A new perspective, reflection, both, or neither?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2012 11:45 PM GMT
    This is a summary of some of the material I had to read for my philosophy class last year. I found it interesting and some of you might too.

    PS: This class focused on Marriage & Family. While I could have rephrased key word to possibly LTR, it is all relative and I felt as though no change need to be made.

    PS#2: 2nd post might be more interesting to read!

    Marriage for Convenience

    Many people still marry for reasons of convenience: for a sexual partner, for financial security, to have a family, or simply because “that’s what you’re supposed to do.” It has been a practical solution to people’s problems. The oldest reason for this type of marriage is that of political, family, economic, psychological, sexual form as well as to conform to what “society” expects of them.

    People also marry for psychological convenience. People knowingly or unknowingly select partner who fills the expected role in the relationship, where one either likes to take care of someone (helpful) versus someone who likes to be taken care of (helpless). Some individuals marry out of fear of being alone or anxiety. Also, person who often feels confused and inadequate is likely to be drawn to a decision maker.

    Another strong motivation for getting married is sexual convenience. As stated in the article, many people prefer a predictable and steady source of sexual fulfillment. Such individuals have no interest in the continual search for a potential partner but rather are sure that they have one. A strong religious or family sanction against premarital sex also has strong influence.

    In many cases today, family convenience may be the force that brings people together. At present time, young couples do not rush into marriage unless pregnancy occurs. Others marry because family is a high priority and they want to provide a stable home for their children. Single parents often times remarry to assure that their kids do not miss the “advantages” of a family life.

    There is also marriage for economic convenience. Most notable example of this is marriages amongst retired older people. They combine their resources and cut costs, thus making it better to manage life together than alone. In other cases, this type of marriage can remain intact even if neither partner is happy. They pick a spouse based on need of maintaining certain image socially and professionally. Sort of like a “trophy wife” that will represent her husband well at various social affairs/events.

    There is also a political convenience. In the past, it came in form of unification of clans, lands, fortunes, and military strength through royal marriages. Nowadays, people frequently marry to obtain papers and legal rights to live in certain places. What motivates them could be desire to escape oppression, poverty, and terrorism.

    Marriage for convenience has developed from very basic survival needs to convenience of knowing that there is someone by your side who can provide or support aspects of life where they might lack. Such marriages resolve some very real problems and can remain stable and strong for as long as the “convenience” is still there. Sometimes these marriages can evolve and include elements of romanticism or companionship or even develop into loving relationships.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 07, 2012 11:50 PM GMT
    And if you're still interested, here is 2nd part of the summary:

    Spiritual Marriage

    Spirituality is not easily defined or readily understood. Authors view is that the spiritual part of the self is a reality, the inner core of a person’s being. It is also capable of transcendence in many forms. It is the point at which people meet and relate or feel as though they were destined to meet and marry.

    Christian church uses term sacrament which means holy and mysterious. It is a tangible token signifying and conveying God’s love and grace, therefore it is something sacred. Judeo-Christian tradition makes a distinction between body, mind, and spirit with emphasis on the spiritual aspect. It is based on earlier Hebrew idea of covenant. It is a covenant with God; who would watch over them as His “chosen people” for as long as they observed His laws and remained faithful. Therefore it requires exclusiveness and faithfulness for life.

    Couples who hold sacramental view of marriage work hard to make their marriages successful. They will accept unhappiness, frustration, and brutality and refuse to consider divorce as a valid option. Essentially, spiritual Marriage comes from people making sacred promises because they trust themselves to keep them, because they trust a higher power for help, and because they trust that the person they make promises to is worth trusting.

    Romantic Marriage

    Romantic marriage is based on idealization and infatuation with original idea or feeling that slowly fades away. The initial feeling of ecstasy and excitement comes from people being in love with love, instead of being in love with a person. Romance is real when people involved see each other as someone special and wonderful; not as someone adored or idealized under romanticism.

    Romanticism frequently starts with a strong physical attraction for someone and an exaggerated perception of the person’s beauty or other external characteristics. It can also involve fantasized exaggeration of a person’s skills or intellect. In romantic love, attraction grows stronger when those involved are separated physically or when other obstacles are in place, such as family disapproval or geographical distance. When obstacles are removed and marriage is made possible, the elements that brought them together begin to diminish in intensity and excitement may fade. Other hurdles cited include lack of money, conflicting values, and different religions.

    Marriage for Companionship

    Companionship is a partnership among two people with compatible ideals, interests, or tasks. It is a partnership because it lacks romantic liaison or intense love relationship. They don’t have to always agree or engage in same activities, but they do find pleasure in the interests they have in common and show respect for each other’s unique interests.

    This type of relationship may have elements of convenience but lack romance. Greater emphasis is placed on mutual needs rather than sexual desires. For example, they might want a mate to talk to, to cry with, or care for. It is a friendship within a union on which they will support each other and enjoy each other’s company. It builds a strong foundation for those who choose to marry to build their future relationship.

    Since Companionship marriage is based on being friends, these relationships are considered sound ones. It is not defined by society or law, only by the two people involved. They also lack excitement and drives partners to find other outlets that will peak their interest. It involves a different job or activity, as well as extramarital affair. The author adds that open marriages occur most often within marriages for companionship, because there is a low level of possessiveness.

    Marriage Is For Loving

    According to the author, love creates love in people who care about each other in any way at all. It is life-giving, it is healing, and it provides freedom and releases energy. It is also intense and durable; it is without exploitation and is worth fighting for, dying for, and living for. It is an enchantment, desire, and unconditional good will. It is love based on one’s uniqueness.

    Strongest marriages seem to be those that incorporate all five views of marriage, recognize them, and actively express them. It involves some give-and-take for the convenience of each other, some sacramental experiences of transcendent beauty, some romantic moments of exciting passion, some common interests and the non-possessiveness of lasting friendship. Love has sparkle and pleasure. It generates affection and strong physical attraction. It also has its highs and lows. However, underneath it all is trust and appreciation for oneself and for one’s partner.

    There are those who are afraid of opening up. They fear the loss of
    their individuality, afraid of being exploited in some way. They are afraid to be ardent, afraid to be intensely involved, afraid to let themselves go. Therefore, their fear of becoming vulnerable stands in the way of experiencing oneness.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 1:11 AM GMT
    And there I thought I had a catchy title and fairly interesting information. I guess I was wrong.icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 1:17 AM GMT
    I enjoyed this article... Very interesting prospective... I learned some new things about marriages icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 1:24 AM GMT
    Omg! Read every word for depth! Thanks for posting! Replying to keep you in my queue! icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 3:19 AM GMT
    Thanks for the article. It's great!

    "There are those who are afraid of opening up. They fear the loss of
    their individuality, afraid of being exploited in some way. They are afraid to be ardent, afraid to be intensely involved, afraid to let themselves go. Therefore, their fear of becoming vulnerable stands in the way of experiencing oneness."

    This perfectly describes many gay men I have met, who often do not know how to give love and in turn to receive love.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 3:41 AM GMT
    I am glad you enjoyed reading the material I have posted. What has motivated me to post this on here is fact that many men on this website seem to have lots of questions or for the lack of better word, confusion on how to pursue a relationship and what would be considered a healthy one. People seem to question themselves on what is right and what is wrong and are unsure about their feelings and what causes them to pursue a certain type of individual.

    By no means do I think that what is written on here can answer all those questions or provide a clear answer. My only hope is that this information will allow people to look at themselves, dig deeper into ones' soul and mind, and help question or maybe understand what exactly motivates them to like or admire a particular kind of guy. Maybe this information will help you find the right kind of guy who will truly make you happy.

    One more thing that I have learned, but haven't mentioned yet, is that there is no such thing as a knight in shining armor or the right one. Instead, its a sea full of fish, some bigger, and some smaller. All have different type of character, set of skills, as well as needs. No one is better or worse than you, because everyone comes with their own set of insecurities, imperfections, short falls. There are 2 types of relationships, two whole and two half-persons, but one will outlast the other. However, that leads to my 2nd summary of another chapter, that I am more than happy to post if people are interested.



    Also, I know this post emphasizes marriage a lot, after all, it was a course focused on M&F. I am also well aware that some information does not relate in any way to gay community, such as "political convenience" since in most states marriage is prohibited by law. However in a context of long term relationships, it is quite relevant.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 4:42 AM GMT
    I just want a NICE, simple, humble, good... trophy husband... who'll be a great dad to the kids I want us to have. icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 5:47 AM GMT
    DavidDB saidI just want a NICE, simple, humble, good... trophy husband... who'll be a great dad to the kids I want us to have. icon_cool.gif


    Haha, that's a very simple and straight forward summary of all the gibberish I've wrote. I know some of the methods and descriptions/examples I used were not best or informative, but I did have to find a way to make it shorter than the chapter itself. Trophy wife, or in our case, trophy husband, may not been best use of words to describe a relationship based on economic convenience and some might find it offensive. It just made it easier for me, at the time, to give such example to help me remember some of the text I've read. This was directed at young professionals who seek out partners that they know will put them in best light. I better example might of been a politician or corporate figure who must create an acceptable image of himself and his family, therefore in need of spouse who can best represent "their" values.

    Same thing goes for my description in psychological convenience. Again, it was my way of creating a short-cut to information that I needed to be reminded of later. I did not mean to be offensive when I mentioned one being helpful while other helpless. To be more precise, it is about some individuals who are naturally inclined to be very loving and caring, and find great pleasure in "providing" for their spouse in any way possible. While others find great pleasure in being taken care of, but reward their spouse in other ways.


    None of this is set in stone, and most relationships have more than one convenience factor in place.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 6:04 AM GMT
    It's a good forum topic to TRULY help one assess what he's REALLY looking for.

    If we can find our perspective of what we truly want... then we're that much closer to finding it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 11:20 AM GMT
    "The initial feeling of ecstasy and excitement comes from people being in love with love, instead of being in love with a person"...wow

    "According to the author, love creates love in people who care about each other in any way at all. It is life-giving, it is healing, and it provides freedom and releases energy. It is also intense and durable; it is without exploitation and is worth fighting for, dying for, and living for. It is an enchantment, desire, and unconditional good will. It is love based on one’s uniqueness"....and again:wow.


    Great article
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 1:20 PM GMT

    " It is life-giving, it is healing, and it provides freedom and releases energy. It is also intense and durable; it is without exploitation and is worth fighting for, dying for, and living for. It is an enchantment, desire, and unconditional good will. It is love based on one’s uniqueness."

    For us two, this is so beautifully stated and true.

    Thank you icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 2:05 PM GMT
    Not to be harsh, but it sounds like the author is giving an unfair reading to any type of marriage except the one they think is good..

    They set out all the different types of marriages they presumably created, highlighted the problems and then said the best solution is a combination of the only parts of those marriages that support their view..

    I think those types of marriages laid out are theoretical and if they do exist it's in a very complex and indistinct way.

    Even if you do ultimately marry for money, its unlikely you wake up clutching his check book in your hand to feel safe. There's a complex array of emotions going on and you may even convince yourself you love the person for "taking care of you" and "being stable" -- when really its just the AmEx but you'll never come to terms with saying that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 4:29 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    " It is life-giving, it is healing, and it provides freedom and releases energy. It is also intense and durable; it is without exploitation and is worth fighting for, dying for, and living for. It is an enchantment, desire, and unconditional good will. It is love based on one’s uniqueness."

    For us two, this is so beautifully stated and true.

    Thank you icon_wink.gif


    Thanks for your reflection, and I am glad you found your partner in crime, or in this case, love and passion! icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 08, 2012 4:45 PM GMT
    Adam228 saidNot to be harsh, but it sounds like the author is giving an unfair reading to any type of marriage except the one they think is good..

    They set out all the different types of marriages they presumably created, highlighted the problems and then said the best solution is a combination of the only parts of those marriages that support their view..

    I think those types of marriages laid out are theoretical and if they do exist it's in a very complex and indistinct way.

    Even if you do ultimately marry for money, its unlikely you wake up clutching his check book in your hand to feel safe. There's a complex array of emotions going on and you may even convince yourself you love the person for "taking care of you" and "being stable" -- when really its just the AmEx but you'll never come to terms with saying that.


    Well, that's what philosophy is all about. It's there to raise questions and hopefully find answers, or at very least promote thinking.

    What you've mentioned can be conscious or subconscious motivation factor when someone seeks a partner. Think about it this way. If someone was raised under less than perfect conditions and great deal of instability in life, don't you think they would be motivated to obtain that stable, financially secure life? The quantity is not the motivator, but the ability of another person making you feel secure in life.

    Of course there are worse cases, such as individuals knowingly and willingly pursuing someone to suck them dry of all the load they've been saving up. icon_lol.gif