So today, I had to give this speech for one of my college classes, Communications. Not like I was nervous before it, because I’ve been debating for four years, but since this class isn’t too rigorous, I wasn’t exactly worried about my grade. Yet, to shake things up a bit, I really wanted to talk about something I was passionate about and a topic that I was pretty sure I was good at discussing, evident from the really good responses from all of you to “The Role of Eponine.” When I had originally written that post, it literally pertained to my entire love life, but I would have never have guessed that so many other people, whether they are male or female, could relate to how I felt. Which made me feel so much better. Because then I knew I wasn’t alone.
Due to that, I decided to do the same thing today, hopefully being successful on the way. I talked about the development of marriage over time and how it may not necessarily equal love, like what most people think. With this, I researched the “free love” movement in the 1850s that really piqued my interest, because it was a strong social fight against the state where gender and love should be fluid, not controlled. Very good academia.
Then you see all these movies, specifically rom coms, talking about how “love is free” and how you are the only one holding back if you don’t love somebody else or if someone doesn’t love you. The idea, I think, is that even if you think nobody out there loves you, the chances of that are extremely slim because love isn’t born. It’s made, and it’s not just like a cup full of it and that’s it. It’s unlimited, it’s created, and it’s shared.
Apparently.
Look, I’m not refuting this (based on my title), but I’m definitely going to question it. Because I’m not entirely sure what love is, so someone please tell me.
Love: an intense feeling of deep affection. ~Google
Heck, yeah, I googled that because I’m not going to go through the trouble to find a “scholarly dictionary” to look up this word. The idea is that this is a socially constructed word, and that maybe the biggest search engine could help me find what society thinks (smart researching, my friend).
Yet, when I look at this word and its definition, I see “hormones.” Because that’s what hormones 
are. I’ve felt intense feelings of deep affection before, but I wouldn’t say that was love because how do I pinpoint a definition to my emotions? How does anyone do that?
Damn, I should have a WOTD for this, so I’m going to stray a little bit from this definition and my issues with it and talk about what this “free love” crap really means.
You know what? The feminists were right: our emotions should not be controlled by the state. Then again, marriage is just a bunch of papers that bind us together so we can get tax and property benefits. So…it really has nothing to do with love.
However, let’s explore this concept of love being free, because this is something I really want to focus on. Since there may be different levels to the feeling of “love,” being free may mean something different to other people. For example, demonstrating service at a soup kitchen is considered to be “free love” because they’re not paying for it, I guess. Yet, you’re still sacrificing your time to help give love. So in those terms, love is not exactly free. Monetarily, love is free because you don’t go to the store, give them $20 and say, “Can I have love?”
Some people will say, “But prostitution and strippers…”
Yeah, well, they’re having sex and flashing their bodies. Not giving you love, unless that’s how you interpret it. According to Google, maybe not. Yet again, maybe because you’re probably touching yourself during this, which may be your form of love.
Maybe let’s simplify this into more moderate terms. Everyday use. How I’m going to predict that 
you and the majority of this world act: pretending to be somebody we’re not to get men to like us. Time is precious, so when we’re giving love, we’re giving up time, so they’re may be a priceless tag on that. Yet, pretending to be somebody we’re not just to get somebody else to like us…is that free? We’re spending so much time trying to primp our hair and learn EVERYTHING about the other person that we don’t even care to just let our emotions go free. It’s more as if our mind is driving our emotions, which is really not the way you would want to live your life. If you have to force yourself to want something, you don’t really want it.
So if love is really free, why do we pretend to be people we’re not? This doesn’t just go for finding a spouse, but also just making friends, in general. Maybe even around your family. Have you ever expressed your true feelings to a person without fearing that they may judge you? And with this fear, you twist your story a little to match how you’d expect them to react?
Is that really…free?
Because if I have to put that much effort in conveying my “deep affections,” screw it all. Nothing is worth that much effort. I’d rather live until I’m 60 years old as a cat lady and wait naturally until I make friends who like me without making me feel as if I have to add a drop of drama juice or the man who wants to actually get to know me. And since that time is so precious, I’ve wasted all the money in the world. But, to be completely honest, I’d rather use that time as a single, happy woman than having to manipulate myself to think I love someone else.
In general, let’s think about the new coming outs: gays, lesbians, transgender. Actually, you want to know who want to talk about? Caitlyn Jenner. I am so psyched that the press has spun this into a positive thing, specifically Vanity Fair. They stepped out of the box and featured her on the cover of the next issue, and it really shows that society is trying to take a step forward towards a more liberal stance. That’s where the love is…or at least an attempt at spreading it. Maybe not free, especially for Caitlyn, but it’s a profit.
Relating to that, I’m going to rant about what one of my professors said the other day to the class. He said, “You know what confuses me? Bruce Jenner. He, she, or it is making so much money that I may even just switch my gender over.”
Okay. ONE: Caitlyn is a woman, so she. It is dehumanizing and he is wrong. At least respect her if you don’t agree with the transgender process. And TWO: You don’t become transgender because you want to get famous and rich and make money. Because that’s not the point. The point is to find an identity in yourself and to stay true to that, and if that means having to undergo a sex change, then so be it. Why should Bruce Jenner have to live in a body that he doesn’t feel comfortable with for the rest of his life?
Where’s the love people? If the press can love him, so can you. It may be expensive, but it is so going to save your ass in the future.
I guess this is becoming a rant about my views of the world, but it really all comes down to the idea that love may not be free, after all. We go into these relationships where we’re expected to balance our emotions and mainly let our good side out so our partner doesn’t go crazy and want to break up with us. Yet, how can I let out my good side 90% of the time when 50% of the time I’m feeling the bad side? Why do I have to pretend to be this happy, optimistic person who can’t complain once in a while without making my boyfriend want to break up with me?
We’re still human.
Should I let go of who I am just to satisfy somebody else? Should I change who I am and the way I feel or act to maintain my relationship with another person? Or society in general? I don’t have to change my beliefs to give respect to others who don’t believe in the same things as I do. I can still give love to a Catholic, if I’m not Catholic; it’s called friendship. And religious tolerance. That’s why that concept was invented – to create some sort of union among society. We can’t live as a community unless we go over the threshold to give some love to others.
Whatever that means. “Deep affectionate feelings.” Or hormones. You interpret it.
100 Ways to Write 