060202, 1745hr, central time.

i really had a bad start to the day today. i woke up at 4am to write my paper, and still had to skip two classes in the morning, to finish it in time. i think the end product is a blob of bullshit anyway, so it's not like i have a great sense of satisfaction now. then, because alvin very kindly set his alarm clock to that unearthly hour to make me wake up, and i forgot to set it for him for his 9am class, he overslept and woke up only in time for his 10am class. i genuinely thought he had intended to skip that class anyway, so i didn't bother to wake him up. i think he's pissed. sob.

becauase i felt so tired, i also fell asleep in my international security class, which is highly embarrassing, because i was sitting right in front of the professor. i woke up from my drowsiness only towards the end of the class, when this super arrogant guy spoke up. omigod, he really got on my nerves. the class was about realism, and he's apparently very knowledgeable in that or something, i actually think he's bluffing. he started his long 15 minute speech with "i've been sitting here, listening to all these discussion..blah blah [throw out some big political philosophers' names, like hobbes and machiavelli]....and i'm very amused." amused?! please, i'm equally amused he thinks he's all so great. and then he went on to say he's a realist, and that he doesn't agree with that the professor is saying about realism - he eventually compromised and said, yeah, there're many different strands of realism. and when someone pointed out the contradictions in his argument - like when he said realism is HUGE on morality, and also on acquisition of power at the same time, someone pointed out that his discussion of morality also included concepts of equality, which in itself, is incompatible with the concept of power acquisition as the primary national interest - he backed down and said, "oh, this is just too complex, maybe i should reserve this for some higher level class." what the! so blardy cocky, i wanted to bash him up.

grrr. just talking about him makes my blood boil. walking out of the class, i also fell off a step, and twisted my ankle slightly. sigh. it's not been a good day.

i just had to rave, but i also remember my promise to discuss love-related topics. so yes, we have a request here: when or how do you know you love somebody? it doesn't even have to be romantic love - even for family, how do you know for sure you love them? in the requestor's own words, how do you know it "confirm-plus-guarantee-plus-chop?"

hmm. difficult question.

really, i've been struggling with this same question for ages now, trust me i have. i've asked around, i'm looked inside my own heart, there's really just no real answer to this question i think. [or as my international security professor likes to say, "it's all in the mind." erm. ok.] from what i've gathered so far though, i'm just going to share what i think.

from a romantic point of view, you know you love that person, when you are willing to give up whatever that is most important in your self-esteem for him. it sounds abstract, but really, it's not. like me, i'm very big on my intellectual and emotional independence, i hate people trying to change my mind through ways other than proper discourse, i hate people trying to manipulate me, i hate it when i get overly emotional over other people, because i generally like to think i have complete control over my own mind, my heart and i have a plan for myself. but, with the man i love, i don't feel like i have to be all that independent to be whole, to be who i am. it seems as though through my love for him, that is my sense of identity. that i can, and i do, love. with this added new component, some other components of my self esteem have to adjust a little.

like this morning, alvin didn't even scold me, but i just felt so terrible. i think i probably overreacted, and the usual cindy would feel both guilty for doing the wrong, and then also dirty for feeling overly guilty. but now, i simply don't care, i feel that it's legitimate for me to be more sensitive towards his feelings, and i don't think it compromises what i perceive myself to be. or, another example, i don't usually like to change my personal plans for other people, because i want to get what i want. but if alvin's asked me to not go to japan, i would seriously consider not going. he didn't ask, and actually it's already too late for me to back out. but if he did ask, i would possibly not go.

hmm. actually, i think i'm making it worse, maybe i'm really isn't a good example, my mind's kinda twisted and screwy. maybe i should use simpler hypothetical examples: if someone bases his whole pride on his collection of NBA jerseys, he knows he loves the girl, if he's willing to sell or even give what whole collection of jerseys away for her. if a girl bases her self-esteem on her natural beauty, but is willing to go through plastic surgery to please her man, that's her love for him. if the man prides himself on being american but is willing to migrate to africa for his woman, that's love. there's really no judgment here on what kind of love is better, whether there should be boundaries on how far one should go for his or her love for the other partner. because whether we see it as a worthwhile cause or not, if he/she loves the other person, that's all that matters to them.

of course, there's an underlying assumption that everyone's got some part of the self, that is held in high importance, and will be sacrificed only for the most important person or persons. yes, there can be more than one person that you can fall for, it really depends on where you set your threshold to be. there can likely be some person with no principles and no self-esteem whatsoever, who can fall in love with whoever that comes along, because he/she will be willing to do anything and everything for that person. you can't say that's not love, because it's really just all in the mind. but of course, then it's not as unique and momentous as the others.

a more specific question asked, was when do you know? frankly, the moment may never have to come. because even if you'll be willing to give up your self-esteem, you may never have to. you may never have to confront that situation, and come up with the decision that your love for that person surpasses your love for yourself. in fact, in most cases, if your lover and you complement each other so well, you don't even have to give up part of your self-esteem, in all likelihood, you will instead blossom and have a greater self-esteem. it's all possible. i'm really talking about if the crunch comes, do you have the inclination to relent, or to abandon the relationship?

or not even the relationship, if there isn't any to start with. yes, i believe that you can fall in love with somebody, with or without the relationship. they're related - in that when you love someone, you want to be in a relationship with him/her, but the status is not a prerequisite for love. nor is love a prerequisite for relationships actually, going off tangent for a while. i don't even think all relationships have to be based in love - but it must at least be based in mutual understanding - if one party thinks it's love, and other think it's casual before-i-meet-The-One kind of relationship, then it's wrong. so yes. i digress.

as for love for family members, i think i still have pretty traditional feelings about that, it just seems like a natural thing to have - love for one's own family members. but i don't think it's a human nature thing though [as hobbes like to argue, all man are equally competitive and selfish in nature, family is a unit established actually to better serve everyone's needs. no crap about basing family on love. heh.] i'm not sure if the romantic definition of the threshold of self-esteem vs love thing can work for family members. i've not actually thought too much about it, because i think ultimately, people are inclined to just feel something for the people that they feel genetically connected to. it's more like a projection of self onto others and vice versa that causes this feeling of kinship. after all, if i'm 50% made up of my mom's genes, what i see in my mom is naturally mentally superimposed and compared to what i see of myself. it's a ntural comparision mechanism. as for the feeling of love, i think it's a matter of building up through time. yes, right now i really love my family, ranked in priority, far more than i love alvin. but that's really an accumulation of 20 odd years of kinship with my family. i cannot be conscious of when i started loving them, but from sheer history of good or bad memories, any guy or any friend would have to lose out to my family. on the other hand, if i've not spent all that time with my family, or if they've been abusive or something, i would still have a feeling genetic kinship, but the feeling of love is not automatic. but then again, of course, like i said before about romantic love, love is really just in the mind - if an abused kid, for some reason still loves his/her family, you cannot say that the kid is wrong, for basing his/her affections on mere genetics. just like you cannot fault some people for basing their affections on some guy's sense of humor. there's no need for reason to love. if it's there, it's just there.

anyway, to summarise that huge clump of words up there:
1) love is when you are willing to give up part of yourself.
2) love needs no reason, it's all in the mind. [remember, some people's minds are screwed. hahaha.]
3) family members have an advantage in cultivating love, by virtue of genetic relations and the time factor. but it doesn't have to happen.

ah, now i'm exhausted, talking about this. it's a good question though. dang, this is fun. anymore questions? email me!. or if you really really want to remain anonymous, you can leave a message in the gbook. or if you think i'm utterly wrong, similarly, email me or go to the gbook too. isn't this such a fun thing to do? heh. counting down to valentine's day.....