Wen 丨 Qingxin Junyue
"What consequences? Isn't that just love? With so many people in love all over the world every day, is it so hard to understand that a woman just doesn't want to be in the shadows and just wants to be loved in the sun? ”
The grievances and desires behind Luo Jia's words in the TV series "Win or Lose" are understood by me, and I believe that many people also understand. However, just after this sentence was uttered, the love between Southern Zhou Rui and Northern Luo Jia temporarily drew an unsatisfactory end.
As far as the matter is concerned, aside from Lin Zhenwei's deliberate promotion behind the scenes, it is also a matter of time before the two people have a conflict over whether the love relationship is public.
Who is right and who is wrong, there is no way to evaluate, at least two people do not think that their ideas are wrong, then the wrong can only be the other party.
The question of whether love is public has always been a hot topic in the emotional field. In this article, we will talk about the TV series "Win or Lose".
Is the relationship public, is it an individual's right?
I know the title, and some people will look ridiculous.
Indeed, I find it ridiculous, but we must admit that it is really a personal right to know whether or not a relationship is public. We need to respect each other's wishes, and it is also necessary to respect each other's wishes.
But based on this view, I would like to add that love is something that two people have in common.
When the two views are merged together, some people will feel a bit conflicted. If you feel a conflict, you're right, because part of the contradiction that arises from this kind of problem stems from that conflict—both sides think they're right, and they make sense of their reasons.
In this way, because of love, one party always wants to persuade the other party, and in the process of persuasion, there will inevitably be disputes, and each side thinks that they are right, and they blame each other for not understanding things and not understanding.
In the TV series "Win or Lose", when Luo Jia publicly exposed the relationship between the two, Zhou Rui said:
"Mr. Locke is right, we're together. But such an announcement was not what I wanted. ”
Where Zhou Ruiqi was, Qi was angry at Luo Jia, who did not respect his wishes and did not understand his helplessness. Zhou Rui feels that he is not respected, and this question of respect is often an intensification point for the problem of whether love is open.
So can we say that Zhou Rui did not love Luo Jia so much?
Not really. Even in the play, Zhou Rui clearly stated: "In each of our lives, in addition to love, there are many others." ”
In the play, the contradiction between whether the two people are in love or not is open also involves a "workplace hidden love" problem, which is the same as Ma Yong and Tian Min in "Three Lives Have the Luck to Meet You", there are external factors that limit the openness of the relationship. Naturally at this time, we can refute it in the words of Luo Jia:
"Why should love be shorter than a career?"
But in fact, in the face of survival, on the issue of not involving principles and moral bottom lines, this "short" must be that one party is not so loving.
Man can only love if he is alive, and although it is not beautiful, it is also a reality. Moreover, in a person's life, love should be the most important, but it is by no means the only one.
So I would like to say that the question of whether the relationship is public or not may not be absolutely correct on either side.
What to do when the differences between the two sides on this issue cannot be agreed?
With regard to the approach, the personal advice is to first determine what are the reasons for the two sides to insist on their respective views.
For example, I saw someone on the Internet point out: "Regardless of men and women, who have been in love for more than three months and are not open, they either want to cheat or have spare tires." ”
Some people may feel quite right, but I'd say there's some truth to this point, but it's too absolute.
In fact, in real life, there are indeed many special situations. If we shoot a bunch of people to death with just one stick, it's a bit sloppy!
Of course, this view also gives us a well-intentioned warning: we need to determine whether the other party's reasons are reasonable and inappropriate.
The basis of this judgment is recommended not to be judged by personal preference. Because at this time, according to personal preference, it is likely that the other party is wrong no matter what explanation. We need to judge rationally and without personal emotion.
The intention we judge is to analyze whether the other party has other bad intentions, but if the other party's reasons are reasonable and justified, we cannot accept them. Then after the effort can not be consistent, you can only say that the fate is not enough. But in most cases, if the other person does not have a bad mind, the problem is not insoluble.
The solution is that we need to figure out what the deeper reasons are for the other person, and what exactly do we need?
To put it simply, when it comes to whether a relationship is public, what most people really focus on is not the [public] thing, but what this thing can embody— a sense of security, a sense of solidity, trust, and a clear identity.
These needs may appear in each other's bodies, or they may appear in us. But no matter which side appears on it, as long as it can be properly resolved, the differences can naturally become consistent.
For example, if the other party is insecure and wants to obtain it openly through a romantic relationship, then the first thing we need to reflect on is why the other party feels this way, whether we are not doing enough and not good in any part of the relationship, or whether there is something around us that makes the other party jealous, uneasy or suspicious. If these problems are handled well, the problems can naturally be solved.
On the other hand, if we are insecure, we can also directly inform each other of our feelings and needs to see if the other party can give us a satisfactory answer.
Most love problems are relationship problems, and good communication is the key to solving problems
Why do we call the love of two people - falling in love. This talk points out the key to love.
Talking is communication, it is communication. Love is the relationship between two people. Combining is to use communication and communication to deal with the relationship between two people.
Sometimes we feel that dealing with relationship problems is more complicated, which is inevitable, because when dealing with relationship problems, we can't just think about ourselves, but our subconscious has a "self" consciousness.
Therefore, those partners who have a stable romantic relationship must at least have one person to constantly restrain the awareness of "self", so as to deal with the relationship problems of two people. The partner who is truly happier is that both parties restrain their "self" consciousness in this relationship.
Or the original sentence, when we regard love as a matter of two people, and in the process can constantly restrain the "self", then most of the love contradictions can be avoided, and the problem of love naturally does not exist.
At the end, I would like to add three more points:
One is that formal things don't mean everything, especially in love. Sincerity and sincerity do not need forms to prove, and can naturally be felt by intention. Sometimes too much attention to form can destroy love.
Second, the question of whether the relationship discussed is open or not exists within a certain range, which includes the time range and the scope that can be disclosed. If the former is infinitely expanded and the latter can only be limited to two people, then please consider carefully.
Third, the question of whether a romantic relationship is open is not related to some "non-marriageism" or whether to marry according to the law. These are two things, the former being a small issue that can be dealt with, while the latter requires caution and caution.
Qingxin Junyue, an emotional observer, ta said book critic, film critic. Warm you, me with words.