My personal opinion is that being "in love" in the romantic sense is a pleasurable form of insanity. Full of brain-chemically induced dizzying highs and terrifying lows, it generally lasts for betweeen six months and two years of a relationship. And for the most part, it feels really good. But it's not the same thing as the kind of love that keeps people together for ten (or more) years. Chemical insanity exists, as far as I can tell, to give two people a reason to stay together for that 6 months to 2 years and have the chance to develop a more lasting relationship.
That said, and now with reference to the book you read, I guess that people who pursue the "being in love" feeling without any intention of settling down with someone could be described as immature. I think it's a phase everyone wants to go through at some point, though, and it has its place. It seems like the authors presuppose that everyone's eventual goal is to pair off and settle down, which is not necessarily true.
Sort of missing the point. If I had meant being "in love" I would have said it -- I make pretty much the same distinction you did, definition-wise.
The author is actually pretty good at not assuming that everyone wants to settle down, considering that it's a book addressed specifically towards people who wonder why they're still single. And her admittedly unscientific methods (she mostly conducted surveys/spoke to people) indicate that a good number of people prefer being in a long-term committed relationship to the singles life.
I guess the question might be better put "Is love itself immature, or do people of our generation pursue love for immature reasons?"
You don't have to answer that, I'm just thinking out loud. :)
Your present, should you choose to accept, is something recycled. See how environmentally friendly I am? Listen to this, it is about an artic explorer who has a nifty british accent as he tells some fucking inspiring stories:
It's OK, you can both be cool together. Or apart, whatever you like. I know you can both be cool, because winter is coming, and winter makes everyone cooler, at least in this hemisphere.
A winner is me, in any case, because I get to listen. Thanks to both of you!
That's not quite disconnecting from safety nets, now is it? But I applaud your continuous attempts to lure me to the dark side of the force. Or it might be the light side, I'm not really sure.
Do I get to live in a cave and teach bats to juggle while I study the water table if I come? Then I might almost be persuaded. Almost.
Comments 6
My personal opinion is that being "in love" in the romantic sense is a pleasurable form of insanity. Full of brain-chemically induced dizzying highs and terrifying lows, it generally lasts for betweeen six months and two years of a relationship. And for the most part, it feels really good. But it's not the same thing as the kind of love that keeps people together for ten (or more) years. Chemical insanity exists, as far as I can tell, to give two people a reason to stay together for that 6 months to 2 years and have the chance to develop a more lasting relationship.
That said, and now with reference to the book you read, I guess that people who pursue the "being in love" feeling without any intention of settling down with someone could be described as immature. I think it's a phase everyone wants to go through at some point, though, and it has its place. It seems like the authors presuppose that everyone's eventual goal is to pair off and settle down, which is not necessarily true.
Just my 2cents.
Reply
The author is actually pretty good at not assuming that everyone wants to settle down, considering that it's a book addressed specifically towards people who wonder why they're still single. And her admittedly unscientific methods (she mostly conducted surveys/spoke to people) indicate that a good number of people prefer being in a long-term committed relationship to the singles life.
I guess the question might be better put "Is love itself immature, or do people of our generation pursue love for immature reasons?"
You don't have to answer that, I'm just thinking out loud. :)
Reply
Your present, should you choose to accept, is something recycled. See how environmentally friendly I am? Listen to this, it is about an artic explorer who has a nifty british accent as he tells some fucking inspiring stories:
http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail254.html
I'll try to send a real b-day present in the x-mas package. I love you.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
A winner is me, in any case, because I get to listen. Thanks to both of you!
Reply
Reply
Do I get to live in a cave and teach bats to juggle while I study the water table if I come? Then I might almost be persuaded. Almost.
Reply
Leave a comment