Though I suppose it's not so cut and dried. But there are scientific tests to determine if you are schitzophrenic or drunk or other fairly subjective things.
Imagine the possibilities. No more wondering. No more being fooled by sexual obsession or sidetracked by platonic admiration or mistaking that "Oh my god, was that an orgasm or did an earthquake just shake the bed?" great sex for something more.
Couples could take it together... sitting together on the edge of the toilet, biting nails as the litmus paper changes colour. Though I suppose it could have its downsides. Someone sneaking into someone's bedroom at night to obtain a result without them knowing...
How would such a test be accomplished? Would it be a hormonal test that measures the presence of Oxytocin or some other neurotransmitter? Or is love something more than a chemical reaction, that requires a battery of psychological tests?
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:10 (twenty-two years ago)
Yeah, it would def be a pee test. I'm sure they can at least measure lust levels because of hormones and uh - fluids.
― Sarah McLusky (coco), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:13 (twenty-two years ago)
You know, questions like... if there were a fire in your flat, what would you save first:1) Your guitar2) Your laptop3) Handsome Soundartist
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:16 (twenty-two years ago)
Honestly though, I think "in love" is pretty relative; what feels like overwhelming-100%-for-certain "in love" once can become small potatoes later in life when an even greater stronger "in love" overtakes ya, and suddenly you're like "WOAH NOW THIS IS THE SHIT!, I was so naive/green/desperate back then".
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:19 (twenty-two years ago)
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:20 (twenty-two years ago)
Sometimes I wonder that the only difference between what I am experiencing *now* and what I experienced in the past that was dismissed as "creepy, scary stalker obsession" is that in this case the obsession is (seems to be) mutual. What is the difference between love and obsession? Mutuality? I don't know.
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:27 (twenty-two years ago)
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:32 (twenty-two years ago)
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:34 (twenty-two years ago)
I think obsession is more like the honeymoon period of a relationship. You think you're in love but you're not REALLY completely in love yet.
― Sarah McLusky (coco), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:35 (twenty-two years ago)
― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:36 (twenty-two years ago)
― Nicole (Nicole), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:37 (twenty-two years ago)
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:40 (twenty-two years ago)
Obsession burns itself out, and sometime there's love left afterwards?
This'd mean that if you have two people who find love through obsession, you have (sometimes ^2) chance of it working. Sorry.
Anyway, the test would never work, because if you knew you were in love, would you trust some test? They haven't tested for you're feeling! This is something new!
I don't mean "you" there, Kate, I mean "one". Ah, what the hell, I mean "me".
― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:41 (twenty-two years ago)
― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:42 (twenty-two years ago)
― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:42 (twenty-two years ago)
― FrancisBacon the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:42 (twenty-two years ago)
In my own experience, I know that right now it's too early to know anything for sure. But I'm just more interested in the rammifications of what could happen if such a test *were* commercially available.
Do you think there would be more couples in the world, due to the fact that people couldn't get out on lame cop-outs, or *less* couples in the world, due to people lying to themselves in order to get sex or whatever?
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:44 (twenty-two years ago)
― Nicole (Nicole), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:44 (twenty-two years ago)
― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:46 (twenty-two years ago)
― hstencil, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:48 (twenty-two years ago)
When it's love, the person is there to answer you and is glad you're saying how great they are, and then you get to hear most of the same stuff back. Then, after so much goo that you both want to HURL, things stabilise. Meaning, things will mellow out to the point where you're able to start seeing other people your friends;-).
― suzy (suzy), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:48 (twenty-two years ago)
At what point does it crystalise into *knowing* for certain?
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:49 (twenty-two years ago)
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:52 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:53 (twenty-two years ago)
― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:57 (twenty-two years ago)
such a test might be useful but i think love is the maintenance of a strong reciprocity between 2 person, who take care of eachother's pleasures and desires so in this sense this test would be more at it's place as being another tool available for the games lovers play.
― Sébastien Chikara (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 24 April 2003 14:06 (twenty-two years ago)
I think that comparison of love and mental illness is not really that far off, but that's another discussion altogether, and I'm totally biased about it anyway.
Even non-scientific tests are subject to interpretation by the testee/tester. I can't tell you the number of times I've read the horrorscopes for both Leo and Pisces and then created a bunch of reasons for why myself and my lover are destined to stay together using a few sentences as a romantic springboard for jumping into a brainstorm. And if I can't come up with a good explanation for the predictions to coexist, I discount the entire study of Astrology for the day and feel fine and just as in love.
Besides, there already is a super test for this. It looks like a large eightball, and you ask it "Are we in love?" and turn it over. If it says "No," you turn it over again. And you keep doing that until it says "Decidedly So." Then, if you had to turn it over more than once, you make up a reason why and feel fine about it.
By the way, any reference to "you" in this post means me and the other hopeless romantics.
* where scientific is defined as gathering enough data to show some kind of pattern, as with pretty much all psychological tests
― martin mushrush (mushrush), Thursday, 24 April 2003 14:09 (twenty-two years ago)
For a long time I no believe in love (other than the normal garden variety). One day I read a thing that says once you have a child and you would sacrifice your life for your child, that is love.
Back then I could not imagine caring about any one person enough to sacrifice my life (me not have child), although could imagine loving humanity enough to sacrifice my life for many.
Now with this guy, he's the first person I ever meet for whom I would die.
Maybe this is still about humanity though coz mostly what makes me feel this way is that he is doing so much good, in a truly altruistic way, for others.
― toraneko (toraneko), Thursday, 24 April 2003 14:35 (twenty-two years ago)
Aaargghh. Doesn't matter what I say now. All sounds silly. neway...
― toraneko (toraneko), Thursday, 24 April 2003 14:46 (twenty-two years ago)
― hstencil, Thursday, 24 April 2003 14:48 (twenty-two years ago)
toraneko, i understood what you meant. maybe you'll find thislittle story interesting.
― Sébastien Chikara (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:00 (twenty-two years ago)
― That Girl (thatgirl), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:08 (twenty-two years ago)
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:11 (twenty-two years ago)
― toraneko (toraneko), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:21 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:37 (twenty-two years ago)
― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:41 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:41 (twenty-two years ago)
Which would need more like a bloody tarot card reading to say...
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:43 (twenty-two years ago)
You can know you are in love one day. THen a year or so later think,"I thought I was in love then, but now I'm REALLY in love." Or you could be in a more mature relationship and REALLY love the person more than the last person you loved. And so on. And now I shut up.
― Sarah McLusky (coco), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:45 (twenty-two years ago)
Would you stay in it, knowing that you only had that limited time? Would you detach yourself from it and just ride it out? Would you end it then to save yourself the heartache of it finally ending? Would you punch the test reader?
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:45 (twenty-two years ago)
― Sarah McLUsky (coco), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:47 (twenty-two years ago)
This is the story of every relationship I've ever been in, so yes, I probably would stay in it.
However, I just did a tarot reading and it is possibly the *nicest* reading I've ever had. Everything is happiness and prosperity and peace and abundance and good things. And the end result is:
The ninth and final card, placed in the center bottom of the triangle, represents the final outcome unless you change course. Knight of Wands: The essence of fire, such a great conflagration. One filled with vitality and passion for life. A sexy and exciting person, daring in their actions, cocky in their attitude, and utterly without fear. Absolute sincerity, coupled with violent emotions that swing wildly from one extreme to another. Boundless creativity and lust for a change of both pace and place. The rapid approach, or more likely departure, of something that sets your world ablaze. Often suggests travel or escape.
― kate, Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:48 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:50 (twenty-two years ago)
"Is it possible to love two people at the same time and how do I keep them in the dark?"
There are two responses:
"I love my mum, dad, brother and two best friends. That's five people so I reckon two is possible."
and
"Handcuff them both to your bed and turn off the light."
Ha ha, I like the second answer!
― toraneko (toraneko), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:50 (twenty-two years ago)
Gee, 'cos I thought you were discussing quantum physics - OBVIOUSLY I was mistaken.
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:52 (twenty-two years ago)
aww, that's a nice thing for the mystical powers of the universe to say about methe HSA.
― hstencil, Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:56 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:57 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:58 (twenty-two years ago)
*I'm putting it in quotes because we broke up because I had to move to NYC, so there's the possibility that if I was still in Chicago, we'd still be together.
― hstencil, Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:59 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:05 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:15 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:19 (twenty-two years ago)
― Mandee, Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:21 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:23 (twenty-two years ago)
Marriages will be torn to shreds...clandestine affairs will be exposed...secrets of all kinds will be revealed...ALL ON NATIONAL TELEVISION.
Coming this fall on FOX (of course).
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:28 (twenty-two years ago)
― (don't hurt me!) (nabisco), Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:37 (twenty-two years ago)
― nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:38 (twenty-two years ago)
I was being sarcastic. Perhaps I should've included a winking face or closing tags to make this clear.
― That Girl (thatgirl), Thursday, 24 April 2003 16:40 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:15 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:16 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:17 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:18 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:19 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:20 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:21 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:24 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:25 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:28 (twenty-two years ago)
I mean, I'm doing my very best *not* to hijack my own thread with discriptions of the endless source of wonder and fascination that is HSA.
(It's funny, since HSA found out about ILX, I was worried that he would be upset by me talking about him. "No," he says "So long as you go on at great length about my sexual prowess." I immediately started blushing furiously remembering that my first thread about him was about how he gave me such a good seeing-to that I couldn't walk for days! So I no longer worry about all my "HSA is a beardy sex-beast!!! K-rowr!" posts.)
― kate (suzy), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:34 (twenty-two years ago)
― Rockist Scientist, Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:35 (twenty-two years ago)
― geeta (geeta), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:16 (twenty-two years ago)
― kate (suzy), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:19 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:23 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:24 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:26 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:27 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:28 (twenty-two years ago)
― kate (suzy), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:29 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chris V. (Chris V), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:30 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:31 (twenty-two years ago)
― Sarah McLUsky (coco), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:31 (twenty-two years ago)
and nick - I dreamt of you! of course it's love! But you have your ladyfriend - you don't need me
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:36 (twenty-two years ago)
Disclaimer: I am not in any way shape or form qualified to dispence advice on love. I guarantee that I have been accused of being psycho and obsessive ten times for each time that any of you have.
― mouse, Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:39 (twenty-two years ago)
My girlfriend, who I don't get to see in person all that often (and won't for about 5 more months when I can move and be with her), visited me for a long weekend a few days ago, and while she was around I felt more calm and relaxed than I am usually able to feel. I can often fall asleep easily next to her (not just out of post-coital physical exhaustion), whereas alone or near someone I don't know or trust (like on an airplane), sleep for me can be anywhere from difficult to impossible.
I have been with plenty of SOs in the past who did not have the same calming effect on me. While I don't mind it being explained by neurotransmitters and chemical changes in the brain, I also don't particularly care about that explanation because I agree with geeta that it's not that useful.
The test for whether or not I am in love is the observation of the extent to which she makes me feel better when I feel worthless, guilty, anxious or otherwise unable to do the things I know I can do when I'm not locked up in some kind of slow panic attack. I'm not talking about scared cause there's a deadline and my boss is mean. I'm talking about petrified because I have to get to the airport during rush hour or because I think I haven't accomplished anything useful on a Saturday afternoon.
I'm older now than other times I've been through the treatment ringer or in the middle of serious episodes of anxiety or depression, and I know more about what's going on and what to pay attention to internally, but that doesn't change the fact that the woman I'm with now makes it a lot easier just by existing.
So yeah. I said the pretty much the same thing as kate re: SO making me feel better just now, but with more words and some clinical stuff.
― martin mushrush (mushrush), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:44 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 April 2003 19:01 (twenty-two years ago)
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 24 April 2003 19:06 (twenty-two years ago)
They're not mutually exclusive, though. Anxiety isn't excitement.
― martin mushrush (mushrush), Thursday, 24 April 2003 19:09 (twenty-two years ago)
It's actually used to predict divorces by analyzing spousal arguments.
So, do a simulation and multiply it by -1 to see if you're in love. ;-)
― cprek (cprek), Thursday, 24 April 2003 19:12 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 24 April 2003 19:15 (twenty-two years ago)
*
Dying for one's beloved: an irresistible combination of eros and thanatos in one package.
― Rockist Scientist, Thursday, 24 April 2003 19:15 (twenty-two years ago)
― kate, Friday, 25 April 2003 07:06 (twenty-two years ago)
I'm a sucker for pain.
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Friday, 25 April 2003 07:18 (twenty-two years ago)
― luna (luna.c), Friday, 25 April 2003 07:20 (twenty-two years ago)
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Friday, 25 April 2003 07:23 (twenty-two years ago)
If a guy starts talking about marriage All. The. Time. and joking around about your "wifely duties" and things, does that mean he's serious about you? I'm getting slightly worried. Not cause I haven't thought about HSA as a potential mate, but because the only person I've ever had any kind of experience like this with... well, he started asking me to marry him within about a month, and turned out to be a raving lunatic abusive control freak. So I don't want to say "you shouldn't joke about that" because if he is just joking, fair enough, but what if he's serious?
― kate, Friday, 25 April 2003 07:30 (twenty-two years ago)
― suzy (suzy), Friday, 25 April 2003 08:35 (twenty-two years ago)
― kate, Friday, 25 April 2003 08:45 (twenty-two years ago)
We could commiserate. I'd have a Batsignal (shaped like frying pan) to let him know that a compulsive cleaning hurricane is headed his way following fit of pique over someone else's carelessness (BTW am stressed which makes me INCREDIBLY scatty. Then add PMT, yowzah!).
― suzy (suzy), Friday, 25 April 2003 09:11 (twenty-two years ago)
That was a link to a real, scientific software which detects true love, or true lies !!
Check it out !
― lovergirl, Thursday, 22 April 2004 07:34 (twenty-one years ago)
I am scienifically in love with all of you.
― Fish fingers all in a line (kenan), Monday, 14 February 2005 21:11 (twenty years ago)
― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Monday, 14 February 2005 22:53 (twenty years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 14 February 2005 22:57 (twenty years ago)
― caitlin (caitlin), Monday, 14 February 2005 23:03 (twenty years ago)
― Kate Kept Me Alive! (kate), Tuesday, 15 February 2005 11:09 (twenty years ago)