This is a discussion that some friends and I have had, for which no one seemed to have a solid answer. Should love be that "feeling" -- that passionate, thought-consuming, consistently affectionate, romantic, whirlwind of emotion? Or is love a caring companionship where things like passion and romance are carefully cultivated and require a conscious effort? Can it be both?
I believe that the intensity of love as a romantic feeling is an initial attraction and connection that leads to a deeper, more mature aspect of love. I do think you lose the effortless component of love over time. I think relationships evolve into comfortable, familial companionship where romance and passion become part of the work, part of the effort of maintaining the relationship's health. There should always be an element of deep caring involved, of course, but I think that when people find themselves having to work for passion, they fear it's the end of the relationship. I don't think that's true.
Like anything in life, a relationship, a marriage, takes work regardless of feelings. There is always somewhere to improve -- communication, romance, quality time, etc. -- but the foundation of it is a deeply caring friendship, and I think that's where true love lies. To me, true love is not whirlwind emotion, but a constant ally. True love isn't so much a feeling as a bond, regardless of the feelings of the moment.
I have heard that the divorce rate is now at 54%. I feel you have to earn your way out of a marriage. If a partner is adamantly no longer willing to put forth any effort into the relationship, and you have done all you can, only then does divorce become an option (except in the case of the three A's - adultery, alcoholism, and abuse). But even the three A's can be overcome, as long as there is EFFORT willing to be made (and obviously drastic and permanent change on the part of the offending partner). I think that's what it all comes down to in a relationship -- are you willing to put in the work to reap the reward?
I'm still surprised at how many people -- regardless of age -- think the basis of marriage is those "good feelings." I'm not an expert by any means, but it seems to me that relying on good feelings is like building a house on a foundation of sand.
The "good feelings" are just hormones. They wear off after 3 years.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with these "divorce rate" percentiles is that they are percentiles of all divorces, not the percent of people who have been divorced at least once. People who marry and divorce and marry again are much more likely to have multiple divorces, thereby skewing the statistic significantly. When you look at it that way, there are a bunch of fuck-ups making the rest of you look bad.
I imagine that's definitely skewing the numbers, but I do find a seemingly more casual attitude toward divorce that either wasn't as prevalent when I was growing up, or I was sheltered from the attitude as a byproduct of the values with which I was raised. It seems to me that many people are treating divorces like break-ups with boyfriends... "we just don't get along that well" or "I want something different now" or "we just don't connect." In my opinion, that's just not a good enough reason to break that bond. I truly believe the marriage vows are meant to be binding except in the specific cases I cited.
ReplyDelete[Edit and re-post for clarity.]