where is this coming from following a tongue-in-cheek discussion about old translation debates.
For realz. What the fook, yo.
For that matter, I have not recounted my entire definition of it, but simply put forth one aspect of it which this entire debate utterly ignores.
"Entire debate."
Sounds like you've actually read very little of it, at least as it was discussed around here.
Nande said:
Because I am not 16 anymore, and I don't want to remain in the mentality of a 16 year old forever. I have grown well beyond that, and if you want to go listen to the songs I've written (I can link you through a DM so's not to shamelessly self-promote), and tell me I haven't struggled with and learned about this concept, I welcome the criticism.
To be fair, there's sometimes another mentality to come after the post-16 epoch. After learning that romantic love isn't just sugar and rainbows, occasionally one learns that it doesn't just have to be blood and sweat either.
None of us here are 16 anymore. I'm literally double that age myself, and I've experienced a lot as well. I'm currently in my longest running romantic relationship (6 and a half years; second and third longest were 5 and a half, then 3 respectively), and sprinkled throughout the past 16 years are numerous other shorter relationships that may have lasted anywhere from a few weeks to six months (in case you give yourself a headache adding these up, understand there was overlap between many of these and the long relationships).
I don’t feel that "Love is a lifetime of accepting another person's failings and forgiving them repeatedly for failing to meet your expectations" is necessarily an incorrect statement (the notion has certainly played a role in my experiences, and there have been periods where that role was prominent), but I'm not sure I would highlight it as the core facet of romantic love either, as you seemingly have done here -- though perhaps that wasn't your intent?
If this isn't what you intended, however, that raises the question of what notion you are raising, and in contrast to what from this debate's sordid history you are setting it. As things stand, you've not really said anything that hasn't been said before, with the exception of the apparent -- albeit possibly unintended -- suggestion that love is about being disappointed, forgiving, and then doing it over again until you die.
Hopefully those times become fewer and more far between with the passage of time and growth of understanding.
Now, if
this was your intended suggestion, it hasn't come across because the point has been made many times while your comment is set up in contrast to "this entire debate," which you assert "utterly ignores" your intended message. The implication being then that something like "Hopefully those times become fewer and more far between with the passage of time and growth of understanding"
isn't what you're trying to get across.
