# I love you but I'm not in love with you anymore - Perspective plz?



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

Hi All,

I've seen quite a lot of negativity around "the old 'I love you but Im not in love with you anymore' speach", mostly by the BS camp, and I was wondering where that negativity came from.

For those of you who've had this conversation, could I ask that you please share what your views on the 'talk' itself were, the person who was talking with you and your feelings behind it.

I'm interested in hearing from both the BS and the WS camp here.


----------



## lascarx (Dec 24, 2011)

Haven't had it directly but I know a few who have been on the receiving end, of both genders. Seems you can interpret it the same way every time.

I love you = I feel guilty about something.

I'm not in love with you = there's someone else in the picture.

It's politician-speak, plain and simple.


----------



## chillymorn (Aug 11, 2010)

lascarx said:


> Haven't had it directly but I know a few who have been on the receiving end, of both genders. Seems you can interpret it the same way every time.
> 
> I love you = I feel guilty about something.
> 
> ...


usually means you didn't meet my needs and I never comunicated them to you so now I found someone to bang on the side so would you just please give me everything you ever earned and leave me be.


----------



## lascarx (Dec 24, 2011)

Well, when the men say it to the women the undertone usually has less to do with earnings and more to do with stretch marks. Have to be fair.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Amonsgt other things I think the chemical part is related to oxytocin and dopamine.

Dopamine would be all about the in love component. Oxytocin is more about the comfortable feelings.

You need both of course with your spouse. A balance. However, you can have the oxytocin with a brother you love as well. 

Dopamine can come from a spouse or possibly an affair partner.

It comes down to what needs are being met by whom and the sexual attractiveness we have for another.

So normally with this the knee jerk reaction is to rule out an affair partner. That said IMO it is unrealistic to think that over a say 25 year marriage you will have no lapses in this dopamine rush. I think that would be very abnormal for all sorts of reasons. It is however something that needs to be renewed.

Normal stuff really. It is just when someone comes to you with this, they are letting you know that they have lost that feeling for you. They may or may not have that feeling for another. Usually it is something that happens with one person at a time. It probably transitions. That would be the confused feelings state.

While it is normal in life to fall in and out of love with someone, it does not mean that there are not causes to this that need to be addressed.

See www.marriedmansexlife.com and His Needs Her Needs


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

I think a lot of us have heard this little cliche, and often thought it at some point or another. But when it gets to the point you vocalize it aloud to your partner it is almost always because you've checked out of the marriage. However I think there is also a small chance that they are just confused and unsure and may bounce these words off their partner to see what happens.

If they are bouncing around the idea there probably aren't many other red flags of infidelity.

But when a spouse actually checks out they always have a plan in place (ie another person to fulfill a certain number of needs) before they make this announcement, usually that plan is verified first (ie the emotional affair has already gone physical).

So if there are red flags (changed passwords, hiding phone, changes in appearance, new underwear) and you hear ILYBINILWY from your spouse it is VAR time and also time to lawyer up.


----------



## PBear (Nov 16, 2010)

To me, it means "I love you (as a friend, sister, etc), but I'm not in love with you (as a spouse/lover)". As demonstrated on these forums, this may mean someone else has taken over the latter role. 

C
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## worrieddad (Nov 3, 2011)

Its a soft way of saying 'I just cant be assed with this relationship anymore' (for whatever reason).


----------



## allthegoodnamesaregone (Nov 18, 2011)

It means "I going to lie to you one more time before you find out the truth"


----------



## KittyKat (May 11, 2008)

Hmmmmm. I know this so called cliche'. I've said it to my husband and I've had it said to me from another lover.
So...

It was truthful when I told my H. I should have never married him. I'm gay. But he was pretty. I'm attracted to pretty men. I just wish they didn't have the "junk". Funny ha ha I know.

But...When you are in a relationship, you may not be "in love" with your spouse at every moment. You may go through periods of knowing you love your spouse, but something is lacking, you've grown apart, whatever the reason.

The issue...do you work through the phase or do you leave. I know this cliche' far too well. And those who have been on this board know my history. I can and will (because I know it will be read) say that I go through periods of loving my spouse but not sure if I'm in love. Then when a period of time passes, I wonder how I could have thought that and I know I'm in love.

People argue. People fight. People disagree. Tempers flare. You don't speak. You live apart. You look at pictures. Your heart aches. One person reaches out. Other person crumbles because they "are in love". Reunion happens. Bliss happens. Time passes. People disagree. "I love you but..." blah blah blah. 

And you wonder if you ever were "out of love" but just in a bad phase. Then it becomes "look, we love each other. We are in love with each other. We can't continue the cycle the way it is. We need to change how we communicate if we want to break this distructive cycle."

So there are 2 different scenario's. I really really meant it with my H. He was a very good man and lord have mercy if I were straight, we would have celebrated our 27th wedding ann. this year.

Second scenario, temper's flaring, bad communication, a bad phase has made me feel that way. 

HOWEVER, I've NEVER said it again since telling my ex H. Why? Because I know myself better than anyone. And I know when I, Me, Us are in a "phase".

Oh, and because I think most people use it as an excuse to screw around and then come back to their spouse because the grass wasn't as green as they thought it was.


----------



## Kurosity (Dec 22, 2011)

I thought that the, "I love you but not in love with you." speech was just a way to say I am out of here while trying to not sound like an uncareing jerk to save face.

I guess it is a perspective issue.


----------



## alliwantislove (Feb 8, 2012)

lascarx said:


> Haven't had it directly but I know a few who have been on the receiving end, of both genders. Seems you can interpret it the same way every time.
> 
> I love you = I feel guilty about something.
> 
> ...


:iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree:


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

I've been struggling with this one for a while now, mostly because, at several points, I have thought this about my wife. But I think I finally understand it and I now recognize just how badly phrased and immature it is.

I think that worrieddad's post is the most relevant, though it's still too cynical for me.

*I love you,*

When I think of my W, I want her to be successful in life, I want her to be happy, to protect her from pain, etc. I do love her. I always will.

*but I'm not in love with you anymore*

I think that this is badly worded and it is so badly worded because of all of the bulls***t that we're fed from the time that we're born. I think that people associate 'in love' with that desire to stay together. After all, All you need is love and when you have it you will "live happily ever after"(tm). This is such a childish and naive view on love, life and marriage and yet I am guilty of holding that concept close to my heart for so much of my life.

I think it simply means "I don't _want_ to be with you anymore", as worrieddad said, 'for whatever reason', infidelity or otherwise. 

What I'm not sure of is whether, in the person's head that is saying it, is whether they are just trying to not say "I don't want you" by softening it with "not in love with you" or whether they are actually equating 'in love' with that desire to stay together.

For me at least, I absolutely do love my W, as a friend and even as lover. But I just don't want to be with her anymore. But if I didn't lover her, I wouldn't have gone through as much pain as I have through this process.

And yet I wonder how that translates to people who hear it. Do they hear, "I don't want you" or do they hear "they don't love me".

I can see why people read so much negativity into this statement (it is a rejection after all) but the person saying it wouldn't be saying it if they didn't actually care about the person that they are saying it to. Love doesn't make a marriage successful, it's just one piece of the puzzle. An important piece mind you, but it's still just one piece.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

"in love" = limerance


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

Yay, I learned a new word! 

No longer "in love" meaning 'I no longer hold your desire to love me above all else'. And yet, limerence is a non-lasting phenomenon anyways. According to that url, people generally reach neutrality within 1-3 years.

I think this goes deeper than simple limerence; otherwise, we'd all be saying this to our spouses after 1-3 years.

One thing that that the article says is:



> Nevertheless Tennov stresses that 'the most consistent result of limerence is mating, not merely sexual interaction but also commitment


I think here, "I don't want to be with you" also means that "I am no longer committed to you". Taken in that light, I can see how most people would think that ILYBINILWYA would imply that someone else has entered the picture, because the supposition is that "if they are not committed to me, then they must be committed to someone else".


----------



## Will_Kane (Feb 26, 2012)

Spouses may feel this way for a long time, but they only verbalize it this way after they've begun to cheat, at least close to 100% of the time on this foru; many times only after they've already actually been caught cheating.


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

Can I recommend that you pull that statistic back a bit and say, "close to 100% of the instances that I have seen have involved infidelity"?

I doubt anyone has done an actual study, nor has anyone taken environmental bias into account like it coming up in the 'coping with infidelity' forums which accounts for 24% of the total posts on the site. 

Just because people tend to say that kind of stuff after infidelity does not mean that it is the only time that they do.

Other interesting stats:

16% - posts about divorce (considering, going through & life after)
0.5% - Long Term Success in marriage posts
41% - General/Uncategorized discussion posts
That means that 58.5% if all posts on TAM have to do with marital issues.
41% of all 'marital problems' posts are discussions on Infidelity

Interesting, isn't it. We never seem to talk about marriage when things are going well, but we sure take notice of it when there are issues. That leads me to believe that we are learning how to deal with marital issues after they have occurred. I wonder, does that imply an education problem regarding marriage?

Either way, I'm just saying that your 100% statistic is probably too bold.


----------



## allthegoodnamesaregone (Nov 18, 2011)

TCx said:


> Yay, I learned a new word!
> 
> No longer "in love" meaning 'I no longer hold your desire to love me above all else'. And yet, limerence is a non-lasting phenomenon anyways. According to that url, people generally reach neutrality within 1-3 years.
> 
> ...


Generally that's the case, they've already met someone else or that someone is in their sights due to a escalating EA.


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

lascarx said:


> Well, when the men say it to the women the undertone usually has less to do with earnings and more to do with stretch marks. Have to be fair.


can you elaborate a bit on this..


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

I love you - you are my friend, my companion, I care about you, want to know you are ok

I'm in love with you - infatuation, desiring, intimate, wanting, needing, you make my heart go thump thump


----------



## TBT (Dec 20, 2011)

When I hear of people saying this it sounds like they're giving a heads up to their partner.Whether it comes from having a conscience or just protecting their own good view of themselves I'm not sure.Imo they could very easily say it with the add on...."so don't be surprised what's coming next",but they seldom if ever do.


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

somethingelse said:


> can you elaborate a bit on this..


cynicism and presumption 

Edit - Studies actually show that when men cheat, their AP's are often *not* younger and skinnier than the BW; in fact it's quite common for the opposite to be true.


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

TCx said:


> cynicism and presumption



well his presumption is so wrong in general

what if a W has kids and no stretch marks and is in fabulous shape...then what would the reasoning be :scratchhead:


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

Why Men Cheat | Psychology Today

9 Reasons why men cheat


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

TCx said:


> cynicism and presumption
> 
> Edit - Studies actually show that when men cheat, their AP's are often *not* younger and skinnier than the BW; in fact it's quite common for the opposite to be true.


What studies are you referring to?


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

tacoma said:


> What studies are you referring to?


I don't have them handy, just something that I came across on a few sites during my exploration into the psychology behind cheating. I was trying to find something that would explain my behavior.

My bad, I shouldn't say 'studies show' unless I can cite my sources. I'll have a look for them.


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

TCx said:


> I don't have them handy, just something that I came across on a few sites during my exploration into the psychology behind cheating. I was trying to find something that would explain my behavior.
> 
> My bad, I shouldn't say 'studies show' unless I can cite my sources. I'll have a look for them.


I actually totally agree with you on this one. None of the girls my H has had A's with are what I consider more beautiful or even have a better physique (and that's with my rational mind)...

I have also read a lot about this questioning why every woman he seeks out is kind of "blah" ... lots of people say they choose a less attractive woman than their W. 

This goes for men usually. I'm not sure about how WWs choose.


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

However, there is always the exception to the rule...so there's a grey area to this theory


----------



## allthegoodnamesaregone (Nov 18, 2011)

somethingelse said:


> I actually totally agree with you on this one. None of the girls my H has had A's with are what I consider more beautiful or even have a better physique (and that's with my rational mind)...
> 
> I have also read a lot about this questioning why every woman he seeks out is kind of "blah" ... lots of people say they choose a less attractive woman than their W.
> 
> This goes for men usually. I'm not sure about how WWs choose.


"Trading down" seems to be the norm in a lot of ways. A lot of erelationship books claim you could provide 80% of what your spouses needs out a relationship, but they would be willing to dump that 80% to get the 20% of what ever it is they feel they are not getting.


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

allthegoodnamesaregone said:


> "Trading down" seems to be the norm in a lot of ways. A lot of erelationship books claim you could provide 80% of what your spouses needs out a relationship, but they would be willing to dump that 80% to get the 20% of what ever it is they feel they are not getting.


Ergo cheating. Have your 80% at home and top it up with the other 20% otherwise.

Jesus, we need to stop this conversation... I'm starting to think that cheating is a good thing. Hold me! (but don't tell anyone when I cop a feel)

Joke... just a joke! (One that is going to go over very badly I suspect.  )


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

allthegoodnamesaregone said:


> "Trading down" seems to be the norm in a lot of ways. A lot of erelationship books claim you could provide 80% of what your spouses needs out a relationship, but they would be willing to dump that 80% to get the 20% of what ever it is they feel they are not getting.


This makes sense....

so the WS doesn't have that feeling like their BS is ugly enough, and they want to explore that area.. 

:rofl:


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Contrary to what logic tells us, this is not, usually, a lie to the BS, it is a lie the WS tells to themselves.

If the WS were to have an affair, why, surely, that would mean they no longer were in love with the BS? 

So in order to 'fix' the fact that they are having an affair, they tell themselves they are no longer in love with the BS.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

as for the trading down part, from the real life incidents among men who have cheated on their spouses/partners (which is not many admittedly, half a dozen or so) all of those instances the AP was not physically more attractive (beauty wise) then the wife but all of them were much more sexy/sexual such as shorter skirts, heavier make up, higher heels and probably much flirtier so perhaps just more available for sex than the W.

The couple incidents I know where women have left, it was definitely trading up for a more expensive looking model (men who were more successful, fitter or more outgoing) though in my case it feels like my ex sought someone who was more sexually available, wasn't looking for anything serious, at first, perhaps because it was some sort of exit affair.


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

Okay, we're way off topic now but... Graph


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

Lon said:


> as for the trading down part, from the real life incidents among men who have cheated on their spouses/partners (which is not many admittedly, half a dozen or so) all of those instances the AP was not physically more attractive (beauty wise) then the wife but all of them were much more sexy/sexual such as shorter skirts, heavier make up, higher heels and probably much flirtier so perhaps just more available for sex than the W.


That's just because they are on the move...they are looking for love and the like. It's mating ritual 101...it's just what comes with the territory

But once these women win their catch, they become like every other W. Comfortable in the relationship

When I was single, I did the whole nine yards to make myself more appealing.

and I guess if the W is actually available, the H is just an idiot


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Lon said:


> as for the trading down part, from the real life incidents among men who have cheated on their spouses/partners (which is not many admittedly, half a dozen or so) all of those instances the AP was not physically more attractive (beauty wise) then the wife but all of them were much more sexy/sexual such as shorter skirts, heavier make up, higher heels and probably much flirtier so perhaps just more available for sex than the W.


Not in my case. The OW was none of those things. But we had a common interest in a hobby.


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

... and... Marital Sex Statistics -- Who is Having Sex and How Often?

Statistics of particular interest to me: 


> 84% of women have sex to get their guy to do more around the house.
> 12% of married people sleep alone.
> The average person has sex 103 times per year.
> 48% of women have faked an orgasm.


103 times per year? Seriously? Twice a week plus an extra on his B-day? Please tell me I'm not the only one that's getting an order of magnitude less than that (on a good year).


----------



## allthegoodnamesaregone (Nov 18, 2011)

somethingelse said:


> This makes sense....
> 
> so the WS doesn't have that feeling like their BS is ugly enough, and they want to explore that area..
> 
> :rofl:


It could be anything , the OM or OW may be not as good looking, but maybe just paying attention to an area the WH/WW feels is neglected. For example, if your wife was feeling neglected because you were working overtime and some old flame on facebook starts telling her how he would always put her first and tells her crap she hasn't heard since highschool.....Bingo ....EA/PA here we come.


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

TCx said:


> ... and... Marital Sex Statistics -- Who is Having Sex and How Often?
> 
> Statistics of particular interest to me:
> 
> ...



I don't agree with the housework part...my H has never done much housework


----------



## TCx (Dec 15, 2011)

somethingelse said:


> I don't agree with the housework part...my H has never done much housework


Then your H is a retard. Excuse me, I have to find a girly mag and some tissues. 


edit - and no, I am not flirting.


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

allthegoodnamesaregone said:


> It could be anything , the OM or OW may be not as good looking, but maybe just paying attention to an area the WH/WW feels is neglected. For example, if your wife was feeling neglected because you were working overtime and some old flame on facebook starts telling her how he would always put her first and tells her crap she hasn't heard since highschool.....Bingo ....EA/PA here we come.


Yeah...I was mostly just having a laugh

But it does make sense what you are saying

It makes the expectations of any S high though...seems like now-a-days if Ss aren't perfect in every aspect they get cheated on

There will always be imperfections in any relationship, which is why it is so dumb to cheat


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

TCx said:


> Then your H is a retard. Excuse me, I have to find a girly mag and some tissues.
> 
> 
> edit - and no, I am not flirting.



Ah ha ha


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

somethingelse said:


> I don't agree with the housework part...my H has never done much housework


Alpha trait.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

MattMatt said:


> Contrary to what logic tells us, this is not, usually, a lie to the BS, it is a lie the WS tells to themselves.
> 
> If the WS were to have an affair, why, surely, that would mean they no longer were in love with the BS?
> 
> So in order to 'fix' the fact that they are having an affair, they tell themselves they are no longer in love with the BS.


Exactly. Most WW's hate cheating and cheaters and would never have an affair. This has been one of their core values since they first heard the word adultery. Then they have an affair. Cognitive dissonance ensues and the rationalization hamster steps in to reconcile the Limbic actions with the Cortex beliefs. The solution is that shortly after the new man rings her chimes, the WW doesn't love the husband after all. In fact, a little later, it turns out she NEVER loved the husband ever. It was all a mistake. It has to be because new guy is her "soulmate" and there can only be one "soulmate."

See, girls in the west are taught to expect a "true love", "soulmate" etc marriage relationship with happily ever after limerance if they are truly meant to be together. Of course, 99.9% of the culture pushing this vision has no idea that it is totally based on the medieval concept of Courtly Romantic Love, which is itself adulterous to the core. It's all about married ladies trading tokens of affection with young chivalrous knights, sneaking around the castle, slowly escalating the tension and physical interaction, raising the expectations and the limerance and finally consummating the courtship. When women don't get that within their marriage, the more honorable ones become susceptible to a guy with game. The truly duplicitous ones join AM.


----------



## somethingelse (Jun 20, 2012)

Machiavelli said:


> Exactly. Most WW's hate cheating and cheaters and would never have an affair. This has been one of their core values since they first heard the word adultery. Then they have an affair. Cognitive dissonance ensues and the rationalization hamster steps in to reconcile the Limbic actions with the Cortex beliefs. The solution is that shortly after the new man rings her chimes, the WW doesn't love the husband after all. In fact, a little later, it turns out she NEVER loved the husband ever. It was all a mistake. It has to be because new guy is her "soulmate" and there can only be one "soulmate."
> 
> See, girls in the west are taught to expect a "true love", "soulmate" etc marriage relationship with happily ever after limerance if they are truly meant to be together. Of course, 99.9% of the culture pushing this vision has no idea that it is totally based on the medieval concept of Courtly Romantic Love, which is itself adulterous to the core. It's all about married ladies trading tokens of affection with young chivalrous knights, sneaking around the castle, slowly escalating the tension and physical interaction, raising the expectations and the limerance and finally consummating the courtship. When women don't get that within their marriage, the more honorable ones become susceptible to a guy with game. The truly duplicitous ones join AM.


It gives the WW justification to cheat. It takes away some of the guilt and shame in order for the A to continue. It is a complete lie.

What is AM?


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

somethingelse said:


> It gives the WW justification to cheat. It takes away some of the guilt and shame in order for the A to continue. It is a complete lie.
> 
> What is AM?


It's a website where married women sign up to have affairs. Guys then pay money to send them hook up messages. A number of people have posted about finding out their spouse in a AM window left open in the browser.


----------

