Pssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssst
Before
B O A R D I N G
CHECK IN
Who Cares - What Matters
DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU’D LIKE TO BE DONE UNTO YOU. . .RIGHT
Or better,
DO UNTO OTHERS AS THEY REALLY WANT DONE UNTO THEM. . .
I mean these are really great aspirations for yourself
FOR OTHERS
. . .or are they the worst?
it’s real close to liking you to break open the
Butterfly Cocoon
before it’s ready
. . .seemingly to make it easier
But actually doing it the most harm ever. . .
THE SAVIOR COMPLEX
I’ve always had one
and thought it noble
and even sometimes wore it as a
Badge of Honor
until I saw I was actually doing more harm
than any kind of well intended
G O O D
so when an article about SAVIOR COMPLEXING comes across my attention
I SOAK IT UP
and ok, fine, here’s the truest of true Confessions:
I end up making this Complex even more
C O M P L E X I N G
and yet, I read on and invite you to do the same now with this article from a recent Psychology Today by Mark Travers, Ph.D., an American psychologist with degrees from Cornell University and the University of Colorado Boulder.
Everyone. . .
Dr. Travers shares that many people come to therapy troubled by their inability to help someone in need. They may say things like:
If you relate to any of these questions, you may have a savior complex. At first glance, your behaviors might point to your helpful nature. But, when examined more closely, your savior complex can be psychologically unhealthy as it can give you an external outlet to focus on instead of addressing your own problems.
Helpfulness is a valued and pro-social trait, but there is a difference between helping and saving. A savior complex goes beyond our ability to help people, crossing into the realm of trying to be a hero in someone else’s life for your benefit more than theirs.
Here I’ll talk about three ways you can manage your instinct to want to “save” people.
When people confide in you, they are often looking for an outlet to let out pent-up emotions instead of wanting to “be fixed.” A big problem for many “saviors” is the mistaken assumption that people are incapable of solving their own issues. If you take up the practice of listening more actively, you may learn that this person is perhaps just looking for a supportive shoulder and someone who will listen.
A study published in the Journal of Positive Psychology finds that listening carefully and attentively increases the level of humility in any conversation, resulting in a positive feedback loop of increased humility and better listening.
Here are two ways to up your listening skills, according to the researchers:
Aside from practicing active listening, resist your urge to intervene. You may find that people can often come to their own aid when helping themselves is the only real way out.
If you try to be the fixer of all their problems, you run the risk of unintentionally pushing them towards a sense of learned helplessness, where they lose the perspective to be able to diagnose and address their own issues.
When a loved one comes to you with an issue, refrain from offering assistance or suggestions right off the bat. Remind yourself that you can be present for someone without having to rescue them. Instead, you can offer validation that shows that you understand and empathize with them and are there for them whenever they need to vent.
One key aspect of the savior complex is the ingrained desire to help even when it’s not wanted or requested. Assuming that the other person is incapable of helping themselves may reflect or be perceived as a superiority complex on your end.
Instead, you can offer assistance in low-pressure ways that keeps the ball in their court. For instance, ask the other person questions like, “This situation seems quite tough. Is there any way I can help?”
Follow their guidance if they ask you to help in a certain way instead of assuming that you know what’s best.
Managing your savior instincts may seem difficult at first, but it’s a learnable skill. Even though you may believe you are doing someone a favor, saving someone who doesn’t want to be saved may backfire. Wait until this person asks for your assistance since it’s likely that someone who truly needs it will ask you for it directly.
And remember
Even as you’re Reaching Out
To REACH IN
f i r s t
IS THIS HELPING THEM
MORE THAN
APPEASING ME. . . ?
Give MORE and take less. . .
Can we. . . ?
THEY SAY:
Giving to others brings a sense of satisfaction and fulfillment that cannot be achieved through material possessions or personal gain. It can also have positive effects on our mental and physical #health. Research has shown that people who regularly engage in acts of kindness and giving are more likely to experience lower levels of stress, depression, and anxiety. . .
S T I L L
In this for real
DOG eat Dog
world
we can still see how
We Mutts can still learn
(or forever RE-LEARN)
New Tricks
without so much as
ROLLING OVER
or worse
PLAYING DEAD
YOU BLEW IT
YOU KNEW IT
DON’T CHEW IT
JUST DO IT. . .
SAY
“I AM SORRY”
. . but how. . .
(when just one way doesn’t feel enough)
Apologies are how we smooth over conflicts and repair relationships, prove our character to others, and coexist as imperfect beings. Yet few of us know how to do it well—or have the bravery to do so.
“A good apology builds bridges. It heals wounds,” says Marjorie Ingall, coauthor of the new book Sorry, Sorry, Sorry: The Case for Good Apologies. “It’s also really hard. Apologizing is a courageous act, because we’re overcoming all of our own animal instincts and all of our own self-protectiveness when we do it.”
Sincere apologies can be difficult to nail. Everyone wants to feel like a good person, which can lead to defensiveness—we talk ourselves out of the idea that we did something wrong in order to safeguard our sense of self. “We immediately turn to excuses, justifications, reasons why the victim provoked us,” says Karina Schumann, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Pittsburgh who’s researched the barriers to apologizing. “And if we’re able to convince ourselves of that, then that can—in our minds—preclude the need for an apology.” Or, perhaps we don’t care enough about fixing a certain relationship to apologize, she adds. We might also overestimate how uncomfortable delivering the apology will be, or assume that it won’t work.
But sincere apologies bring a host of benefits to the person delivering the message and the one receiving it. They help solidify relationships and mend trust, both of which can lower stress and improve mental health. “It’s really unhealthy to hold onto shame and guilt and not try to work through your emotions around negative behaviors and harmful acts you’ve committed,” Schumann says. Plus, some research indicates that those receiving apologies can experience improvements in blood pressure and heart rate, as well as increased activation of empathy-related brain regions that set the stage for forgiveness and reconciliation.
If you’re ready for your mea culpa moment, here are eight keys to apologizing well.
Apologies are better late than early, says Cindy Frantz, a social psychologist at Oberlin College who has researched how timing influences apology effectiveness. “What we found is that there can be a temptation to offer an apology quickly,” she says. “It’s an effort to shut the whole incident down and move on. And that benefits the perpetrator, but it doesn’t meet the needs of the victim.”
You can’t deliver an effective apology until and unless the injured party believes that you fully understand what you did wrong, she says. “If the apology comes before that, it’s not going to be seen as sincere.”
If you’re dealing with a relatively minor offense, consider apologizing over text message or in person, Ingall suggests. Emails often work well for more serious situations. “And if you really screwed up, there’s something very powerful about a stamp and nice stationery and a pen,” she says. Just don’t issue your apology via social media, which can be humiliating for everyone involved.
Another rule of thumb: “When you’re apologizing to someone, you have to give them an out,” Ingall says. “You don’t want somebody to feel trapped by you—they need an escape route.” Don’t block the pathway out of someone’s work cubicle, for instance, or lean into their car window so they’re unable to pull away.
Use the words “I’m sorry” or “I apologize.” Opting instead for phrases like “I regret” or “I feel bad about what happened” often results in non-apologies, which “have the vague contours of an apology, but don’t actually get there,” Ingall says. (See: The classic “sorry if you were offended” or “sorry, but…” approaches.) Plus, saying you regret something puts the focus on you and your emotions, when it needs to center squarely on the wronged person’s feelings.
Why should you apologize if you’re both at fault? That’s exactly the question many people struggle with, Schumann says—and certainly, there often is dual-responsibility. “But I like to encourage people to really focus on taking responsibility for the parts of the conflict that they’re responsible for,” she says. Avoid the urge to phrase it as, “I’m sorry I did this, but you also did that.” The inclination to do so is “normal, because we want to contextualize our behavior and call attention to the fact that we’re also hurt,” she says. But save it for later on in the conversation.
Always choose your words carefully when apologizing, advises Lisa Leopold, an associate professor of English language studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey who has analyzed the language of public apologies. Avoid conditional phrases, like “if” or “may”—as in, “I’m sorry if anyone was offended,” which suggests that perhaps there were no victims. “But” is another misstep. It undercuts your message, she notes.
It’s crucial to use “I” or “my” while apologizing, Leopold adds. For example, say “I’m sorry for my outburst,” rather than “I’m sorry for the interaction this morning.” And always use the active voice. “If you say something like, ‘I apologize for what happened,’ well, ‘what happened’ is something you have no control over,” she says.
It can also be helpful to utilize intensifiers such as “very,” “truly,” “sincerely,” “deeply,” and “extremely.” These can “enhance the language of an apology,” Leopold notes.
One of the core elements of an apology is making reparations. Sometimes, Schumann says, that will be possible in a direct way: You broke their favorite wine glass? Buy them a new one. Spilled coffee on their dress? Pay for the dry-cleaning.
If that’s not feasible, consider more symbolic forms of repair. For example, if you hurt someone’s feelings with a critical comment, make it clear that you misspoke. “Sometimes you can’t repair what’s happened, but you can think about the relationship moving forward,” she says. “How can you communicate a promise to behave better?” It’s important for the other person “to hear that this is not going to continue…and they can trust you to improve your behavior in the future.”
A variety of things can help make it clear your words are coming from the heart, Schumann says. First, the apology should match the severity of the offense. If you’re apologizing for infidelity and say, “Sorry about that, love,” you won’t come across as very genuine, she notes; however, those words might be adequate if you’re 10 minutes late for dinner.
You should also aim to put yourself in the other person’s shoes and convey that you understand what you did was hurtful to them, and the consequences they dealt with as a result. It can be helpful to listen first and ask them questions about their vantage point, Schumann advises. “That might allow you to really understand what they’re going through, and therefore be able to offer a more authentic, victim-focused apology.”
An apology is a starting point. Particularly with severe offenses, the person wronged will often need time and space to heal, and it’s important not to pressure them. It can be tempting to follow up with something like, “What’s wrong? I apologized—how long are you going to hold onto this?” Instead, Schumann suggests checking in like this: “I understand this isn’t going to fix everything, and I want to continue to do whatever I can to make this right by you. I hope that, even if you’re not ready to forgive me, you’re open to working with me to get us to a point where we can move forward.”
Now, just remember
WHEN THE SHOE’S ON THE OTHER FOOT
Without a doubt
The Worst Critic
you will ever encounter is the one
that stares back at you
from the mirror. . .
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
the things this mirror image will yell at you,
YOU’RE UGLY
YOU’RE STUPID
YOU’RE SO DUMB
YOU’RE AN IDIOT
YOU’RE NO GOOD
YOU’RE WORTHLESS
YOU ARE_________________________
and it’s always the
_________________________________
that shouts the loudest
B U T
IT IS NOT TRUE
is what you need to yell
back
L O U D E R
(every time )
I’m very ugly
So don’t try to convince me that
I am a very beautiful person
Because at the end of the day
I hate myself in every single way
And I’m not going to lie to myself by saying
There is beauty inside of me that matters
So rest assured I will remind myself
That I am a worthless, terrible person
And nothing you say will make me believe
I still deserve love
Because no matter what
I am not good enough to be loved
And I am in no position to believe that
Beauty does exist within me
Because whenever I look in the mirror I always think
Am I as ugly as people say?
(Now read bottom up)
by Abdullah Shoaib
THERE IS ALWAYS MUCH TO BE SAID
. . .especially when it comes from what we think but can’t always express, but when it comes to
ETHICALLY SPEAKING
maybe
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS
(as they should)
when the question comes up
Maryam Kouchaki, Ph.D., is a professor of management and organizations at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management. Her research focuses on decision making, diversity, and ethics. She helps people who strive to make their careers meaningful and become their best moral selves, and who want to positively contribute to the world through their work. She helps us answer, in short form, just how ethical we think we actually are. . . ?Let’s imagine that you come to our lab at Northwestern University to do a task. You have sets of numbers in front of you, and you are asked to find the two numbers that add up to exactly 10 for each set. For each correct response, you earn 50 cents.
Now, imagine that we tell you that you can score yourself, and then recycle the paper with your responses, which doesn’t have your name on it. All you have to do is turn in a payment slip with your score, and we pay you.
Would you cheat?
When we conducted these types of studies, after participants left, my research assistant actually dug through the recycling and scored everyone. And we often found that everybody basically cheats a little and earns $2 to $3 extra.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. . .
Decades of research point to moral fallibility, that humans are not perfect and are likely to fail in being moral. Everyday people end up violating their own moral values, sometimes unknowingly, and they find numerous ways to rationalize or ignore this behavior. By doing so, they keep their image of themselves as good, honest individuals—so good that the average person thinks they’re more likely to go to heaven than Mother Teresa.
Is there anything to be done about this? First, we need to be aware of all the subtle ways that our moral decisions can be swayed. Then, we can put safeguards in place so we can make better decisions over time—and become better people.
Moral decisions don’t simply come down to a conscious choice to cheat or not. Research has found that certain things consistently influence our choices—whether it’s how we’re feeling or what time of day it is.
In one study, we gave participants the numbers task to complete while listening to anxiety-inducing music from the movie Psycho. In that situation, people are even more likely to exaggerate their performance.
What’s the explanation? Our data suggest that anxiety increases people’s perception of threat, which in turn results in self-interested, unethical behavior. In threatening situations, our brain shifts into a state that facilitates rapid defense mechanisms; our cognitive resources are temporarily diverted so we can quickly respond to the situation and protect ourselves. Because of these self-protective impulses, we are more likely to narrowly focus on our own basic needs and self-interest, rather than being more mindful of ethical principles.
Another factor that matters is time of day. In one study, half of our participants were randomly assigned to do a task in the morning, 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. The other half did it between 2 to 6 p.m. in the afternoon. In this case, we saw more cheating in the afternoon.
This is evidence for people’s inability to regulate their behavior in a tempting situation. The mere experience of everyday living—making decisions, expending physical energy—can reduce our ability to exert self-control as the day progresses. As we become more tired, our morality is compromised.
We’re also heavily influenced by the way people around us behave. We learn vicariously from our peers, our groups, and our leaders. Workplaces can intentionally or unintentionally normalize unethical behavior, which leads to collective corruption. For example, in one paper we showed that the language used by corporations reflects their culture and shapes employees’ behaviors. Specifically, we found that corrupt companies use linguistic obfuscation (language that is difficult to understand) in their values statement, and as a result team members cheat more.
There is other research pointing to even more factors that affect our moral decisions. For example, if people have ambitious goals or have performance pressures, they are more likely to engage in everyday dishonest behavior. These subtle situational forces can swing our moral compass.
Importantly, we often don’t realize the impact of these factors. If I asked you whether you’re more likely to be unethical in the morning or afternoon, you probably wouldn’t think it makes a difference.
In some ways, our brains may be concealing our own dishonesty from us. In another one of my studies, participants who engaged in a task where they had the opportunity to cheat had a much weaker memory of the experience—when and where it happened, how they felt—compared to those who completed a task without the possibility of cheating. This forgetting seems to be one of the psychological tricks that enable us to engage in questionable behavior over time.
Based on Maryam’s research, here are some guidelines to help you make more moral decisions and continue growing and learning as an ethical person.
1. Plan for ethical challenges. Since other people play a significant role in our morality, one place to start is to find an ethics mentor. You can seek guidance from someone inside or outside your organization, someone trustworthy to discuss ethical issues with.
Next, you can also manage other people’s expectations of you—whether directly or indirectly. For example, in one of my studies, participants were less likely to ask someone to lie after receiving an email from them with a moral quotation in the signature (something like “Success without honor is worse than fraud”).
Even just including that type of quotation in your email signature is a type of safeguard, so you are less likely to be asked to do something questionable. In this way, showing your character can help stop moral dilemmas from even arising.
2. Bring awareness to a moral challenge in the moment. There is a lot of evidence of “moral fading,” where we simply don’t pay attention to the moral implications of our decisions. When dilemmas do arise, we have to explicitly look for these moral implications and not narrowly focus on the costs for ourselves. For example, you may be choosing between two products and one might be cheaper, but at the same time you have information that the company is using questionable labor practices. Do you take that into consideration? Do you think about the harm in this context?
Another key is avoiding rationalization. We can be very creative in justifying questionable behavior when there is self-interest involved. We might tell ourselves, “Oh, everyone does this, I’m just following orders, I’m doing this for the greater good, it’s their own fault, they deserve it.”
If you’re aware of these tendencies, you can try three tests to avoid self-deceptive rationalization:
Finally, not rushing the decision is important. In a classic study, Princeton Theological Seminary students were less likely to help a stranger who was lying slumped on the ground when they were facing time pressure to go and deliver a lecture.
The traditional advice for making a decision is to sleep on it—and that is helpful to encourage you to think about decisions more carefully. If possible, you can also consult your company’s organizational policies by reading codes of conduct or calling a hotline.
3. Use reflection to learn from moral challenges. To be ethical doesn’t mean being perfect all the time, but it does mean being dedicated to learning. When you make a mistake, you can reflect in order to learn and do better in the future. To adopt an ethical learning orientation, ask yourself, “What can I do to be a better person?”
Sometimes, the problem is that we treat work as a completely separate realm of life. My research suggests that our tendency to separate personal and professional life—what is called “identity segmentation”—leads us to engage in more questionable behavior because we use a different code of conduct at work and at home. When people have an integrated identity across their professional and personal life, that leads to a sense of authenticity and more ethical decisions.
You can also learn by seeking more feedback and getting input on your moral decisions. This is particularly important because at work, managers tend to give much more feedback on performance mistakes rather than moral lapses. And we’re less likely to ask for feedback about our own ethics at work.
Ultimately, we may also have to assess whether our work is a moral fit. Is this the type of organization or job that is a good fit for you? Is this the industry you want to be part of?
I like to think about work as a “moral laboratory.” At its best, it provides opportunities for you to learn and grow in your job, and become your better self.
So. . .
maybe it’s truly not so much what you say or think. . .
WHAT SHOW YOU
(ethically speaking)
Mary always, gives me, like so many others, the most essential of Moments:
It doesn’t have to be
the blue iris, it could be
weeds in a vacant lot, or a few
small stones; just
pay attention, then patch
a few words together and don’t try
to make them elaborate, this isn’t
a contest but the doorway
into thanks, and a silence in which
another voice may speak.
~ Mary Oliver ~
So here’s the thing about
Moments
We wait for just the right ones
so we’ll never miss them
And in the waiting
We miss them the most
So make sure you look both ways
And especially straight ahead
before stepping out
in the multi-lane traffic
of your life
or you’ll have a moment
that won’t miss you
When it comes to
M O M E N T S
. . .take one
It’s really east to spell:
L O V E
but do you really speak its
L A N G U A G E (S). . .
Gery Karantzas, Ph.D., is currently a professor and director of the Science of Adult Relationships (SoAR) Laboratory in the School of Psychology at Deakin University. He is also a couples therapist and was the former national convener of the Australian Psychological Society Psychology of Relationships Interest Group. He just recently pulled back the curtain, once again, on the Language(s) of Love
Love languages—the concept coined by Baptist pastor Gary Chapman some 30 years ago—has taken the relationships world by storm. It’s often the “go-to” topic on first dates, and, for those in relationships, love languages are said to provide deep, meaningful, and reliable insights into how relationships function. Putting love languages into action is believed to increase relationship happiness.
The concept clearly has appeal. At last count, 20 million copies have been sold worldwide of Chapman’s 1992 book The 5 Love Languages: The Secret to Love That Lasts. The book has been translated into 49 languages.
There is only one catch. There is little evidence to support the idea that love languages are “a thing,” or that love languages do much of anything to help improve relationships.
There is only one catch. There is little evidence to support the idea that love languages are “a thing,” or that love languages do much of anything to help improve relationships.
According to Chapman, there are five love languages. Each of these love languages is a way to communicate your love to your romantic partner.
In his role as a Baptist pastor, Chapman had been counselling couples for years. It was through his observations of couples that the idea of love languages was born.
He believed love languages were an intuitive and simple way to teach couples about how to tune into each other’s ways of expressing love. And so, he began running seminars for husbands and wives, and the popularity of his seminars grew.
The five love languages are:
Chapman suggests that people typically use all love languages, but that most people tend to rely on one love language most of the time. This is referred to as a person’s primary love language.
According to Chapman, people are more satisfied in their relationships when both partners match when it comes to their primary love language. However, people experience less satisfaction in their relationships when both partners do not share the same primary love language.
Another important aspect of the love languages concept is that relationships are likely to deliver the greatest satisfaction when a person can understand their partner’s love language, and act in ways that “speak to” their partner’s language. In essence, this idea is about tuning in to what a partner wants.
This is an idea that has existed across many models and theories about how relationships function well. That is, responding to a partner in a way that meets their needs and wants makes a person feel understood, validated, and cared for.
Despite the popularity of the theory of love languages, only a handful of studies have been conducted and reported over the past 30 years. Research is largely inconclusive, although the balance sways more toward refuting rather than endorsing the love languages concept.
Let’s start with how love languages are assessed. In popular culture, the Love Language QuizTM is an online questionnaire that people can complete to find out about their love languages. Despite millions of individuals having taken the quiz (according to 5lovelanguages.com), there are no published findings as to the reliability and validity of the measure.
Researchers have developed their own version of the love languages survey, but the findings did not meet the statistical thresholds to suggest the survey adequately captured the five love languages. Also, their findings did not support the idea that there are five love languages.
Furthermore, a qualitative study, in which researchers coded the written responses of undergraduate students to questions about how they express love, suggested there may be six love languages. However, the researchers reported difficulty agreeing on how some of the students’ responses neatly fitted into Chapman’s love languages, particularly in the categories of “words of affirmation” and “quality time.”
Next, let’s turn to research testing a core premise of the love language theory: that couples with matching love languages experience greater satisfaction than those who do not. Evidence for this premise is very mixed.
Three studies, including one that used Chapman’s Love Language Quiz, have found that couples with matching love languages were no more satisfied than couples who were mismatched.
However, a more recent study found that partners with matching love languages experienced greater relationship and sexual satisfaction than partners with mismatched love languages. This research also found that men who reported greater empathy and perspective taking had a love language that better matched the language of their partner.
Finally, what does the research say about whether having a better understanding of your partner’s love language is linked to higher relationship satisfaction? Only two studies have investigated this question. Both found that knowing your partner’s primary love language did predict relationship satisfaction in the present or into the future.
So, as you can see, not only is there very little research investigating love languages, but the research to date doesn’t strengthen belief in the powerful properties of love languages.
COULD IT BE
THAT THE GREATEST WAY TO SAY,
“I LOVE YOU”
is still the way you
SHOW IT
and not the way you
s p e a k
i t. . . ?
Only Time Will Tell By JJ Heller, David Heller and Andy Gullahorn
There’s not enough paper in this world There’s not enough ink to write it down No melody is sweet enough No metaphor is deep enough To describe the treasure I have found
I keep trying to tell you how I feel But I always come up short How beautiful you are to me But there aren’t enough words I keep trying to write a love song But it’s hard to say it well Love is a story that only time will tell
It’s one thing to say “for better or worse” And another when you find out what that means So much happens over time Some dreams come true and some will die How do you describe that kind of thing
I keep trying to tell you how I feel But I always come up short How beautiful you are to me But there aren’t enough words I keep trying to write a love song But it’s hard to say it well Love is a story that only time will tell
I’ve searched libraries And dictionaries Studied poets Still all I know is
I keep trying to tell you how I feel But I always come up short How beautiful you are to me But there aren’t enough words I keep trying to write a love song But it’s hard to say it well Love is a story that only time will tell Love is a story that only time will tell
PRETTY POWERFUL, STUFFS, huh, but not quite as powerful as the LOVE that’s shown here. J J Heller, is an artist I’ve loved for a long time because the music that she and her husband, Dave create often create something in us, or at least shines a light on what’s been created and now needs some special noticing.
J J goes on to share, even more personally:
This video gets me every single time.
When we’re young we make vows imagining an easy and wonderful future. We say “for better or worse” even though we don’t know what lies ahead. We promise to be faithful, supportive and true no matter what.
Making these promises is indeed an act of love, but living out this love in hospitals, worse-case diagnoses and late-night bouts with pain.. that’s a love on another level. A deeper, expanded love.
With that said, this beautiful video is dedicated to those fighting through intense physical challenges, and to those who love them fiercely and relentlessly.
A huge thank you to this brave couple who has allowed us to share part of their story with the world in hopes it will bring healing and encouragement.
And another giant thank you to Joy Prouty for capturing this sacred footage, both of their labor and delivery several years ago, and also of the recovery from a double mastectomy mere weeks ago.
And thanks to Dave Heller and Andy Gullahorn for writing this beautiful song with me.
Love is a story that only time will tell. 🧡
Just one Question:
WHAT
OF
YOUR
L O V E. . . ?