The type of love being sold by our culture has no shelf life, says Travis Gasper.
The problem with love is a problem of language. When I can use one word to encompass my feelings for my wife, my brothers, my new TV, Arrested Development, Abita Turbodog, and that warm pizza sitting right over there, things get screwy. I’m not advocating an Eskimo-describing-snow reform of the English language (which is a myth anyways), but it does beg the question of how we arrived at such a wide definition of something so essential to our humanity in the first place.
The answer, in part, lies with our brilliant “Mad Men.” There’s no better human emotion to co-opt and commercialize than love. If I can take the intense goodwill you feel for your spouse or partner and attach it to my brand of car, cereal, beer, etc.; I can put a price tag on the feeling and line my pockets with your cash.
In the powerful hands of advertisers and mass media, the word love is bent and skewed before being tossed back at us. The advertising world’s main purpose is to sell, so it is their duty to craft in us a consumer mindset. And the modern consumer mindset is not based on loyalty. It’s based on competition.
In the consumer mindset, if something is broken, you don’t fix it. Instead you go out and buy a new one.
One of the biggest flaws with this approach to relationships is that we all, at some level, have an awareness of our own brokenness. So even though our culture is telling us to avoid the broken and seek the new, we know that we, too, are broken and are to be avoided. This is why so many people are unhappily jumping from one relationship to the next. It’s why we’re guarded when we should be open. It’s why we’re culturally obsessed with a man or woman systematically voting people off a show after a series of shallow dates.
Our consumer culture is trying to erase the most important aspect of any loving relationship: commitment.
A psychologist and professor named Robert Epstein has been studying the quantifiable aspects of love for years. He is especially interested in how Western marriages compare to Eastern marriages. What he continues to find is that even though many Eastern marriages are arranged and do not feature the “falling in love” moment that Western marriages do, they often have many more indications of love over time than Western marriages.
In a recent article titled “Fall in Love and Stay That Way,” Epstein wrote:
“We grow up on fairy tales and movies in which magical forces help people find their soul mates, with whom they effortlessly live happily ever after. The fairy tales leave us powerless, putting our love lives into the hands of the Fates…A careful look at arranged marriage, combined with the knowledge accumulating in relationship science, has the potential to give us real control over our love lives—without practicing arranged marriage. Americans want it all—the freedom to choose a partner and the deep, lasting love of fantasies and fairy tales. We can achieve that kind of love by learning about and practicing techniques that build love over time.”
That is the essence of commitment: building love over time.
Our relationships tend to burn bright and fast. The mutual agreement from the start is that it will be over as soon as one partner stops pleasing the other. After all, there are plenty of other potential partners to choose from. Our “love” for our partner is now the same type of “love” we have for our smart phones. It lasts until that new, sleek, robo-sultry-voiced version is readily available.
Arranged marriages don’t begin with love. A participant in one of Epstein’s studies even called it “like at first sight.” But since the foundation of the relationship is commitment, neither partner needs to fear the other leaving at first sight of an updated model. This commitment leads to a safety that promotes intimacy. Couples can be open and transparent with one another without the fear of driving someone away. They can share secrets, confess fears, have bad days, try on new philosophies, be ugly, apologize, and forgive without worrying about betrayal. Instead of running away, there is a constant running-toward.
In other words, commitment is a turn-on.
I am in no way advocating arranged marriages in our culture (although it would be hilarious to see the parents’ input on shows like The Bachelor), but I think an increased value can be placed on the devout nature of love. Devotion requires strength and creativity, which in turn can lead to all kinds of sexy.
Even though our consumer culture has put a huge effort into presenting manliness as remaining detached and immature, commitment resonates deeply inside every man. It is the charge to be heroic, to stay strong in the darkest hours. It is that moment in the plot when everything seems doomed, the moment where the hero musters his strength to charge again and defeat the darkness. Commitment is a guaranteed adventure—and can be a precursor to great sex.
Yes, I do love that pizza. And I love Turbodog too. But I would never fight, sacrifice, or set this whole damn world on fire in pursuit of them.
That’s the type of love I reserve for my wife. And that love’s not for sale.
—Photo nathanmac87/Flickr
Travis, I LOVE your piece. And I love the way you see love and our culture. I couldn’t agree more. Valter, humans aren’t “designed” for anything one way over the other. There are pluses and negatives to long term relationships just as there are to having many short flings. If we were all meant to romp around having sex with random people, STDs wouldn’t exist. Children wouldn’ fair better with both a mother and father. Ultimately, it comes down to choice. What you choose and how you want to live your life. It also comes down to personal perception. As… Read more »
@Erin: “humans aren’t “designed” for anything one way over the other” Yes they are. Otherwise, relationships would be totally chaotic and haphazard. 🙂 E.g., we are “programmed” to be attracted (to some specific features), and to long for company (we’re social animals). In the same way, some species are “designed” to be monogamous; other species aren’t (and they are the vast majority). Hence, I wonder if human species is closer to the former or the latter. Societal expectations says we are (or should be!) long-term monogamous; facts (especially in the last 60 years) say the opposite. Thus I ponder about… Read more »
Valter, the reality is that human beings are purposely more highly evolved “animals” then that of any other spieces on the earth. So if you want to continue to use the mating habits of other animals as proof of whatever human behavior you think it justifies, it’s always going to fail. For the simple reason that humans are complicated; and that we operate at a different emotional and physical level then any other animals on the face of the planet. And there is a reason for that. We are not just a function of our bodies. The reality is that… Read more »
@Erin: “Because I don’t want to be an “animal”, with the physical and mental capacity of one. Do you?” Whether we like it or not, we do have animal nature. We are more evolved than other animals, sure, but that doesn’t deny that a good part of our being is still animalistic. Many of our behaviours are similar to animals’ ones. As a matter of fact, we are basically animals with a neocortex. Besides the neocortex, though, we still have a reptilian and a mammalian brain part in our cranium, just like any other mammal has. Human beings have dreamt… Read more »
No Valter, whether we like it or not, we have a human nature. Over simplifications to comparisons to animals do us little good. I rather learn about human behavior based on what humans do, not animals. And it has nothing to do with what makes me happy. No amount of your eye rolling and winking changes that. Because If I wanted to talk about what made me happy, I would advocate that monogamy was programmed into us. But it isn’t. Any more then polyamorous behavior is. Both have a place and it ultimately comes down to choice. You can not… Read more »
I think the author has good points, but he has a fundamental fallacy as well. I.e., the idea that we can find a “recipe” for making relationships work, avoid divorce, stop suffering. There’s no such “recipe”. Life has no guarantee, things will sometimes go awry, and shit will happen. I agree that in our “fast food society” we seek instant gratification and we forget the importance of commitment; yet, even in the far past couples weren’t happy. They were more stable, yer, but not really happier. Human beings don’t seem “designed” for long term relationships. Some people succeed, many don’t.… Read more »
Good points. While I agree that arranged marriages are difficult to look at in particular contexts, what I find interesting is the fact that Epstein has used a large sampling of couples who are now in a Western context. So I don’t think that Stockholm Syndrome or fear of being stoned to death would necessarily apply in those cases. In terms of divorce, I agree that there are times when it is definitely called for (I have seen this in my own family). To advocate commitment in the face of serious (emotional, psychological, physical) problems would be irresponsible. However, I… Read more »
I’ve read Robert Epstein’s work before, and I’m not convinced that he’s established the causality properly. Consider, in all countries, including places with arranged marriages, one women have gained access to divorce, the divorce rate has skyrocketed. In Egypt, women finally gained the right to divorce in 2000, and the divorce rate has dramatically increased every year since. Egypt also has a strong tradition of arranged marriages. The same effect can be observed in Japan, which historically had arranged marriages. Under the Meiji regime, prior to the 1940s, women could not initiate divorce even in the instance of a husband… Read more »
I completely agree with your points, Mike. “Why doesn’t a high divorce rate simply indicate that only the positive marriages are surviving? What’s a bigger failure: getting a divorce or wasting years trying to “save” an obviously failed marriage?” There are couples that are much better off getting divorced than staying married. My mother and father were one of those couples. They were miserable together, but stayed together until their children were mature enough to handle a divorce. And now they are both much happier and remarried to much better suited partners. I really don’t see how divorce can just… Read more »
There’s a funny thing about human nature.
When we think we can ‘trade in’ our choices we become noticeably less happy with them.
Yes, I agree.
I’ve often said in the last decade or so that bad laws and stupid ideas were the death of marriage. You sir, have nailed down one of the stupid ideas that destroys marriage. Brilliantly said. I salute you!