opinions // no. 22

Unconditional

love 1s a toxic
cultural concept

» Healthy relationships have
conditions and boundaries

Janis McMath
Editor-in-Chief

 

Goats around the globe have

always romanticized the concept of
unconditional love. Pop songs glorify

it, relationship gurus emphasize the
importance of it in a relationship, and
everyone has something negative to say
about unconditional love's opposite:
conditional love. While well meaning, this
concept regarding love is severely flawed
and, in a few words, dead wrong.

A common definition of unconditional
love is a love offered “without expectation
or repayment.” Unconditional love is to be
there for someone at their worst and still
love them wholly. Part of this is a positive
and lovely idea, but if we follow the logic to
the end, we can see the negative underbelly:
accepting someone's abuse because you love
them “regardless of their flaws.”

It’s not hard to find a bunch of
examples of abusive partners romanticized
in media; Edward in Twilight basically
controlled Bella and watched her while
she slept pre-relationship when he
was crushing on her, Ross and Rachel’s
relationship in Friends is all about
manipulation, lying, and dramatic
arguments, and Khal Drogo forces himself
(only in the show) on Daenerys in the
beginning of Game of Thrones, yet people
are still constantly tweeting “you're my
sun and stars.” A lot of these examples
are explained as unconditional love, and
it feels like they are only given that title
because people are aware of how many
absurd obstacles have been faced in these
relationships. Unconditional love is given
as an honorary title often as a celebration of
the unbelievable (and sometimes extremely

negative) hardships
faced and conquered.
This concept is what
causes people to
romanticize the idea
of love overcoming all
obstacles—and while
that is beautiful, there
are some obstacles
love should never
overcome.

Manipulation,
cheating, and lying
are great examples.
These are examples
of emotional abuse
which individuals
should not tolerate in
any relationship, but
culture romanticizes
them and so do
the young adults
that consume that
media. A selfless
love is a toxic love to
the giver; personal
emotional needs
should be fulfilled
in a relationship—it
only makes the
relationship better for
both people if both are satisfied. Everyone
has expectations for their partners, as they
should, so pretending that love is “without
expectation” can deprive partners of being
honest with what they need. Using “don’t
you love me unconditionally” is also an easy
way for an abuser to pressure their victims
into doing things they feel uncomfortable
with.

Even a dog loves conditionally. Dogs
that face physical abuse often become
aggressive or completely terrified and

 

<)

 

unsocial; dogs that receive proper care,
love, food, and physical exercise are often
happy and love their owners. Dogs are seen
as unconditional bundles of love, but dogs
have very strict (and simple) rules that
need to be obeyed in earning their love.
All of this is not to say that
conditional love doesn’t have abhorrent
examples: only loving your children if
they obey your will, loving a partner
simply for their possessions or looks,
rejecting a family member because of
sexuality or religion—the list is endless.

theotherpress.ca

 

Illustration by Athena Little

Clearly there are conditional loves that
are predicated on terrible and unfair
conditions. But a conditional love with
fair boundaries that protects the giver
is what all good relationships are built
upon. A good partner will have similar
conditions for the relationship and
naturally follow your conditions since
your values align. Always look to protect
yourself and your well-being; don’t
commit to anyone who doesn’t respect
your reasonable needs and boundaries.

BC 2020 provincial election debate analysis

> It is more exciting than you think

Jerrison Oracion
Senior Columnist

 

he BC provincial election this year

is probably not the most exciting
with the coronavirus pandemic still
happening. Many campaign rallies had
to be presented as town halls on the
internet, there were not a lot of TV
ads from the major parties about the
election, and you may not know who is
running in your riding because you were
not able to engage with them because of
social distancing measures. But the one
thing in this election that was almost the
same as previous years was the leaders’
debate, and this event has the power to
get everyone talking

The debates inform viewers about the

leaders of the major parties, what leaders

will do if chosen, and ultimately help

you decide who to vote for. The debate
happened in the Chan Centre for the
Performing Arts at the University of British
Columbia with safety precautions in place
and was moderated by Shachi Kurl. All the
leaders of the major parties were in the
debate including Premier John Horgan of
the BC NDP, Andrew Wilkinson of the BC
Liberal Party, and Sonia Furstenau of the
BC Green Party.

The themes that were discussed in
the debate included pandemic recovery,
housing, the environment, and social
issues. In the beginning of the debate,
all but Wilkinson acknowledged that
they were on the unceded territory of the
Musqueam nation. During the section
on pandemic recovery, Furstenau grilled
Horgan on calling an election during the

pandemic and breaking the agreement that
they had on fixed election dates. Horgan
said that he was not thinking of calling one
until the pandemic happened and he still
declares that the reason why he called the
election was because he wanted to have a
stable government handling the pandemic.
Throughout the debate, Wilkinson
did not wow me though he is a doctor, and
he emphasized on the idea of reducing the
PST to three percent and funding programs
through loans a lot. While reducing the
PST could reduce the cost of everyday
items, it can lead to budget cuts and fewer
services. Wilkinson grilled Horgan for not
building more hospitals to meet the needs
of the province but they announced that
they were going to build more hospitals—
though they have not been built yet.
Horgan did a great job in the debate

because his answers were straightforward,
and he was enthusiastic. Although, he
said a controversial answer when the
leaders were asked about their white
privilege being a political leader. Horgan
responded with, “For me, I did not see
colour. I felt that everyone around me was
the same.” Many say he chose the wrong
choice of words to describe that he had a
lot of friends from various cultures and he
apologized after the debate.

Furstenau was also great in the debate
grilling the other leaders on various issues.
The leaders also tackled BC’s Green Plan,
tent cities, and protests on pipeline projects.
The BC provincial election leaders’ debate
this year was very informative and was
helpful in learning from the major parties
about how the province is going to get
through the pandemic.