>It seems very clear which version you prefer, but why do you call it a "fantasy" of spontaneity? I should've been clearer: 'fantasy' doesn't mean 'false' here

>It seems very clear which version you prefer, but why do you call it a "fantasy" of spontaneity? I should've been clearer: 'fantasy' doesn't mean 'false' here. More like 'embellishment', an additive, framing, to reality that makes it more palatable and exchangeable (symbolically). The point of bringing up arranged marriage demonstrates spontaneity itself is more radical than is framed in the case of mainstream rhetoric around amorous relationships rather than a partisan approval.