Labels, Relationships and Marriage

[Mune]

DISCLAIMER: This was written by me ages ago- So... That explains the date at the bottom. I am welcome to criticism, or questioning of points. No direct attacks were intended.

In modern society, the regular idea is that once you 'fall in love' with someone, you engage in a battle of wits between what your 'head wants', and what your 'heart wants'. The idea is that a persons heart will obviously want to be with the respective person that they love spending time with, in a labelled form. The integrity of the idea is based on the public. Should it be just 'the two'. There would be no need for the whole issue of going through the 'asking out process'.

Basically put, there are more than enough psychological factors to asking a person to 'go out' with you. Even if one's heart desires another, they still have to overcome the principles behind 'peer pressure, potential rejection, contingency-plans (that is, planning what to do if something happens they don't expect), a set line to say for example. More examples of addition of stress to the situation include what to do physically, wondering what they'll think of you, wondering if they'll be around their peers.

I recall a friend, and I will not name him for obvious reasons, as if I did it would be nothing but gossip- But he walked over to a girl he had had a crush on for some time, and handed her a box of chocolates. She, in turn, nervously took the box, with her friends around, and they both walked in opposite directions. Almost nothing happened.

Now, if I were to resimulate the entire series of events, with the lack of people around, I'm willing to bet that there would of been a completely different outcome. Good or bad, I don't know. But there would of been a different outcome.

I've conversed with many about the idea of a relationship and I just don't feel the need to be in one. I've a girl who I love dearly with all my heart, and I don't feel the need that there needs to be any labels involved in order for it to be any more official than it already is. The way I see it- Relationships are a form of ownership, not active ownership, subconscious ownership. The idea that being in a relationship- If something 'bad' happens. You can call it 'cheating'. Also, I don't understand, and I never will understand the principle of 'dumping' someone. That in itself is a pretty draconian way of putting it. The idea that you've suddenly fallen out of love with someone, and the label must now be broken, but saying that you've *dumped* them.

Well for a start, if one truly loves another, then they will overcome any arguments or fights. In fact, it pretty much has the same aspects as the immune system. With no arguments, no proverbial pathogens, the bond will be weak. It needs to be tested. Attacked. "Let's see just how strong these bonds are."

Valentines day. There's a joke for you. A day in which a couple are expected to show a higher-than-average love towards eachother. Things such as kissing in public become socially acceptable, just because of words given to a day. This is nonsense. Not only is it once again, another advertising campaign designed to scam gullible couples out of their money, but it also has been given a mascot. Oh yes. Cupid. The naked baby with a weapon of war. How cute. I'm no judge, but I certainly believe that if you 'look forward' to Valentines day for an enhanced amount of portrayed love from your other half, then something isn't right. There shouldn't be any specific days where particularly high standards of love are shown. It should be a constant. A bond. I won't talk much of this because I'm probably getting seen as cynical. Which would be a compliment, but nonetheless, as long as these points are being taken no-less-seriously, I don't mind.

One last point which I wish to arise is 'marriage' which, I really do just find a joke. I do respect those who were brought up with marriages all around them, and have led 'long loving marriages of 25 years'. But I do NOT respect marriage restricted things.

My instant thought from this is, that I am certainly against those who wish to wait until they get married to do anything sexual. Depending on their reasoning. If their case revolves around "I'm not doing it because it says in the bible."- Then that is made void and ridiculous in my mind, and ridicule it I shall. If they have valid reasoning, such as they do not want to risk getting pregnant, then I'll take it slightly more seriously, though saying that, getting married does certainly not show being ready for a baby. Neither does age. It's something that one and their partner must decide through heavy thinking. Bringing another life into this world, but anyway- I'm not here to tell you how to live. I'm just expressing points of view.

But I digress, from pregnancy back to the original point- Marriage. Marriage is a nice little day for the girl, and a nice little day for the guy to impress the girl, but other than that, I see it as a shallow, hollow, event that should not need to go forward in the first place. It seems that modernly, all that people care about is making things official. Since when does putting two metallic rings on your fingers count as an official life-time psychological bond being made.

And don't even get me started on divorce.

/End entry- 10:52 pm - 14/12/2010

[Icu]

If you don't want to use these terms, then don't.

If you fall in love with a girl, and spend the rest of your life with her etc. then people will say you're in a relationship. You don't like that term? Want to use another one? Fine! That's totally not the point. It's just a word, as are all of these evil "labels," that people use to communicate ideas. You seem so afraid that everyone is going to make all kinds of nasty assumptions about you the second you start letting them use "labels" on you. You're making these words mean something more than they do by talking about them, and acting like they do. Most people couldn't care less.

If I enjoy Valentines day, for instance, with my girlfriend it doesn't mean that I wouldn't have enjoyed it without the name attached, or that I'm getting scammed, or any of that. It's a fun, trivial little holiday. You make it out to be a symptom of some horrible disease. It can help people remember how much they love the other person. You think they shouldn't need a day to do that? I agree, but then Valentines day isn't even the problem is it?

You're human just like anyone else, and we all (pretty much) experience love just as you do. I don't think you should care how others describe it or what they chose to do with it, and if someone tries to force their views onto you (which I think happens less than you think), then don't let them.

[Mune]

Originally Posted by Icu

If you don't want to use these terms, then don't.

If you fall in love with a girl, and spend the rest of your life with her etc. then people will say you're in a relationship. You don't like that term? Want to use another one? Fine! That's totally not the point. It's just a word, as are all of these evil "labels," that people use to communicate ideas. You seem so afraid that everyone is going to make all kinds of nasty assumptions about you the second you start letting them use "labels" on you. You're making these words mean something more than they do by talking about them, and acting like they do. Most people couldn't care less.

If I enjoy Valentines day, for instance, with my girlfriend it doesn't mean that I wouldn't have enjoyed it without the name attached, or that I'm getting scammed, or any of that. It's a fun, trivial little holiday. You make it out to be a symptom of some horrible disease. It can help people remember how much they love the other person. You think they shouldn't need a day to do that? I agree, but then Valentines day isn't even the problem is it?

You're human just like anyone else, and we all (pretty much) experience love just as you do. I don't think you should care how others describe it or what they chose to do with it, and if someone tries to force their views onto you (which I think happens less than you think), then don't let them.

Well said. Although I do disagree with the second paragraph. For a few reasons.

If I enjoy Valentines day, for instance, with my girlfriend it doesn't mean that I wouldn't have enjoyed it without the name attached, or that I'm getting scammed, or any of that.

For the idea behind Valentines day- I wasn't arguing a point of it's label. I was arguing it's point in general. Forgive the false idea that was given across. But on the note- If you don't believe you're getting scammed- This is why Valentines day is such an effective business time.

It's a fun, trivial little holiday. You make it out to be a symptom of some horrible disease. It can help people remember how much they love the other person. You think they shouldn't need a day to do that?

It is not fun from my point of view. It's agonising, although somewhat pleasing to watch other humans put all of their money in the sink for an over-rated day.

I do not think a day is needed, and I'm aware you agree, so that's that.

And- One point from the first paragraph;

You're making these words mean something more than they do by talking about them, and acting like they do. Most people couldn't care less.

Well, I disagree. If I hug, and kiss someone who I love- The question "Is she your girlfriend?" instantly arises. It seems to me that, in this race, any sign of affection constitutes a very defined relation. Then again- I'm only speaking from the UKs point of view. I'm sure in countries like Italy- Hugs and kisses among friends are very much common.

[ahoragi]

But I digress, from pregnancy back to the original point- Marriage. Marriage is a nice little day for the girl, and a nice little day for the guy to impress the girl, but other than that, I see it as a shallow, hollow, event that should not need to go forward in the first place. It seems that modernly, all that people care about is making things official. Since when does putting two metallic rings on your fingers count as an official life-time psychological bond being made.

I agree with this. I have been with my gf for 10 years and not doing the marriage thing. Nowadays it seems like "Marriage" is just a contract that can be torn up and discarded just like a piece of paper on a desk and is too often used for scamming money or monetary gains.

[Eltu]

Well, Mune, I could have said exactly the same things myself - I agree with everything you said to 100%.

[Human No More]

I've spent a long time thinking about this... the need for a lifemate is something extremely important to almost every person, and people are biologically programmed to seek it out.
I honestly do need someone... but I can understand the idea of wanting someone but not having a name for it. Really though, having a part of yourself as being with another is an important thing, it's a deep emotional connection.
I completely agree about the difficulties of finding someone though... I've tried every way really - from waiting and hoping, to honestly looking, but the truth is, many people are not at the same stage, not looking for the same thing, or are already with someone. Finding someone like-minded seems impossible , and even the ways I've tried end up badly. People didn't evolve to be alone, and too many people have this idea that being with anyone is preferable, of love as something it is not, and that just makes looking for a true lifemate even harder.

Things like marriage, I don't like the concept that much - if people want to choose to have one, then they can and should, but there becomes this sort of expectation, as if to say 'you don't love each other unless you have some piece of paper' - it implies that people do not really trust each other, and need to be coerced and held to each other, when if there was honestly trust, they wouldn't need that. While I'm certainly not opposed to the concept, the only way I would ever consider it is purely for financial reasons, and then just quietly, minimally, because it isn't a big deal and shouldn't be required. Sometimes people want whatever approval, often simple social pressure, which is a very bad thing, but it's the reason for many. People who genuinely care about each other can be happy with trust.

If people want to enjoy valentines day as it should be - of appreciation for each other, then they can and should - but the fact remains that is is hugely commercialised and companies try to create an expectation - that you 'must' buy them something if you love them. IT's the same as marriage, that it becomes expected and many people do it for acceptance, when if the love is there, it isn't necessary.

Icu is right about 'labels' (actually a term I despise in that context, because all they are is a description) - it doesn't matter what you call it, or even if you want to, it still remains the same thing. Equally, terms can apply to something that is not the same thing, but the need for someone is a deep biological and psychological need.

[Raiden]

Heh, I was expecting Mune to post something like this...

I agree; marriage and valentine's day are foolish, contrived things that people have invented to make marriages legally official and to make a profit, respectively. Some people enjoy it, but if I gave a damn and had someone else, I would be reluctant to engage in such events.

Although I tend to despise love in general, these are one of the main reasons why; it has gone from an amazing complex of psychological bonding to a corrupted miasma of price tags and legal papers.

[Aaron]

Originally Posted by Raiden

... it has gone from an amazing complex of psychological bonding to a corrupted miasma of price tags and legal papers.

Happily married though I am, it is rather impossible to argue with that. Sadly.

[Icu]

Whoa there guys..... hold on.

I think love has nothing to do with any of what you just said inherently. What some people chose to DO with love might, but that has nothing to do with what love actually IS.

No body is holding a gun to your head and forcing these legal papers and price tags down your throat. If you find someone who you love and you both don't want any part of those things, then avoid them! Some people may not avoid them, but you are not "some people". Do what you want with love, there's nothing in the definition that makes any of these things necessary.

This is why I don't buy much into the "labels" hate. Because no matter what anyway says you can always chose to act however you want. Then who cares what "they" try to call you. It has no direct bearing on your actions or beliefs, and thus it only matters if you chose to let it matter to you.

And besides, not too long ago, in what apparently were the good ole days of love, people were basically told who to love/marry (and to some extent today), as determined by social status, wealth, education, etc. I don't think you can look at love throughout history and say that it's collapsing or anything.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by Icu

Whoa there guys..... hold on.

I think love has nothing to do with any of what you just said inherently. What some people chose to DO with love might, but that has nothing to do with what love actually IS.

No body is holding a gun to your head and forcing these legal papers and price tags down your throat. If you find someone who you love and you both don't want any part of those things, then avoid them! Some people may not avoid them, but you are not "some people". Do what you want with love, there's nothing in the definition that makes any of these things necessary.

This is why I don't buy much into the "labels" hate. Because no matter what anyway says you can always chose to act however you want. Then who cares what "they" try to call you. It has no direct bearing on your actions or beliefs, and thus it only matters if you chose to let it matter to you.

And besides, not too long ago, in what apparently were the good ole days of love, people were basically told who to love/marry (and to some extent today), as determined by social status, wealth, education, etc. I don't think you can look at love throughout history and say that it's collapsing or anything.

No, it isn't collapsing, but that was the start of what we have now, and I doubt it will get better.

Although I agree with what you said, I can't help but feel that nearly all of it has been tainted by what I mentioned. I would have to get very far away from modern societies to find what I'm thinking of.

[Human No More]

There's still an expectation by many people, which certainly does NOT help.

[Pa'li Makto]

Personally I think it's better for a woman to only get involved in procreation with a man with whom she is married to or is about to marry. For me I think marriage would be a security thing, it seems a lot harder/ or at least less excused by society for a man to run from his wife than his girlfriend and a woman would be able to have a small safety net of the legal implications of marriage ie, child support if she is left with a baby by herself. Not to generalize men but this stuff does happen and getting into a physical relationship is a lot more risky for a woman, not including the risk of STDs.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by Pa'li Makto

Personally I think it's better for a woman to only get involved in procreation with a man with whom she is married to or is about to marry. For me I think marriage would be a security thing, it seems a lot harder/ or at least less excused by society for a man to run from his wife than his girlfriend and a woman would be able to have a small safety net of the legal implications of marriage ie, child support if she is left with a baby by herself. Not to generalize men but this stuff does happen and getting into a physical relationship is a lot more risky for a woman, not including the risk of STDs.

This is the other problem; in a world full of love defined largely by western standards, there is little room for other ways of thinking.

In my opinion, physical relations are fine as long as mutual and undistorted consent is present, since any biological complications can be managed before they occur.

However, I think you have a lot of thinking to do if you're really that afraid of desertion, or you think it's common.

It isn't, and if you really love someone enough to engage in such behavior, you should do it; it's a part of being a sentient biological entity, and there's nothing wrong with partaking in it for the purpose of pleasure; humans have been doing that for hundreds of centuries, and nothing wrong has come of it.

Furthermore, at the risk of offending you, I should point out that such...paranoia of desertion or other problems are signs of underlying psychological issues......

[Mika]

Originally Posted by Raiden

This is the other problem; in a world full of love defined largely by western standards, there is little room for other ways of thinking.

A very powerful and true statement Raiden, in my opinion!

At the root of our being, all of us long for deep intimate (not just or limited to being defined physically) emotional relationships with others. None of us can survive without these connections. And the world, the universe, histories, have provided us with an infinite ways of possibility that we as beings can find, make, have, express those relationships to meet that need. All of us know how 'lost' and 'lonely' we feel without those connections.

And yes it would seem that the vast majority of humanity, as they mature and move towards adulthood, also long for a particularly strong connection, a singularity of relationship that is percieved as a 'life-long mutuality' of 'two' being together as 'one'. The global consistent 'label' that is usually attached being defined as the union known as 'Marriage'.

In some ways the philosophical aspect of this union of two as one is the belief that this is the perfect or perfection of this human condition of longing for connection. But is it? And if it is, why does it appear that it is 'failing' or 'flailing' round the globe in today's *cough* 'modern' societies?

Unquestionably part of the answer is that from the moment we arrive here in physical form on this earth we are showered or bombarded with experiences and messages that shape and define our perceptions and expectationis of love and relationships. As Raiden notes, that are largely influenced and limited by our cultural and world orientation ... the society scripts and labels, where we live.

Even Avatar presents the ideal .. within the confines of a particular perspective.

I will not argue with the generality of mankinds longing and observable inclination towards this union with the 'one other'. But I will observe that it is equally been proven and evident, that it is impossible for any singularity of relationship to be able to provide or meet all the needs of any individual, within the confines of that relationship. In other words ... how I see the problem is that 'expectation' is the inheritent flaw within the constructs and definition of the 'label'!

And it is those 'expectations' that become the burgeoning (burden) weighing down of our expressions of this longing.

At least wise the above is the 'Intelectualized' way of looking at it?

So 'what is love'? And what is this longing for a 'Beloved' .. a 'Soul Mate', .. a 'Kindred Spirit', .. a 'Spiritual Helpmeet', .. 'A Soul Companion' and why do we feel so empty, half not whole, without it? And is that connection the one and same or only limited to the union with the one whom we seek and usually join for 'life long mutuality'. Considering presently many of the global sociatal scripts seem to focus primarily on this union (aka) 'marital' relationship model as within mostly the physical/emotional/mental perspectives. Is the 'union' with the 'one other' meant to be the 'life long mutuality' relationship as well?

Confused .. so is probably each and every one of us!

Particularily, in my opinion, because the reality is that almost none, if any, of those cultural/sociatal scripts, necessairly have any strong negative messages or reprucussions regarding the sharing of ones emotional, mental, or even spirit aspects with others outside the percieved singular relationship. Where it boils down ... is that what is labeled as and upheld with strong conventions, laws, ordiances, scripts and seen as 'Taboo' is primarily focused on the 'physical' sharing element of the union relationship! Here it seems is where 'love' is not supposed to transcend a society's perception of the 'union' with a life long partner!

Yet, back to the awakening, the question, are we meant to, is it possible to have this complete 'completeness' of heart/mind/body/spirit with only one other? Or is the life-long mutuality relationship meant to be mostly for the 'physical' connection with some degree of affinity bonds to sustain it in the emotional, mental, and even possibly the spiritual realms, but the probability of it also being the 'Soul Mate' Connection not likely? At least wise that seems to be the apparent scenario emerging out of today's 'marital' breakdown statistics.

Maybe these breakdowns, flailings, are because so many historically and presently, have married under their percieved expectations - because they had too, or were limited within ones own thinking by those socital/cultural/religious/etc. scripts. It seems clear that a large proponent of individuals whose first (or more) marriage breaks down .. seem to focus the second time around more on the 'Soul Mate' Connection, the primary longing, within the new relationship.

So is humanity ready, is it possible to find from the outset the perfect union ... one that will consist of the life-long mutuality (particulairly of the emotional/mental/spiritual realms and needs), as well as the 'One', the longed for Soul Mate.

More in particular is it possible to acutally be able to make this sustained connection while still quite 'young', relatively speaking, in maturity and age? Considering most of those whom do eventually find their perfect uinon with their 'Beloved' ... have not done so till much later in life (aka --- the second time around).

Just a thought to consider .. are any of you so certain .. you can beat the odds?





(ok ... this is a parital thought .. and I'll hve to come back and finish later.)

[applejuice]

Originally Posted by Pa'li Makto

Human beings aren't monogamous though, we're designed to further our species by having as many mates as possible, that's scientific fact so no, marriage isn't realistic at all.

There's investigation about that. It seems that sexual relation increases the release of the hormone oxytocin. Oxytocin, apparently, changes the brain behavior to allow more attachment to the partner... so, I think we are evolving towards monogamy. (At least I like to think so).

Anyway, marriage usually grants more safety to the couple. I'm not going to say that it is necessary, but in my experience, there's a point in the relationship when the marriage issue emerges and both partners agree to it, to demonstrate each other the commitment or the path each partner wants to take. It's like each other telling "I will be with you always" and it's something that emerges everyday. Marriage is not for everyone, it takes a lot of commitment.