I'm so glad you're back, cdn!
You know, for me, it's not mere semantics. "Being a mate" regardless of whether I am in a romantic partnership, or if he's there with me, does make sense for me. "Being a mate", as I see it, means: being available for the growth and responsibility of a LLTMBR, by being available for growth and responsibility in every conversation; being love, surrender, and joy in every conversation; and being in love in every conversation. And -- "every conversation" includes what I tell myself. What I tell myself when I'm with people and when I'm alone.
If I am being all that: growth, responsibility, love, surrender, and joy -- then I am in a very real sense "being a mate" -- regardless of whether or not I have actually met my partner yet, or that he's present.
Similarly, if I do have a boyfriend and he's with me or he's in Sweden, and I am NOT being all that, then despite the fact that I'm in a LLTMBR, I'm not "being a mate" -- I'm being a butthead.
So I wouldn't dismiss being vs. getting as mere semantics. It's the difference between living a life I love, or not. I think that's a pretty consequential difference!
(I don't love being a butthead.)
|