Isolde Posted November 25, 2008 Posted November 25, 2008 This isn't exactly a "whining that romance and chivalry is dead" post. I was just thinking lately about how different everyone's experiences of relationships are. For example, say two people get divorced. One of them (usually the man, for whatever reason) starts dating someone else within a few months. The other might not date anyone for years and years. Some people are apt to have boyfriends/girlfriends all throughout high school and college, sometimes even 5-7 different ones, and other people remain single through most of their teens/twenties. I tend to hear two different assessments of romance in today's crazy modern world: 1. Date around, meet as many people as you possibly can in every possible way, and pursue relationships with those you find compatible. 2. You'll know it when you find it. True romance is rare; it's worth waiting for, it has nothing to do with the "dating ritual," it just happens and then you will just know it. Actually, I'd feel better if 2) was true because then I wouldn't have to analyze anything anymore. Discuss: do you think true romance is actually something exceedingly rare, and those who date a lot are settling in one way or another for less than that kind of love?
shadowplay Posted November 25, 2008 Posted November 25, 2008 Yes, I think true romance is rare...if you mean the kind of intense passion you see depicted in old movies and books. I've only felt that spark for a small handful of the several thousand people I've ever met in my life....so what sort of odds are those? And what's the chance those people will feel the same spark back? While compatibility has some merit, too often it's a rationalization for settling. Two people can be compatible with no spark.
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 Yes, I think true romance is rare...if you mean the kind of intense passion you see depicted in old movies and books. I've only felt that spark for a small handful of the several thousand people I've ever met in my life....so what sort of odds are those? And what's the chance those people will feel the same spark back? While compatibility has some merit, too often it's a rationalization for settling. Two people can be compatible with no spark. YES, YES, YES to what you said about compatible with no spark. I know exactly what you mean. I'm not sure that I was really talking about the love rituals in old novels, like Jane Austen and such. It's just in older times, people expressed it differently, and portrayed love as something rare and absolute, and I'm questioning whether that's maybe actually TRUE.
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 I just feel like the whole thing has become diluted in our society due to the hectic pace of life and the increasingly disposable artificial nature of things (the downside of "progress").
redfathom Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 By comparisson, I don't think it's rare, but you should expect something extraordinary. Which might seem like the same thing. Don't base what romance should be on fanciful books and movie, because you will be disappointed. They are dramatised. I am happily married (for the most part) but when I watch them I feel like my relationship is just blah! The funny thing is when you have a relationship with too much passion, it's considered to be a "red flag"! HAHA, you just can't win. By all means, love at first sight is a huge red flag.
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 Well over the top passion could be a red flag, but sometimes a relationship starts that way and ends up more balanced, sometimes it starts out balanced and later becomes more passionate. There are different types of passion too, it's not always crazy like "I'm-going-to-jump-off-a-cliff-if-you-dont-love-me". However I think it's important that people expect something remarkable and beautiful, because all too often they've stopped thinking of relationships as those things.
bayouboi Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 This isn't exactly a "whining that romance and chivalry is dead" post. I was just thinking lately about how different everyone's experiences of relationships are. For example, say two people get divorced. One of them (usually the man, for whatever reason) couldn't read past this part, but it's possible there are valid points that follow /shrug
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 couldn't read past this part, but it's possible there are valid points that follow /shrug I was not saying that it is bad or good to start dating people soon after a divorce, I was making an observation based on what little I've seen in people around me. Irrelevant to my actual post anyways
movingonandon Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 This isn't exactly a "whining that romance and chivalry is dead" post. I was just thinking lately about how different everyone's experiences of relationships are. For example, say two people get divorced. One of them (usually the man, for whatever reason) starts dating someone else within a few months. The other might not date anyone for years and years. Some people are apt to have boyfriends/girlfriends all throughout high school and college, sometimes even 5-7 different ones, and other people remain single through most of their teens/twenties. I tend to hear two different assessments of romance in today's crazy modern world: 1. Date around, meet as many people as you possibly can in every possible way, and pursue relationships with those you find compatible. 2. You'll know it when you find it. True romance is rare; it's worth waiting for, it has nothing to do with the "dating ritual," it just happens and then you will just know it. Actually, I'd feel better if 2) was true because then I wouldn't have to analyze anything anymore. Discuss: do you think true romance is actually something exceedingly rare, and those who date a lot are settling in one way or another for less than that kind of love? I think that the idea of the crazy passionate romance is one of the most destructive ideas leading to a lof of unhappines to a lot of people (mostly women). Why? Think for a second what this belief says: it says "I am powerless over my feelings, it is up to PURE CHANCE to make me run into somebody that will fulfil all my emotional and all other types of needs. I don't need to do anything, I just need to wait long enough for this to happen." Um... yeah... And even if you do actually bump into such a connection by chance, what happens in 5 years, eh? "Oh, what happened to us. Something is lost. The spark is lot. I guess this wasn't my true and passionate romantic love after all, wah-wah-wah". My philosophy is exactly the opposite: I know that I can have a great and passionate relationship with any woman with whom i'm compatible, as long as both of us share the commitment to the relationship. Basically, all relationships take work. Just waiting around for that 'perfect romance' teaches us anything but learning to put that work into relationships and dealing with common relaitonship problems. I have spoken
movingonandon Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 By comparisson, I don't think it's rare, but you should expect something extraordinary. Which might seem like the same thing. Don't base what romance should be on fanciful books and movie, because you will be disappointed. They are dramatised. I am happily married (for the most part) but when I watch them I feel like my relationship is just blah! The funny thing is when you have a relationship with too much passion, it's considered to be a "red flag"! HAHA, you just can't win. By all means, love at first sight is a huge red flag. Also, let's not forget that in poems/books/movies where such type of romance is depicted, we have only 3 outcomes (and I challenge somebody to find evidence of the contrary): 1) One of the partners dies 2) Cruel circumstances separate them forever 3) They get married at the VERY END of the book/movie. The happily ever after part is never in the books - literally As somebody said: "It is much easier to die for the woman you love than to live with her" :lmao:
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 I think that the idea of the crazy passionate romance is one of the most destructive ideas leading to a lof of unhappines to a lot of people (mostly women). Why? Think for a second what this belief says: it says "I am powerless over my feelings, it is up to PURE CHANCE to make me run into somebody that will fulfil all my emotional and all other types of needs. I don't need to do anything, I just need to wait long enough for this to happen." Um... yeah... And even if you do actually bump into such a connection by chance, what happens in 5 years, eh? "Oh, what happened to us. Something is lost. The spark is lot. I guess this wasn't my true and passionate romantic love after all, wah-wah-wah". My philosophy is exactly the opposite: I know that I can have a great and passionate relationship with any woman with whom i'm compatible, as long as both of us share the commitment to the relationship. Basically, all relationships take work. Just waiting around for that 'perfect romance' teaches us anything but learning to put that work into relationships and dealing with common relaitonship problems. I have spoken MovingOn, thank you for your insightful post. I am not saying I subscribe to point A or point B. Rather, I'm setting up the typical dilemma that women tend to face. I say women because we tend to fantasize more Passion first, compatibility second, or compatibility first, passion second? It can go both ways. I wasn't trying to advise passivity or laziness, though. It is just that increasingly, my experiences have led me to believe I can only trust in Fate.
Trialbyfire Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 Neither the numbers game or the wallflower work for me. Not only does it have to be compatibility, it has to be kick-arse chemistry! If this is the "true romance" you're talking about, it's not dead. If you're talking about "forever", well, that might be dead.
movingonandon Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 MovingOn, thank you for your insightful post. I am not saying I subscribe to point A or point B. Rather, I'm setting up the typical dilemma that women tend to face. Passion first, compatibility second, or compatibility first, passion second? It can go both ways. I wasn't trying to advise passivity or laziness, though. It is just that increasingly, my experiences have led me to believe I can only trust in Fate. Sorry, this wasn't a quasi-rant directed to the strict content to your more measured and balanced post, but a general response to a general sentiment I've encountered repeatedly Yes, it can go both ways. Just sayin' that given the logistics of dating (which starts with a series of 1-3 hours brief interactions), makes it somehow um, 'ambitious' to expect THE spark. You're in front of a person that you probably don't know at all. You don't know how would they react in a crisis, whether they'd kick a puppy etc. All you can tell is whether or not they're super hot, in which case at least let's be honest and not call it the romantic love of our life Fate ultimately has the last word, but we still have a wide margin of error / wiggle room on our own
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 Oh, I don't go in with those kinds of expectations at all. It's just discouraging that I never get a third date with a dude I like. And hence it's comforting to think that when I meet the right guy, I would just *know* it.
amaysngrace Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 I think romance is rare. It does take work to have a relationship but when it's someone you are into it doesn't seem so hard. It's something that you want to do rather than what you have to do. So I guess in that regard work is not the right word. TLC maybe?
Ariadne Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 do you think true romance is actually something exceedingly rare, and those who date a lot are settling in one way or another for less than that kind of love? I agree with this part. It's very hard to find that kind of love, and dating a lot doesn't increase the chances very much. But then, some people (maybe who haven't known true love) fall in love with every single person they date. Those relationships don't usually last very long.
johan Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 If the chemistry and timing is right, it's easy to do. Just have them over, get the right atmosphere going, cook dinner together, drink a little wine, and laugh a lot. Wham. Bam. Romance, ma'am.
amaysngrace Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 Bam. Romance. Cooking an Emeril meal are we?
CommitmentPhobe Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 I just feel like the whole thing has become diluted in our society due to the hectic pace of life and the increasingly disposable artificial nature of things (the downside of "progress"). Diluted from what?
SushiX Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 I agree with this part. It's very hard to find that kind of love, and dating a lot doesn't increase the chances very much. How are you supposed to find this true romance if you don't go out and meet a bunch of people? Sit around and maybe it'll just suddenly appear? Those who date alot are in search of true romance, I don't they're settling for anything less, they're just still searching..
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 Diluted from what? From what it used to be, I guess? Even my mom agrees. Not that everything was idyllic when she was my age, just that these days people tend to be more cynical and jaded towards romance, perhaps?
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 How are you supposed to find this true romance if you don't go out and meet a bunch of people? Sit around and maybe it'll just suddenly appear? Those who date alot are in search of true romance, I don't they're settling for anything less, they're just still searching.. Oh great now you just made me sad Sushi. All these people in search of love... and not finding it...
movingonandon Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 I think romance is rare. It does take work to have a relationship but when it's someone you are into it doesn't seem so hard. It's something that you want to do rather than what you have to do. So I guess in that regard work is not the right word. TLC maybe? Yup, this one is a judgement call. Obviously it does not have to feel like "work" (in a bad way), and it's unfair to string along someone you aren't that into. but i don't think i need to have a massive hardon and be smitten by a personality in order to have a fantastic relationhsip. after some subjectively determined treshold of sufficient attractiveness, i don't need more. i see perfectly sweet and attractive girls every day that could easily be great relationship material if we turn out to be compatible - which in my mind is the harder part. also, you can gradually become attracted to someone over a number of dates (and to dismiss this as inferior to the 'instant attraction' seems dumb to me) (even if you're in a relationship with the hottest woman/man on the planet, eventually you will get used to them, and will not find them as attractive, so you will need to work on this anyway; this goes both for physical and character traits)
Author Isolde Posted November 26, 2008 Author Posted November 26, 2008 I mean, I see plenty of guys that I can easily envision myself going on dates with, it's not like I'm turning them down because I have some vision of true love in my head. But in the meantime I'm not going on dates and thus I'm trying to decide what my plan should be so long as I'm single.
amaysngrace Posted November 26, 2008 Posted November 26, 2008 The worlds run amok. We have a breakdown in communication even though we are communicating worldwide. Everyone is distracted. People are busy chatting with the people that they know so they don't meet anybody new and if they do they won't be getting their full attention. You go online and score a date but if it doesn't work that's cool. You can view how very many more local singles are available. Right there. With the click of the button. So if it doesn't pan out with the one you're seeing this weekend no worries. They were only choice #4 anyway. Yes I agree...diluted. It's so far off of where it once was that it's become impersonal. Convenient. And at the same time so very inconvenient.
Recommended Posts