me_irl

If a person feels a need to say I love you, I think one may analyze and find that this behavior has no meaning, and often has the opposite effect. If I need to say I love you, I am projecting my internal assumptive state onto you without effectively aligning my internal state with your needs and perception of the relationship.

That act of communication could indeed be done with love, but only if you are emotionally insecure, with short temporal self awareness, and a shallow emotional depth.

If I am self aware on this level, one must question the egalitarian nature of our relationship. It is likely that we are very mismatched in terms of Machiavellian personality spectrum, and that likely implies a layer of manipulative coercion in the worst case scenario.

On the opposite end of potential, I am projecting a state I desire you to occupy. If that state is not entirely self evident in my actions, what is my purpose in making the statement. Am I setting goals. Am I correcting course. Am I having an epiphany from my temporal amnesia as the singular brain cell between my ears periodically resets.

Love is like intelligence, those like myself that feel the need to talk about it, likely do not have any, and certainly those that call themselves smart are anything but. If my love is not self evident, speaking otherwise is to cause complacency at best, and malicious coercion at worst. To tell me that you feel loved, is to give a great complement. To tell you I love you, is to reflect my lack of self awareness, laziness, and limited heuristic attention to the needs of the relationship.

To be clear, there is nothing wrong with saying I love you. I am referring to a very subtle and deeper layer of ambiguous meaning. I am pinning down one of the underlying issues that causes the conceptual nebulosity to call the word insufficient or even malevolent.

Lastly, the comment on a bot and heroin are playing on the idea that we are all just chemistry, so why not play to the most effective solutions to the needs, while picking obviously harmful mechanisms, implying an equivocal dynamic in relationships, to invalidate both premises.