I’ve been dating my girlfriend for more than six months now, and we’ve been going along really well ever since we first met. Time together is always of quality, and I care a lot about her.
A few weeks ago, she told me for the first time that she loved me. Although her words meant a lot to me, it led me to believe that I wasn’t sure I actually loved her — though I care deeply about our relationship. Is it wrong to say “I love you” if I am not sure I’m actually in love? I’m afraid this could lead us to end our relationship otherwise. — Name Withheld, France
From the Ethicist:
Having watched a few romantic comedies in my life — or has it been a few thousand? — I am familiar with this quandary. One partner worries about having derailed a relationship by blurting out “I love you” too soon. Or is flummoxed by the surprise declaration. Or wonders why “I love you” is answered only with “Ditto,” “Same” or “Back at ya.” All that seems true to life. So is the fact that people in relationships are highly adept at drawing distinctions within the language of devotion: “I love you, but I’m not in love with you.” Or: “I do love you, but not that way.”
What’s worth bearing in mind is that an avowal of love can have meanings beyond its words. The French philosopher Emmanuel Levinas made much about the difference between the saying and the said. The “said” is just the content of whatever proposition you’ve asserted. But the “saying” is an act — a way of opening yourself up to another. Your girlfriend, beyond expressing her sense of desire and devotion, was making herself vulnerable, perhaps signaling her commitment to the relationship and testing whether you reciprocated it.
That’s clearly the effect it had, given your current soul-searching. I’d suggest that you try speaking to her — opening yourself up to her — with a full heart. As your copine surely knows, people in a couple who come to love each other don’t necessarily do so simultaneously. It sounds as if she’s willing to give you time and space to develop your feelings at your own pace. And an honest conversation is how the deeper ethical work of love happens — the work of seeing, honoring and caring.
But if she has a vision of a shared future that doesn’t resonate with you — if you consider the relationship comfortable but not necessarily for keeps? In that case, exaggerating your feelings in order to preserve the status quo would amount to “breadcrumbing”: leading her on, and preventing her from moving along with her life. The prototype breadcrumber is the manipulative cad who just wants to keep all options open on a Friday night. More typical breadcrumbers, I suspect, are driven not by cynicism but by uncertainty, and by a desire to avoid conflict. They may tell themselves that they’re being kind as they postpone a reckoning. And we all know how that movie ends.
A Bonus Question
I’m a child of divorce whose mother has just begun dating a new man. My parents have been divorced for almost two years now, and I live with my mother. My mother initiated the divorce and has dated quite a bit, but she did not enter a serious relationship until earlier this year. I’m happy that she has found someone she likes.
However, recently my mother told me the name of her new boyfriend, and being the curious Gen Zer I am, I looked him up. Unfortunately, after a minimal amount of searching it became apparent to me that he was arrested for a burglary in 2016. He has a very distinctive name, and the pictures and information match up.
My mom and I are very close, and our relationship is what’s most important to me. Do I have an obligation to tell my mom what I found? — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
Why, yes. That would be an act of a loving child. Just don’t deliver the news with prejudgment; in fact, don’t assume it’s news. Your mother might be well aware of the situation. They could have discussed it on their first date. Maybe the story of being wrongly arrested for burglary is a hilarious, or harrowing, tale he often recounts. Maybe, in the course of a divorce, he retrieved items from a residence that he still considered his home but that his spouse or former spouse did not. Maybe he committed larceny at a low point in his life, in the grips of an addiction he has since put behind him. Maybe he’s a career criminal. You have a data point; he has a life.
But your loyalty is owed to your mother, not to her new boyfriend. Whatever the significance might be of what you’ve learned, you shouldn’t keep her in the dark about the fact that you’ve learned it.
Readers Respond
Last week’s question was from a woman who was conflicted about whether to donate to a fund-raiser that’s meant to support her friend’s ailing pet. She wrote: “I have developed a friendship with a group of women, all of whom have taken in difficult-to-place foster dogs. One woman ended up adopting a dog that had behavioral issues she was willing to work on and that had tumors, which had been removed by the animal-rescue group. It has now been almost two years since the woman adopted this dog, and the tumors are back. The cost to test and remove the tumors starts at around $2,000. The woman is saying she is broke and doesn’t know whether she should proceed. … One of the other friends in the group decided to start a GoFundMe to help cover these costs. This dog adopter is very reckless with her finances. She works a decent job and makes ends meet but spends as if she’s in a much higher income bracket. … All this is to say that, knowing the dog has had issues with tumors, she has failed to put aside any sort of emergency fund. … I have to date not contributed to the GoFundMe campaign, although I can easily afford to. She has made her choices, and I think that if she needs to go into debt and put this on a credit card, that’s a direct result of her reckless spending and therefore her problem. Why do I feel guilty?”
In his response, the Ethicist noted: “Your detailed anatomizing of your friend’s financial peccadilloes makes it sound as if what’s at stake here is whether you indulge her bad life choices. When you contrast her recklessness with your frugality, your disapproval radiates from your words like heat from a waffle iron. She is, to your mind, among the undeserving poor, because her poverty is chosen, not imposed upon her. I get why you disapprove. Financial imprudence is annoying in friends who ask others to cover their costs. You might find a polite way to share your concerns about her failure to put money aside for emergencies like this one. You might even suggest that the situation she finds herself in could be an opportunity for her to reassess her financial habits. But it would be best to focus on what’s most important here, which is your shared concern for animals in need — the issue that brought you together in the first place.” (Reread the full question and answer here.)
⬥
As a veterinarian, I have to disagree with the Ethicist. There is an adage in veterinary medicine that helps us stay sane: “You can’t care more than the owner.” I think that it applies here. — Maia
⬥
I agree with the Ethicist up to the point of advising the letter writer to have a word with the friend about how she handles her finances. That’s crossing a line. Not your money, not your business. I recently had a friend say that any unsolicited advice is criticism. The letter writer should give or not give to help the dog, but she shouldn’t take it upon herself to criticize how someone else spends her money. She should focus on the dog. — Lea
⬥
A person who regularly purchases front-row seats to concerts headlining a prominent rock band is not suffering from poverty, self-induced or otherwise. Recognizing the financial irresponsibility of a reasonably financially endowed person should not be conflated with shaming those in poverty. While I agree with the Ethicist’s ultimate advice, there is no reason to scold the writer for noticing that her friend, as well as having admirable qualities, is financially irresponsible and sometimes inconsiderate of others. — Abby
⬥
I know this is an unpopular take these days, but no one is obligated to spend money on specialty medical care for a dog. It’s not animal abuse for an owner to refuse cancer treatment regardless of his or her financial situation. While I might agree that the letter writer’s friend’s financial choices are questionable, I agree with The Ethicist that her decision to contribute should reflect her views about the dog, and not about the owner’s finances. — Kristen
⬥
Not to be a stuck-up European, but all I could think of while reading both question and answer was: “Americans are a different breed.” From people’s unwillingness to buy health insurance for their pets, to the overspending, to the baffling moralizing on other people’s life choices in the face of a sick dog. All in all, this situation is very American. Why wouldn’t you want to help a sick dog? Why wouldn’t you want to help a friend? — Leonardo