Friday, April 29, 2005

Oh L’amour

All alone we go on day after day
All alone we suffer
Oh, steal your heart away….

(Fleetwood Mac, “Steal Your Heart Away”)


The trouble with unrequited love is this: does anyone know of an instance when the unrequited became requited? Please raise your hand… anyone? Well?

I thought so.

Pining for the stars and the moon and the sun will always be just that—pining. Unless the stars and moon and sun would one day come down from the sky... well! So either you choose to remain miserable pining or you move on. Only you can do that; the stars and moon and sun are too far away to even notice your suffering. It’s your choice whether to remain in an unrequited situation or not.

Ang harsh, ano?

Growing up I was (Drama) Queen of Unrequited Love. For the longest time I kept falling for straight guys; you can’t get more unrequited than that. I kept smashing my head against the wall with every straight guy I fell in love with.

After ten years of being a straight-chaser, I woke up one day and chose to stop this nonsense. So now I’ve concentrated solely on gays and you know what? The situation remains the same—unrequited is unrequited, whether straight or gay. At least now I’ve learned to swerve and not hit the wall anymore.

Now I insist that there should be some level of reciprocation of feelings. If only one is interested, then it’ll be unfair for both. Insisting on remaining in an unrequited position is not only masochistic, it’s also tiring.

There is a difference between unrequited love and selfless love. The former expects something in return; the latter is given freely, willingly, and without a heavy heart. If you want him to love you back, it’s unrequited and you’ll be unhappy. If you expect nothing in return, then there’s joy in giving.

Are you being selfless or are you really expecting something in return?

7 Comments:

Blogger Nelson said...

there was a survey circulated in email a couple of years ago asking 1) would you rather be loved or 2) give love? a lot of my gay friends answered the first, and it's understandable. who wouldn't want to be loved, right? but what if a person is giving you love, but you don't want it--specifically from that person--what would you do about it? so then comes the issue that some people would like to be loved by the person of their choosing.

aaaaah. hindi kaya selfish din yun? but like the workings of human frailty, it doesn't really work that way.

on the other hand, it is quite painful for one to give love--a lot painful if one is expecting something in return. however, if he/she is the masochist / martyr type--or at least it doesn't matter to him/her if he/she'll be hurt (at least he/she already know from the onset), the feeling is much freerer. and yes you're right--there's a lot of joy in giving. less baggage pa.

i think i've been on both sides, and i'm more leaning towards on giving selfless love. sometimes it hurts, but you know what--once you deal with the pain, it's ok, the love with remain.

one ends up wiser and can move on loving another again.

9:52 PM  
Blogger Nelson said...

ps -- paki edit na lang comment ko, obviously kagigising ko lang he he he

9:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

halloo

a theory i have that most of my friends affirm:

if object of affection is a guy, then it is next to impossible to turn unrequited to requited. it's either he's into you or he isn't. of course kung no strings attached sex lang naman ang habol, hindi tinatanggihan ang grasya

if it's a girl, may posibilidad. i know a lot of couples where the girls would say that they didn;t really like the guy at first. yung iba pa nga ilang beses ngang na-basted pero nadaan sa pasensya at pagpupursigi. it seems girls are more open to "learning" (an awkward term in this context but i don't know how else to put it) to fall in love with someone.

of course ang problema ngayon is in determining where the line is between being masugid and being makulit.

wachatingk?

anyway, the point of this post is... you'd have a better chance if you turn straight!

mwahahahaaha!

xanderKhan!

2:33 PM  
Blogger McVie said...

Xander, I'd rather turn to stone or a pillar of salt.

Meron din namang cases among gay couples wherein there's this "natuto ring mahalin" yung isang tao. Kaya lang feeling ko in both cases (gay or straight) the chances of falling out of love are higher. It's just that among straights there's a societal structure (marriage) that discourages splitting up so easily.

Hmmm... us gays are really dehado. Shet.

6:09 AM  
Blogger Nelson said...

Oy hinde rin.... at least when we have sex we don't have unwanted pregnancies he he he

1:58 PM  
Blogger McVie said...

Ay oo nga pala Nelz, nasa isang bansa ka na allowed ang gay marriages. Okay, let me rephrase that: in a country where gay marriages aren't allowed--like the Philippines--dehado ang mga gays dahil wala tayong social structures to help keep a relationship together.

Then again, in the 70s the idea of being free of structures meant that we gays can create our own structures, make new ones. So in a sense, hindi rin pala tayo uber-dehado. Hay naku, I'm typing as I'm thinking. It's all the point of view.
:-)

10:01 PM  
Blogger Nelson said...

ok lang yun... i actually think we're less dehado now than before. gay marriages are starting to be acceptable na -- case in point: Spain. They're nearing to pass legislature allowing gay marriages -- and to think that they're a predominantly Catholic country like Pinas!

Balang araw makakapag-asawa rin ang mga bakla sa Pinas he eh he

3:44 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home