complicatedlife Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 :laugh:Which Steve H. didn't follow himself. :laugh: He is also on wife number 3..... Link to post Share on other sites
Athena Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 So you're saying that the MM who is cheating on his wife, according to Harvey, shows love and loves his wife. Is that what you're saying? I guess Steve Harvey forgot to include the 4th P: #4. Put your penis only in your wife's vagina! No, Steve Harvey does not condone a MM cheating on his W And btw ... he admits he did it before, and that he was wrong to do it. Link to post Share on other sites
complicatedlife Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 No, Steve Harvey does not condone a MM cheating on his W And btw ... he admits he did it before, and that he was wrong to do it. Yes..in his book he says that men cheat because they are not getting what they want in their relationship or it's about the man himself (something along the lines of self esteem issues - too long to write about here). He also says that some men cheat because there is always a woman willing to cheat with him.... Link to post Share on other sites
RecordProducer Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 RP: Do you think that the baby boomers have a better concept of relationships?I think older people know more about life and love. Yes. You think 25-year olds know more about marriage than 60-year olds? Don't answer that; it was a rhetorical question. No, Steve Harvey does not condone a MM cheating on his W.Who cares about Steve Harvey? The original poster said that a MM who is cheating on his wife is professing love, providing for and protecting his wife - and therefore, he loves his wife. Yes..in his book he says that men cheat because they are not getting what they want in their relationship or it's about the man himself (something along the lines of self esteem issues - too long to write about here). He also says that some men cheat because there is always a woman willing to cheat with him....So he basically says that it's either about the man or it's not about the man. Very comprehensive. Yep. Link to post Share on other sites
Athena Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 No, Steve Harvey does not condone a MM cheating on his W Who cares about Steve Harvey? The original poster said that a MM who is cheating on his wife is professing love, providing for and protecting his wife - and therefore, he loves his wife. Who cares about Steve Harvey? -- Um, the OP cares!!!! The OP is reading from and quoting from his book, and she uses his three P's that he says show a man loves a woman... FROM STEVE HARVEY'S THEORY, SHE THEN EXTRAPOLATES HER OWN CONCLUSION: that in her understanding (if) his theorems were applied to a MM and an OW, then a MM cannot possibly love the OW. So you're saying that the MM who is cheating on his wife, according to Harvey, shows love and loves his wife. Is that what you're saying? RecordProducer, it appeared that you asked in this above post if according to the author, he says the MM who is cheating on his wife shows love and loves his wife ... and I was pointing out that the author quoted (Steve Harvey) didn't state that, but that the OP had drawn her own conclusions from something ese that he stated, that is: about Single Men loving Single Women. Here's what the OP wrote: see below. How a man shows his love.. A man shows a woman he loves them by showing them the three P's according to Steve Harvey.. 1.Profess his love for her 2.Providing for her 3.Protecting her if its not a combination of the 3 he does NOT LOVE you.. According to this a MM cannot possibly LOVE his OW. He professes, provides, and protects his W.. What do u all think? Link to post Share on other sites
Author MsPrada Posted March 27, 2009 Author Share Posted March 27, 2009 That would be correct Link to post Share on other sites
complicatedlife Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I think older people know more about life and love. Yes. You think 25-year olds know more about marriage than 60-year olds? Don't answer that; it was a rhetorical question. I'll answer it even though it was rhetorical. I did used to find the way my parents and grandparents think is very old-fashioned. But now that I am older and have had more life experiences, I realize that a lot of what they say is true - especially my dad, but even moreso, my grandmother. I now find that she's actually NOT old fashioned in regards to relationships for an 80 year old woman! Link to post Share on other sites
RinClavin Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I think the point of this entire thread is that if a man's love is as simple as the three P's then it could be definitive proof of whether he loves his OW or not. I disagree with that. You can follow the logic through on both sides of the question and it doesn't add up. For instance: If a man loves a woman he will Provide, Protect, and Profess. Hence if a husband performs these three things then the black and white answer is he loves his wife... that is what the principal of the three P's would suggest. The problem with this logic is many men do these things up until the day they file for divoce... many men do these things while banging another woman... ten other women... many men do this while they beat their families. You can't follow this logic through 100% Take another example. If a man does not follow the three P's and he neglects to profess his love [to other people] for his OW but has all the other signs of a healthy relationship (communication and honesty, emotional and physical intimacy etc.) he cannot love her... because he doesn't follow the three P's. I think we can all agree that love is never as simple as that. I personally believe that the term "love" encompasses so many things it is never possible to ENTIRELY love your spouse. I don't think, as imperfect beings (both as individuals and as partners), that it is possible to feel and act upon all of the many facets of romantic love all of the time. Following that same logic (and my own personal experience) I am having to admit that it very much possible to feel different aspects of romantic love for different people. Emotions are extremely complex. Situations vary. Actions, in that they stem from both emotions and situations, can be very contradictory. As important as those three P's may be to a man, I don't even think that Steve Harvey would say that rule applies 100% in ever situation. It appeared that the OP was trying to fit love into that three sided box and use it as a mathematical theorem to prove once and for all which woman the MM loves. However, I offer, that the logic fails if applied in a black and white manner. Link to post Share on other sites
LakesideDream Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 Absolutely - this is far more based on an underlying foundation of respect rather than the "ownership" model suggested by the "three Ps". I'm with you on this one, LsD!! OWoman, Ownership.. that's a powerful and curious word. I don't think I have ever had occasion to appy that word to either of the two women I have loved in my life. Rather, I have felt blessed. Blessed to have someone who loved and cared for me by my side. Blessed that I could actually relax when I was with them and enjoy the time we shared. Joyful that making love was not a contest. Happy to have a purpose in life greater than my own needs. For that I must give credit to my ex wife. Even with her "problems" she made me believe that I had that peace, that purpose for long after she felt it. That was kind of her. It's possible that for some of us that only comes once. What "was" must sustain us through what is. Of course there is the other side. When it's all gone, when you are alone in your life the hole is a big one. So big I cannot look at it. So big I built a wall around it I can't see over. These are difficult times, bound to become more difficult. I don't envy those trying to keep it together in the current world situation. My only advice is that we all should remember what "could be".. and I'm not refering to the green grass over the next hill. Link to post Share on other sites
complicatedlife Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I think the point of this entire thread is that if a man's love is as simple as the three P's then it could be definitive proof of whether he loves his OW or not. I disagree with that. You can follow the logic through on both sides of the question and it doesn't add up. For instance: If a man loves a woman he will Provide, Protect, and Profess. Hence if a husband performs these three things then the black and white answer is he loves his wife... that is what the principal of the three P's would suggest. The problem with this logic is many men do these things up until the day they file for divoce... many men do these things while banging another woman... ten other women... many men do this while they beat their families. You can't follow this logic through 100% Take another example. If a man does not follow the three P's and he neglects to profess his love [to other people] for his OW but has all the other signs of a healthy relationship (communication and honesty, emotional and physical intimacy etc.) he cannot love her... because he doesn't follow the three P's. I think we can all agree that love is never as simple as that. I personally believe that the term "love" encompasses so many things it is never possible to ENTIRELY love your spouse. I don't think, as imperfect beings (both as individuals and as partners), that it is possible to feel and act upon all of the many facets of romantic love all of the time. Following that same logic (and my own personal experience) I am having to admit that it very much possible to feel different aspects of romantic love for different people. Emotions are extremely complex. Situations vary. Actions, in that they stem from both emotions and situations, can be very contradictory. As important as those three P's may be to a man, I don't even think that Steve Harvey would say that rule applies 100% in ever situation. It appeared that the OP was trying to fit love into that three sided box and use it as a mathematical theorem to prove once and for all which woman the MM loves. However, I offer, that the logic fails if applied in a black and white manner. This is an excellent and very insightful post! And who says what you feel for someone has to be confined to that one "l" word? What I feel when I truly care for someone can't be defined with just one word. I agreed with all you've written. Link to post Share on other sites
RinClavin Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 Thanks ComplicatedLife :-) You bring up a good point, that we all need to remember, the term Love has so many different meanings and so many different inferences. It is not easy to define, and as such... we may all have vastly different definitions. We seem to love the debate of whether or not the MM loves his OW... and/or whether he loves his W. Of course we care, because it matters to us. But we argue love like it is science. We argue emotion as though it is logic. We argue words as though they have concrete meanings. Link to post Share on other sites
bentnotbroken Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 Love is actually part scientific(at least the patterns)and has been studied extensively. Love falls into many categories,stations and phases. It encompasses biology(brain activity has been measured)as well as personal choice. I don't know if everyone argues love as much as the ultimately are arguing about boundaries and standards. Link to post Share on other sites
RecordProducer Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 I really enjoyed reading all the posts since I've posted last time. Very interesting post, RinClavin. Especially this: it is never possible to ENTIRELY love your spouse As frustrating as it is to admit, you're probably right. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts