Spinoff - Is love necessary?

[Lucie]

I am an optimist and I believe in love wholeheartedly. That's what creates the extra effort when things get tight. That agape, unconditional love is marvelous and when you have it, you cannot ever go back to the regular eros and fillial love. When you get that agape love it's like flying in your own private customized G4 plane. But when it is lacking it's like flying coach on Southwest (no offense to anyone that loves SW).

Love is a choice. You don't always wake up wanting to lick your partner from head-to-toe. In the beginning the sparks are explosive but as things settle it's that agape love that sustains you.

 

[barbiesocialite]

Love is subjective so it depends on the person.... although I believe it is important for couples to share mutual respect, social/familial/financial goals and a commitment to the marriage is important for the foundation of a healthy marriage/relationship, i'm inclined to say the presence of romantic love is not necessary.

Personally I feel love must be earned by both parties. For all of my personal relationships and friends, I have only come to love or establish emotional intimacy a person after observing their commitment to our relationship/friendship and experiencing a consistent reality that shows me they sincerely have my best interest at heart. I'm not a woman that feels instantly attraction by appearance, no matter how good someone looks. So with some moderate level of premarital physical attraction, this is gradual love is necessary foundation for strong sexual and passionate physical intimacy anyway for ME. That said, IMO It is better to grow in love over time by observing individual's roles as spouse and parent. I believe this establishes love and commitment of substance for the long run.

This brings me to the "arranged marriages" thread where a recent Harvard study discovered that on average, couples who's spouse was chosen for them by family or a matchmaker reported increased levels of marital success, including happiness, longevity and lower divorce rates compared to people who marry more for more modern & westernized romantic ideals.

 

[Oasis]

i would. love is actually quite low on my list. *shrugs*

 

[Triniwegian]

Love is what will keep you from chocking the $hit out of him when he makes you mad.
The only reason I would marry for anything else is millions, multiple millions.

 

[aribell]

I think some kind of physical chemistry should be there, otherwise it would just feel like a roommate type situation. But that whole, "I spent all day either thinking about or talking about him" type of experience? Nah. I'm increasingly of the mindset that simply liking the person plus being attracted to them is probably enough if the commitment's there on both sides.

Also, on physical chemistry--this is usually poo-poo'd as shallow, but does anyone else think that physical chemistry is nature's way of telling you who you'd mate well with? For instance, there was that study that showed that women were attracted to the scent of men who they were biologically dissimilar to--enough that there would be balance. I see a difference between wanting to be with someone just because they are physically good-looking and wanting to be with someone you have chemistry with.

 

[RegaLady]

I think that chemistry does not mean you love a person. As many have stated it is a primal thing or infactuation, but without love it doesn't make for a great marriage either. I think love will come, in fact, I am not sure if one can love a person off the bat. I think its really one of those things that take time and strengthens with trial and error. A person is lucky if they have mutual passion with a person and build on love on top of that. That is what many women want. Unfortunatley, I don't think everyone will experience that. So I'd rather have a man I was somewhat attracted to or very attracted to, who was a great provider, and was able to love me and we build on that.

I have seen passionate 'love' attractions end in disaster.

 

[Vinyl]

I think it really depends on what's important to the person... are they willing to risk getting married later/having complications with having children so they can wait for love? Are marriage/kids more important to them than love?

I couldn't see myself marrying someone I didn't at least have SOME spark for... Love can and does grow overtime but for me when I was with someone I felt love for but not that "spark," it would be obvious when I'd meet someone I -did- feel that spark with or hear other people talking about how into their SO's they were, etc. I'd get jealous.

(Okay I just realized this thread was from '08... who bumped this? )

 

[naturalmanenyc]

Arranged marries do last, so I presume love is not a requirement for a successful marriage. Then again, who knows what goes on behind the closed doors of those households.

Lots of people marry for stability and comfort, not necessarily love.