Love is not primarily a feeling.
Love is a pattern of choices over time.
Feelings are weather.
Love is climate.
Someone can feel intense attachment, longing, obsession, dependency, craving, familiarity, nostalgia, lust, fear of abandonment, or even ownershipโฆ and label the whole messy smoothie โlove.โ Language lets them. Reality does not.
So when someone says, โI love you more than anything,โ but their behaviour says: โI lie to you, betray you, minimise you, replace you, scare you, exhaust you, or ignore you,โ they are not describing love.
They are describing attachment plus entitlement plus self-soothing.
That cocktail is (sadly) common. It is also not love.
Some people want love to be defined by declaration, because if love is whatever they say it is, they never have to change what they do.
Attachment
Attachment sounds like:
- โI feel connected to youโ
- โYouโre familiarโ
- โYou regulate my emotionsโ
- โI donโt like the idea of you being goneโ
Attachment answers the question:
What happens to me if you disappear?
Attachment can exist without care, respect, or kindness. Babies attach to caregivers who hurt them.
People attach to substances that destroy them. Attachment is not moral. It is neurological.
Entitlement
Entitlement sounds like:
- โBecause I feel this way, you owe me accessโ
- โBecause I chose you, you should tolerate my behaviourโ
- โBecause Iโm attached, I get to define the rulesโ
Entitlement reframes another human being as a resource. Not a person with autonomy.
Not a collaborator. A utility.
Entitlement answers the question:
What am I allowed to take from you without your consent?
This is why cheating, belittling, neglect, and control coexist so comfortably with โI love you.โ
Entitlement dissolves responsibility.
Self-soothing
Self-soothing sounds like:
- โYou calm me downโ
- โYou make me feel better about myselfโ
- โI need you when Iโm dysregulatedโ
Here is the key distinction:
Love asks, โHow is this affecting you?โ
Self-soothing asks, โHow are you affecting me?โ
When someone uses another person primarily to manage their own discomfort, they are not loving.
They are coping.
Now, put the three together:
Attachment + entitlement + self-soothing =
โI feel strongly about you, I believe I have rights over you, and I use you to regulate myself.โ
That is not love. That is dependent with branding.
Why the resistance?
Because accepting your framing would require one brutal admission:
Feelings do not grant moral authority.
You do not get credit for intensity.
You do not get absolution for desire.
You do not get to rename harm because you did not mean it.
Love is not whatever the loudest person insists it is.
Love is constrained by reality.
Reality says: If your behaviour diminishes someone, you are not loving them.
If your presence requires them to shrink, you are not loving them.
If your comfort depends on their confusion or silence, you are not loving them.
Calling this love is like calling theft โborrowingโ because you felt nervous.
Words do not bend physics.
And if this strikes a chord with you, understand this:
If love were purely self-defined, abuse would be impossible.
Everyone would get to say:
โI hurt you because I love you.โ
โI control you because I love you.โ
โI betray you because I love you.โ
That is not a worldview, dearhearts.ย It isย a loophole.
Actual love is externally verifiable. It leaves witnesses, consistency and repair.
ย
