Some people are inert, either traumatized, or are just not born in such way that they can feel the feeling of love, but only a pesudo attachment through logical assertion.
It’s like people who doesn’t feel they have a gender, even though they can look at themselves in the mirror, they still don’t feel it mentally.
I know I shouldn't say this, but really, not feeling it mentally, is itself compulsive.
I agree with HC on this one. Love can become very compulsive, depending on the context.
To the blind, everything is merely guessing in the dark.
From what I have learned about Maia, your comments are not only wrong, but a little offensive too.
I think you’re conflating two elements in the same relationship: the love the mother has for her child and the responsibility. The responsibility has to do with the fact that it is an adult/child relationship. As an adult, we are the ones responsible for the care of our children. But love does not depend on this kind of relationship. It can exist between two adults, or between a child and her teddy bear.
If it exists between two adults, the kind of “slavery” you get (if you want to call it that) is, if anything, the reverse of what you described. Usually, the one who is in love is the one who enslaves him/herself into the service of the loved one. The man, for example, might buy the woman flowers, might go out of his way to take care of her, might respond to her every beck and call. He basically surrenders his selfish will to serve hers. If anything, he allows himself to be owned by her.
I think it’s because of this conflation of love and responsibility that you think it’s the other way around. To be responsible to someone else, particularly to a child, means to carry the burden of having to make sure the child never gets into trouble, or gets hurt, or gets sick, etc. And because he/she is a child, he/she is less capable of, and knows less about how to, take care of him/herself. Thus, fulfilling this responsibility entails telling the child what to do, what not to do, what to eat, when to take a nap, rewards for good behavior, punishment for bad, etc. This is where you get the appearance of “ownership”. It rests on responsibility.
Between two adults, there is no responsibility. Each adult is fully capable of taking care of themselves. Thus, the love expresses itself as self-enslavement, not the enslavement of the other person. But in the case of a parent to a child, the love expresses itself as the enslavement of the child. What’s common in the two cases is the desire to fulfill the needs and happiness of the other. It is assumed in the case of two adults, that each adult is fully capable of deciding for him or herself what he/she needs and wants, and how he/she can go about getting that. Thus, the only thing for the one who loves the other to do is listen to the other’s needs and wants, and how to fulfill them. But in the case of the parent and child, what must be done in order to fulfill the needs and wants of the child is to take the responsibility of caring for the child, which means that as the one who knows best what the child needs and wants, and how to fulfill that, the parent must make the decisions, must be in control over the child.
“Hurts so Good” :-"
Or
"You see these Shackles baby Im ur slave
I’ll let you whip me if I Misbehave" 
Tell that to this guy!
But you’d have to ask 'what is slavery"
I don’t see much love except from those wishing to free them.
Sometimes “emotional” slavery is quite a willing bondange, James - people haven’t become aware enough yet of what they give up for it, at least in my book.
Lust and desire is a passionate chosen bondange if it becomes addiction. Love, on the other hand, frees us, don’t you think?
VEry compulsive love sounds like attraction, perhaps even love, mixed with panic. people often confuse this with desire or excitement. This can lead to really trying make a relationship work or start with people who you shouldn’t so much as give directions to.
The trouble with this sort of thing is that love , attraction, desire, compulsion, panic, fear, ad so on, none of these are natural categories.
We have a range of complex emotional responses that are ever changing, sometimes second by second, and we invent such categories to have a dialogue how the way we feel. But we can never convey exactly to another person what those feelings are. Words are but brief approximations and we can not know how these are known to each of us.
This problem hinges on the utterly ridiculous claim that morals can be objective.
We can’t even see to agree on the need for love - or exactly what love it, how could we mobilise logic to determine and absolute moral truth?
I don’t see my post as taking any stand on the objectivity of morals, nor even that it is related in any way to that issue. There are natural categories of emotions, and these can be verified through MRIs and what people are saying they experience. These emotions need not be the same exact experience for each person, but there is incredibly regularity being found in emotional states, brain patterns and people self-evaluation of their emotional states. It is no stretch and can be part of useful conversation to Point out to someone who is exibiting compulsive ‘romantic’ behavior, that they are exhibiting signs of fear and panic. This is actually a fairly common pattern. This can be useful for them to realize and with some focus they can begin to notice that it is not simply excitement or passion, but actually fear that is Winding them up.
WHy are you making a plea for emotional objectivity, only to deny it in the next sentence?
Not that had anything to so with what I was saying.
And are you really so naive as to think you can objectively identify an emotional state from an MRI? That’s absurd and a circular argument. as you could never verify the image except by the description of the emotion by the patient.
AS for “compulsive ‘romantic’ behaviour”, such a thing is only problematic if it is unrequited, otherwise the exact same behaviour is a loving couple. It’s all a matter of perspective.
You “shore” about that?
