The difference between being in love and loving somebody

[between places]

... I am interested in how you are defining "being in love" compared to "loving somebody".

How does it feel to be in love?

And when would you say I LOVE YOU?

These words are used differently in different languages. That´s why I am asking.

[MaryWeather]

For me, being is love is wanting a romantic relationship with someone. Loving someone is more of a broad term in my book. I love my best friend, my parents, my brother, but I am not in love with them. As far as how it feels to be in love, I think that it is probably different to everyone, so it is hard to answer that question.

I personally would say I love you to a significant other and family members only, because it can be interpreted so many different ways.

[qwair]

For me being 'in love' means limerence, which is the mental and physical sensations when you have a crush on somebody: trembling, palpitations, wanting to be close to them all the time, thinking about them obsessively, having an unrealistic concept of them as people, feeling euphoria, and sometimes feeling shy or awkward in their proximity. These, for me, are very physical and real effects, and are very pleasurable. They usually die down after a couple of months, but they tend to flur up again or last a bit longer if I begin a relationship with that person. Even within a relationship, they have never lasted for over eight on nine months.

Loving someone is for me the feeling of wanting a person in my life, and missing them when they're gone. It is also the feeling that the other person is important to me, that I'm willing to go to great lengths for their sake, and the wish that they feel the same about me. This, for me, is the more important emotion, because it is the emotion I base my relationships on. I've had successful relationships without ever being 'in love', but never had a successful relationship without loving my partner, and them loving me back.

[Guest]

To me its the same thing, just that the first one, "in love", is only used when not in a relationship with the person one is "in love" with. So to me:

I am in love with that person - we are not a couple.

I love somebody - might be a couple, might not be a couple.

I dont use the word love for family and friends, because I see the word love as a strong emotion that (to me) is the desire to be with and 'bond' with a person. I like my family and I like my friends, but I dont have any desire of cuddling with them, touching their hair or spening most of my awake time with them.

I suppose Im pretty alone with this definition of "love".

Adding (because I missed this question): I never say "I love you", because I dont love anyone. I would say "I love you" if I had a romantic partner, otherwise...no.

[pegasusoftraken]

I basically understand the two phrases in the same way as qwair. "In love" is all the sensations and limerance at the start of a relationship, or in an intense crush. Though personally I don't enjoy the feeling, and wish I didn't fall in love, in that sense.

For me loving somebody means that I feel an intense connection with them, that they are important to me, that I think they are awesome, and them being in my life makes me happy - whether as partners, or friends, or whatever. And for me loving somebody isn't conditional on anything they do, and is seperate from feeling a desire for intimacy or affection or a relationship or anything.

Though when I love somebody, I don't always tell them that, particularly in friendships. Kind of depends on whether it feels appropriate to say.

[DerkhanBlue]

Though when I love somebody, I don't always tell them that, particularly in friendships. Kind of depends on whether it feels appropriate to say.

Same here, I don't neccessarily tell people I love them because that might potentially be awkward, as the people I 'love' can be friends or family members. I have to say, though, that I don't 'fall in love', so there cannot follow a feeling of 'loving' someone the way these things often go - as in, first you 'fall in love' and then you progress towards 'loving' that person if the relationship goes well.

So basically, since I don't love romantically and there's no better word to express the intensity of (friendship-style) feelings I do have, I use 'I love [person]' in non-romantic contexts.

[Guest]

"In love" I usually reserve for romantic love - which brings about physically urges to do stuff that platonic love does not. I have no interest in kissing, hand holding, cuddling, etc with my friends. Loving someone well, it just means I care about someone and their well being. I don't even have to like a person to love them, just like I don't have to know an animal to love them.

[between places]

To me its the same thing, just that the first one, "in love", is only used when not in a relationship with the person one is "in love" with. So to me:

I am in love with that person - we are not a couple.

I love somebody - might be a couple, might not be a couple.

I dont use the word love for family and friends, because I see the word love as a strong emotion that (to me) is the desire to be with and 'bond' with a person. I like my family and I like my friends, but I dont have any desire of cuddling with them, touching their hair or spening most of my awake time with them.

I suppose Im pretty alone with this definition of "love".

Adding (because I missed this question): I never say "I love you", because I dont love anyone. I would say "I love you" if I had a romantic partner, otherwise...no.

nope, not at all alone. exactly how i see it- feels great to hear( see) somebody write this ;)

[Dirge]

For me, being is love is wanting a romantic relationship with someone. Loving someone is more of a broad term in my book. I love my best friend, my parents, my brother, but I am not in love with them. As far as how it feels to be in love, I think that it is probably different to everyone, so it is hard to answer that question.

This. As for when I'd say it...well, that has been a bit of a sticking point in past relationships. I've never said it first, and never feel as though I'm saying it as honestly as the other person.

[WhenSummersGone]

Being in love means, to me, that you are in a relationship with romance and loving feelings. Loving feelings is caring about someone. Kinda like you can be in love and have loving feelings, but loving feelings doesn't always mean you are in love.

Also I disagree that a crush is someone you are in love with. How can you be in love if you don't even know they like you back? Sounds silly to me. This is more infatuation than in love.

[Arctangent]

As others have mentioned above, "in love" often implies romantic attraction, infatuation, and/or limerence. I tend to shy away from using the phrase "in love" because I think it can be misleading to conflate these phenomena with love itself - they can co-occur, but they're not the same. I'm also not sure whether I'm personally capable of "being in love" or not, but I've decided the distinction between romantic and non-romantic love isn't very relevant to me anyway. What matters to me is that the kind of love that results from close friendship is there, and that's what I choose to base my relationships on.

While I'm unsure of what it means for me to be "in love," the feeling of love itself is relatively easy for me to identify in myself. There are a few things I've identified as being central to my personal experience of love:

• Being friends, which means having some kind of deep intellectual and emotional connection.
• Caring about the person and actively wanting them to be a part of my life.
• Wanting them to feel loved in their relationships with myself and others; feeling happy when this occurs.
• Experiencing warm affection and empathy toward them, and desiring to express these feelings in some way.

Love is not something I feel toward a lot of people, and it's not something I experience toward anyone by default (including family members). It's something that develops gradually as I get to know and connect with someone. Sometimes I'll tell the other person explicitly that I love them, other times not. It depends on the situation. In any case, it's not something I say lightly.

[WhenSummersGone]

As others have mentioned above, "in love" often implies romantic attraction, infatuation, and/or limerence. I tend to shy away from using the phrase "in love" because I think it can be misleading to conflate these phenomena with love itself - they can co-occur, but they're not the same. I'm also not sure whether I'm personally capable of "being in love" or not, but I've decided the distinction between romantic and non-romantic love isn't very relevant to me anyway. What matters to me is that the kind of love that results from close friendship is there, and that's what I choose to base my relationships on.

While I'm unsure of what it means for me to be "in love," the feeling of love itself is relatively easy for me to identify in myself. There are a few things I've identified as being central to my personal experience of love:

• Being friends, which means having some kind of deep intellectual and emotional connection.
• Caring about the person and actively wanting them to be a part of my life.
• Wanting them to feel loved in their relationships with myself and others; feeling happy when this occurs.
• Experiencing warm affection and empathy toward them, and desiring to express these feelings in some way.

Love is not something I feel toward a lot of people, and it's not something I experience toward anyone by default (including family members). It's something that develops gradually as I get to know and connect with someone. Sometimes I'll tell the other person explicitly that I love them, other times not. It depends on the situation. In any case, it's not something I say lightly.

How can you be "in love" if it's just infatuation and romantic attraction?

[iamphoenixfire]

To me, there is a difference between loving and being "in love." For instance, I love my best friend (I feel like this is more platonic and informal) but I'm in love with my significant other (this seems more romantic I suppose)

[qwair]

How can you be "in love" if it's just infatuation and romantic attraction?

Because that's what people mean when they say the phrase 'falling in love'. They don't usually mean that they've grown to really know a person and value them as a part of their lives, rather that they've developed feelings of limerence for a person, which may or may not later develop into a loving relationship.Also, I haven't heard people who have been in a 5 or 10 year relationship describe themselves as 'being in love', because the feelings of limerence and infatuation naturally fade away after some time.

Then again, this might be because of different use of language in different parts of the world. I agree that there should be a line between limerence ('in love') and love, and I don't think it's so important how you call things, as long as you know what they are.

[WhenSummersGone]

How can you be "in love" if it's just infatuation and romantic attraction?

Because that's what people mean when they say the phrase 'falling in love'. They don't usually mean that they've grown to really know a person and value them as a part of their lives, rather that they've developed feelings of limerence for a person, which may or may not later develop into a loving relationship.Also, I haven't heard people who have been in a 5 or 10 year relationship describe themselves as 'being in love', because the feelings of limerence and infatuation naturally fade away after some time.

Then again, this might be because of different use of language in different parts of the world. I agree that there should be a line between limerence ('in love') and love, and I don't think it's so important how you call things, as long as you know what they are.

But you can't fall in love with someone you aren't dating, you don't even know them lol. If it's just a crush it isn't love, just a crush.

[qwair]

But you can't fall in love with someone you aren't dating. If it's just a crush it isn't love, just a crush.

Define 'dating'... Again, this term has different meaning in different cultures.

The way I think about the term, 'in love' is exactly the way I would describe the kinds of feelings I have for a crush.

You are right, that 'in love' and 'love' are two different things, and have little to do with one another.

[WhenSummersGone]

But you can't fall in love with someone you aren't dating. If it's just a crush it isn't love, just a crush.

Define 'dating'... Again, this term has different meaning in different cultures.

The way I think about the term, 'in love' is exactly the way I would describe the kinds of feelings I have for a crush.

You are right, that 'in love' and 'love' are two different things, and have little to do with one another.

Meaning you have at least dated for a month or so. Telling someone you are in love with them, or love them, before a first date is just, weird. You may have romantic feelings and infatuation towards them but calling it love doesn't sound right. Much like I don't believe in love at first sight because it isn't love unless you know that person.

[Guest]

How can you be "in love" if it's just infatuation and romantic attraction?

Because that's what people mean when they say the phrase 'falling in love'. They don't usually mean that they've grown to really know a person and value them as a part of their lives, rather that they've developed feelings of limerence for a person, which may or may not later develop into a loving relationship.Also, I haven't heard people who have been in a 5 or 10 year relationship describe themselves as 'being in love', because the feelings of limerence and infatuation naturally fade away after some time.

Then again, this might be because of different use of language in different parts of the world. I agree that there should be a line between limerence ('in love') and love, and I don't think it's so important how you call things, as long as you know what they are.

*shrug* I have always heard the term "in love" to mean the passionate romantic love people have for a partner - my Uncle and his wife who have been married for over 40 years are in love in the gushy, mushy romantic sense. They love their kids and their own parents and even their friends. But, they are in love with each other. Though, they are a bit of a special case, since after 40 years they are that sweet older couple that will sit on the park bench cuddling and calling each other pet names for hours. :lol: But, still, that sort of romantic love is what I have always heard it mean. Not limerence, which is a crush. But the past crushing to actually having deep, real feelings. I use the phrase in love, even though I am in a seven year relationship. There is a married couple in the sexuals section that uses the phrase in love, actually even having the "fall in love with my partner again" be one of the strategies for getting their marriage to work after the sex issue. I believe it was a long term marriage as well. :)

The terms probably do mean different things in different areas though. Just like dating over here and in Europe mean different things. Language is such an ineffective way to communicate given how many definitions each word / phrase can have!

[qwair]

Meaning you have at least dated for a month or so. Telling someone you are in love with them, or love them, before a first date is just, weird. You may have romantic feelings and infatuation towards them but calling it love doesn't sound right. Much like I don't believe in love at first sight because it isn't love unless you know that person.

I understand what you mean, but I think you are confusing 'in love' and 'love' again. I do not call infatuation love, I call it 'in love'.

Of course I wouldn't say to someone I barely know what I feel about them, because, well, I don't know them very well and I don't trust them. But, if I were talking to a friend about going to a first date with someone I've fancied for a while, I might absolutely say that I'm completely head over heels in love with them and obsess about them and wouldn't know what to say and how to act. Not sharing your feelings doesn't mean you don't feel them.

Oh, and although I've never experienced 'love at first sight', I definitely did become infatuated with people after meeting them for 20 minutes. I think that 'love at first sight' is not meant literally, as in the first time you lay eyes at a person, more of a metaphor for that 'click' or chemistry that happens sometimes between two people in a short while.

my Uncle and his wife who have been married for over 40 years are in love in the gushy, mushy romantic sense. They love their kids and their own parents and even their friends. But, they are in love with each other. Though, they are a bit of a special case, since after 40 years they are that sweet older couple that will sit on the park bench cuddling and calling each other pet names for hours. :lol:

Off topic: Ewwww. If that's what romance is then I'm aromantic. Luckily, that's not how I see romance at all.

But yeah, people use the same word differently all the time.

[Philip027]

I've never really discerned between those, to be honest. Neither of them necessarily state that you must already be in an established relationship with the other person, and I could and probably have seen them used interchangeably.

[WhenSummersGone]

Meaning you have at least dated for a month or so. Telling someone you are in love with them, or love them, before a first date is just, weird. You may have romantic feelings and infatuation towards them but calling it love doesn't sound right. Much like I don't believe in love at first sight because it isn't love unless you know that person.

I understand what you mean, but I think you are confusing 'in love' and 'love' again. I do not call infatuation love, I call it 'in love'.

Of course I wouldn't say to someone I barely know what I feel about them, because, well, I don't know them very well and I don't trust them. But, if I were talking to a friend about going to a first date with someone I've fancied for a while, I might absolutely say that I'm completely head over heels in love with them and obsess about them and wouldn't know what to say and how to act. Not sharing your feelings doesn't mean you don't feel them.

Oh, and although I've never experienced 'love at first sight', I definitely did become infatuated with people after meeting them for 20 minutes. I think that 'love at first sight' is not meant literally, as in the first time you lay eyes at a person, more of a metaphor for that 'click' or chemistry that happens sometimes between two people in a short while.

my Uncle and his wife who have been married for over 40 years are in love in the gushy, mushy romantic sense. They love their kids and their own parents and even their friends. But, they are in love with each other. Though, they are a bit of a special case, since after 40 years they are that sweet older couple that will sit on the park bench cuddling and calling each other pet names for hours. :lol:

Off topic: Ewwww. If that's what romance is then I'm aromantic. Luckily, that's not how I see romance at all.

But yeah, people use the same word differently all the time.

I just really don't think you can be in love with someone unless you have built a connection with them. It's just romantic feelings but not love. Even as a hopeless romantic I have never loved anyone unless I have spent time with them. Infatuation feels like love but it isn't. I hear people confuse the two.

[qwair]

I just really don't think you can be in love with someone unless you have built a connection with them. It's just romantic feelings but not love. Even as a hopeless romantic I have never loved anyone unless I have spent time with them. Infatuation feels like love but it isn't. I hear people confuse the two.

Okay, one more time, slowly.

In love has nothing, I repeat, nothing at all to do with love. It has the word in it and that's it. Firefighter and Jetfighter have the word fighter in them, but are two completely different things and have nothing else in common. In love is infatuation, the physical and mental aspects of a fresh relationship or a crush. Love is the desire for someone to be a part in your life and for you to be in theirs. Not the same at all.

The one who is confusing love and in love here and using them interchangeably is you. You seem to be reading every time I write 'in love' and substituting 'love' for it, which is not what I or others in this thread mean at all. You insist in saying that somehow when I say in love it somehow means I love these people, which is not what I mean.

I understand that you would rather use different terms, and that's okay, but please stop misreading me and suggest I am saying something that I am not.

[WhenSummersGone]

I just really don't think you can be in love with someone unless you have built a connection with them. It's just romantic feelings but not love. Even as a hopeless romantic I have never loved anyone unless I have spent time with them. Infatuation feels like love but it isn't. I hear people confuse the two.

Okay, one more time, slowly.

In love has nothing, I repeat, nothing at all to do with love. It has the word in it and that's it. Firefighter and Jetfighter have the word fighter in them, but are two completely different things and have nothing else in common. In love is infatuation, the physical and mental aspects of a fresh relationship or a crush. Love is the desire for someone to be a part in your life and for you to be in theirs. Not the same at all.

The one who is confusing love and in love here and using them interchangeably is you. You seem to be reading every time I write 'in love' and substituting 'love' for it, which is not what I or others in this thread mean at all. You insist in saying that somehow when I say in love it somehow means I love these people, which is not what I mean.

I understand that you would rather use different terms, and that's okay, but please stop misreading me and suggest I am saying something that I am not.

I just have no idea why you would call it "in love" when it has nothing to do with love.

[Arctangent]

How can you be "in love" if it's just infatuation and romantic attraction?

Well, I'm not saying this is universally true (since definitions of "love" and "in love" can vary quite a bit, as is already apparent in this thread), just that I've personally observed some people using the phrase this way. I've seen many people talk of "falling in love" to refer to an intense crush or the high of a new relationship. In this usage, the feeling of "being in love" tends to be relatively short-lived, and may or may not be followed by longer-lasting love in a relationship. But I've also seen some people use it to describe love that generally occurs within a romantic relationship.

I don't associate love with infatuation either, which is why I sometimes find the phrase "in love" to be misleading, especially since pop culture depictions of romance often mistakenly conflate the two. I think it's important to distinguish between them, and to me personally it makes most sense to do so by avoiding the phrase "in love" altogether. But I do acknowledge that there are differences in how people use terminology, and I don't think my interpretation is necessarily more "right." I can still make sense of what other people mean as long as they're being clear and consistent in their definitions.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

I'm basically with what some others here have said about infatuation/limerence versus a more general form of affectionate love...

That said - there's definitely a distinctly different "flavour" to romantic feelings in my head than purely platonic ones. This is most obviously evident in how I feel about male friends (I'm heteroromantic) and family members as opposed to certain female friends. But really, that element is not overarchingly important to me. If I dig deep and look past the tricks that infatuation and limerence played on my mind in the past, I can see that what matters to me in all relationships is that more broad and general affectionate/caring love. Meaning that very close friendships and friendships involving some romantic feelings can essentially look outwardly identical with me.

So yes, basically I think this is a highly subjective thing, and that in the vast majority of cases when the term is used in pop culture depictions of romance - people are talking about being infatuated. And that's why I don't really like talking about "being in love". It tends to carry that self-indulgent element of using another person to "complete" oneself. I know that not everyone uses the term that way - and some really do use it to refer to a romantic relationship which they've genuinely committed to consciously (post-limerence high) - but it's problematic enough that I'm generally down on the term altogether these days.

[Notte stellata]

I just have no idea why you would call it "in love" when it has nothing to do with love.

I think it's just a convention in the English language, like "love at first sight." It may not make sense, but most people have a shared understanding of what "in love" means, so it's still an effective term in communication. I'm kind of similar to you in that I tend to see "in love" as being in the passionate stage of a new relationship rather than having a crush, but I've heard other people use "in love" to refer to a crush, and I'm fine with that.

Like LoC and KST, I don't really say "in love" these days, because what's important to me is real love (which doesn't have to be romantic), not the pop-culture notion of romance. But I think under some circumstances "in love" (i.e. infatuation) and "love" can co-exist: If romantic feelings developed on the basis of a deep friendship, there will be the "in love" feelings associated with romantic attraction, as well as love from the friendship. But love itself isn't dependent on romantic attraction, and it can exist even if romantic attraction never developed.

[Guest]

my Uncle and his wife who have been married for over 40 years are in love in the gushy, mushy romantic sense. They love their kids and their own parents and even their friends. But, they are in love with each other. Though, they are a bit of a special case, since after 40 years they are that sweet older couple that will sit on the park bench cuddling and calling each other pet names for hours. :lol:

Off topic: Ewwww. If that's what romance is then I'm aromantic. Luckily, that's not how I see romance at all.

But yeah, people use the same word differently all the time.

:lol: There is a reason I said gushy, mushy romantic sense. Most people get kinda sick of being around them because of how they act, even after so long.

[passionatefriend61]

When I was growing up and still viewed "romance" and "friendship" as two separate things, two distinct types of love or relationship, there was never much difference in the emotional qualities of the love I felt for people I wanted to be romantic friends with and the love (or, what I thought was love but probably wasn't) I felt for people I wanted to be in romantic relationships with. I experienced the same levels of intense desire, emotion, longing for connection and intimacy, interest in physical affection, desire for some kind of exclusivity, need for reciprocity regarding the amount of love, etc. It got me into trouble a few times, not to mention a whole lot of hurt, particularly because when I was younger, I didn't have the language or the sophisticated thinking necessary to explain what I wanted or what my feelings meant (and didn't mean).

I guess if you asked my teen self what the difference was, she either would've blinked and been at a total loss because she never paused to consider what she would've done if one of the objects of her "romantic" desire actually reciprocated and proposed a relationship, or she would've said "level of exclusivity," which would've fallen flat if she'd thought about it long enough because there wasn't actually a significant difference between her desired amount of exclusivity in potential romantic friendships or queerplatonic friendships and the desired amount in "romantic" relationships. My younger self just sort of assumed that there was a significant difference because for everybody else, there is. Oh, and I guess the stronger attractions she felt toward men vs. women was also a factor in separating "romance" from "friendship" but even taking that into account, wanting a romantic friendship with one man and a romantic relationship with another, didn't actually entail different desires per each relationship. Just different labeling? And perhaps, it would've been cool if romantic friends had lovers but not cool if romantic partner had a lover.

Nowadays, I don't draw a distinction whatsoever between "loving someone" and "being in love with someone," which is basically referring to romantic love as different than nonromantic love. I don't love very many people, and love usually--not always, but usually--takes me time to develop and requires that I feel a really strong attraction to someone. An attraction to their personality, their intellect, or that unexplainable attraction that feels more like spiritual resonance.

I like more people than I love, and liking someone, even a lot, doesn't automatically lead to me feeling love for them. So, I guess that's the distinction I personally make. Not "romantic love vs. nonromantic love" but "love vs. like." Or maybe, more broadly, "people I love vs. people I don't love." I have no idea what magical formula is required for me to love someone, but it's more than getting along really well and liking them, which is a combination that by itself is rare in my life.

[WhenSummersGone]

I just have no idea why you would call it "in love" when it has nothing to do with love.

I think it's just a convention in the English language, like "love at first sight." It may not make sense, but most people have a shared understanding of what "in love" means, so it's still an effective term in communication. I'm kind of similar to you in that I tend to see "in love" as being in the passionate stage of a new relationship rather than having a crush, but I've heard other people use "in love" to refer to a crush, and I'm fine with that.

Like LoC and KST, I don't really say "in love" these days, because what's important to me is real love (which doesn't have to be romantic), not the pop-culture notion of romance. But I think under some circumstances "in love" (i.e. infatuation) and "love" can co-exist: If romantic feelings developed on the basis of a deep friendship, there will be the "in love" feelings associated with romantic attraction, as well as love from the friendship. But love itself isn't dependent on romantic attraction, and it can exist even if romantic attraction never developed.

I just find it misleading I guess, when really you just like that person and want to date them.

[IvyZero]

I view loving someone as a Mother Teresa kind of love. Care.

IN LOVE is wanting to be one with someone. A future with them every day.

I love my best friend who is a girl. I'm not a lesbian or Bi. I just care about her because she is my dear friend. I tell her I love her as part of my family. Nothing romantic. A extreme care.

My other best friend who is a guy is IN LOVE with me. Want a relationship. I do like him {Like a crush} but I...don't feel a IN LOVE with him. I love him as a friend. A extreme care.

Everyone can love {Care} but not all can be in love.{Romantic}