I have quite a basic question. Why is it considered objectionable or immoral to be with someone on the basis of their bank balance, but perfectly understandable to be with someone because of their cheekbones?
I was watching Wimbledon this summer and someone remarked that some of the tennis star’s “WAGs” were more attractive than the players. “I’m sure she’s not with him for the money,” was the sarcastic comment. It’s been quite a long thought process for me, but that got me thinking – aren’t all the ways we judge others worthy of love completely arbitrary, whether it’s cash in the bank, the shape of their bum or the way they tell jokes? It seems to me quite an obvious, logical conclusion.
This, in a roundabout way, brings me to the question, “What is love?” There are a million love-songs, countless love stories, but all it is, when you boil it right down, is mutual attraction. It works on a multitude of levels. Some people, in an attempt to appear thoughtful, enjoy pointing out that the Ancient Greeks had several words for love, while we only have one (which, in any case, isn’t true). But even if it were, that strikes me as fine. I see no reason why there needs to be a separate term to differentiate the way I love custard from the way I love a person. It is merely acknowledging fondness for something.
There exists in our vocabulary the term, ‘true love’, by which people generally mean mutually strong, reciprocal feelings of attraction, however fleeting. It can also mean “often over-romanticised displays of affection that our culture deems necessary to prove one truly cares for another”. It can also mean putting up with mundane things as though expecting no reward, despite the fact that there is payback. As I’ve mentioned before, love is comprised largely of emotional blackmail and guilt.
What I’m driving at here is that all attraction is arbitrary. There are no “soulmates”, no “star-cross’d lovers”. Romeo and Juliet were two kids who fell in love in particularly unfortunate circumstances. That kind of tragedy is not proof of anything more profound than human irrationality (and yes, I know they’re fictional characters).
Love is not eternal, love is not powerful, love is not mystical. Love is temporary, love is natural and love is pretty damn simple. There is no ‘true love’, there is no universal recipe for it. It’s game theory or something.
Love is not blind. Turns out it’s just as judgemental, shallow, irrational and ill-informed as you are. Funny, that.
