Quote:
Originally posted by Kimmie1913
Interestingly enough, historically many sociaologists say love has NOT been the primary reason people get married. It has been a factor but not the catalyst to cause them to choose to marry.
|
Oh, I agree with you. You look at your grandparents, or great-grandparents (even maybe your own parents)--these folks didn't always marry for "love" per se, and had these very long unions. Then you have folks who marry for "love" and their relationship lasts about 2-5 years. Now whether these longs unions required one person to be very satisfied and the other to be totally miserable is a different story. Many women I know paid dearly of their own happiness to stay in a long union for the happiness/satisfaction of their husband/children. Is that wrong? Maybe, maybe not. I think some sound arguments can be made from either side.
I still think that if the husband and wife are to be mutally satisfied in the relationship, the love and the respect has to be there. I don't mean monkey love (that's an ugly term, but I keep hearing so...)-- passionate, booty-shaking love though, and I think that's where folks in relationships today get all messed up. Once the passion is gone, they realized that they never really loved and/or respected their partner, so there goes the marriage. True love and respect for your mate has only a small percentage to do with butterflies in your stomach, and how often you have fantastic sex, and how much they "do" for you. It has more to do with what you're willing to sacrifice and invest in a person because you believe in them. How much you respect their opinions. How much they want you to be happy. What sacrifices and investments they are willing to make in YOU for the long haul. It's really a more qualitative thought process, and that's why what you find in a lover may not be the same things you should look for in a mate--because the type of love and respect required isn't usually the same.
Threaded Mode