why does romantic love take priority

[fern_77]

i don't understand why romantic love is seen as more important than platonic love. people are often expected to devote more of their time and energy to romantic relationships than platonic ones, and although friendship is important, society seems to deem romance as more so. sometimes romantic relationships work out poorly because a person in it will believe the other person spends too much time with their friends. when people are in romantic relationships, their friendships are often expected to take a backseat to that. i don't think that romance and romantic love is more important than friendship and platonic love, but lots of people do think that and i can't wrap my head around why that is

 

[Sylas]

Selfishness is one of the core universal traits of the human psyche.

Romantic love is usually far more selfish and self centered than platonic love.

Monogamy, possessiveness, jealousy, marriage and so on are all exemplifications of how romantic love is often seen as an act of sort of mutual ownership, this person now in a sense belongs to you in a manner that nobody else does. It appeals on a fundamental level to that part of the brain that's selfish.

Meanwhile, platonic relationship can (but certainly aren't always) be less selfish because there's nowhere near the same expectation of ownership or exclusivity. In most cultures friendship is perceived as a more giving and selfless form of relationship.

So, romantic relationship are generally seen as more important in society because they appeal more to the core, selfish nature of the human mind.

 

[Moonhart44]

I agree. I am a sucker for boys but i am also a sucker for friends. But as a person with friends who stopped hanging out with them the moment they got a boy, I make sure I give my …. Well i dont have friends for other reasons but to whom ever i like i try to make them feel respected and cared about over neglected cuz I’m in some boy bs.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

I have had platonic friendships, and because I lacked relationships when young I tend to value them. The fondness I feel in those relationships is still strong, but they are not channeled romantically. My spouse knows about these and trusts me. Of course, as we age, the romantic love between us has changed but it is no less important as an expression mutual care and respect.

I have a platonic relationship with a Thai nurse that I met on a COVID discussion group, and will visit in April because she wants to show me her country. My spouse sees nothing wrong here because she knows that she is the only lover that I desire.

 

[OkRad]

There are three things here....romance ( I assume you mean sex), friendship, and love. They are quite different, though they sometimes are together.

The obsession with sex really is bizarre. It's merely biochemistry, like hunger. But once hunger is sated, people don't start looking at cookbooks all day and getting all excited about eating and pretending to eat and go and watch fruit ripen in a supermarket and fondle veggies and alter their lives for the sake of pork chops, yet food is FAR more essential to human survival. Just weird.

And sex isn't even an avenue to love, though it has been touted as one.

I like to read the Greeks because they differentiate all these things and talk about them endlessly. How did two people going for cappuccino without ending up in the sack come to be termed, "Platonic?!" Poor Plato. Besides, "Platonic" friendships are a laugh because no one i know can sit around and talk about Plato and his Forms for very long without wanting sex or food.

Then there is love. Love is way different and not that easy to find, but Love really can change a person and the chemicals it produces are astonishing. A lot of people don't want it. They will throw you and your love to the curb because you don't look cute or make enough money. A lot of people just want sex and food and football. But personally, I love love. It produces in some of us the most exquisite chemicals and feelings and ideas......truly life changing. Love what you will -----people, partner, dog, cat, children, plants, God....oh man, it's powerful.

And if people like sex or sex-free cappuccino, well, good on them. I am not saying one way is better than another. Just liked the topic and threw in my two cents

 

[risk]

My theory is romantic love is a disease, its more about hormones. Then the merits of interest in question who they are what they have done and the very spirit of that person. I think Forest Cat is right in suggesting this all originates in human nature. But honestly for any society of sophistication its not unlike our diet for fatty foods and various other culinary death causing garbage. The hormone driven romantic love honestly appears to be a destructive influence. It might very well bring two people together. But on its own it cannot keep them together it is fundamentally a drug high which eventually wears off.
That being said for disclosure I am incapable of romantic love so I am biased.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

A lot of people don't want it. They will throw you and your love to the curb because you don't look cute or make enough money.

All too true. I have known women, including my spouse, who have felt used by men when they were seeking human connection, hoping for a relationship. I cannot treat women as disposable, so I am proud that while I wasn't her first, I am the last lover she wanted.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

I could be wrong but I don`t think romance is the same as sex.

I don't know, but from my experience with my spouse the first time we made love, my experience was unusual. Before then I had felt completely rejected by women and had to rebuild my agency. I thought that the adventures we shared were romantic. At least I was falling for her personality. Then, to have her accept me sexually at a time I despaired of that ever happening was life changing for me. It was the romance that gave me confidence to ask her in the first place when I was so inexperienced in such things.

 

[Judge]

i don't understand why romantic love is seen as more important than platonic love.

Forget any neurological considerations or biases over such a thing. Narrow it all down to the most common denominators of what drives a society and its culture. Where more often than not, religion for better and worse plays a critical role in such considerations.

Romance has an overwhelming dominance over friendship given religious emphasis on procreation and family values, and equally the physiological aspects of sexual gratification. Both compounded by societies with private sectors which seek to capitalize on both. In essence, sex sells- whether for procreation or not.

 

[Judge]

I didn`t think about that, religion. Religion isn`t a big thing here so it usually doesn`t play a role in love. Most people don't care what you believe in. It sounds difficult having to deal with religion when you find love.

That's the thing. If concerns over procreation isn't a driving force, consider basic instinct.

One or the other...makes for quite a "prime mover" when it comes to prioritizing romance over values. Norway is experiencing a decline in their birth rate, but I suspect as human beings they are still having lots of sex.

Friendship is a great thing, but I would never have described it as being "orgasmic".

 

[Judge]

I have to say, it`s a strange thought, having to consider religion if I met a woman I like. I don`t care about that, it`s a detail.

I think we have more basic instinct here than religion. Birth rates have gone down lately but I think the `activity` have actually gone up.

Oh, I don't think it's anything new that in Scandinavia religion is taken in moderation- or less. Though in other societies and countries, religious values may still be a driving force in how people conduct themselves.

Reminds me of when I had a brief relationship with an Austrian woman. With a devout, yet contradictory sense of what she would and won't do sexually relative to her religious values and morbid fear of pregnancy. Made it all rather bizarre, especially given that no other women I had a relationship with had any particular religious values at all.

 

[Tom]

Because Plato is not my type.

 

[clg114]

I have been married most of my adult life (55 years) to the same wonderful lady. To us, romantic love is very, very important. We are both very happy due to 1. Each other and 2. our family. Our family keeps getting bigger, we got our fourth greatgrandchild a few weeks ago. It just keeps getting better and better. So for me, romantic love is everything

 

[OkRad]

I didn`t think about that, religion. Religion isn`t a big thing here so it usually doesn`t play a role in love. Most people don't care what you believe in. It sounds difficult having to deal with religion when you find love.

That is incredible to try to understand when where I live, it's the exact opposite. I mean, I don't care what people think but it can be forced into laws and everything. Even atheists here are REACTIONARY and still define themselves through religion by making every decision being about their not having it, which means they are still thinking about it . I met one person raised from birth as a Humanist. One. Tell us more, please. It's fascinating that humans are so far apart in their thinking when we all look relatively alike!! Humans!

 

[Au Naturel]

i don't understand why romantic love is seen as more important than platonic love. people are often expected to devote more of their time and energy to romantic relationships than platonic ones, and although friendship is important, society seems to deem romance as more so. sometimes romantic relationships work out poorly because a person in it will believe the other person spends too much time with their friends. when people are in romantic relationships, their friendships are often expected to take a backseat to that. i don't think that romance and romantic love is more important than friendship and platonic love, but lots of people do think that and i can't wrap my head around why that is

People are mostly programmed that way. Without the programming, the species wouldn't reproduce. Not everyone has that kind of programming and so humans are diverse.

 

[Fino]

People like drama, and that's where the drama's at. Hear the 1,000,000 desperate songs of longing and hurt. I think platonic love is more likely to last long-term.

 

[Suzette]

I think romantic love is a sort of gaslighting perpetuated by society to encourage procreation.
It's like romance is dangled as a reward for having kids.

Because having children, especially from the female perspective, is hard, dangerous work! No woman in her right mind would undertake the job without some reward.

So biology prompts you to have kids through hormone signaling and society backs it up with white lies.

Of course I am joking. After all "womb rights" have simply been a commodity to buy, sell and trade up to modern times. The ideal of romantic love is probably only as recent as the middle ages.

In just a few hundred years, a social device that was created by the aristocracy as another form of social control and for amusement, has become a mythos the masses feel entitled to have. We feel entitled to have it because we don't want to be excluded.

Yet "Romantic love" is the epitomy of a co-dependant relationship. And most of us spend an inordinate amount of time trying to heal ourselves from co-dependant relationships. I don't think most of us actually do want romantic love.

We want our biological needs met. We want companionship. We like having help meeting our material needs but do we really want "romantic love"? Probably not.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

That is incredible to try to understand when where I live, it's the exact opposite. I mean, I don't care what people think but it can be forced into laws and everything. Even atheists here are REACTIONARY and still define themselves through religion by making every decision being about their not having it, which means they are still thinking about it . I met one person raised from birth as a Humanist. One. Tell us more, please. It's fascinating that humans are so far apart in their thinking when we all look relatively alike!! Humans!

I was raised a Catholic, but as a teen discovered ethics when I read Bertrand Russel's "Why I am Not a Christian." It seemed to be a good fit with how I tried to view my interactions with the world. I do not make decisions pro or con using religion. Rather I try to be ethical. Hard sometimes. Now I am studying ways of making sense of things, Modern Stoicism.

 

[OkRad]

I think romantic love is a sort of gaslighting perpetuated by society to encourage procreation.
It's like romance is dangled as a reward for having kids.

Because having children, especially from the female perspective, is hard, dangerous work! No woman in her right mind would undertake the job without some reward.

So biology prompts you to have kids through hormone signaling and society backs it up with white lies.

Of course I am joking. After all "womb rights" have simply been a commodity to buy, sell and trade up to modern times. The ideal of romantic love is probably only as recent as the middle ages.

In just a few hundred years, a social device that was created by the aristocracy as another form of social control and for amusement, has become a mythos the masses feel entitled to have. We feel entitled to have it because we don't want to be excluded.

Yet "Romantic love" is the epitomy of a co-dependant relationship. And most of us spend an inordinate amount of time trying to heal ourselves from co-dependant relationships. I don't think most of us actually do want romantic love.

We want our biological needs met. We want companionship. We like having help meeting our material needs but do we really want "romantic love"? Probably not.

Extremely thought provoking! Yes, I read that marrying for love is new and still only in certain places. People never married for one, millennia ago. Then women DID become commodities and the only way to assure a kid was your own was the have the woman there, always. Then came concubines for the same reason. The wife was a status, like a foreign king's daughter or something. Not one you loved. Think King Henry the XIII. Did he love any of them? Ha! Maybe one.

After the Industrial Revolution came leisure for certain classes and races as others still ground on. Even as late as the 2000's, some American senator was telling single, pregnant women on welfare to just go find a guy, for Pete's sake and get married!

Rep Mark Anderson was the one who said : ""On a personal note, I would consider revisiting the issue of your marriage failure and perhaps take some classes in parenting. Ultimately, your children need and deserve a full-time father and perhaps you could also solve your financial troubles by remarrying."

HA! Yeah. I see he wasn't offering to take on a poor woman with kids. What a dope.

So it's complicated for sure, because women have, historically, been considered war booty (γέρας) and alliance-makers and children bearers and it's really staggering, truly, the amount of collective trauma and dehumanization women have probably felt over centuries.

 

[Suzette]

I do. Maybe I`m stupid, maybe I`m crazy. Maybe I`m both? But I want that romantic love. I refuse to let romance die, darnit!

I do too
Honestly, my post was pretty one dimensional. There is "truth" there but humans have inexplicable qualities than can not be explained with pure science. Unless one refuses to look that is!