can you imagine still loving your boyfriend when they're old, grey, and wrinkled?

Apr 26, 2004 19:27

so... this guy i know sent me this FWD message... and in it was this story about someone recalling their youth in the 50's... and it was like a sitcom would be described... and at the end was something about fixing things that are broken rather than throwing them away... one of the examples was marriage... and i can't agree with this... because i ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

lifeisacabernet April 27 2004, 06:41:13 UTC
This is the second post about marriage I have read in as many days. Spring must be here, and with it comes wedding season.

Your view on marriage is rather unique- probably the only child of divorced parents who admits before they even marry that divorce would be an option if things changed too drastically. But if that's an option you'd consider, why not marry young? Because your mother forbids it?

Everyone, even the most constant of people change over time, and I don't think it's realistic to expect to be "in love" from 20-30 years of age until death. In fact, if you really want to get technical about things, it's impossible: they pinpointed the chemical that produces the sensation of being "in love" (with all the stomach butterflies, etc.) in the mind, and the body ceases to produce it after 3 years in a relationship. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying. Biological fact is biological fact.

That being said, I don't think it's unrealistic to marry- if your love comes from a deep respect instead of a chemical reaction. I don't get butterflies in my stomach every time Scott walks in the room, but I couldn't think of a better person to share my life and start a family with. When people go into a marriage expecting to have that "in love" sensation for the rest of thier lives, they are not only setting themselves up for disappointment, but they are cheating themselves out of truly appreciating the person they are with.

Those first few years, you're blinded by your rose-colored glasses. Everything is dreams and possibilities. A marriage that lasts, is a partnership that is absolutely content and happy with exactly what they have, in both life and eachother.

Just my thoughts.

Reply

webmistress_liz April 28 2004, 15:47:04 UTC
i think that being in love transcends the butterflies in the stomach feeling... it's beyond a chemical reaction... it involves respect, trust, and quite simply being each other's best friend... it's not just that tingly feeling all the time... that's just the biological side of it... then again, you and i have very different ideas of love... you're very pragmatic and i'm a bit more spiritual... so alas, we're bound to disagree...

Reply

lifeisacabernet April 29 2004, 06:53:05 UTC
It's ok, you still have nice bewbs.

Reply

lifeisacabernet May 1 2004, 18:40:37 UTC
The fact that you are comparing real love with a biological process is proof that you have never actually felt its touch. Anyone who has been truly, madly, and deeply in love will tell you that you are wrong. Yes, there is an initial chemical reaction...however, you said the word mind instead of brain. Now if the mind is metaphysical, and the "chemical" is released in the mind, than that must be metaphysical as well.
eric

Reply

lifeisacabernet May 2 2004, 07:13:35 UTC
No, it just means *I* work in science and *you* read way too much into symantics.

I wouldn't interpret my interest in science as never having been in love- I just seek the reasons as to why one would behave so irrationally. In fact, I'd argue that, since you and Liz seem to be under the influence of this reaction, you are offended at the prospect of it being so simple as chemistry. I have been there, and I understand it.

But I think it's not only rude, but arrogant and naive to say that I have never experienced a love (like, say, yours?) because I am committed to reason.

Reply

i'm responding because he almost never reads this... webmistress_liz May 2 2004, 22:26:38 UTC
it isn't his lack of scientific knowledge, it's you being a cynic... he's fully aware that there is a chemical reaction in a person's brain that causes all the tingly lovey feelings... in fact, when i brought it up a few years ago in conversation, he already knew that... he's not offended, he just thinks you're full of shit to say that people are not in love after three years... yes, the chemical reaction changes, but the lovey emotional squishy business isn't all chemistry... and being in love isn't always irrational... being in love when you're a teenager tends to be, though... a 16-year-old brain is still a 16-year-old brain, no matter how mature a person claims to be... there is still the power of chemistry at work in there... and i still support the theory that the examples of love a person is shown in their formative years affect the way they view love as they grow older... one might argue that it is not your interest in science that makes you see love as you do, but the lack of stable relationships in your youth... psychology AND chemistry... love is a chemical reaction, but it is also a learned behavior... a person does not always display the learned behavior, but it happens more often than not... the way they view love is always a reaction to what they learned...

in the end, i am still one of those people who believes that love is beyond the physical and enters into the spiritual... again, this is how i was raised, and these were the examples of love i was shown...

and i know you're probably just trying to start problems, but don't be arrogant and naive yourself by assuming things... by your logic, you are reacting the way you are because you're offended at the prospect that you've never experienced the sort of love i believe exists...

there are things science can't explain...

Reply

Re: i'm responding because he almost never reads this... lifeisacabernet May 3 2004, 06:58:23 UTC
I'm not trying to start problems here at all. Eric's comment to me was entirely presumptious, I responded in what I believe to be an appropriate manner.
I have no problems with, nor do I pass any sort of judgement on, your relationship and your feelings for one another. When I state scientific facts, I do not mean to say that you and Eric, specifically, will not be in love in three years: I mean to say that it's a possibility in ALL relationships and that it is unrealistic to assume that those sensations will last forever. I HOPE that you stay as madly in love as you are now for the rest of your lives. I am your friend, and as such I don't resent your happiness. But haven't you noticed that you're *always* in love with your boyfriend, each one more than the next? And your relationships don't tend to extend furher than two years, do they?
I'm not being cynical, I'm being realistic. Maybe your mom & stepdad are still as "in love" as they were the day they married- but didn't you confess that they're both drug users? That does tend to alter one's emotions a bit, doesn't it? I can't say that sets an entirely positive example for you, either. I wouldn't want to try to live up to that standard without the aid of chemical enhancements.

And I don't appreciate having my personal life brought up in a public forum. I think it's ridiculous that you need to make personal, presumptive attacks on me and my beliefs so that you can prove your love to the world. Aside from being in poor taste, it's also not a rebuttal to the scientific facts I had stated. This is why I hate arguments with liberal arts majors- "You just don't understand" isn't even a valid argument, but that's how these things always end.

Reply

Re: i'm responding because he almost never reads this... webmistress_liz May 3 2004, 09:29:39 UTC
i don't really care what my friends think of our relationship... if i did, we wouldn't have started a relationship in the first place... the issue isn't really what i have or don't have or what i've had in the past... whether anyone thinks we'll succeed or fail matters little to me... i have nothing to prove to anyone... i grew past that a long time ago... i'm talking on a broader scale...

as far as my past relationships, i'm not more and more in love as time goes on... it was actually quite a varying scale... first one i didn't love, second one was the stupid 'i love you forever' of high school, third i didn't love, fourth i loved, and fifth i loved, but with a little bit of coldness held with both of them... when the feeling wore off, it was time to go... shit, with some of them the feeling never really took hold... yes, eric and i have the strongest relationship i've ever had... but even you can attest that he's the best guy i've ever been with... not even from that lovey 'oh you're the bestest' standpoint, but he's just a much better human being all around... i would certainly hope i valued him more than i valued the other miscreants i've dated...

my mother was never a drug user while i've been on this earth... she smoked pot and took diet pills in high school, but past that, she didn't do anything... she thinks it's pointless... my stepfather is a different story... but their influence didn't occur until i was 15... prior to that, i had my stepmother and father, who are under the influence of no drugs and lead quite the happy life... that came about when i was 4, so prior to that i had my grandparents... this isn't even taking into account the number of happily married aunts and uncles i have...

nobody is attacking you or even arguing for that matter, but if that is how you see debates over the internet, than i can't force you to believe otherwise... nobody said "you just don't understand," they're just not agreeing with you... this isn't the forum for you to trump yourself up and smack down those you see as less than yourself... there is no right or wrong here... nobody is going to 'win' this discussion...

Reply

Re: i'm responding because he almost never reads this... webmistress_liz May 4 2004, 11:55:37 UTC
to add to this, looking at my birth parents' marriage could also be an example for me... they got married too young because they wanted out of their houses, and it backfired... sure, the world got me outta the deal, but it's still a model of what not to do in life... the trick is being smart enough to learn from both the good and the bad... most people aren't very smart...

most of my relationships died before they hit the one year mark... i've only had one relationship that made it past one year, and that was jim, and that was lizzy being more into the sex life than the love life... whenever i thought about leaving, i thought to myself "but i'll never have sex this good again!" but again, it's the change people go through as they age... puberty doesn't level out until your early 20's...

and the 16 year old thing wasn't against you... half the people i know have had the 'love of their life' occur at 16... in fact, i gave away almost nothing of your personal life in my responses...

Reply


Leave a comment

Up