From the bottom of my heart… I Love You

ocean

 

I have come to learn over the last decade of being a husband there are things that change and things which do not. Bills change, friends change, people change, but change has always been known as a sign of growth in natural law. It can be said everything which does not change is unnatural. When a child has an issue with growing it is thought to be a bit illogical and thus that child is sent to experts to determine the issue which is usurping the natural order. The process of growing is the process of changing. The purpose for a child to grow is so he/she may become an adult. Growth is the vehicle for the change we all need in our lives.

 

In ten years, I have laughed hard and cried harder. I have run forward with reckless abandon, and I have moved backward tip-toeing on eggshells the entire way. I have triumphed and I have made mistakes, in all I have done regardless of whether or not my personal character has been consistent, I have grown. I have seen my marriage stand on the verge of failure to the pinnacles of success, and everything in between. It was not by my own hand which my marriage was saved, but by the same principles left to us by our creator through natural law.

natural law

I have found out relationships need also to obey natural laws, all relationships must grow to survive. The growth of two people into a whole functioning unit is a wonderful metamorphosis. It takes us from being individuals who have the ability to create whatever we desire and build our future with our own hands into becoming an entity which will have the strength to stand no matter the circumstances because we are no longer standing alone, but tied together with the same goals, the same dreams, driven by the desire to see the success of one another. Relationships are poetic in this manner, revealing depth and complexity line by line until the goal of motivation is recognized or achieved.

 

Love is more than just a combination of words and a summary of romantic actions, love is a commitment to change.

 

A commitment to ever-evolving with the best interest of one another in mind well before ourselves. It is the choice we make to render our own lives less important than the life with our beloved. It is a commitment to each other’s goals, hopes, and aspirations to memory. A commitment to remove our insecurities from one another and to build a stability which can dawn a new era in our lives and empower us to achieve more than we had ever dared to before. It is a commitment of crushing our own belief systems and forcing ourselves to achieve the impossible, and all of this is never motivated by emotions, our emotions are fleeting at best.

 

These commitments all have one thing in common, the constant of change was chosen. The promise of fulfilling the natural order of law to be upheld, the choice of remaining at each other’s side no matter what the cost is how to say from the bottom of our hearts…. I love you.

from the bottom of my heart

Sometimes we all want the same thing:

the same thing.jpg

We run our world with full vigor and a type of control which we each exude over all aspects of our individual lives, even if we are not aware of it. Our understanding of what we can control is the reason why we can learn understand our direct environment. It is the fundamental way we ultimately learn how to interact with each other. We use what we have learned about ourselves through our individually learned methods to learn about others, and I have begun to suspect that we have all learned wrong. Lately, I have been noticing how impatient people are with one another. The level of animosity produced not only keeps us from valuing one but another but also interferes with our ability to love in our relationships.

But even though we see the results of this there is very little actually being done to combat the problem. The reason for this is because of the social duality we have created and allowed to perpetuate repeatedly without sitting don to properly address the root causes of the problems. On one side is the camp of solutions, they work night and day to garner and achieve the impossible in their lives. They foster lifelong relationships and battle against all injustice and unrighteousness there is and strive for fair and equal treatment of all people. This camp sacrifices career and monetary goals to ensure their families remain close and friends are not left behind. There is very little monetary value which can be associated with these solutions and therefore it is difficult under normal circumstances to be able to find the support it takes to see their solutions come to life. And then there is the second camp which has the intention of the first camp but ultimately finds the best solutions to not only see part of their values come forth but also sustains them to be able to function on their own. This camp works very closely with compromise but does not often relent on their beliefs.

Having both is necessary to our world for without one of them imbalance would take control. Unfortunately, the imbalance between the two does exist because of the methods in which they interact with one another. The level of control which they both refuse to surrender because of their own reasoning is why we are unable to find the middle ground in a large number of our conflicts. And how we conduct our relationships, is also reflected in a similar manner. If we take a look at our politics, for example, we notice on most news channels which cover what all is going on, you are left with conflicting opinions of each political party. While no government is perfect, you can always expect problems to occur with anything which has been created by man (just try to figure out your phone, computer, or car when there is a problem if you don’t believe me. But the way we manage conflict and control our environments in no way shape or form exude any sort of tolerance for the other camp and If we do not find a way to address this need for control we will suffer our children to a similar fate. For intolerance is not love.

 

headlineImage.adapt.1460.high.Keene_Pumpkin_Festival_riot_01a.1414505083050.jpg

We should be learning harder on how to work together rather than tearing each other apart. Creating solutions to save face is not the same as saving one another. We want safety without rejection, love without persecution, security without victimization. We all want the same thing even if we are unconsciously aware of it.

We all want to be loved without conditions.

index

An Open Letter Of My Own Failure

images

Lately, with writing about love and marriage I have found myself struggling. Of course, this can be contributed to the day to day struggles of attempting to write while being a full-time dad, husband and holding an actual 9-5 job. But, this battle has been more than that, I can only describe the fight as the inability to build momentum into writing what is relevant to relationships, love, and marriage as a whole. Recently, I identified the key issue in the fight to write. The issue is me.

I have been attempting to write from a perspective which I had long believed was as unique to me as it is close. I have decided to abandon this approach altogether. So what caused me to reach the conclusion to throw every note I had taken away and begin anew? I had failed.

I had failed to reach my audience, failed to create substantial change, failed to shift paradigms, and ultimately, failed to reach myself in my own writing.

I have always been a believer of the husbandman becoming the first partaker of his own fruit, but my belief was never placed into practice. Time and time again I would fail to invest in myself. I would spend hours attempting to write meaningful material for other people whom I hoped would be my audience. I had lost sight of the path which enlightens me as I enlighten others. I continued in this facade to the point it had become a habitual offender to which I owed myself an explanation and offered none. I rationalized the lack of accountability with my thoughts of some personal flaw which I felt the offense had been made manifest from within me. I blamed myself continually to the point it was the comfortable blanket of self-doubt and loathing in which I rested all of my thoughts, time and investments into.

I had a desire to help others with their marriages and yet all the while, I suffered silently in my own. There was nothing wrong in my marriage, my wife beautiful and loving of ten years, loyal and faithful, was completely invested in me. Any issues we had were few and far between and those we did were resolved by communication with one another. Yet as much as I am invested in her, fully willing to go above and beyond for anything she and my daughter asked for, I was not so much invested in myself.

This same effect also had bled over into my writing and it was at this moment while I stared at the screen and looking myself in the digital mirror that I could not recognize myself in the sea of words and work which now have been laid before me. Who was I in all of this and did the “me” as myself truly exist or did I manage to build a persona of a “me” I hoped to be but could never see myself as. The only thing I saw in this reflection of my worth was the subject which I was writing about had not betrayed, my hope in what was to come. I had faithfully stayed on the path of my innate desire to help others understand what love and marriage really was. But I had not considered myself in the equation, I was building a formula of information which I would never use or apply. I was becoming the very thing which caused me to write in the first place. I was giving answers to questions which I did not believe, and I was writing to a heart which was “right” by the social mirror but grieved the very essence of my conscience and my belief of marriage.

Therefore, if I have spoken to you, written to you, or communicated to you in any form or fashion any of the previous, I would like you to consider this my apology to you. My failure as an individual as hindered my ability to share the truth with the collective and thus, I have failed you as well. I have learned many things in life and among them I have come to understand, that failure is not final, but it is only the beginning. And for us, it will be the beginning of a new chapter in life, and in the life of the material, I publish going forward. It is the beginning of my own personal self-investment, partaking of the first of my own fruit before sharing it with the masses, and those who need it. We will rebuild the walk of trust anew and from the ashes of the previous and now destroyed work, we will share in the abundance of the future together in this new generation. Thank you for walking with me thus far, I pray we make it together to our destinations.

-Kenneth M. Boggs Jr.
Husband. Author. Father.

 

ali.png

What is love? Quite Simply Series… An excerpt 

Love the intangible four letter word which everyone wishes to hear at some point in their life. This desire may become fulfilled by those who we deem relevant to us at some level of importance. The effectiveness of love is usually peaks when delivered by someone we care about or have some kind of relationship with. It is seldom we find love based relationships which are born and maintained successfully based upon no previous experience. In fact for most people, to love someone there is a requirement of some kind of interaction, or history which love would be founded upon. If there is no attachment to the love interest then there is very little reason for most people to pursue the interaction any further. If the above were true it could be said the majority of people who exercise love are only doing so because it satisfies a form of need or importance to them. This would ultimately render love as an entity which is based on our personal desires and interactions.
But does this mean all is love is our interactions based upon selfishness?

Defining love by objectionable rationale would serve only to limit the possibilities relationship interaction. It would diminish the very foundation which love is based upon and force us to view our lives and relationships in a cause and effect perspective.

History has shown this is not the case and therefore the definition of love based on selfish desire is not a rational method for defining it.

Sadly, when you ask what love is, most people define love in the scope of only what it means to them. Normally, the answer is typically conveyed in a manner which is supposed to garner the support of the person asking and in the way which is the most socially agreeable. Though what the answer bearer often in these cases is “true” the majority of what they illustrate is based solely on their perspective definition.

Let me put it like this, if you were to ask someone who has never traveled outside of their neighborhood what the world was like, it is most likely they would define it based upon what they deem to be important, or worth mentioning as it relates to the world to them. The same would be true if you asked another person who had been out of their state, another who has traveled to foreign countries, and another who had traveled to space. As each level of experience is escalated, the method and perspectives of each level would convey a description of the world in a manner which is reflective of the experiences they have had. While this may be an acceptable way to explain what the world was like, it would not garner the same answer if you were to ask them all to define what the world is. Each would give a definition of the world in a manner which would convey a similar framework, although they may answer differently, you would find there are fundamental consistencies within each definition which could be deciphered as a foundational bottom-line meaning.

What the former suggest is when we ask a question which is moreover vague, we are more than likely to receive an answer which doesn’t encompass a foundational meaning, or at the very least a meaning with which you could base every description upon. If we, however, were to ask a question which is specific to the framework of a bottom-line, then the perception not only changes of how the question is interpreted but also how the answer is relayed back.

While there are many who agree giving love a bottom-line meaning is difficult to define as universal, there are just as many who see love from a place which can be based universally if we were to define it not as a feeling, or emotion but as an action.

Unfortunately, the image of love is often left to the limited perspective of those experience is equivalent to the perspective of what the world is like for those who have not left the neighborhood.

The evidence of this lies a simple google search of “what is love”. From my personal experience, the first thing which comes up is a 90’s song by Haddaway on YouTube. Of the 480 million results which are pooled by Google, the first few results immediately following are definitions which once analyzed, indicate perspectives which are based primarily on the author of the article. Most of which identify major facets of love and the experiences which can be found surrounding it, but there are few which give a clear fundamental explanation of what love is. A video search and an image search will produce much of the same, but the majority of the results will not submit love to be an emotion.

On the opposite side of the fence is the method which media imaging portrays love to be which more often than not becomes part of the general populace will adapt and adapt to their own interpretation. While the message about love in these explanations can be meaningful at times, the modern glamorization often blurs the lines of what love, and desensitizes those who view it from reaching a foundational conclusion, one which can be utilized as what love is and not what it is like.

Reflect for a moment and think hard on how you found the definition of love. When we look at it hard enough and hold it to scrutiny we will find we will ultimately define it as something which we desire from others and not as something which we ourselves look to do. Our perspectives on love, because of the influences of the world around us, has us looking at love with a perspective which indicates our varying levels of experiences. This is opposed to a fundamental bottom-line foundation which can be accepted universally. When conveyed, one would normally relay love to the kind of love with which the conversation is based upon.

Romantic love, or love when speaking about a relationship with two people who have in interest in one another would steer the conversation in the direction of a definition which would fit the idea of romance, intimacy, or something similar, the same would be done when referring to parent-child relationships, passion, and most other aspects of love. It is therefore universally accepted to define love based solely upon the context of the subject of the conversation rather than defining love on its own and then molding the conversation into the definition. This is the neighborhood perspective of what love and is not reflective of the foundational and fundamental aspects of it. It can also explain why love is so often paired with a feeling rather than a foundational quality of true, or bottom-line of what love is.

While the neighborhood perspective of love is still true, it is limited in its ability to be the source for which all of the world can place its foundational view from. The same is true about neighborhoods in general, the world’s population cannot be expected to live in just one neighborhood, meaning the world cannot be expected to define love as a whole in its essence as something which resides in a basis of only one perspective. It can be argued if you were to compile the definition of every neighborhood and find the commonality in them that a foundation definition can be formed. Yet, while this theory can also be true the problem would be still the fact the definition with which you will achieve would still only be based upon perspectives and not based upon the necessary specifics which the neighborhoods can universally agree upon. This is due to the fact that each neighborhood, or perspective would have its own point of view and the differences would ultimately disparage the very objective which you are attempting to achieve.

A perfect example of this is the method the Greeks used to define love. Rather than assigning it a unifying foundation, the Greeks chose to define love in a manner which attempted to encompass the neighborhoods of love by type as all inclusive. Based off of their system, there are eight different types of love: Eros, Philia, Storge, Ludus, Mania, Pragma, Philautia, and Agape. Each of these eight neighborhoods were used to explain the various types of love encountered in life and each with its own catalyst. While they do speak to the actions which are the motives of love and the motives behind love, none of these attempt to define what love is on its own. Similarly, Robert Sternberg, a professor at Cornell University conceptualized the Triangular Theory of Love, noting there are three root elements of love and the combination between them produce the varying degrees of love we encounter. All of which still do not place an definitive answer to what love is, but rather identifies the neighborhood types which they can be found in.

In essence, if we were to look for an answer to how to love someone or how to be loved for that matter, the universal answers we can expect to receive will be still based primarily upon the perspective and not the foundation. This fundamental flaw is the reason which we have seen such varying states of disagreements concerning love and the interpretations of how it is to be represented. With reference to the types of love, there are an infinite number of explanations of love which are primarily based upon sex, passion, personality compatibility, familiarity, glamour, and attraction. Each one with its own neighborhood and each neighborhood its own perspective as to how it relates to love.

Love is… His warm legs to put your cold feet on

I have found in life there are two types of days most of us have. The first is the kind of day which causes us to be full of joy and laughter. You know, the kind of days which we enjoy the rays of sun on our faces, or hanging out with our friends as we just enjoy each other’s company. And then there are other days. You know the type, the kind of days where everything which can go wrong…does. The bad performance review at work, or the car accident on the way home, there are millions of things which we can see within our daily routine which can make our days miserable.

So we return home. And for those who have spouses, life partners or just the person you trust your whole world with there, we have two more kinds of days. Either the kind of day when it seems as if the world is against you (which it is but more on that later) and your loved one understands when you tell them about it or they don’t. We have all been there when we have returned home to the only place which you may find a bit of relief and either find that relief or become even more frustrated. This frustration sometimes becomes disconnected from the original issue and turns into tension between you and your loved one.

What began as an outside influence has now become a cauldron of negativity festering around everything you wish to keep peaceful. But it does not have to remain that way, and there is something you can do about it. In fact, all you really need to do is…..

resetPush the reset button on yourself.

We all know we have one, whether or not we choose to use it in moments like these can really be the difference between a loving long-term relationship and one which is spiteful or ends in a manner which was not how you originally had hoped. Resets are perfectly fine in a relationship, and truthfully when you are in a relationship that is truly loving, you will notice no one keeps count of the reset button. You can always take a second to start over, and there will be no reset penalty held against you.

For some, resetting may be a walk in the park and coming back to the conversation, for others it may be taking a shower, but whatever it is there is no specific limitation to be able to start over. One of the core attributes of love is patience, and resetting when needed is a wise way to work your ability, in love, to be patient.

When you press the reset button on yourself, you are allowing another opportunity for your loved one to reevaluate you and for you to reevaluate yourself. Take advantage of this moment and remember the reason you are having a conversation in the first place. You are home and the person you are talking to is your love. There is a reason you trust them with the safety of your habitation, a reason you are talking to them about your day. The reason is that you love them and your sharing of the good, the bad, and the ugly is the place you have found to be a safe outlet for you.

Resetting does not have to be a complicated matter. It can be whatever simply reminds you of the reason you are sharing the good, the bad, and the ugly which can be considered a type of reset as well. For my house resetting is when I go to bed. No matter what happens through the day when I get ready for bed I know that my wife will place her feet on me as we snuggle up together.

The fact that her feet on most days are cold is the kind of reminder which keeps me in a humble place when I tally my obstacles for the day. For the reason she can and has placed her feet on me in the first place is because I am the safe place she finds before she rests from the evening. It is a reminder of the importance of us as a couple and how we should continue to grow closer to one another. Her feet may be cold on some nights but not on others, but when they are as long as she keeps them there we warm them together. Whether it is feet warming or dealing with those not-so-good days, love carries us through them and being patient enough to wait till things get better (or warmer) will always bring us back to the result we continually hope for.

Warm legs