Importance of Romantic Love

[jj33]

Well then you know. Among "old families" so to speak there is historically a lot of marrying to cement power bases now referred to by the rest of us as inbreeding. I am told that in those circles, it is almost expected that one or both parties will have their own private lives. Not that all of them subscribe to that but I am told it is not unusual. It may be dying out I dont know that is not something of which I have first hand knowledge.

[OWoman]

While the Hmong live a very different life than we do in a more modern society, many people marry for reasons other than romantic love. And that being the case it makes sense that if great romance wasnt the basis for the marriage, then even if they feel a more intense love for someone else, it may not be a reason to leave the marriage.

 

To paraphrase Tina Turner Whats Love Got to Do with It? Not alot in some cases. That really hit home with me. xMM's marriage to his wife was not based upon romance it was based upon status and yes they liked each other well enough at some point in time. But romance and romantic love as we discuss it was not part of the equation.

 

So all the squabbling that goes on here about whether the MP loved the AP and whether he/she would leave if they really loved the AP may be based on a flawed premise in many many cases.

 

I don't know anything about the Hmong, but I've studied enough anthropology to know that romantic love as the basis for M is not only a "western" invention, it is also a very recent and bourgeois invention. For the upper classes, and the poor (and I'm talking really poor - not the cushioned poverty of those with welfare grants and sheltered housing to fall back on) M is often a business transaction, based more on the partner's ability to provide (a good bloodline, political connections, access to resources, etc) than on hollywood notions of luuuurve. M has historically been based on ensuring known paternity of offspring for inheritance purposes, conferring "legitimacy" and preventing the squandering of resources on the spawn of another. Middle class notions of love are a thin disguise for what is essentially an economic arrangement.

[OWoman]

So the BW's who spend an inordinate amount of time castigating the OW due to (their own) bitterness at (their own) H's cheating (on them) - you know, the ones who by all (of their own) accounts have the market cornered on virtue, priopriety and innocence - they got what they deserved as well?

 

Wait... on the other hand, I see what you mean.

 

:laugh: :laugh:

 

Nice to see your brain is as sharp as ever, OB!

[jj33]

Thank you OWoman and Open Book for expressing my point so eloquently

[redcurls]

Sid is right. NONE of us can speak for what someone ELSE felt years ago. That's a ludicrous premise to think we CAN.

 

People in affairs have a tendency to rewrite their history, projecting the feelings they have NOW over the course of their entire past relationship history because they tend to forget how they felt 20 years ago (or refuse to acknowledge it). Hell, I've done it myself.

 

People change. They see things differently at 45 than they did at 25. They'll take their 45 year old 'wisdom' and apply it to their behavior 20 years ago. While they may be interpreting things differently now, the fact remains that most are simply rewriting history using the way they see things NOW.

 

Based on my own experience, and from what I have been reading here and in other places, BSs are best at rewriting history (as in "our marriage was perfect until evil OW appeared from under a rock." etc.) but never mind that.

 

I don't rewrite anything. I'm very clear-eyed and very aware of reality. I'm basing my opinions on facts alone. I never had any illusions as to the level of commitment that exists between xMM and his W. I know, without a shadow of a doubt, that he is very devoted to her, as she is to him. But true love and romance? No.if you knew the FACTS you would think so too.

 

 

My point is: to some people, honor, status, convenience, extended family's opinions, obligation, fear, etc. Are a much stronger glue than romantic love and passion, and that's ok. I'm not judging or criticizing them. But eventually, sometimes after decades, there will be a realization that some place within them was never quite whole, and then there will be regrets. Or not.

[jj33]

Its interesting to me that individuals have an interest in condemning the social mores of other cultures (or subcultures as the case may be) as being flawed and taking offense at the idea that not every subculture of every culture views marriage in the same way that they do.

 

Seems to me that this is a defense mechanism. I mean each spouse is a better arbiter of their own marriage than anonymous posters on a forum but surely years of anthropoligcal research and documented history cant be discounted simply because its not the way one lives ones life or believes others should live theirs?

 

Lets face it. It wasnt so long ago (relatively speaking) that the laws that treated women as a man's property were taken off the books. So this idea that the modern western view of marriage, for lack of a better generalization, is the only view is clearly incorrect. Otherwise it looks like we are back to the Scopes trials. Science be d*mned.

Edited January 31, 2011 by jj33

[OWoman]

Its interesting to me that individuals have an interest in condemning the social mores of other cultures (or subcultures as the case may be) as being flawed and taking offense at the idea that not every subculture of every culture views marriage in the same way that they do.

 

People who discount the societal practices elsewhere or insist that are the only ones worth considering only demonstrate their own ignorance, IMO. But perhaps you're right, and it is merely insecurity. It's a lot easier to dismiss a different view as "Third World" - as if the Third World is some bucket of backward depravity, not the result of centuries of dedicated exploitation by the First World - rather than stopping for a moment to consider whether or not there might be something of value in their perspective.

[PeachyPink]

After knowing the OP'er I almost see this as a personal attack, I could be wrong...Yawn?

I do not know you or the OP, so I don't know why you saw my reply as a personal attack. Sorry you did not take my post at it's face value. Sorry also that you thought my post was boring.

[PeachyPink]

People who discount the societal practices elsewhere or insist that are the only ones worth considering only demonstrate their own ignorance, IMO. But perhaps you're right, and it is merely insecurity. It's a lot easier to dismiss a different view as "Third World" - as if the Third World is some bucket of backward depravity, not the result of centuries of dedicated exploitation by the First World - rather than stopping for a moment to consider whether or not there might be something of value in their perspective.

One can honor the similarities, but IMO it is equally as ignorant to ignore the differences.

[OWoman]

One can honor the similarities, but IMO it is equally as ignorant to ignore the differences.

 

sure - but if all but a very few Ms (middle-class "western" Ms of the last half-century or so) all have something in common, then it's pretty obvious that the dominant trend is the one that most Ms share, and the exception is the one shared by the few (the middle-class "western" Ms of the last half-century or so) - even if most of the posters here fit into that "exception" category. Trying to pretend that their situation is the norm, when in fact it is a recent minority trend is both culturally and historically ignorant.

 

ETA - if one sees more commonality between a situation under discussion (such as JJ's xMM's M) and the dominant trend than the minority trend, then ignoring the commonalities and insisting that it ought to comply with the minority trend simply because that is what any particular poster feels comfortable with is an exercise in futility.

Edited January 31, 2011 by OWoman

[donnamaybe]

Why is it so upsetting to be romantic love?

You found upset in that post? Wow.

[donnamaybe]

Bottom line, as regards A's - QUIT LYING AND SNEAKING AROUND! How f'ing hard is that?!

 

You want two screw two people or more? JUST SAY IT!

 

All this talk about "social mores" and "cultures" is BS. Lying is wrong. End of story.

[jj33]

Bottom line, as regards A's - QUIT LYING AND SNEAKING AROUND! How f'ing hard is that?!

 

You want two screw two people or more? JUST SAY IT!

 

All this talk about "social mores" and "cultures" is BS. Lying is wrong. End of story.

 

A prime example of a cultural bias. In some cultures or sub cultures coming out and saying it would be the height of rudeness and disrespect. Doing quietly and discreetly is considered to be respectful.

[donnamaybe]

A prime example of a cultural bias. In some cultures or sub cultures coming out and saying it would be the height of rudeness and disrespect. Doing quietly and discreetly is considered to be respectful.

So there exists a culture that says lying is good?

 

Um, yeah. Sounds good...

 

I would have to say that WHATEVER culture it is, if ONE party in the situation does NOT want to be lied to, then THAT should be the standard.

[OWoman]

A prime example of a cultural bias. In some cultures or sub cultures coming out and saying it would be the height of rudeness and disrespect. Doing quietly and discreetly is considered to be respectful.

 

I must second this, as I lived in just such a place.

[Spark1111]

Well, just as there are all sorts of affairs, there are all sorts of marriages too!

 

Marriage is defined by the two people in it, regardless of where they may live on the planet.

 

For many, it is a contractual partnership, and a physical indiscretion outside of it may be quickly overlooked as long as the status quo is not disturbed.

 

Doubt they post here at LS.

 

However, I believe the pain of betrayal is directly linked to how romantically you do/did love your partner; your expectations of fidelity were very high, and you trusted them to remain faithful to you.

 

And love has everything to do with that, IMO.

[donnamaybe]

Well, just as there are all sorts of affairs, there are all sorts of marriages too!

 

Marriage is defined by the two people in it, regardless of where they may live on the planet.

EXACTLY!

 

Some geographic location does NOT get to choose whether someone has to accept being lied to and deceived, though some would dearly like it to be so.

[Quiet Storm]

I will use parts of a response I made in another thread to express my views on this.

 

I think most men feel romantically about their wives when they marry.

 

But...

 

Many men go into marriage fully aware that the "in love" feelings they have for their wives are going to fade. They don't expect or need to be madly in love with their wives forever. They chose her for a life partner, and usually they honor that commitment for life.

 

I think many men expect that the "passtionate in love" feelings will morph into a comfortable, "know you like the back of my hand" kind of love. Dependable, nurturing, loving and good. A side-by-side partnership. A mutual love for family and friends. A shared past full of good times, struggles and funny things that happened. That is what marriage is, and the loss of passion does not nullify that. These men usually love their wives, they love their families and are content. They do not want a new marriage, their current one is fine. "Not in love with her anymore" is not grounds for divorce in most men's minds, because it is an expected result after being with someone for so many years.

 

Most men cheat because they want excitement, new sex, the rushing, passionate feelings. Not because they want a new wife. They know that if they were to marry OW, those powerful, urgent feelings would fade, just like with the wife.

 

I think many women have unrealistic expectations of "romantic" love. Too many of us believe that the strong, urgent feelings of romance last forever. Some of us become very unfulfilled when they don't. Regrettably, some women (and a few men) break up their families to chase something that is going to fade anyway.

 

Women often define a relationship as "romantic love" when it includes lots of attention, caring and words of affirmation. Men often view "romantic love" as strong feelings based on physical attraction. Romance to them is the hoops they have to jump through when they are in "pursuit". Men have figured out that when they fulfill a woman's needs for romance (attention and words) that women are more willing to give themselves physically.

 

Men do not expect these feelings to last indefinitely, because much of them are a result of the pursuit. Most men know that the passionate, urgent feelings of early love are not sustainable.

 

When men marry, do you think men envision ripping their wife's clothes off in fifty years when she's old and gray? No. They envision him & his wife sitting on a porch watching their grandkids playing in the yard.

 

If men were cultured to act on their romantic feelings, men would abandon their families every five years or so when the passion wears off to start a new family. The world be full of single older women that got dumped when their H's lost the passion and ran off to follow their "feelings".

 

Marriage exists because of commitment, not romance. It often begins with romance, though. Commitment is an action of love.

 

Romantic passion is just the reaction of chemicals in our brain. That's it. And men are often logical enough to realize this, but many women are not and end up in serious emotional pain.

 

Many OW feel a certain "specialness" because MM feel passionate about them and not the wife, but they don't realize that their "love" is on it's own natural course, and the passion will fade eventually. Yes, the love and the romance you share is special RIGHT NOW. But that passion has an expiration date. And will MM still want an OW when it progresses to that comfortable wifey kind of love?

 

From reading here, you can often see the progression of the fading chemicals. In the early stages of a relationship, the feelings are so intense and important. OW is very important to MM because she inspires such strong feelings in him. But remember...these feelings are not coming from OM heart (OMG!) but his BRAIN. Yes, the two people have bonded, and it feels real special to them in that moment. But it is not all that special in the sense that 1) our bodies are designed to do this so we will procreate and 2) it is not sustainable. The passion can last a long time in the affair because of the time constraints and sneakiness. But eventually, MM begin to pull away when the feelings lose intensity. When that happens, the risks don't outweigh the benefits of the A anymore. Without those chemically generated feelings, OW often becomes an annoyance, a liability. Someone to appease & let down easy so that she doesn't cause problems in his real life.

 

Romantic love is all about brain chemicals. Once those fade, the comforable, caring kind of love replaces it. Since MM already have this role in their lives filled by the wife, the OW often becomes useless to him when those chemicals fade. He will often keep her around and happily use up what she is willing to offer, but she will be easily discarded if he is put in the position to choose between OW and the marriage.

[jj33]

So there exists a culture that says lying is good?

 

Um, yeah. Sounds good...

 

I would have to say that WHATEVER culture it is, if ONE party in the situation does NOT want to be lied to, then THAT should be the standard.

 

Donna you have missed the point entirely. Noone is saying that anyone should have to be lied to if they dont want to be. Only that some people prefer it that way or expect it to be that way. Clearly you dont. The idea that a marriage is an economic arrangement is not so odd even in the USA. Why else would people talk about a "good catch".

 

The fact that marriage is often an economic arrangement doesnt mean someone is signing up to be lied to, it only shows that there are all types of marriages. Not just marriages based upon romance.

 

People marry for different reasons, people stay married for different reasons and people stray for different reasons. There is no one size fits all answer.

[donnamaybe]

Donna you have missed the point entirely. Noone is saying that anyone should have to be lied to if they dont want to be. Only that some people prefer it that way or expect it to be that way. Clearly you dont. The idea that a marriage is an economic arrangement is not so odd even in the USA. Why else would people talk about a "good catch".

 

The fact that marriage is often an economic arrangement doesnt mean someone is signing up to be lied to, it only shows that there are all types of marriages. Not just marriages based upon romance.

 

People marry for different reasons, people stay married for different reasons and people stray for different reasons. There is no one size fits all answer.

But when a M IS an economic arrangement, it is already KNOWN at the onset what it's about. No lying going on.

 

However, when one party in a M IS being lied to (regardless the rationalizations about it all) who does NOT want to be lied to and DOES want a monogomous M, then would you not agree that the person doing the sneaking around should man (or woman) up and be honest and let their spouse choose how THEY get to live THEIR life? Wouldn't YOU want that from your partner? Basic common courtesy and honesty, regardless where you live?

[greengoddess]

Actually, I do know, not from xMM (he never talks about their R) but I know enough, and am certain that I'm correct. And, there is no question about my feelings, they are very clear.

 

some people are ice cold to each other in public but red hot in the bedroom. How could you possibly know especially if he never talks about their relationship?

[jlola]

I will use parts of a response I made in another thread to express my views on this.

 

I think most men feel romantically about their wives when they marry.

 

But...

 

Many men go into marriage fully aware that the "in love" feelings they have for their wives are going to fade. They don't expect or need to be madly in love with their wives forever. They chose her for a life partner, and usually they honor that commitment for life.

 

I think many men expect that the "passtionate in love" feelings will morph into a comfortable, "know you like the back of my hand" kind of love. Dependable, nurturing, loving and good. A side-by-side partnership. A mutual love for family and friends. A shared past full of good times, struggles and funny things that happened. That is what marriage is, and the loss of passion does not nullify that. These men usually love their wives, they love their families and are content. They do not want a new marriage, their current one is fine. "Not in love with her anymore" is not grounds for divorce in most men's minds, because it is an expected result after being with someone for so many years.

 

Most men cheat because they want excitement, new sex, the rushing, passionate feelings. Not because they want a new wife. They know that if they were to marry OW, those powerful, urgent feelings would fade, just like with the wife.

 

I think many women have unrealistic expectations of "romantic" love. Too many of us believe that the strong, urgent feelings of romance last forever. Some of us become very unfulfilled when they don't. Regrettably, some women (and a few men) break up their families to chase something that is going to fade anyway.

 

Women often define a relationship as "romantic love" when it includes lots of attention, caring and words of affirmation. Men often view "romantic love" as strong feelings based on physical attraction. Romance to them is the hoops they have to jump through when they are in "pursuit". Men have figured out that when they fulfill a woman's needs for romance (attention and words) that women are more willing to give themselves physically.

 

Men do not expect these feelings to last indefinitely, because much of them are a result of the pursuit. Most men know that the passionate, urgent feelings of early love are not sustainable.

 

When men marry, do you think men envision ripping their wife's clothes off in fifty years when she's old and gray? No. They envision him & his wife sitting on a porch watching their grandkids playing in the yard.

 

If men were cultured to act on their romantic feelings, men would abandon their families every five years or so when the passion wears off to start a new family. The world be full of single older women that got dumped when their H's lost the passion and ran off to follow their "feelings".

 

Marriage exists because of commitment, not romance. It often begins with romance, though. Commitment is an action of love.

 

Romantic passion is just the reaction of chemicals in our brain. That's it. And men are often logical enough to realize this, but many women are not and end up in serious emotional pain.

 

Many OW feel a certain "specialness" because MM feel passionate about them and not the wife, but they don't realize that their "love" is on it's own natural course, and the passion will fade eventually. Yes, the love and the romance you share is special RIGHT NOW. But that passion has an expiration date. And will MM still want an OW when it progresses to that comfortable wifey kind of love?

 

From reading here, you can often see the progression of the fading chemicals. In the early stages of a relationship, the feelings are so intense and important. OW is very important to MM because she inspires such strong feelings in him. But remember...these feelings are not coming from OM heart (OMG!) but his BRAIN. Yes, the two people have bonded, and it feels real special to them in that moment. But it is not all that special in the sense that 1) our bodies are designed to do this so we will procreate and 2) it is not sustainable. The passion can last a long time in the affair because of the time constraints and sneakiness. But eventually, MM begin to pull away when the feelings lose intensity. When that happens, the risks don't outweigh the benefits of the A anymore. Without those chemically generated feelings, OW often becomes an annoyance, a liability. Someone to appease & let down easy so that she doesn't cause problems in his real life.

 

Romantic love is all about brain chemicals. Once those fade, the comforable, caring kind of love replaces it. Since MM already have this role in their lives filled by the wife, the OW often becomes useless to him when those chemicals fade. He will often keep her around and happily use up what she is willing to offer, but she will be easily discarded if he is put in the position to choose between OW and the marriage.

 

 

Finally,someone who understands the stages of love. So many people think Romantic love last forever. They do not understand it is a stage. Most people going through affars are comparing the Romantic sdtage they are in wuth lover, to The comfort stage they are in with the wife. Does not mean you cannot visit romance once in awhile after chemicals have faded. But simply your love will feel different.

 

If people read books on "The Science of love" rather than using movies and poeme to understand love. There would be less divorce and dissapointment.

 

The #1 reason for marriage failure. Unrealistic expectations.

[desertIslandCactus]

Ownership of other humans is against the law in the enlightened world.

 

And if you consider abusive Ms to be respectful , then give me outlaw status any day.

 

I have yet to find an OW who doesn't place a blame on the W as OW's excuse for 'rescuing' the H ..

 

The marriage is closed to outsiders, and their bodies do belong to each other.

[half_ofa_heart]

I will use parts of a response I made in another thread to express my views on this.

 

I think most men feel romantically about their wives when they marry.

 

But...

 

Many men go into marriage fully aware that the "in love" feelings they have for their wives are going to fade. They don't expect or need to be madly in love with their wives forever. They chose her for a life partner, and usually they honor that commitment for life.

 

I think many men expect that the "passtionate in love" feelings will morph into a comfortable, "know you like the back of my hand" kind of love. Dependable, nurturing, loving and good. A side-by-side partnership. A mutual love for family and friends. A shared past full of good times, struggles and funny things that happened. That is what marriage is, and the loss of passion does not nullify that. These men usually love their wives, they love their families and are content. They do not want a new marriage, their current one is fine. "Not in love with her anymore" is not grounds for divorce in most men's minds, because it is an expected result after being with someone for so many years.

 

Most men cheat because they want excitement, new sex, the rushing, passionate feelings. Not because they want a new wife. They know that if they were to marry OW, those powerful, urgent feelings would fade, just like with the wife.

 

I think many women have unrealistic expectations of "romantic" love. Too many of us believe that the strong, urgent feelings of romance last forever. Some of us become very unfulfilled when they don't. Regrettably, some women (and a few men) break up their families to chase something that is going to fade anyway.

 

Women often define a relationship as "romantic love" when it includes lots of attention, caring and words of affirmation. Men often view "romantic love" as strong feelings based on physical attraction. Romance to them is the hoops they have to jump through when they are in "pursuit". Men have figured out that when they fulfill a woman's needs for romance (attention and words) that women are more willing to give themselves physically.

 

Men do not expect these feelings to last indefinitely, because much of them are a result of the pursuit. Most men know that the passionate, urgent feelings of early love are not sustainable.

 

When men marry, do you think men envision ripping their wife's clothes off in fifty years when she's old and gray? No. They envision him & his wife sitting on a porch watching their grandkids playing in the yard.

 

If men were cultured to act on their romantic feelings, men would abandon their families every five years or so when the passion wears off to start a new family. The world be full of single older women that got dumped when their H's lost the passion and ran off to follow their "feelings".

 

Marriage exists because of commitment, not romance. It often begins with romance, though. Commitment is an action of love.

 

Romantic passion is just the reaction of chemicals in our brain. That's it. And men are often logical enough to realize this, but many women are not and end up in serious emotional pain.

 

Many OW feel a certain "specialness" because MM feel passionate about them and not the wife, but they don't realize that their "love" is on it's own natural course, and the passion will fade eventually. Yes, the love and the romance you share is special RIGHT NOW. But that passion has an expiration date. And will MM still want an OW when it progresses to that comfortable wifey kind of love?

 

From reading here, you can often see the progression of the fading chemicals. In the early stages of a relationship, the feelings are so intense and important. OW is very important to MM because she inspires such strong feelings in him. But remember...these feelings are not coming from OM heart (OMG!) but his BRAIN. Yes, the two people have bonded, and it feels real special to them in that moment. But it is not all that special in the sense that 1) our bodies are designed to do this so we will procreate and 2) it is not sustainable. The passion can last a long time in the affair because of the time constraints and sneakiness. But eventually, MM begin to pull away when the feelings lose intensity. When that happens, the risks don't outweigh the benefits of the A anymore. Without those chemically generated feelings, OW often becomes an annoyance, a liability. Someone to appease & let down easy so that she doesn't cause problems in his real life.

 

Romantic love is all about brain chemicals. Once those fade, the comforable, caring kind of love replaces it. Since MM already have this role in their lives filled by the wife, the OW often becomes useless to him when those chemicals fade. He will often keep her around and happily use up what she is willing to offer, but she will be easily discarded if he is put in the position to choose between OW and the marriage.

 

 

Can I print this and hand it out to every woman in the world???? This seems to be spot on. It describes every stage so eloquently.

[East7]

QuietStorm...wow...just WOW

 

I love your vision of love and marriage. If there were many people thinking the way you do, there would be much less affairs and divorces. But I guess we have to get a couple of slaps before understanding a couple of things. Good that you try to learn from other people's experiences.