post, I guess I should ask him what his definition is because I'm beginning to see that everyone's definition of being in love can vary slightly.

[Wiseman2]

3 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

He on the other hand, says that he's not in love with me although he loves me. Now, by nature he is an EXTREMELY cautious person when it comes to relationships because of his past.

Ok, then pace yourselves, but don't get strung along with double talk. 

You say he's "cautious" What do you mean by that? Are you rushing or is he pumping the brakes or both?

Is he recently divorce/broken up? Is he on the rebound? Does he complain about an ex being "toxic" ? These are all red flags.

 In itself the "I love you but not in love with you" is what people tell someone when they have one foot out the door.

[Kwothe28]

1 hour ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

1. How do you differentiate between being "in love with" and loving someone (in a romantic relationship)?

 

You are(as a lot of people) confusing "passion" with "love". Passion is just a component of love. That is strong at start with people who just met and "clicked". They feel strongly about each other because of that passion. But they could maybe never be with each other and make a life together. Love is more then that. It includes not only passion but also intimacy and longevity of being together and understanding each other. That is why they say that what is left after that "infatuation period" that is filled with passion, is actually love.

1 hour ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

2. How important is it to be "in love" with your partner?

 

Deoendds on a person. I know relationships that survive solely on a mutual interest. But to me, very. If you are going to spend your whole life with somebody, you better make sure you do love that somebody. Because that somebody would be your new family.

1 hour ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

3. Can you see yourself being with a partner long term without being in love? Assuming that the physical attraction is still there. 

 

Nah. Again, there are people who hold relationships based on other stuff. Like interest. Or just simly they got used to each other so they wont leave. Or got kids so they just revolve their lifes about that. I was never like that

[waffle]

27 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

He on the other hand, says that he's not in love with me although he loves me.

Oh boy.  This is never good.

It's one thing to not feel "in love" and continue along anyway, but it's quite another when someone actually TELLS you this.  A sure sign something is off for him.  Is this someone you see a future with?  Because I'd hazard a guess he's telling you he doesn't see one with you.  😞 

edited to add: it sounds like you're in one relationship and he's in another.  He's telling you he's not "all in" the way you are.  Often statements like this precede the Friend Zone but more likely the Friends with Benefits designation

[SleepyOwl1969]

1 hour ago, bluecastle said:

This is one of those things where my gut is to say, "If you have to ask..." In other words, you know, and I say this as someone very prone to getting in my head, creating knots, and making myself needlessly dizzy. But as I tell my girlfriend plenty, I know I am in love with her the same way I know the earth is round or a 98 degree day is scorching. It's just an emotional fact that eclipses analysis.

Generally speaking, I think there is the period of "falling" in love, which is all sorts of hormonal and pheromonal, and which (if strong) leads to a rich, expansive feeling where you remain captivated both by all you know about another person and all you still have to discover. I say "I love you" when that falling period has given way to something, but the fundamental feeling remains potent. On the other hand, to love someone without being in love is to deeply appreciate them at a lower octane, as one does a friend. A very beautiful thing, no doubt, but maybe not the foundation of an expansive romance. 

I would say this is critical, kind of like asking, "How important is it to be full after a meal?" If you're still hungry, you're likely not satisfied, and when you're not satisfied you get antsy, curious for something more sating, and become prone to not being kind to the server.  

No. I've probably done a version of this, hoping for a click, hoping certain thoughts and questions just vanished when, in fact, they only grew more sharper over time, and eventually realizing that (for me) it wasn't a fair thing for the other person or myself. 

That's me, in a nutshell. What's going on with you to bring up these questions? 

Thanks so much for your reply Bluecastle.

I feel that I am in love with him. And I also feel that there is a distinction between being in love with and loving someone. But I think my definition may be off a little. I guess I typically define in love as looking at someone and feeling smitten or feeling a butterfly type sensation. I've had that in the past however I think it's more of infatuation/lust than anything else. Those relationships didn't last very long because that feeling soon died down.

This relationship is different. It was slow and steady. I grew to love him as opposed to feeling the other way around.

In Reading up on the definition of being in love, it sounds as though if you are in love there is a romantic / physical connection. If you just feel love it is the type of a friendship type relationship between two people...I think? LoL

The reason I came here to ask this question is because my partner has told me that he loves me but is not in love with me yet. I've asked him if he thinks that this will come in time and he said yes. He is an extremely cautious person by nature and equally so when it comes to relationships. I'm not sure what his definition of in love is. And I suppose I should be asking him. 

He says that he's only been in love once in his life.

Throughout our year and a half relationship it has taken him a lot longer to progress then my experience in the past. I do think he thanks and feels things but doesn't articulate it because he's scared. He doesn't want another field relationship under his belt. Especially not at this age.

For me, being a love is important and a relationship. My axe husband and I were together for 15 years and had a great relationship but I can say that I was not in love with him. There was no romantic or physical connection between us, at least on my part. We were more like really good friends.

My current partner is amazing and anybody would look at him and the way he treats me and think that he is in love with me.

He tells me that he is very happy in the relationship he loves where things are going and if he wasn't serious about things and he certainly would not have had me introduce him to my kids.

Sorry, I'm kind of going all over the place with this but I'm just wondering what other people's definition of it is. 

I wonder if maybe I'm putting too much emphasis on this, if he treats me as well as he does and we are as happy as we are. Does it matter if he says he's in love with me or not? I don't know....

[SleepyOwl1969]

1 hour ago, Andrina said:

 

 

Thanks for your reply Andrina. 

There is definitely chemistry between the two of us. 

The sexual chemistry is there as well. I've had relationships with sexual chemistry  but they were lacking in other areas and so did not last. This relationship is a solid combination of both. 

 

 

 

[smackie9]

You know what...if you are really happy, that's all that counts right? I wouldn't question it at all...and well IMO it doesn't need to be a subject to keep revisiting. 

[SleepyOwl1969]

32 minutes ago, Wiseman2 said:

Ok, then pace yourselves, but don't get strung along with double talk. 

You say he's "cautious" What do you mean by that? Are you rushing or is he pumping the brakes or both?

Is he recently divorce/broken up? Is he on the rebound? Does he complain about an ex being "toxic" ? These are all red flags.

 In itself the "I love you but not in love with you" is what people tell someone when they have one foot out the door.

When I say he's cautious, this is a big part of his personality whether it's work, family, relationships, romantic relationship etc.

More specifically, with romantic relationships, I think he just needs to be sure. He's 52 and I think he wants to get this one right. He has not been married before and has no children. No, he never complains about them being toxic. They have all had their share of issues obviously since they're no longer together but nothing overly dramatic.

He has said that he's been in love once. But when I think about the relationship is speaking about, I think he was quite infatuated with her initially and so its a possibility that he mistook in love with infatuation? 🤷‍♀️

He definitely has full-fledged long-term relationships. So he's not the type to jump around from person to person.

The reason he told me he's not in love with me is because I pressed him to answer that question. He didn't just come to me and say it. I was probably "all in" at about 5 months to be honest. But I have been trying my best to take it slow and try to match his pace.

He, like most people, don't like to be forced or pressured into anything. And as recently as the other day, and about 6 months prior, we had a conversation about love. Again, this was me bringing it up. 

So I suppose to answer your question, I am pushing him a little bit and when I push him I think it makes him pump the brakes even more because he wants to say things when he is ready. And I know that that's the right thing because I don't want anyone saying anything to me that they don't mean or feel forced into saying.

 

[Andrina]

So what has his relationship history been like? No longer than 6 month relationships? A 20 year relationship? How long did the one last where he says he was in love? How long ago was that?

Well, one red flag is emotional baggage, whereas a barrier is put up. Sounds like he doesn't allow himself to fully love because of his fears. IMO, people shouldn't venture into relationships until they rid themselves of baggage.

I think it is an important topic to further address. If it were me, I would ask him: Do you have a particular timeline, whereas if the loving didn't evolve to being in love, would you then want to call it quits? 

Also, if I were you, I'd consider my own timeline, that if my man couldn't truly say he loved me, even if he showed it, that I would call it quits. As for me, if a man couldn't tell me he loved wonderful me after a whole year and a half, I'd likely move on.

But that's me. You're also getting alternative opinions, which could be just as valid. It's what ends up being in your comfort level and your gut feeling.

I would not, however, guess and give excuses for his behavior without him spelling out that it's the case. That would be you putting your own spin on things to appease yourself. Good luck and let us know how it goes.

 

[bluecastle]

27 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

He on the other hand, says that he's not in love with me although he loves me. Now, by nature he is an EXTREMELY cautious person when it comes to relationships because of his past. So it takes him a lot longer to get to certain places in a relationship than I would. 

How recent is this past?

I ask because what you're describing sounds a lot like symptoms of emotional unavailability: someone on guard, not in a place to dive into the water but more comfortable at the shoreline. Great as everything is, do you find yourself longing for him to surrender to it all a bit more than he presently seems capable of? If everything stayed roughly as is do you think you could be fully content or itching for more?

The more you write the more I get the sense that the answers might be "yes" and "no," respectively. Is that correct? 

For whatever it's worth, I think "extremely cautious" could be applied to myself, and my girlfriend. We've both been bruised, scraped, burned. But healing all that, in order to be open to love, giving it and receiving it fully, was a path we were both on before meeting. I'm happy we've validated that journey in each other, rather than validating an instinct (alive in both of us, and occasionally something we have to deal with!) to stay guarded and protective. 

I share that not because I think we're some model for how it should be, but just to say: a year and a half is a pretty decent chunk of time to be with someone, and it sounds like you're feeling, understandably, a bit alone on a ledge. I like Andrina's advice about having an internal timeline to how long you can start sincerely comfortable on that ledge without being joined, as it sounds like you've brought this up plenty.  

When I told my girlfriend I loved her for the first time, about six months into things, it was because I knew by then that my love for her was a very hard fact, bigger than fleeting feeling, and keeping it to myself felt wrong. Thinking back, I would have been okay if she wasn't ready to say it back—at least for a bit. But it also would have stalled what I saw as us setting off to sea together, so to speak, which is what I wanted in a partnership.

Maybe I'm off here, but my sense is that you're wanting to head into those deeper waters with him. If that's the case, make sure to own that truth, and keep it on a higher plane than all the decoding of his emotions and exuding his reticence. The puzzle of another is not one we can ever complete. That's why it's so important to be comfortable alongside all the pieces. 

[Batya33]

How it's defined is completely irrelevant.  There are varying definitions and it's relevant if you're doing an analysis for your studies or your job or out of idle curiosity.  Not relevant as far as figuring out what you're ok with.  He is not in love with you.  He has loving feelings towards you.  You are in love with him. Is the imbalance ok with you?  If it is  and you're not settling, cool.  But if it's going to eat away at you it is not ok.

I have a friend in her 60s.  She's been with her partner for over 10 years. They are each divorced and he has grown kids, she has no kids.   He told her way back when that he wanted her to know he was never getting married again.  She did want to marry again.  Finally he moved in with her.  He's never proposed to her.  They are still very much together.  She settled for what he was offering.  I haven't spoken to her in years now but I know 10 years ago when they'd been dating a couple of years she was over the moon about him and happy.  But she's also settling.

You have to look inside yourself and be bluntly honest with yourself that he doesn't see you as his one - not in an in love way.  Please don't tell yourself lies about how "in love" is silly/only infatuation/not necessary.  If it is necessary to you decide whether it's ok if he never falls in love with you.  

[jul-els]

It’s semantics. You love someone or you don’t. He’s saying he does, but based on what I’m understanding, it sounds like he’s a little bit scared of it. You, not so much. You know that you’re happy in love. That being the case, enjoy it. There are no guarantees in love, and his self-doubt may dissipate or it may not, but as you know you love him, you can have the joy of doing so for as long as you’ll both allow. No one can predict how long that will be, but it’s a universal truth, regardless of who you choose to partner with.

[Batya33]

1 minute ago, jul-els said:

It’s semantics. You love someone or you don’t. He’s saying he does, but based on what I’m understanding, it sounds like he’s a little bit scared of it. You, not so much. You know that you’re happy in love. That being the case, enjoy it. There are no guarantees in love, and his self-doubt may dissipate or it may not, but as you know you love him, you can have the joy of doing so for as long as you’ll both allow. No one can predict how long that will be, but it’s a universal truth, regardless of who you choose to partner with.

To me it's not semantics in this context -he wants her to know he does not feel the same about her as she does about him - that there is an imbalance and he is happy to be with her, he loves her but it's the Meatloaf lyrics -2 out of 3 aint bad.  Now in that song he says "there aint no way I'm ever going to love you" but this guy in this situation is basically saying the same thing -he's never going to love her the way she loves him.  It's all substance.  Not semantics.

[waffle]

45 minutes ago, SleepyOwl1969 said:

He has said that he's been in love once. But when I think about the relationship is speaking about, I think he was quite infatuated with her initially and so its a possibility that he mistook in love with infatuation? 

 

I'd be very careful about assigning feelings to him that he doesn't have, i.e. "he might actually be in love with me and not know it because he treats me so well" and "he says he was in love with this other woman but he was probably just infatuated."   This is wishful thinking on your part.  If he tells you now, however far removed this relationship is, that he was in love with her, then you can be sure he was in love with her.  Consider also the possibility that he might still be in love with her.  Maybe not in an active, still-in-contact-with-her way, but more of a "the one that got away" and/or regrets about breaking up with her (if he did) or not fighting hard enough for her (if she broke up with him) and maybe even subconsciously keeping himself available for her.  Obviously conjecture on my part but something is very off here and now he's put you in a position of waiting for something that may never happen with his "I'm not in love with you . . . yet" comments and answering your "do you think it might come in time?" with a yes.  After a year and a half, the odds are not in your favor.

A man who is truly serious about his current relationship does not talk like this.

[jul-els]

57 minutes ago, Batya33 said:

To me it's not semantics in this context -he wants her to know he does not feel the same about her as she does about him - that there is an imbalance and he is happy to be with her, he loves her but it's the Meatloaf lyrics -2 out of 3 aint bad.  Now in that song he says "there aint no way I'm ever going to love you" but this guy in this situation is basically saying the same thing -he's never going to love her the way she loves him.  It's all substance.  Not semantics.

Yes, but the question itself is a matter of semantics. That was my point. I agree the real question is as you said, whether or not what he has to offer is enough for her. That’s something only she can know and will have to determine for herself. 

[SleepyOwl1969]

4 hours ago, Kwothe28 said:

You are(as a lot of people) confusing "passion" with "love". Passion is just a component of love. That is strong at start with people who just met and "clicked". They feel strongly about each other because of that passion. But they could maybe never be with each other and make a life together. Love is more then that. It includes not only passion but also intimacy and longevity of being together and understanding each other. That is why they say that what is left after that "infatuation period" that is filled with passion, is actually love.

Deoendds on a person. I know relationships that survive solely on a mutual interest. But to me, very. If you are going to spend your whole life with somebody, you better make sure you do love that somebody. Because that somebody would be your new family.

Nah. Again, there are people who hold relationships based on other stuff. Like interest. Or just simly they got used to each other so they wont leave. Or got kids so they just revolve their lifes about that. I was never like that

Thank you for your input and perspective.

The love is definitely there on his part and online. I'm just trying to figure out what in love means to him and I guess the only person that can answer that is him. 

 

[SleepyOwl1969]

3 hours ago, smackie9 said:

You know what...if you are really happy, that's all that counts right? I wouldn't question it at all...and well IMO it doesn't need to be a subject to keep revisiting. 

One of my good friends says this exact same thing. Her personality is very similar to his. She is also quite cautious about everything in her life, including her marriage. She says that I should just enjoy what is happening and not put undue pressure on him. She said that if a man were pressuring her and asking her questions like I'm asking my partner, she would probably think about leaving the relationship.

 

In fact, if I were to snap my fingers and have him claim to be in love with me, I really don't know what would change. He is amazing to me and with me.

[SleepyOwl1969]

4 hours ago, waffle said:

Oh boy.  This is never good.

It's one thing to not feel "in love" and continue along anyway, but it's quite another when someone actually TELLS you this.  A sure sign something is off for him.  Is this someone you see a future with?  Because I'd hazard a guess he's telling you he doesn't see one with you.  😞 

edited to add: it sounds like you're in one relationship and he's in another.  He's telling you he's not "all in" the way you are.  Often statements like this precede the Friend Zone but more likely the Friends with Benefits designation

Thanks for your comment.

To be fair, I am the one who not only asked him this but pressured him for an answer.

We are both very communicative and talk about relationships in general and ours specifically. I don't think we are on different pages at all, actually.

He's not the type just to introduce any woman to his friends let alone his parents. And we put off him meeting my children until we were very sure that things would be progressing. That's why it took as long as it did for he and the kids to meet. So, I know he takes our relationship very seriously. 

Thank you again for your perspective.

[SleepyOwl1969]

3 hours ago, Andrina said:

So what has his relationship history been like? No longer than 6 month relationships? A 20 year relationship? How long did the one last where he says he was in love? How long ago was that?

Well, one red flag is emotional baggage, whereas a barrier is put up. Sounds like he doesn't allow himself to fully love because of his fears. IMO, people shouldn't venture into relationships until they rid themselves of baggage.

I think it is an important topic to further address. If it were me, I would ask him: Do you have a particular timeline, whereas if the loving didn't evolve to being in love, would you then want to call it quits? 

Also, if I were you, I'd consider my own timeline, that if my man couldn't truly say he loved me, even if he showed it, that I would call it quits. As for me, if a man couldn't tell me he loved wonderful me after a whole year and a half, I'd likely move on.

But that's me. You're also getting alternative opinions, which could be just as valid. It's what ends up being in your comfort level and your gut feeling.

I would not, however, guess and give excuses for his behavior without him spelling out that it's the case. That would be you putting your own spin on things to appease yourself. Good luck and let us know how it goes.

 

Thanks Andrina.

As for his long-term relationships, they last between 2 years and six or seven years I believe. The woman that he said he was in love with, he dated for 4 years and this was about 10 years ago when it ended.

I have a question for you, if you don't mind.

You said that if your partner didn't say the words but showed the actions you would still call it quits. Just curious as to why you would make that decision? Would it not be enough for that person to show you daily that they love you even if they don't say it?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to pick your brain 😊

I know it's wonderful to have the words and the actions together. I myself like to hear the words but also like to see the actions. In my opinion though, based on my past relationships, the old saying is true; actions speak louder than words. I have had men in my past tell me wonderful wonderful things but they did nothing, time and time again. It sounded amazing but I never "saw" anything. My partner now is very action-oriented. He does a lot for me. There would be no question in anyone's mind that he loves me. 

As I stated earlier and one of the other threads, if he did suddenly come to me and say that he was in love with me, I really don't know what would change in our relationship. And I say this because he already does so much for me.

 

Thanks again 🙂