To that flight - known to all - that butterflies occasionally perform inside of us we call love. You don't know what I'm going to tell you, that strong and exciting feeling that makes us beautiful and joyful overnight. But it is also a social construct, that we are innocuous in the bowels since its creation, radically conditioning our vision of the relaciones.Por that, the representation that
each of us makes of the things of love (love, relationships, bonds, sex, fidelity, etc.). It's never totally particular, because we belong to a society and we always build our own intimate reality under a collective conception of the world. Yes, love is political. In this part of the world, patriarchal, heteronormative, capitalist and consumerist.

In general, we still shape the realm of affectivity based on the corrupt beliefs that the myth of romantic love has brought us. Unfortunately, this rigid pattern regulates our way of loving and designs from the top down our experience of love experience. What is the expectation to have in a relationship, the succession of steps to take in a relationship, the list of behaviors to be accepted or rejected, the distribution of roles based on gender or the number of people who can love at the same time.

I will not take the trouble to make a detailed description of romantic love, as in the collective imaginary we have fairly integrated the narrative of the idyllic loves between princes and princesses. I will simply say that the chance to find half orange leaves in the hands of the good or bad chance of our well-being, deactivating the strength that each one has to transform his or her reality or nullifying the responsibility of his or her own life. It establishes the relationship with a couple as the only axis of the affective universe, and recognizes as second degree the bonds with friends or family, somehow disregarding other networks of love.

In such a bounded space there is not much room for love. Because it necessarily has to be free love, because it's made of emotions and feelings, which you can't regulate very much or promise in the long run. The concept of free love cannot, therefore, be an object, but it is appropriate to define it well, since our relationship with freedom is so dysfunctional that it often retains characteristics inappropriate to the freedom of quality.

Free love is not just lying down with more people, the dehumanized accumulation of affections, or compulsive consumption of love. What makes us freer is not the number of lovers, but the knowledge to build qualitatively different relationships. With whom we want, as we want and as we want. But being aware of the needs of oneself and lovers, and establishing care and mutual respect at the basis of all relationships with people.

This, of course, requires a clear awareness of affective responsibility. Or what's the same, the ability to mature manage our individual freedom. I mean, when we get the opportunity and the excitement of a relationship, we have the courage to ask ourselves questions: if I really want to get in, if it makes sense for me, if I can sustain a relationship, or if I can give the care and the treatment that you have to give to a person. If we want to change the paradigm and lead our sexual affective life with other coordinates, let us not forget: Free to live, free to love. There are no chains. Because we want, because we want.