Rtl2 All About Love Das könnte Dir auch gefallen
Die Serie All About Love (RTLZWEI) streamen ▷ Viele weitere Serien-Episoden aus dem Genre Soap im Online Stream bei TVNOW anschauen. All About Love - Mutti Knows Best. Nach einem gründlich missglückten Heiratsantrag zieht Marie zurück zu Mama Ute. Die wiederum ist RTL2. Franzis Eltern planen ihr Leben durch. Doch dann lernt sie einen Libanesen kennen! Alle Videos dieser Sendung Nächstes Video. All About Love: Die Scripted-Reality-Reihe will die großen Gefühle ins Zentrum stellen – ob diese positiv sind, wie aufrechte Liebe und. All About Love: App ins Glück Preview - RTL2. by RTLZWEI. All About Love: Verliebt in einen Knasti Preview - RTL2. by RTLZWEI.
All About Love - Mutti Knows Best. Nach einem gründlich missglückten Heiratsantrag zieht Marie zurück zu Mama Ute. Die wiederum ist RTL2. All About Love: App ins Glück Preview - RTL2. by RTLZWEI. All About Love: Verliebt in einen Knasti Preview - RTL2. by RTLZWEI. RTL2 mit einer durchschnittlichen Bewertung von 3,6 Sternen der Besucher von heidiforlag.se Wir haben 51 Episoden von All About Love in unserem. Folgen Archiv Empfohlene Sendungen. Der Psychofan. Staffel 2, Folge 57 Di. Dabei hätte für die Ich stimme zu. Arm Aber Sexy. Staffel 2, Folge 31 Do. Fett In Love. Staffel 2, Folge 32 Di. Die Horrorfreundin. Lillys Letzter Lapdance. Verliebt In Einen Knasti. Sie bucht im Internet ein Staffel 2, Folge 21 Fr. Als Teenies please click for source sich Lara und Mike die Ehe versprochen.
Rtl2 All About Love - Der Psycho-ExDie junge rebellische Hauptschul-Referendarin Melissa 26 hat ständig Stress mit ihrem Staffel 2, Folge 61 Mi. So gut Staffel 2, Folge 67 Fr. Vicky ist mit ihrer Mutter von Herne nach München gezogen und skypt seitdem viel mit ihrem Freund Staffel 2, Folge 54 Fr. Liebeschaos Einer Gogo.
Rtl2 All About Love VideoShaka Ponk - Whole Lotta Rosie (AC/DC) - Live dans #LeDriveRTL2 RTL2 mit einer durchschnittlichen Bewertung von 3,6 Sternen der Besucher von heidiforlag.se Wir haben 51 Episoden von All About Love in unserem.
The journey of two young people going off to college from their sheltered homes and different backgrounds to face the real world of battling peer pressure and falling in love.
I saw Zenande Mfenyana and got excited to watch this movie but this movie disappointed in all levels. Africa's best actors and actresses but the worst movie.
No clear plot or theme, no clear direction. Poor coordination overall. A movie is supposed to transport you, take you on a journey of the characters, not leave one desiring for good storylines.
So many holes to the storyline. What a bore of a movie?! Sign In. Keep track of everything you watch; tell your friends. Full Cast and Crew.
Release Dates. Official Sites. Company Credits. Technical Specs. Plot Summary. Plot Keywords. Parents Guide.
External Sites. User Reviews. User Ratings. External Reviews. Metacritic Reviews. Photo Gallery. Trailers and Videos.
Crazy Credits. We want the newest things and immediately, and we feel the same about people. When we instead put in the proper time and commitment that people require, we have happier relationships and lives.
How many family members do you have? The more people that are in our network, the better opportunities we have to learn how to love.
If we spend more time with cousins, aunts, uncles, and grandparents, for example, we get more chances to see how love really works.
There are lessons for you to learn about love from them that your immediate family may never teach you. Learning from these individuals is vital to the success of your relationships.
There were a few times I felt like it had a slight agenda, but that may have just been in my head.
If you want to improve your relationships by learning what love really is all about, you need to check out this book! About Us.
Four Minute Books participates in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising commissions by linking to Amazon.
I feel like an even bigger asshole writing this all here for public viewing. Having said that, I did take something big from this book, and that was hooks' idea that we need to have a working definition of love, before love can come about in its it truest form.
I think in saying this, she articulated something that we all know intellectually, but in a way that really translates.
For this, it was worth the read. View 2 comments. Jun 26, Nathan "N. Please do read this. Make yourself better make the world better.
You can trust bell hooks. Be kind. Mar 01, Katelyn rated it really liked it Shelves: women-gender-sexuality. In writing this review, I felt the need to pose the question: What makes a feminist book?
Does it need to deal specifically with feminism, gender inequality, women, etc.? Does it simply need to avoid problematic stereotyping and other issues that contribute to the cultural perpetuation of systemic sexism?
Does it need to be written by a self-avowed feminist or inspiring woman? This book does a lot of those things, but most importantly, it is daring in its exposure of an issue that causes deep cult In writing this review, I felt the need to pose the question: What makes a feminist book?
This book does a lot of those things, but most importantly, it is daring in its exposure of an issue that causes deep cultural anxiety, perhaps because it is disproportionately attributed to women.
Love is a human issue masked as a women's issue. It is at once intensely personal and widely applicable.
Reading these chapters, organized by types of love, we see hooks's process, a format that for some reads as a self-help narrative.
For me, it provided an approach to dismantling my own misconceptions about love in my life. While hooks's ideas are not directly useful for my own situation at all times, it is easy to translate her strategies into methods that work for me.
For example, I am not a spiritual person, so praying is not something that I find useful, but she states more universally on page , "Prayer provides a space where talking cures.
This book is feminist because hooks unapologetically inhabits a subjective space. She is expected to philosophize in a way that is relatable to anyone, to a diverse audience, which is what I have identified as at the root of many criticisms I've read of this volume.
Instead, she speaks mainly about herself and her own experiences. In this way, she allows herself and her readers to claim individualized spaces.
It encourages personal exploration that happens both internally and externally. This is something that women often need to hear repeated in a society that expects them to sacrifice personal growth for the benefit of others.
Not everything in this book resonated with me. There were passages that I took issue with on a basic level. For example, I disagree strongly with her judgment of Monica Lewinsky's participation in the affair with President Clinton; I was angered by her assessment.
There were parts that felt dated, which is inevitable when reading a book 15 years after publication. Generally speaking, however, I found this book useful and powerful, and I feel stronger having read it.
View 1 comment. Mar 02, Roxana rated it liked it. I have to say I had mixed feelings about this book. I found it eye-opening at times, but other times I simply couldn't connect with it at all, and couldn't quite move past some gender generalisations that the author so passionately claims herself to stand against.
It did make me think about the meaning of love and the context of love more widely, yet I still can't agree with some of the principles on which this book is based and the idea that unless love follows certain rules e.
To me, it's just so much more complex than that, and I don't think there's any one person who holds the absolute truth about it.
This is precisely the beauty of it, the fact that our perception of love - because I honestly think it is a matter of perception - changes ever so slightly with new relationships - romantic or otherwise, and that we gain new insights each time, without ever grasping the full meaning of it.
In the end, despite the popular appeal of this book, the position adopted by the author often seemed to me rather limiting, constraining, and not something I personally agreed with.
Casually leafing through bell hooks's All About Love: New Visions a few years ago in a bookstore, I was drawn by her idea that love should be regarded as a verb, not a noun.
Traditionally, our culture thinks of love as a thing , a passive feeling of tenderness or affection that comes over us, into which we fall involuntarily, something instinctual over which we have little control.
Drawing on the work of M. Scott Peck and Erich Fromm, she defines love as an act of will: "the will to extend one's self for the purpose of nurturing one's own or another's spiritual growth.
Love is work, hooks argues, but work which can be learned : a crucial point for the masses of people in our society who feel a lack of love in their lives, but also feel powerless to change that.
The art of loving, she argues, is not taught in our society despite the many how-to courses on every aspect of sexuality , but it ought to be.
We are all taught that we should instinctively know how to love well, and that, lacking that knowledge, or having developed it imperfectly, we are stuck in a monstrous state.
Like all crafts, the art of loving is something we must learn and work at in order to do well. I connected deeply with hooks's definition of love as a verb, as generous action.
It mirrored my own experience of relationships in which people truly nurture one another, how much work that is and also how rewarding.
I also liked the way in which her definition of love explicitly excludes abusive relationships - there can be no nurturing of anyone's spiritual growth in a situation where abuse is happening.
This considerably narrows the field of relationships which can be called "loving," but I think such a narrowing is useful. So often we're exposed to the idea that abuse or neglect can coexist with love, and I like hooks's distinction between care - a precious aspect of human relationships in its own right, and one she clearly values - and the larger, mutually nourishing set of actions and feelings that make up genuine love.
Although I don't read many social theory or self-help books, the first few pages of her opening chapter were enough to convince me to buy All About Love that very day.
I had no idea, though, how much the book as a whole would challenge my thinking. When I picked it up again, I started with hooks's preface, in which she talks about our society's simultaneous obsession with and discomfort around love.
She references many books in the self-help tradition, as well as other authors writing about love.
I was feeling an intangible discomfort as I read, and I hadn't thought to examine it until I ran smack up against this passage: Yet whenever a single woman over forty brings up the topic of love, again and again the assumption, rooted in sexist thinking, is that she is "desperate" for a man.
No one thinks she is simply passionately intellectually interested in the subject matter. No one thinks she is rigorously engaged in a philosophical undertaking wherein she is endeavoring to understand the metaphysical meaning of love in everyday life.
No, she is just seen as on the road to "fatal attraction. I was made uncomfortable by references to self-help books and admissions of lovelessness, because I associate them with a traditionally feminine lack of intellectual rigor, the stuff of "chick lit" and daytime television.
Do I believe, intellectually, that the philosophical examination of love is less worthwhile than an exploration of, for example, violence?
Of course not. Do I believe that the traditionally feminine should be shunned? But so pervasive is internalized sexism, that I do apparently carry around these beliefs on a subconscious, emotional level.
Throughout my reading of the rest of hooks's book, I had to keep reminding myself of this realization, and thinking carefully about what underlay my reactions.
It was a very valuable, if uncomfortable, exercise. All About Love 's chapter on honesty also forced me to think about the practice of lying in new ways.
I've become pretty inured to to idea of telling a plethora of "little white lies" throughout the day; I think introverts in our society are especially encouraged to do this.
I construct a falsely outgoing self, which I present in most casual interactions throughout the day. Instead of declining invitations on the grounds that I need more alone time the truth , I sometimes invent "other plans" that keep me from accepting, out of a fear of hurting my friends' feelings.
As hooks points out, we expect all people to do this to some extent: Lies are told about the most insignificant aspects of daily life.
When many of us are asked basic questions, like How are you today? Much of the lying people do in everyday life is done either to avoid conflict or to spare someone's feelings.
Hence, if you are asked to come to dinner with someone whom you do not particularly like, you do not tell the truth or simply decline, you make up a story.
You tell a lie. In such a situation it should be appropriate to simply decline if stating one's reasons for declining might unnecessarily hurt someone.
I was initially hostile to the idea that this kind of everyday lying is harmful to our ability to love.
I do believe, despite the general truth that "honesty is the best policy," that there are times when lying is the most appropriate and generous - yes, loving - course of action.
But when I press myself, I realize that these times are in the tiny minority, and mostly involve death-bed scenarios.
And when I think about the most satisfying, validating interactions I've had, even with strangers, they've often involved the choice to be honest rather than invent an excuse.
I'm specifically remembering a time when I was traveling alone in England, and was asked out on a date by a stranger. I knew I didn't want to go, and a series of excuses immediately presented themselves: I had a ticket to a sold-out show, I was really tired, I was going to meet friends, my boyfriend was the jealous type, and so on.
But instead, I responded simply, just as hooks suggests: I smiled and said "Oh, no thank you. But thanks for asking.
He wasn't compelled to ask "Well, what about tomorrow night? We parted on friendly terms, and I could enjoy my solitary wanderings with a sense of empowerment, rather than guilt.
Memories like this make me wonder how lying has come to seem like the only option to so many people, myself included.
And, as hooks points out, the detrimental effects of widespread duplicity are much more serious than this. Messages in the mass media and popular culture particularly TV, movies, and "romance guildes" like The Rules teach us that women are expected to be manipulative and deceitful in order to "snare Mr.
Right," whereas men are expected to be untruthful in their denial of a need for love and affection. Such behavior becomes normalized: just part of the mass of small, "natural" lies we're expected to tell in the course of a day.
Of course such socialization impedes peoples' ability to connect honestly with one another. Seen in this larger context, and despite the fact that my primary relationships are already very open, honest and loving, hooks has convinced me to take a long, hard look at my impulses toward dishonesty for the sake of ease or social comfort.
Not every chapter in All About Love was as mind-blowing for me as the first few. There were places I disagreed with her, and a few distracting generalizations that made me wonder about the research backing her up.
She claims, for example, that "most" American adults did not have genuine love modeled for them in their families of origin, but instead received a dysfunctional combination of care and abuse or neglect which was apparently the case in her own family.
Having grown up one of the lucky ones, raised by parents who modeled constructive, truly loving practices for me and taught me self-love, boundary-setting, and the need to take responsibility for my actions, I wonder what the statistics are on how many people get what I had as a kid.
I'm ready to believe hooks's claim that a majority go without, but since I would have guessed differently, I'd like to see some figures confirming it.
Nevertheless, All About Love was thoughtful, well-written, and provocative. It gave me a solid framework in which to think about the act of loving, and even changed my behavior, which I can't say about many books, even fantastic ones.
I'm sure I'll be returning to hooks's thoughts on love frequently in the future. May 11, El rated it it was ok Shelves: library-borrow , cultural-studies-and-other , hear-me-roar-and-gender.
What did I just read? That's okay, because I am in support of people growing and changing and becoming, whatever, their most authentic selves.
But I was surprised by this book. I would say the first half or more really did work for me. She touched on topics that made sense to me.
What especially worked for me was a section on Commitment that talked about the workplace, and since I work in a place that doesn't not necessarily foster a loving environment all the time, which I recognize more now that I've removed myself from some of the larger negativeness, I found what she had to say about love in the workplace especially profound.
She recognizes that most people think a loving workplace is a thing of myths, but I do believe it can exist, but that so many people are wrapped up in gossip and not showing their true selves, so it's next to impossible for any love to grow out of that.
I don't think she necessarily expects people to hold hands and sing Kumbayah all day long - she understands that with love comes work, hard work, it doesn't come easily.
And that's the true basis of this book. There's this idea that any true love is a magical thing that comes along, and then our lives are perfect and no work is required.
Many people are dissatisfied in perfectly good relationships because they realize they still have to work, and so it must not be true love, right?
Wrong, and that's what hooks is trying to help readers understand. But then at some point, there was a shift in tone, and suddenly we're reading about religion and angels.
Yes, angels. And the Bible. I understand that there is feminism in Christianity, or so some claim, but I'm not sure I buy it because, well, that ain't my shtick.
But to each their own. This book was published in but the references to popular culture or politics are much more related to the s. While most of the book involved talk of spirituality, once it crossed over into talking about straightforward religion, I started to feel my eyes glazing over.
Spirituality is one thing, as far as I'm concerned, because it can be whatever it means to each individual. But religion is usually of an organized establishment, and my experience means something very specific to me, so love in that context is basically the same thing I've heard most of my life from everyone else - that to be religious means to LOVE and then those same people turned around and beat their children after church because of the smallest infraction.
That's what I witnessed, though thankfully not in my own household. In any case. There's this attitude that love and the ability to love others comes from that very specific source of spirituality, which I disagree with.
I am not religious, I do not believe in the same things a lot of other people believe in, but I am capable of love, I am capable of compassion, I am capable of having morals, all without believe in God.
I believe in being a good person, which transcends religion - or at least it should. Still, I can't deny that hooks had some decent things to say throughout most of the book, even if it was a bit self-help-y, even though hooks very specifically discussed how different her book was from other self-help books.
She allows there's an issue in most self-help books about gender stereotypes and how they perpetuate those issues in our society, that idea that men are from Mars and that women are from Venus, and all that jazz.
Those ideas or problematic in numerous ways, and I feel this was hooks' way of addressing the previous literature.
Bottom line: What worked for me here really worked for me; what didn't work for me really didn't work for me.
I would not recommend this book to anyone reading bell hooks for the first time - this is probably not the place to start, unless all of what I wrote about above regarding Christianity is something you're interested in.
In any case, it's a short book, easy to read. It's not very complicated, but if you're looking for answers, there aren't that many here beyond stop thinking true love is all about rainbows and lollipops.
You're going to fall in love and you're going to have to work at it. Get over the idea that relationships are easy-peasy.
But she also said some good things about what it means to be in a loving relationship, and I think all of that is work reading.
So maybe just read the first four or five chapters? Yeah, maybe do that. Stop reading when she starts talking about angels.
Unless that is your thing. I really love bell hooks, but this may be closer to a 2. It started off well, with some clear and illuminating statements, but I found it inconsistent.
The final third of the book seemed to resonate. I found myself experiencing polarised emotions - underlining whole sections, and then laughing at others.
I imagine that I would have thoroughly enjoyed this more if it had been my first reading of anything hooks, early in my teenage years.
Jun 25, Kathy rated it it was amazing Recommended to Kathy by: Found it myself. Shelves: sociology-cultures , philosophy.
On this, the fourth anniversary, and beginning of the fifth year of the Iraq war, while thousands marched on the Pentagon in protest, I finished reading "all about love: New Visions by bell hooks, a truly visionary and life-changing read, which should be required reading for this entire nation.
I was initially skeptical of her thesis that society needs to adapt a universal definition of love, but as I continued reading, the idea struck a chord of recognition within me that I certainly hope will On this, the fourth anniversary, and beginning of the fifth year of the Iraq war, while thousands marched on the Pentagon in protest, I finished reading "all about love: New Visions by bell hooks, a truly visionary and life-changing read, which should be required reading for this entire nation.
I was initially skeptical of her thesis that society needs to adapt a universal definition of love, but as I continued reading, the idea struck a chord of recognition within me that I certainly hope will continue to resonate for the rest of my days on this spinning orb.
She proposes first, that love is not a feeling at all. Love is an action that we choose to take. Additionally, her theory is that love must contain a number of components including: care, affection, trust, respect, open honest communication, and commitment.
Love, by definition, may never include abuse If it does not contain ALL of those components, then it ain't love.
Many who read this will come to the painful realization as I did that they do not truly know how to love; and through this suffering will also recognize that, even so, they continue to maintain faith in love.
Having had a father like mine provided all too convenient of an excuse for blaming men for my anger and disappointment.
She discusses how society has come to accept and embrace these ideas that murder compassion, promote poverty, and support warfare.
This discourse speaks to the space within the heart that so many of us had come to think would never be filled. My conclusion, love It is all that really matters.
Mar 01, Emily rated it liked it Shelves: our-shared-shelf. Though I gave this book three stars, it was a very important read for me.
I learned a lot from bell hooks about choosing love, about re-vitalizing our dedication to honesty, accountability, and hope. I would recommend this text to everyone.
I am unabl Though I gave this book three stars, it was a very important read for me. I am unable to rate this book higher for a few reasons: 1 As an agnostic with atheistic tendencies who was raised Catholic, hooks concentrates on too many Christian and biblical expressions of faith for my taste.
These made me hold the book at arm's-length for portions that I believe I otherwise would have been able to embrace very readily. My desire for less discussions of God is not a judgment, but a personal preference.
My reservation with this particular text is that, in my opinion, she represents too many generalizations as fact without citations.
As a recovering codependent who has spent many years steadily improving in therapy, I have come to realize that there are definitely some boundaries that individuals have every right to set for themselves and the interactions they have with others, even if those boundaries render the true openness hooks advocates for to be somewhat compromised.