The Myth of Romantic Love, Happy Valentines Day!

Submitted by Rockhardington on
Printer-friendly version

I was almost going to get sad about not having a valentines, but the more I thought about it, the more it seemed like elements of my fantasy being frustrated. Rationality is great, too bad it's so sobering. Romantic fantasy is a drug too.

The Myth of Romantic Love
Carol Herbster, Psy.D

One of the biggest influences in today’s relationships is based on a misunderstanding. If you ask people what love is, the most common response is that “love is a feeling.” As long as we define love as an emotional state, marriages are at risk. Surprised? The reason why most people define love in that manner is that movies, songs, and novels tend to characterize in that way. The romantic idea that one can fall in love with another person that she has never met is a wonderful fantasy. But if you back up a minute and think about it, does it really make sense?

It is understandable why we are so attracted to this fantasy. After all, if love is a feeling, it makes the whole dating process so much easier. First, it makes choosing a potential spouse an automatic process. You see Ms. Right across the room and your biochemicals start to churn. You feel great as your brain secretes substances associated with attraction. The song you heard when you met, stirs up intense feelings every time you hear it. Problems seem to fade away as if no longer important. We are not at all accountable for this choice. The decision is being made for you, rather than by you.

If the other person is feeling the same way, a connection is launched. You feel awesome as you begin to pursue a relationship. If the feelings continue, you become even more certain that you are on the right track. If the feelings wane, then you start to decide that this relationship may not be “the one.” You are guided purely by your brain chemistry and the resulting emotional response to it. This integral decision is being made purely on emotion, not logic, reason or practical considerations.

So where does our attraction radar come from? How does our brain decide that the stranger across the room is the right one for us? To make a long story short, children learn at about three years of age that two people are actually separate and therefore, the child and the other person are now in a relationship together. This is the time that children learn what love is. Unfortunately our primary teachers, our parents, are not always the best model for a loving relationship. If the child comes from an abusive household, her brain will be programmed to be attracted to similarly abusive men. If he is raised in a highly judgmental and critical household, he will be programmed to be attracted to rejecting and withholding individuals. Remember there is no logic or right and wrong associated with this choice. It is purely what is programmed by the brain at the time.

In other words, our attraction is prompted by the emotional understanding of a three year old. Think about that! Would you want a three year old choosing your next spouse? That is why you must supplement those biological signals with a dose of logic and reason before pursuing a long-term relationship. Attraction can be one component of the decision-making process but should not be the primary driving force. Three year olds just are not that insightful or wise.

To put this in context, love as a primary motivation for marriage is only about a century old. Before that, more practical considerations dominated the decision making process. Parents of the couple played an active role in choosing mates. Each member of the couple would be sizing up the other based on what is needed to clothe and feed their future family. Does each spouse have the skills necessary to provide for the families primary needs? It is only when basic needs were no longer the focus that we can indulge our emotional/biochemically-generated impulses.

I once hosted a chat on the internet about love. When I suggested that love was not a feeling, I received a flurry of hate responses and belittling suggestions. Even the very utterance of a different definition could not be tolerated by most of my young audience. It’s as if I was robbing them of an integral part of their belief system and threatening the very basis on which they lived.

That is how profoundly this misunderstanding has invaded our beliefs. Any slight challenge to it, results in a strong and definitive attack on my expertise and character. To be fair, challenging a basic belief certainly will stimulate a powerful response. We so much want our romantic fantasies to be real that we actually sacrifice the well-being of our relationships to maintain it.

I hate to bring up logic again but please indulge me. We as human beings cannot hold two opposing feelings at the same time. If I was mad at my husband, I would no longer be able to love him based on the emotional definition of love. The fact that so many people believe in the myth of love is one of the reasons that so many relationships dissolve. If we are going through hard times which are inevitable in life, we cannot maintain love as an emotion. Rather we become overwhelmed with stress and anxiety and we interpret those feelings as “falling out of love.”

Slowly the relationship becomes plagued with negativity because the feeling of love cannot be re-established easily. As we struggle to regain that feeling, we begin to think that our relationship is failing. We may be better off leaving rather than on trying to replenish what was temporarily lost. Anger and discontent ensue and who suffers – of course, our children. Might it be worth looking at the question of love once more to see if another definition may be more accurate and more sustainable over time?

So if love is not a feeling, then what is it? Love is a verb and should be understood as an action rather than a feeling. The definition that I believe best captures the spirit as well as the letter of the concept is “love is a decision backed by behavior.” So how is that different? Let’s go back to the example above. I have become angry at my husband for some perceived transgression but now that I decided love is not a feeling, my commitment to my husband is not impacted by my temporary state. Even though I might be angry, I can still love him based on my decision to do so.

Instead of lashing out impulsively because I am angry, I act in accordance to my decision and sit down and discuss what happened without the uncontrolled expression of rage and frustration. We resolve our issue without drawing psychological blood and this discussion will only make our relationship stronger. My feeling turns from anger to compassion and understanding. After all, feelings are fleeting and basing decisions on fleeting events is an immature response.

Another distinction between love as a feeling versus an action is related to the underlying assumption of who is accountable for maintaining the relationship. If you are using emotions to guide your actions, then each partner is looking for the other to make the situation feel better. When our needs are not being met, we consider the other person as failing in his role as spouse or partner. However, if you shift to the thinking-oriented definition, the person with the emotion becomes responsible for resolving it. Instead of looking outside of ourselves, we are expected to think about how we are feeling and then act in a loving way towards our partner regardless of our emotional state. We promote a sense of love when we take responsibility for our own feelings and the way we deal with them. The mature definition of love focuses on being loving, not just getting love.

Dr. Herbster has been a Clinical Psychologist for 14 years. She was a talk radio co-host for a program called "Practically Speaking" which dealt with the challenges of families in our contemporary world.

Comments

Well Said Doc

Now read Marnia and Gary's stuff.

Quote:

Romantic fantasy is a drug too.

No shit dude.....btw, do I know you by a different name? Thanks for sharing the article.
Peace be unto us all

Good stuff, tho I think love

Good stuff, tho I think love is more than either a feeling or a thought. I would describe it as a sense of alignment in purpose. Love will always be mysterious, and it should stay that way in my opinion.

Another good resource on this is the book "Love and Will" by Rollo May.

Amen!

Someone who tries to define love will always have their own personal perceptions involved--there is no way to get around that as we are all exceedingly influenced by what we have felt in our own lives.

rediscovered

I, too, think love is best

I, too, think love is best defined as a verb, in terms of action, because I need not feel love for someone in order to act lovingly toward them. As a matter of fact, some people are so blinded by their subjective "feelings" of love that they do not see the harm they are causing their "loved-ones" with their non-loving actions...all that matters to them is that they "feel" love and the consequences of their own actions upon their loved ones goes completely un-noticed by them. My husband's witholding of the money I needed to go to college years ago (when I was much younger and we could well-afford it) is a case-in-point. He was content to "feel" love for me and refused to see how the lack of a college education for me was harming not only me, but himself as well. He refused to see how his actions were having a very negative impact upon me because he was so blinded by his subjective "feelings" of love.

"When choosing between two evils, I always like to pick the one I haven't tried before." Mae West
Questioner: "How do you keep your youth?" Mae West: "I pay him very well."

While there is some truth in this argument . . .

. . . I think it greatly overstates its case. The article says, "We as human beings cannot hold two opposing feelings at the same time." That's just not true. People routinely carry conflicting emotions at the same time. Have you ever heard of a love/hate relationship? Do you know anyone who loves and is angry at their teenager at the same time? I sure do. Emotions come in layers. Many people have a surface emotion about themselves or their partner that masks underlying emotions.

That's not to say that you can't trigger an emotion. This site is all about using generous touch to trigger feelings in your partner. Also, many people in arranged marriages have found love by treating it as a verb rather than just an emotion.

As a poet, I have observed romantic love, both in myself and others. I have studied it and documented it. My understanding of love has evolved greatly since I was three. Let's not throw this baby out with the bath water. Yes, you have to work at love, but it also deserves to be enjoyed as a wonderful emotional state.

P.

Love 101

Good point Poet. Starting to realize these things for the first time after years of thinking of love in the conventional way. Like a lot of lessons here, its difficult not to throw the baby out with the bath water while getting a handle on it. Its a shock to even think of love in any other way than what I saw on TV for so many years as a kid!

Anyone else

have the sense that there is a kind of blissful love that, even though connected to one's partner (or perhaps due to the nourishment of the exchange), encompasses the whole world? It's not the dopamine driven obsession, but it's not "ho hum" either. It's a feeling of connection with everything.

In a word, YES!

Maybe some day they will hook someone up to an MRI 24/7 so we can see ALL the interactions between ALL the hormones/neurotransmitters. Until then, I will report what I feel subjectively and not worry if my feelings don't correspond exactly with the current brain model.

Marnia, is the feeling you describe some form of ecstasy? I haven't felt the connection with everything, although I was close for a moment once. I may have a few loose wires up there.

Still seeking,

P.

Hmmm...

More of a feeling of exhilaration, or a quiet ecstasy. Aliveness. Feeling in love with everything. A feeling of being "in the flow," or on life's surfboard/snowboard.

But not reckless. And no spins. smiley

In short, probably feelings you've had, too, and just called them something else.

Heck!

It might be said that this whole website is about sustaining and deepening romantic love! It's sort of trendy to say that romance is really a species of mental illness or delusion, but if we have Karezza, why do we need to think that?

I've seen many people who are attracted to abusive partners. Yes, they're replaying the abusive scenario's of their parents, just like it said in the article. However, it's always seemed to me - and I've felt this strongly - that one of the reasons that they (we!) are attracted to the abusive partner is a primal need to heal.

An abusive parent, or witnessing an abusive parental relationship, can colour every aspect of our lives. So, people need to heal these wounds. One of the ways people do it - like it or not - is by getting back into a similar relationship. It's terrible I know, but it's also the way that most people create opportunities for healing.

I'm excited about adding Karezza into this mix. I mean, people who are attracted to people like they're parents are in for a lot of pain. They may learn, but it can also be like a train wreck. We've all seen it...

The abuser may no longer need to abuse; through Karezza, he might have the will and the tools and support to understand himself or herself. Likewise, the one who is attracted to the abuser might understand and overcome that attraction as well.

It seems to me, that the attraction to what Jung called our shadow, combined with Karezza, is potentially very progressive, very healing.

Hooray for romantic love. And after all, my mother has a lot of great qualities too!

Delusion

As long as there's a delusional aspect to romantic fantasy, it is good for some people to be wary.

I think the point of this article is to try to encourage rationality in relationships. We could spend years acting according to our programming and seek poor partners to "heal" ourselves. Or we can take the elevator and use our heads in choosing a partner. Rationality first, there's plenty of room for spirituality, healing, and the mysteries without the train wrecks.

Rationality?!

It just doesn't seem to work. At least from what I've seen. I don't think that I've met anybody who chooses their partner rationally. So maybe the beginning point is to work with what's real: that the partner you choose - especially when you're younger, is likely to reflect what you grew up with.

I'm all for rationality - push-ups for our frontal lobes and all... but sometimes it's just not there.

Halo

Couldn't agree more with

Couldn't agree more with Halo. Rationality is so overrated. It's really the last operating system we want to rely on, because it doesn't utilize compassion at all in its navigating system.

For me, the way the author

For me, the way the author spoke of love as action rather than feeling was very important. Abusers often excuse their actions as coming from feelings of love, but if love is looked upon as action rather than feeling, the abused can then say "are his/her actions loving, no matter what his/her feelings are?" I mean, if someone beats you, does it really matter if they tell you how much they love you the next day?

"Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol or morphine or idealism." Carl Gustav Jung

What we grow up with is

What we grow up with is definitely an influence, but a person can exercise rationality and discrimination in partner selection. Reason in our daily lives is practical and is practiced differently than the kind of reason used to make dry calculations.

You're not likely to witness someone deciding upon a partner using a list of good or bad qualities with the conciseness of arithmetic. But it's not uncommon to see people decide to make compromises, decide to stay in one location rather than move with their partner, decide to do what's best for the kids, or decide to split ways entirely. It's not a clear use of rationality in the way we are accustomed to thinking about rationality, but people can and do reason their way in and out of relationships. This is often tainted with the drives and desires of the limbic brain, but that doesn't mean rationality doesn't exist in these situations, just superceded.

Plus, if the person is drawn to the qualities present in a partner that they are familiar with while growing up, and they heal as you say, what faculty is allowing them to move on or to decide to not get involved with an abusive person with similar qualities?

Some of the confusion might come from the use of the word romance. Not all romance is healthy and can be just as destructive as an addiction or compulsion. There are a lot of examples of subjective experiences of romance being completely insane and destructive. I'll leave it to you to classify what is romance or not. I don't think the intention if the author is to define these things for us, but to practically say- careful of your subjective experience, there's more to it.

Another point of view

What about trying to do some inner listening when a potential partner appears? Personally, I think both hormones and rationality can mislead us in mate choice. I like the phrase "egoless contemplation." I think that is a good goal to strive for when thinking about a potential intimate connection.

When I was dating (after I learned a lot about management of sexual energy), I started asking about each potential mate, "What is the role of this person in my life?" And then I tried to listen.

This resulted in some surprising "no's" and some surprising "yes's." That is, the men I thought were perfect "fits," were often in the "friends only" category, while some that looked like really unpromising choices were in the "yes...there is much to learn here" category. Sure enough, I learned a lot.

Gary was a prime example of the hidden synergy that can exist between partners. He didn't start digging up the brain chemistry of sex and relationships until a year after we were together. Guess he needed time to heal, and he needed for a solid trust to build up between us.

So next time someone winks at you, check with the oracle to see what her ideal role is in your life. smiley

Some guy

Just totally winked at me, should I check the oracle?

I think we think about what rationality is in different ways. I like aristotle's understanding of rationality. It's something that's inseparable from the mind. It is us, not something that can or cannot be employed. "egoless contemplation" would actually be a high use of rationality and that is the ultimate goal of human beings according to Aristotle. In fact, virtuous action is done to put ourselves in a position to experience this rationality in the highest sense. It's not that there is a way to make decisions through ways other than rationality, our soul/will is inseparable from rationality and all good decsions and actions taken on them are done through rationality. Influence of hormones would not be rational. Those decsions are not rational, they aren't even decisions, but impulses. Rationality is the true function of the soul, and all rational actions are done with connection to that. It is not the mechanical process that it's made out to be. It's impulse that is mechanical.

Beautiful

Makes perfect sense to me. I think that's the goal of inner balance, to align our desires with our highest best interest. The ultimate in rationality. smiley