lofty, I see lust as more of a raw thing, purely physical, love is more all encompassing. It may have been me being naive saying that, I'm guessing I'm assuming the lust can die away a bit, I've not been in that situation.
I agree Paul, which is what I tried to say up there ^. I just think that you cant be 'Madly' in love after 40 years of being married and knowing someone inside out. You can love them very much, you can still fancy them, but not be 'madly' in love. The lust does fade, but there are still the odd occasions ;o)
That's what I mean Tinker, in a way. Although even being 'in love' wanes and you just end up being comfortable with someone because you know them so well and you love them. No-one in my opinion could live for a long time in the state of euphoria that being 'in love' brings.
You can fall madly in love with me if you like, tinkerbell. I do not have a partner either and would love one. I would love to fall in love with someone.
Lofty....yeah!....I have "trained" Mrs sqad, she has "trained" me.....we are used to each others routine and ways.......not sure what this "madly in love" has anything to do with it.
No, it gives the romantics (usually below 45 years of age) to say...I AM!
as a medical man sqad you should know that the space between the ears is the one area most responsive to stimuli - note the use of plural as I'm not one to stint myself so I'll choose the top half. However, within reason 'if you ain't tried it don't knock it' does seem to present more opportunities.