Love is not a feeling. It’s a way of being in this world. I am a being of love. I am not making this claim to boast or suggest that I am better than the beings who surround me. But Jesus commanded us to love one another. The tragedy is that some beings meander through life never really loving someone.
A feeling flickers, a fleeting spark,
A blush, a grin, a thrill in the dark.
But love, true love, a deeper, wider sea,
A way of being, now and eternally.
Not just a passion, even desire will eventually fade,
But a gentle current, through sun and shade.
A lens through which the world is seen,
A river flowing into a horizon serene.
I am a being, fashioned by His grace,
Not claiming higher, or a loftier place.
For in the whispers of a sacred call,
To love another, was the command for all.
Yet some may meander, from greetings to byes,
Untouched by tenderness, unspoken sighs
For another’s sorrow, or another’s joy,
A hollow echo, or a selfish ploy.
But love is sewn, in the very core,
A way to live, and to give forevermore.
To see the light, in every soul you meet,
And offer comfort, on life’s winding street.
So let the feeling, bloom and then subside,
But let your heart, in love’s embrace reside.
A constant presence, a steady gentle breeze,
and for all of these, give thanks on your knees
Edited by: ElRoyPoet, 2019
140 Questions to Ask Your Crush, Recommended by Relationship Experts
How to Know If They Are Worth Dating IN 7 DAYS
In For the Long Haul
This will take the steam out of your kettle! At the end of the day, you’re either a geezer or geezette. So why not try—to get along—before you get moved to the back burner?
“Passion and commitment are widely believed to be the foundation of strong romantic relationships. But a relationship is made of two unique individuals, and personality traits these individuals possess or lack can often make a relationship more likely to endure… Humility appears to be a huge asset to relationships. One study found that people tend to rate this quality highly in their significant other. It also found that someone who is humble is more likely to initiate a romantic relationship, perhaps because they’re less likely to see themselves as “too good” for someone else… The ability to forgive is so important because pain is an inevitable part of any relationship. People mess up. They might say something they don’t mean, be unknowingly inconsiderate or forget an important event. So when looking for a partner, it’s probably a good idea to find someone who recognizes that making mistakes is part of being human.” Excerpt from: This Trait Could Be Key to a Lasting Romance
“Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?” 2 Corinthians 6:14
Lucky in Love
Some people come together for convenience.
Others, because they don’t want to be lonely.
I’m not so sure, what has kept us together?
I’m just so happy, you found me!
The science behind, why some couples stay together and why some don’t make it: When a child is born, the mom naturally bonds with her offspring. Ironically not all moms are able to nurture their children into ideal family relationships. It could be, because of her upbringing that she doesn’t know how to, or circumstances beyond her control (i.e. fatigue, illness, absent partner, etc.). The other factor that comes into play, is the adolescent’s development years and as a result, when they graduate from school, there is a lot of history and certain innate tendencies, that are not easily outgrown, even into maturity.
Consequently, when these young adults start looking for a partner, they are faced with 3 personality types:
1. The “Anxious” who make up about 20% of the population and are overly preoccupied with their partners and whether they love them back.
2. The “Avoidants” who make up about 25% of the population and resort to distancing strategies, to discourage attachment, because it might result in a loss of independence.
3. The “Secures” who make up about 55% the population, these are comfortable giving and receiving love and gravitate towards partners with the capacity to make them happy.
Anxious and avoidant types are drawn to each other, despite their incompatible styles: as the person seeking closeness works harder to get it, their avoidant partner pulls away, thus reaffirming their separate beliefs that relationships are unfulfilling or restrictive. Secures are usually unavailable, because they are already in a relationship. However, the single ones can happily partner with anxious and avoidant types, and even have a steadying effect on them, by helping their partners realize there is no threat.
In conclusion, it’s the normal people who save the day, because only they can neutralize the toxicity in people, (feelings of rejection or standoffish). This is one arena where being different really doesn’t pay off, because the love relationship is old school and will be for generations to come. So, striving to be normal will never go out of style and who knows you might even get lucky! Excerpts from The attachment secret: are you a secure, avoidant or anxious
“Start children off on the way they should go, and even when they are old they will not turn from it.” Proverbs 22:6
The Increasing Challenges of Compatibility for Single Young Adults
In recent decades, the landscape of romantic relationships has undergone profound transformations, making it increasingly difficult for single young adults to find compatible partners. This shift can be traced through a chronological progression of societal changes—each contributing to the decline of the traditionally stable “secure” personality type and fostering a more fragmented, and often more damaged, dating environment.
Initially, society’s expectations centered around conservative family structures and emotional stability rooted in secure attachment. Historically, the majority of individuals—about 55% according to attachment theory—were categorized as secure, capable of giving and receiving love comfortably. These individuals served as stabilizing forces in relationships, often acting as the “balancing” influence in partnerships plagued by incompatible attachment styles such as anxious or avoidant tendencies.
However, the advent of widespread drug use and alcohol consumption, coupled with the rise of elective body enhancements, began to erode this foundation. Substance abuse and physical alterations often serve as coping mechanisms or attempts to boost self-esteem but can also distort emotional stability and authentic self-perception. Such factors contribute to a decline in the proportion of individuals with unshakable self-confidence and emotional resilience, thereby reducing the pool of inherently “secure” personalities.
Simultaneously, the women’s liberation movement and evolving gender roles have redefined societal expectations around independence and relationship dynamics. Women’s increased empowerment led to greater autonomy, yet also introduced new complexities into dating and partnership formation. The traditional model of relationship stability—built on mutual emotional security—becomes more elusive when societal norms emphasize individual achievement, career focus, and personal freedom over long-term commitment. As a result, many women and men alike are less inclined toward settling into stable, emotionally balanced partnerships, further diminishing the number of “secure” individuals available for committed relationships.
The proliferation of dating apps and online platforms has revolutionized how singles meet and interact. While these tools have expanded access to potential partners, they have also contributed to a culture of superficiality, instant gratification, and endless options—factors that undermine deep emotional connection. The transactional nature of digital dating often favors fleeting encounters over meaningful bonds, fostering a sense of disposability and fragility in relationships. Moreover, the ease of switching partners and the abundance of choices can lead to “serial dating” behaviors, which hinder the development of secure attachment and promote attachment styles characterized by anxiety or avoidance.
Subculture lifestyles—ranging from high-risk social scenes to alternative relationship models—further fragment the compatibility landscape. These lifestyles often emphasize individual expression and non-conformity, which can challenge traditional notions of stability and emotional security. As societal norms diversify, the shared cultural and emotional foundations that once fostered stable pairings become more diluted, making it harder for individuals to find partners whose attachment styles and life philosophies align.
Consequently, the cumulative effect of these societal changes is a demographic shift where “damaged goods” singles—those with insecure attachment styles or emotional scars—are increasingly prevalent. The pool of “normal,” emotionally balanced individuals diminishes as the external pressures and cultural shifts favor more transient, less stable forms of connection. This scenario creates a cycle where the likelihood of encountering compatible, secure partners decreases, making meaningful and lasting relationships more elusive.
References and Timeline:
How Courtship Changed
– 1960s–1970s: Social movements such as sexual liberation and women’s rights loosened strict courtship rules and changed gender expectations.
– 1980s–1990s: Divorce rates increased, and family patterns diversified, reducing the stability of lifelong marriages.
– 2000s–2010s: Social media and smartphones transformed how people present themselves and meet.
– 2010s–present: Dating apps made matching immediate and abundant, increasing choice overload and “serial” matching behavior.
Main Factors Making Compatibility Harder
– Lost filters and rituals: Fewer shared community and family-driven ways to meet resulted in less built-in alignment on values and life goals.
– Digital dating dynamics: Apps increase options but encourage snap judgments and short-term interactions. Some research links online dating to lower relationship satisfaction and higher partner turnover, though outcomes vary by platform and user goals.
– Substance abuse and body modification: These trends can reflect coping mechanisms or identity work that complicate trust and emotional regulation. Causal links to attachment patterns are complex and not definitive.
– Social diversification: Greater acceptance of subcultures and relationship models dilutes once-common expectations, making it harder to find closely aligned partners.
– Political ideology and religion: Parents’ beliefs shape family routines, discipline, and emotional climate. Conservative or religious families are sometimes associated with authoritative parenting (combining clear rules with warmth), which relates to better emotional regulation and secure attachment. Conversely, liberal families may lean toward autonomy-focused or permissive approaches, which can reduce consistent boundary-setting.
What Upbringing Produces Secure Young Adults
– Sensitive, responsive caregiving in early childhood (caregivers who reliably soothe, respond, and support exploration) is the strongest and most consistent predictor of secure attachment across many studies.
– A stable emotional environment, characterized by low chronic neglect or abuse, predictable routines, and adults who model emotion regulation.
– Positive peer experiences and opportunities for safe exploration during childhood and adolescence.
– Parenting style and cultural context: authoritative parenting (warmth combined with clear limits) supports emotional regulation and secure attachment more reliably than extremes of harshness or permissiveness. Political and religious values influence how families balance obedience, community involvement, and autonomy, which in turn affect attachment development.
– Later supportive relationships and therapy can help increase attachment security over time.
Practical Steps for Seeking Healthier Relationships
– Practice emotional skills: label feelings, use calming strategies, and clearly state needs.
– Prioritize consistency: reliable behavior builds trust faster than idealized gestures.
– Favor in-person, conversation-friendly dating settings over endless swiping.
– Seek partners who demonstrate repeated emotional responsiveness, not just surface attraction.
– Be deliberate in partner selection: look for patterns of responsiveness and stability rather than relying solely on initial chemistry.
In conclusion, the cumulative effects of cultural shifts—such as women’s liberation and evolving gender roles, rising divorce rates and family diversification, social media and dating apps, trends in substance abuse including drug and alcohol use, body modification, and expanding subcultural diversity—have fragmented the traditional foundation for stable, secure attachment. As a result, individuals with insecure attachment styles or emotional scars are becoming more visible, and the pool of emotionally balanced, secure individuals is effectively diminished. Understanding these societal influences highlights the importance of self-awareness, emotional resilience, and deliberate efforts toward stability to increase the likelihood of forming lasting, healthy relationships. Otherwise, one partner may have to assume a codependent role and settle for a dysfunctional relationship; however, its demise is inevitable because it was doomed from the start.
Codependency Recovery: 7 Keys to Healing Yourself
“Another thing you do: You flood the Lord’s altar with tears. You weep and wail because he no longer looks with favor on your offerings or accepts them with pleasure from your hands. You ask, ‘Why?’ It is because the Lord is the witness between you and the wife of your youth. You have been unfaithful to her, though she is your partner, the wife of your marriage covenant. Has not the one God made you? You belong to him in body and spirit. And what does the one God seek? Godly offspring. So be on your guard, and do not be unfaithful to the wife of your youth.” Malachi 2:13-15
Poem Analysis:
Love, in its most profound and trans-formative sense, transcends the transient nature of emotion. While feelings of affection, attraction, and passion are undeniably part of the human experience, they are but fleeting currents in the vast ocean of what true love embodies. To understand love as a way of being is to recognize it not as a reaction to external stimuli, but as an internal orientation, a deliberate choice, and a fundamental mode of engaging with the world. This understanding is not a declaration of superiority, but a reflection of a deep calling, a spiritual imperative, and a psychological reality.
The psychological landscape often explores love through the lens of attachment theory, emotional regulation, and interpersonal dynamics. While these frameworks offer valuable insights into the “expression” and “experience” of love, they often fall short of capturing its essence as an inherent state of being. Psychology can illuminate the “how” of loving behaviors – the secure attachments formed in childhood, the empathy that allows us to connect with another’s pain, the communication skills that foster healthy relationships. However, the concept of being “a being of love” suggests a more fundamental disposition, a core identity rooted in compassion, kindness, and a genuine desire for the well-being of others. This isn’t to say that such an orientation is innate or effortless; rather, it is a cultivated state, a result of conscious effort and a willingness to prioritize connection and understanding.
The Bible offers a powerful and foundational perspective on love as a way of being. Jesus’ command in John 13:34-35, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another,” elevates love from a mere suggestion to a defining characteristic. It is not simply a feeling to be felt, but a mandate to be lived. The love commanded here is not contingent on the other person’s worthiness or appeal; it is an unconditional, outward-focused love, mirroring the divine love extended to humanity. This echoes the profound description of love in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7: “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.” This passage meticulously details the “behaviors“ and “characteristics“ of love, highlighting it as an active, enduring force rather than a fleeting emotion.
To claim to be a being of love is not an assertion of moral superiority or a boast of inherent goodness. It is a recognition of a profound responsibility and a commitment to a particular path. It is acknowledging the internal work required to shed the layers of self-centeredness, fear, and judgment that can obscure this inherent capacity. It is a continuous process of choosing empathy over indifference, forgiveness over resentment, and understanding over condemnation. This commitment is not about being perfect, but about striving to embody the principles of love in our interactions, our thoughts, and our actions.
Sadly, the reality is that many individuals navigate life without ever truly experiencing or expressing this deeper form of love. They may experience infatuation, familial affection, or even platonic connection, but the transformative power of a love that is a way of being remains elusive. This can stem from a myriad of factors: past trauma that has erected emotional barriers, societal pressures that prioritize individualism and competition over connection, or simply a lack of awareness of the profound potential within. The inability to love in this way is a tragedy, not just for the individuals themselves, but for the world around them, which is deprived of the warmth and light that a being of love can radiate.
Disclosure:
This essay was developed through human-AI collaboration, combining original editorial perspectives with scholarly research. The editor maintains academic integrity and assumes full intellectual responsibility for the theme and its conclusion. All links are property of their respective authors.
elroypoet.blog 