I DO agree that it's different with kids however...sometimes perhaps it's best to stay in a relationship 'just for the kids' (I'm not referring to you Kyu I just mean whatever...I just mean keeping families together is important as I think you've said before and I of course agree).
But the thing is I think it's kind of artifical because what's the point in a 'commitment' that can still be easily broken? On the outside it might LOOK strong...but on the inside...if people wanna break up they're gonna break up...and if they don't really love each other (or might no longer in future) why would they wanna tie themselves down in an unloving relationship?
I mean the thing is...there are people who GENUINELY DO love each other for YEARS but they STILL break up despite the fact they promised to stay together forever...so if they could break up anyway...isn't the commitment kind of artficial?
And if you really genuinely love each other for long enough, and it still stays strong WHY would you NEED 'commitment'?
I also think it would be arrogant for me to expect to stay together with someone FOREVER (at least early on, I mean if we've already been together 10 years then perhaps that's a different story but STILL - long relationships can still die)....BECAUSE there are people (as I said) who DO genuinely love each other for YEARS and they STILL break up/get divorced...I'm not arrogant enough to think I'd be a special case...
Sure I can feel true love...but so have others and some of them have broke up anyway...I'm just being realistic lol...I'm not gonna treat myself as a special case...if I feel extremely strong true love - I'm not gonna think it's necessarily stronger that OTHER people who have ALSO felt extremely strong true love....
So I think I'm just being realistic lol.
I think if you are making a 'commitment' but you can still leave anyway if you wish (as so can they) - and if it gets bad enough (and why would you want to stay in a bad relationship anyway if it's no longer going well) - that's kind of like having a key that you use to lock things that are too precious for even YOU to touch in a room...and you PROMISE not to touch them....BUT - still keeping the key in case you change your mind LOL!
If you could change your mind and unlock the door anyway...why keep the key? It seems artificial.
If anyone thinks the analogy fails then I'd be interested to hear your input
lol
I think often commitment is a by-product of LOVE for people...not the other way around...I think commitment ITSELF is just like the unnecessary icing on the beautiful cake that's just a common by-product of the beautiful (and hopefully exquisite) cake.
EvF
EDIT:
Reading back I still think this is sexist stereotyping an narrow-minded. I said no such thing and it of course isn't as simple as that (and like I said it's sexist stereotyping anyway I think (or an oversimplification at the very least)).
I want a long lasting loving relationship with a woman...if I can have that with someone without manufacturing a 'commitment' then I think that's stronger TBH....
And if she only wants to stay with me if I 'get married' or whatever then I think that's very superficial and unworthy and if she can't love me without that then she doesn't love me enough...and I wouldn't expect her to do the same for me. I.e: If I only loved HER if we'd 'get married' or 'make a commitment to promise to stay together forever and ever' (which is just plain idealistic and a superfical by-product of something much greater IMHO) - I wouldn't expect her to stay with me if such superficial shit was really what was important to ME either...
If two people really love each other then I think that's enough and IF they're NOT going to stay together UNLESS they 'get married' or 'make a commitment' then I think they're swapping the real thing for a supeficial unworthy bullshit by-product of the real thing and it MIGHT just MIGHT go downhill from there..
But that's just how I see it. But that IS how I see it anyway; for what it's worth anyway.
EvF
But the thing is I think it's kind of artifical because what's the point in a 'commitment' that can still be easily broken? On the outside it might LOOK strong...but on the inside...if people wanna break up they're gonna break up...and if they don't really love each other (or might no longer in future) why would they wanna tie themselves down in an unloving relationship?
I mean the thing is...there are people who GENUINELY DO love each other for YEARS but they STILL break up despite the fact they promised to stay together forever...so if they could break up anyway...isn't the commitment kind of artficial?
And if you really genuinely love each other for long enough, and it still stays strong WHY would you NEED 'commitment'?
I also think it would be arrogant for me to expect to stay together with someone FOREVER (at least early on, I mean if we've already been together 10 years then perhaps that's a different story but STILL - long relationships can still die)....BECAUSE there are people (as I said) who DO genuinely love each other for YEARS and they STILL break up/get divorced...I'm not arrogant enough to think I'd be a special case...
Sure I can feel true love...but so have others and some of them have broke up anyway...I'm just being realistic lol...I'm not gonna treat myself as a special case...if I feel extremely strong true love - I'm not gonna think it's necessarily stronger that OTHER people who have ALSO felt extremely strong true love....
So I think I'm just being realistic lol.
I think if you are making a 'commitment' but you can still leave anyway if you wish (as so can they) - and if it gets bad enough (and why would you want to stay in a bad relationship anyway if it's no longer going well) - that's kind of like having a key that you use to lock things that are too precious for even YOU to touch in a room...and you PROMISE not to touch them....BUT - still keeping the key in case you change your mind LOL!
If you could change your mind and unlock the door anyway...why keep the key? It seems artificial.
If anyone thinks the analogy fails then I'd be interested to hear your input
lolI think often commitment is a by-product of LOVE for people...not the other way around...I think commitment ITSELF is just like the unnecessary icing on the beautiful cake that's just a common by-product of the beautiful (and hopefully exquisite) cake.
EvF
EDIT:
(May 13, 2009 at 6:54 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: That you're "not big on commitment" makes you anti women IMO.
Reading back I still think this is sexist stereotyping an narrow-minded. I said no such thing and it of course isn't as simple as that (and like I said it's sexist stereotyping anyway I think (or an oversimplification at the very least)).
I want a long lasting loving relationship with a woman...if I can have that with someone without manufacturing a 'commitment' then I think that's stronger TBH....
And if she only wants to stay with me if I 'get married' or whatever then I think that's very superficial and unworthy and if she can't love me without that then she doesn't love me enough...and I wouldn't expect her to do the same for me. I.e: If I only loved HER if we'd 'get married' or 'make a commitment to promise to stay together forever and ever' (which is just plain idealistic and a superfical by-product of something much greater IMHO) - I wouldn't expect her to stay with me if such superficial shit was really what was important to ME either...
If two people really love each other then I think that's enough and IF they're NOT going to stay together UNLESS they 'get married' or 'make a commitment' then I think they're swapping the real thing for a supeficial unworthy bullshit by-product of the real thing and it MIGHT just MIGHT go downhill from there..
But that's just how I see it. But that IS how I see it anyway; for what it's worth anyway.
EvF
