Love is not simple, nor is it always kind. I think we can all understand that and likely recall times when it was neither of those things in our lives. However, for no group of people is love more complicated than those who fall under the LGBTQ+ umbrella.
Growing up, I remember watching movies like Pride and Prejudice and The Notebook. The romances in these movies were inspiring and caused me to experience an emotional roller-coaster each time I watched them (I watched them both more times than any person probably should). Yet, these movies were not about me. They were about straight people in straight couples facing problems that straight couples tend to face. Sure, they underwent problems and trials and had to overcome them; however, I did not yet realize how much worse was in store for me in my own romantic escapades later in my life.
In True to Our Feelings, Robert Solomon says of love: “Love is, in part, the continuous discovery or adding on of . . . charms and virtues” (Solomon 54). However, despite this positive view he does earlier acknowledge that love has “its nastier, negative, and anxiety-producing aspects” (Solomon 52). What he fails to mention is that this definition of love is for those of us who find ourselves in strictly cisgender, heterosexual relationships. After all, LGBTQ+ relationships have something unique baked into them: shame. Shame is something that almost every LGBTQ+ individual feels over their sexual orientation or gender identity when they are ‘in the closet’. However, to think that this shame ends with coming out is, sadly, mistaken. No, rather LGBTQ+ people must face constant shame over themselves and their relationships.
Despite the many inspiring and truly thought-provoking things which Robert Solomon says regarding love, I cannot help but find that, when applied to LGBTQ+ relationships, they simply fail to fully encapsulate the entire picture. How many straight couples understand what it feels like to have to let go of their partner’s hand when passing in front of a church or a certain part of town out of fear for their life and well-being? How many straight people understand what it is like to have your love put on the news and argued over daily? Now, make no mistake, this is not their fault, and I don’t think acting as though every heterosexual, cisgender person is personally responsible for this is appropriate; however, I simply ask that we acknowledge that we have different experiences with love. A difference that Solomon’s view simply does not consider.
Now, I would like to paint a picture of what a philosophy of love that is truly inclusive might look like:
Robert Solomon says of shame: “Shame involves the sense of seriously failing those around you, violating their norms, falling short of their expectations, letting them down” (Solomon 95). Love is something that, as we all well know, is not always perfectly positive. Rather, love involves pain and loss and, for some, no small degree of trauma. However, for those of us who find ourselves in LGBTQ+ relationships, there is a thick layer of shame that is baked into that. Not shame in our love. No, we embrace this fully and proudly in the face of all things; however, we cannot escape the constant reminders from friends, family, and strangers on the street that we have failed to meet society’s expectations of love.
Our love, they remind us, is “disgusting” and “unnatural”. Love may be strong but how can it stand up against such constant attack? I do not know. But it does. It does stand against this constant social siege. It stands against all forms of attack and belittlement. How could any theory of love be complete without understanding how love could stand against all of this? Solomon says of love “Love is, in part, the continuous discovery or adding on of . . . charms and virtues” (Solomon 54). This, despite its wisdom, is not it. Yes, this is part of what love is, but it is not all of it. A constant adding of charms and virtues is not enough to stand against this relentless attack. Yet, maybe if we add something to this we would get the full picture:
Love is a constant adding of virtues and charms which, by their very nature, sure up and build up against social pressures and attacks.
This definition, I hold, gives us the complete picture of love that Solomon just barely misses. After all, without love building its own defenses many a young romance would die when a parent demands it. Yet, Romeo and Juliet love despite all things. And, somehow more powerfully, Romeo and Johnny love despite the social siege upon their love. Moreover, the longer and the harder they love, the more their love becomes resistant to the barrage. Surely any person who sees this must find that love is more than charms and virtues mixed with some negative feelings. Rather, love is a force that builds its own fortress. It is something that insists upon itself and builds up walls to defend against attack.
Okay, I have said a lot of things here, some of which you may agree with more than others; however, I think the most important thing that I hope that you walk away from this post with is the understanding that to ignore the way that shame is baked into LGBTQ+ relationships by our society is undeniable. Moreover, ignoring this when discussing the philosophy of love makes a theory untenable when applied to the real world. Despite what some people may want, LGBTQ+ individuals are not going anywhere. We are here to stay. Accept it. Our love is real and deep and cannot be ignored.
In conclusion, Solomon’s understanding of love fails to account for the experiences of LGBTQ+ individuals and, therefore, becomes untenable when applied to love in the real world. A more inclusive, and accurate, philosophical view of love must account for the fact that love is self-evident and self-defending. When we take this into account, we get a better and more applicable view of love than Solomon presents in True to Our Feelings.
Work Cited
Solomon, R. C. (2007). True to our feelings: What our emotions are really telling us. Oxford U Pr, N Y.
Shared by: Ethan R.
Image Credit: Karen Arnold