Upon learning that this second issue of our magazine, Paprika, is dedicated to the concept of "light love," I asked two very dear friends, whose perspectives I'm sure are quite different, for their opinions on the subject, so that we could discuss it more comprehensively. The first is Professor Dr. Ünsal Söylemezoğlu, a psychiatrist and author known in the psychiatric community for his unique personality and colorful character. The second is Dr. Oğuzkan Bölükbaşı, a nuclear physicist and poet, who always courageously expresses his sometimes unconventional ideas. Let's see what they have to say about light love. First, I will present their views, and then I will try to convey what I understood from their writings within a framework of discussion.
ÜNSAL SÖYLEMEZOĞLU wrote the following about the concept of "light love":
FIRSTLY, AGREEMENT ON THE DEFINITION IS IMPORTANT. YOU ARE DEFINING A RELATIONSHIP AND CALLING IT "LIGHT LOVE." LOVE CAN BE LIGHT, OR, AS I MAKE AN ANALOGY, IT CAN BE "HARD." I WON'T DWELL ON THAT. BUT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE AGREE ON WHAT WE UNDERSTAND BY LOVE. WHAT DO I UNDERSTAND BY LOVE, AND WHAT DO YOU UNDERSTAND? FROM YOUR EXPLANATIONS DEFINING "LIGHT LOVE," I THINK THESE RELATIONSHIPS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH LOVE, NOT EVEN A DISTANT ONE. WHAT WOULD IT BE CALLED? I could give you many, many definitions… I won't dwell on them. Instead, I'll talk to you about love, combining the therapy sessions I've had with people and, of course, my own experiences, with the one that resonates most with me, the one I believe in.
THE THING I UPLOADED TO YOU
MEANINGS
DON'T THINK OF IT AS YOU ARE...
YOU WILL BE DECEIVED…
YOU..
WITHIN THOSE MEANINGS
ONLY..
YOU ARE IN MY HEART...
LOVE IS NOT THE PRODUCT OF A CONSCIOUS PROCESS AND IS ALWAYS EXPERIENCED WITH SOMEONE OF THE OPPOSITE SEX. IN LOVE, THE OTHER PERSON DOES NOT EXIST. WE CREATE THEM COMPLETELY THROUGH UNCONSCIOUS PROCESSES, UNAWARELY, BY PAINTING THEM. THERE IS A PSYCHOLOGICAL PAINTING IN LOVE. WE UNCONSCIOUSLY PAINT THE ASPECTS OF THE PERSON WE DISLIKE OR FIND UNFORTUNATE, AND INSTEAD, WE GLORIFY, EXALT, AND IDEALIZE THEM.
LOVE GIVES RISE TO ENERGY. WHEN WE ARE IN LOVE, EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD GAINS MEANING. YOU'VE NEVER SEEN THE SKY LIKE THIS BEFORE. YOU SUDDENLY WATCH A LEAF FALLING FROM A TREE, DANCING IN THE AIR AS IF IT WERE CANCELING. LOVE IS A VERY SUBLIME, ENTHUSIASTIC, ENERGETIC STATE OF EXALTATION, OF TRANSFILM.
Through psychological manipulation, idealization, and idealization, you acquire a lover you can't stop gazing at. And as you look at them, you lose yourself. This experience is the greatest compliment a person can give themselves in life. In love, all the pleasures of the world are showered upon a single pleasure, upon a single person. Even that is not enough. When a person experiences love, their heart doesn't just fill up, it overflows... The word "overflowing" means an indescribable, immense joy.
FALLING IN LOVE IS A TEMPORARY STATE. THE HONEYMOON INEVITABLY ENDS. THE LONGEST-LASTING LOVE STORY IN THE WORLD LASTED THREE YEARS. ON AVERAGE, IT ALWAYS ENDS WITHIN MONTHS.
Even when we know someone is suitable and fulfilling for us in every way, no matter how hard we try, we can never quite fall in love. In the love between two people, it's about reflecting one's own self-love onto the other, loving them with the same self-love one has for them. Because two people mutually reflect their self-love onto each other in love, what they share increases the value of both of them. That's why 2+2=5 in love. A person first loses themselves, then loses the other, and finally they lose each other's very existence. That's why they say everything is permissible in love and war. We all know, "A lover doesn't ask about Baghdad, they transcend horizons and go on..."
LOVE IS A PERSON'S ATTEMPT TO END THEIR LONELINESS, TO BREAK DOWN THEIR OWN LIMITS. IT IS A CRY FOR HELP. PLEASE WATCH THE ITALIAN FILM "ET" (MEAT).
We can descend from the eighth floor to the ground floor in three ways. We can go down the stairs one by one, use an escalator, or take an elevator. When in love, some people suddenly descend to the ground floor in an elevator, inflicting deep emotional wounds, like sponge divers who have suffered a shock. The depth of this experience, the speed of the descent, the pain experienced, and its resolution depend on a person's past. Sometimes, sudden descents in an elevator shatter the self, and restoring that self takes a long time…
NEVER TURN YOUR NOSE OFF AT LOVE.,
IT IS A GRASSY PLACE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DESERT…
WITH LOVE
PROF. DR. ÜNSAL SÖYLEMEZOĞLU
Professor Söylemezoğlu, with his unique style, states that the boundaries of love are determined by an individual's emotional capacity. He argues that the meanings an individual assigns to the person they love actually reflect themselves more than the other person, and that whether we call love 'light' or 'hard,' what matters is the experiences. He emphasizes that those who are not yet ready to commit to a relationship will experience love as 'light,' defining it as an inner capacity. He suggests that during the period of falling in love, the lover, using the power of love, erases the undesirable, unlikable, or unacceptable aspects of the other person, thus transforming the beloved into an idealized hero. He stresses that love is essentially composed of what an individual desires and creates within their inner world. He notes that love, created by directing an individual's imagination and narcissism towards an external object, is the greatest compliment a person can give themselves. He explains that this self-compliment increases their life energy, expands the perception of their five senses, and thus gives new meaning to the ordinary events of life. He argues that mutual love is the sum of newly assigned meanings and self-love, thus creating an effect that goes beyond synergism, disrupting mathematics, and consequently, 1+1 equals more than 2.
The author points out that losing love can be a deeply traumatic experience because it destroys narcissistic feelings, and that its recovery can sometimes take a very long time. To better emphasize the magnitude of the consequences of separation, he references the film 'Meat,' reminding us of how an individual who has lost love, in order to end the pain of loneliness, first destroys the person they loved and then consumes their body parts, absorbing them into themselves forever. Despite the negative side effects that can sometimes lead to fatal consequences, he rejects the 'light' form of love in today's world, saying 'no risk, no trip,' and 'fall in love because love is an oasis in the desert.' In his writing, he also states in one sentence that 'love is an experience that can only be lived with the opposite sex.' Knowing him very well, I'm sure this doesn't stem from homophobic concerns, but I must say I still find this sentence difficult to understand. If what homosexuals experience isn't love, then what is it? To what extent is it appropriate for us to label what they experience? Since we said that what matters is the experiences lived, and since they named their experiences 'love,' what difference does it make if we don't accept this statement? Perhaps in the next issue, Mr. Söylemezoğlu will explain what he meant.
Oğuzkan Bölükbaşı wrote the following:
CALORIES OF LOVE
“"Sexual intercourse causes weight loss."
The average person loses 26 calories during a one-minute kiss. Half an hour of good sex will burn another 150 calories. Kissing is also good for your teeth: the extra saliva produced during kissing keeps your mouth clean and reduces the risk of cavities.”
(http://www.bayansitesi.net/bilinmeyen-seks-gercekleri.html)
It wouldn't be wrong to conclude that love-based sexual intercourse leads to greater calorie loss. Love can also cause weight loss even without sex, especially unrequited love, which can make people lose their appetite. I don't think Majnun, Ferhat, or Kerem had obesity problems.
In this day and age, Kerem, Mecnun, and Ferhat are nothing more than unrequited lovers who exist only in fairy tales.
New types of relationships have emerged, such as casual relationships and light relationships. The mother of these relationships is rapidly developing technology, and the father is the fast-paced life. As a result, these relationships are low in calories, stripped of fat, and shallow, so they don't drive people crazy, leave them stranded in deserts, or make them struggle to unbutton their shirts.
If you ask whether these new types of relationships are good or bad, I would find it difficult to answer. Because both good and bad are relative. Some people find deep love meaningful and worth experiencing, while others find the opposite. If you want to look at it from the perspective of societal values, I believe the defining characteristics of these values are technology and urbanization. And actually, looking at it from the perspective of societal values isn't very healthy either. Those who shoot their young sisters or their estranged wives in the street also have societal values as an excuse. What truly matters are human values.
Now, let me try to get back to the point without straying. Light love, or low-calorie love, is experienced quite intensely, and I mentioned the reason above: rapidly developing technology and fast-paced life. Urbanization also contributes to this, of course, because life is lived most rapidly in cities. Even if technology has reached villages and towns, the pace of life hasn't quite reached them, so encountering light love is unlikely; in fact, there are hidden Kerems and Aslıs there. The disease of unrequited love hasn't been eradicated yet.
Light love, as the name suggests, isn't a type of love that causes pain, but rather one that entertains. Money is shared, no one possesses the other like property, and individuals live their lives freely. Perhaps the concept of "betrayal" even disappears. The definition of "loyalty" also changes. Even though these things are viewed very negatively in traditional thought, they are happening and forming in an unstoppable way. They even call into question the morality of traditional thought. Because in this light relationship, women and men become equal. In contrast, in traditional thought, women are not free because they represent honor, and men, as guardians of honor, call the shots in every neighborhood.
Even though it's too early to judge these things, the reality of "low-calorie love" is something we see, hear, and read about in the media every day, and witness in our daily relationships.
Before I judge an event, an idea, or a value as right or wrong, good or bad, I look to see if it conforms to nature. If it conforms to nature, it is right; if not, it is wrong, in my opinion. I first look for an example of it in nature.
Light love is like nature itself. Trees and animals experience light love to a large extent; we can also say they live according to the needs of their nature, or in newer terms, the requirements of their nature. Trees don't pollinate the same tree every year, bees don't flock to the same flower every year, cats don't look for the cat of the previous March every March; nature is almost the source of light love.
Someone reading the paragraph above backwards might say, "Are we animals? We are human beings, the most honorable of creatures." Let them say it; that's their opinion. However, their failure to understand that they must guide their lives according to the realities of the needs hierarchy is their own shortcoming; there's nothing that can be done about it.
I'm not claiming to justify light love; I'm merely stating that its existence is in accordance with nature. If you ask whether it's in accordance with human nature, I would say, "What is human nature anyway?" Human nature is in a state eroded by the value judgments of the dominant masses. General human nature (id) naturally desires to live, but what its environment teaches disrupts this naturalness. Therefore, the worldview and perception of human relationships of a Swede, an Arabian, an Indian, an American, a Moroccan, and a German are different, and none of them are natural.
What exactly does it mean to be human? Engin Geçtan says, “Contemporary societies have brought with them a unique phenomenon. People tend to form relationships with far more people than before, but for much shorter periods and on a more superficial level. This is similar to the story of a group of hedgehogs meeting on a cold day. They huddle together to keep warm, but their spines prick each other. When they separate, they suffer from the cold. By moving back and forth, they eventually find the optimal distance where they can warm each other without their spines pricking each other.”
I think this is what needs to be said without overthinking it. Light relationships, light loves are the most suitable things for the nature of today's structure. Urbanization and speed don't allow for deep relationships.
John Lennon, in one of his songs, essentially says, "While you're making plans, life is passing you by." This person, who discovered this speed years ago but became passionately attached to Yoko Ono because he was from our generation, also had to experience the contradictions inherent in nature.
In conclusion, any way of life that is natural, does not disrupt balance, and does not restrict the freedom of others is acceptable.
OGUZKAN BOLUKBASI
MARCH 2011
Mr. Bölükbaşı points out that when we focus our attention on the era we live in and its values, 'light love' becomes an understandable and acceptable concept. To those who ask, 'Where is the sentimentality? Can light love be a way of life that suits the deep nature of humanity?', he says that human nature is a debatable concept, and that the dominant values of our time (such as consumerism) are a force that can destroy fundamental naturalness, and that perhaps our values need to be reshaped in changing circumstances.
He emphasizes that light love is actually natural because nature itself is the source of light love. As evidence, he states that plants and animals have 'light love'-like experiences. Unlike Ünsal Söylemezoğlu, he notes that the risks or costs of light love will also be 'light,' and therefore, the sometimes unavoidable pain of love can be avoided, and for this reason, it is more enjoyable. He also states that the experience of 'infidelity,' one of the most traumatic experiences of human life, can become tolerable thanks to light love. He emphasizes that light love will also be useful in questioning traditional morality and can be used as a tool to give women as much freedom as men. In his writing, where he generously defines the mother and father of light love, he says that rapidly developing technology is the mother and a 'fast' life is the father. In a world where the economy is paramount, he emphasizes that light love, within the context of current values, will lead to an energy economy, thus protecting people from suffering and allowing them to live peacefully without having to tunnel through mountains or wander into deserts.
The question I'd like to ask Mr. Oğuzkan Bölükbaşı is this: In a world where the brevity of life is emphasized, where only positive emotions are prioritized, and where avoidance of suffering is constantly promoted, is it possible to grasp the meaning of life? Should life be a place where only positive emotions are experienced, or should it be a place where all emotions are experienced? Although love sometimes brings profound pain, pain and failure are often more generous than success and happiness because they teach so much. Pain is magnificent knowledge for anyone who explores and understands it, and it shows the value we place on life and our experiences. I remember telling someone in a therapy session, who said they couldn't understand their partner's tears, that they had problems with their partner because of their crying, and that they therefore preferred to stay away from intense relationships (light love), and even boasted, "I've never cried," that I felt very sorry for them. When they asked, "You should feel sorry for my partner. Why are you feeling sorry for me?" I replied, "Because it's very painful for a person to have nothing in their life that they value enough to cry about." The idea that someone might invest their love out of fear of causing pain doesn't resonate with me at all.
I would like to ask about the concept of "light love" on my own behalf. If we were to ask those experiencing "light love" if their love is "light," how many would say that it is only a "light" love in their presence? How sure can we be that experiences that begin "light" will always remain "light"? Could it be that when people say to themselves, "I am experiencing light love," they are actually just trying to ease the burden of responsibilities they have created in their minds, using a self-serving rhetoric to comfort themselves? I believe that love is simply an experience, and it can be lived without judgment.