3 ms·

Probably because what most people call "love" is really just the first stage of it, and if it has not been replaced by something deeper (i.e. respect) by the ti

Probably because what most people call "love" is really just the first stage of it, and if it has not been replaced by something deeper (i.e. respect) by the time the initial love fades, then it wasn't love but infatuation - or, more precisely passion was not nurtured carefully enough to become respect, and so it was just an infatuation. In short, it would be absurd to mix up infatuation with love.

d3nj4l 5y ago
If it was - as you say - just infatuation, then wouldn't it be better to seek a divorce? Why does that become absurd?
- brigandish 5y ago
  This: > [a] situation where you seek divorce because you’re no longer in “love” is not: [a] situation where you seek divorce because you’re no longer infatuated One might well call the second situation absurd too, as, if you knew it was absurd then you shouldn't have wed, but it's still a different absurdity.
- silisili 5y ago
  Sometimes. The entire problem is that the infatuation stage just doesn't last that long, which of course makes one ask...why did you get married too soon? The bigger problem as I've seen over the years with people is that they confuse the two with -other- people. A person married for 5 years becomes infatuated with someone else, which of course means they love them and not their spouse anymore. In their eyes, at least. And the problem with that thinking should be immediately apparent. It's a complicated subject and I'm not an expert by any means, just sharing my observations.
  - loopz 5y ago
    Was it really love, if you become willing to hurt your spouse. Is being ruled by desire big enough for you?
slothtrop 5y ago
Presumably this could be sussed out long before marriage. And if that deeper love and respect should disintegrate, there would be some sort of catalyst. My expectation is that it's unlikely in the long-run to fall out of love if both parties still nurture the relationship and invest themselves. But maybe I'm wrong and it happens anyway.

d3nj4l 5y ago

If it was - as you say - just infatuation, then wouldn't it be better to seek a divorce? Why does that become absurd?

brigandish 5y ago
This: > [a] situation where you seek divorce because you’re no longer in “love” is not: [a] situation where you seek divorce because you’re no longer infatuated One might well call the second situation absurd too, as, if you knew it was absurd then you shouldn't have wed, but it's still a different absurdity.
silisili 5y ago
Sometimes. The entire problem is that the infatuation stage just doesn't last that long, which of course makes one ask...why did you get married too soon? The bigger problem as I've seen over the years with people is that they confuse the two with -other- people. A person married for 5 years becomes infatuated with someone else, which of course means they love them and not their spouse anymore. In their eyes, at least. And the problem with that thinking should be immediately apparent. It's a complicated subject and I'm not an expert by any means, just sharing my observations.
- loopz 5y ago
  Was it really love, if you become willing to hurt your spouse. Is being ruled by desire big enough for you?

slothtrop 5y ago

Presumably this could be sussed out long before marriage. And if that deeper love and respect should disintegrate, there would be some sort of catalyst. My expectation is that it's unlikely in the long-run to fall out of love if both parties still nurture the relationship and invest themselves. But maybe I'm wrong and it happens anyway.