Why do we need relationships?

@Pin actually got a lot of it right already.

Nature has equipped humanity with the means to do two things, the things that all species do: survive and procreate. These means are for the most part our biological urges and whatever became of them during the process of evolution. The whole topic is too big to put into this one post, but that is the underlying issue. We still have those biological urges, even though our more (or less) rational minds have stifled the need to act on them. Instead, we have developed a system of social conventions and rules that we follow, most without questioning it. This is how we explain and justify giving in to our urges to some extent.

I say to some extent, because monogamy is not present in all corners of nature. But humanity has been able to sustain its supremacy over the globe by building first tribes and later on whole civilisations, governed by rules which we still follow and/or change according to our collective knowledge and ethics. This in mind, relationships - or rather the feelings involved in them - are a remnants of the initial programming of our species.

I also see it from a more romantic perspective: besides the biologial, sociological and evolutionary aspects, psychological advantages are for me the more practical principles to follow. Funnily enough, I am most attracted to compatibility. A lot of it is already biologically ingrained in our urges, but there is also a psychological aspect to attraction which cannot be ignored. But I'm straying a bit off topic. The advantage of a compatible parter is mutual understanding and personal growth. Sometimes, we need a parter that supports us unconditionally (although it could be argued that this is not unconditional if you are in a relationship), to pick us up when we're down, and pull us out of the holes that we dig ourselves. While it is true that some of it may be done by friends and family, there will always be topics that you will never speak about with people within even your close relations, with the exception of an intimate partner who - again - understands and supports you.

Life will always throw things at you to struggle with. What better way to tackle these obstacles than with a partner? As life coach Bryant Chambers often says: "We are stronger than I."
 
Ryso89 said:
As I guy though, I feel like the pressure to initiate weighs heavier on us, generally. If / when I do, usually if she doesn't reciprocate right away, I am hurt, and I immediately back off and vow to never even speak to that person again.

I have too many protective measures, but that is who I am. My gut reactions usually kick my defenses into overdrive, though.

But for me to want to initiate, I have to study her for a while. Her habits, what she says. Subtle things about her that may or may not appeal to my prejudices.
Click to expand...

Wow really, I thought guys had a better handle on rejection lol. That's got me thinking. There is so much to consider when dating and this process puts me off. I can tell whether I like a guy or not from the first meeting/date. In high school, I used to test guys on whether they liked me by seeing if they were determined enough to come back and try again. Well these days I don't because adults are very different, I guess it's maturity and the competition. I hate the competition, why do we have to impress people who might already like us. Anyways I hear what you're saying, maybe getting to know the person first by hanging out, helps narrow it down. I might just try initiating once in a while, and hope to learn something.
 
Ginny said:
@Pin actually got a lot of it right already.

Nature has equipped humanity with the means to do two things, the things that all species do: survive and procreate. These means are for the most part our biological urges and whatever became of them during the process of evolution. The whole topic is too big to put into this one post, but that is the underlying issue. We still have those biological urges, even though our more (or less) rational minds have stifled the need to act on them. Instead, we have developed a system of social conventions and rules that we follow, most without questioning it. This is how we explain and justify giving in to our urges to some extent.

I say to some extent, because monogamy is not present in all corners of nature. But humanity has been able to sustain its supremacy over the globe by building first tribes and later on whole civilisations, governed by rules which we still follow and/or change according to our collective knowledge and ethics. This in mind, relationships - or rather the feelings involved in them - are a remnants of the initial programming of our species.

I also see it from a more romantic perspective: besides the biologial, sociological and evolutionary aspects, psychological advantages are for me the more practical principles to follow. Funnily enough, I am most attracted to compatibility. A lot of it is already biologically ingrained in our urges, but there is also a psychological aspect to attraction which cannot be ignored. But I'm straying a bit off topic. The advantage of a compatible parter is mutual understanding and personal growth. Sometimes, we need a parter that supports us unconditionally (although it could be argued that this is not unconditional if you are in a relationship), to pick us up when we're down, and pull us out of the holes that we dig ourselves. While it is true that some of it may be done by friends and family, there will always be topics that you will never speak about with people within even your close relations, with the exception of an intimate partner who - again - understands and supports you.

Life will always throw things at you to struggle with. What better way to tackle these obstacles than with a partner? As life coach Bryant Chambers often says: "We are stronger than I."
Click to expand...

That's very moving, I feel like I understand the whole dynamics of relationships better. I like your writing, it spoke to my heart. Thank you for your contribution.:smooch:
 
Faye said:
I do not think we do necessarily. The Dalai Lama and some other spiritual practitioners make a pretty good case for celibacy. Of course, if everyone were celibate, our species would die off. But aside from that, I do not really see a need for relationships.

Sex, Celibacy and Spirituality: Why the Dalai Lama Doesn't Date
Click to expand...

Celibacy is not an option, i'm too young for that, lol. Thanks for the link. I guess it all depends on the individual. My curiosity brings me to here, trying to understand so that my relationships are better handled by myself. In my first "relationship", I didn't know what I was doing which led me to lose myself and stuff. Now I want my first proper relationship to be meaningful in a way, to lead me somewhere, instead of being a prison of confusion.
 
Madgirl143 said:
but we get that from friends and family, so is there any other reason for relationships except sex? Do people think about these things or do they just follow their biological instincts?
Click to expand...

I think you hit on the head something I've often wondered. I honestly think to some extent, it's just because people do it/and it's become a habit.

But when I really examine it, I don't really think there's anything but friends out there. Some friends may involve attraction. Other friends may involve a mutual passion for tennis. Another may involve a mutual passion for music. At the end of the day, once you get friends who are as close as close can be, where you'd take bullets for each other, there doesn't seem to be much else to ask. Romance is just a passion like tennis or music, as far as I can tell...it can be very intense and psychological, but it's just one other type of passion. Love is love, and is ultimately the same. Sure there are subtle differences in how it is expressed in different cases, but the core of it seems to remain the same always/those who don't think this way generally tend in my experience to be confused.

The whole 'making a special, formal deal' about relationships really does seem to just be out of habit. Nothing inherently wrong with habit ... just, I don't think there's anything too mysterious beyond that.
 
Last edited:
charlatan said:
I think you hit on the head something I've often wondered. I honestly think to some extent, it's just because people do it/and it's become a habit.

But when I really examine it, I don't really think there's anything but friends out there. Some friends may involve attraction. Other friends may involve a mutual passion for tennis. Another may involve a mutual passion for music. At the end of the day, once you get friends who are as close as close can be, where you'd take bullets for each other, there doesn't seem to be much else to ask. Romance is just a passion like tennis or music, as far as I can tell...it can be very intense and psychological, but it's just one other type of passion. Love is love, and is ultimately the same. Sure there are subtle differences in how it is expressed in different cases, but the core of it seems to remain the same always/those who don't think this way generally tend in my experience to be confused.

The whole 'making a special, formal deal' about relationships really does seem to just be out of habit. Nothing inherently wrong with habit ... just, I don't think there's anything too mysterious beyond that.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your input,I guess when you put it like that it kinda makes more sense why relationships exist. You're right, at the end of the day they are all the same, I just kept looking at it in terms of what we get from the relationship.
 
Yeah, I mean there's no denying romance can be a very passionate experience -- much as music or tennis can be (if those sound really silly to compare to the intensity of romance, just find out how some of the stars like Roger Federer feel about tennis....it's a deep, intense passion that is life-changing.)

What I think is baffling is ideas like automatically loving a romantic partner more than others in your life -- that, I chalk up to blind, unreflective following of convention, and the same goes for most of the jealousy and all that surrounding romance, ie it's no deeper than the sugar cravings we have probably....a primitive instinct, maybe exacerbated by the fact that once, finding a mate in the wild competitively was a prime need in the biological hierarchy. Ultimately I think the idea that jealousy is healthier in romantic relations than in friendship is silly/based on the mistake of thinking love is fundamentally different in either case.

I mention this baffled stuff because I have wondered like you what exactly people look for apart from what they get from friends/family. On the one hand, I get it -- just like one friend of yours may not share your intellectual passions, or your tennis passions, another might be someone you love but where there isn't a romantic spark. So in that sense, I get making a special deal of that to enjoy the experience of romance.

But OTOH as should be clear from the rest of my post, I far from view it as a necessity. I mean, ultimately *I* don't care if my friends share my passion for abstract topics, or for that matter any of my passions. My friendships are generally more of the 'would you take a bullet for me' type than about our interests.
In that sense, I don't think there's really anything different in essence/in terms of the things most important to me that I'd get, simply because love is the same in essence in all cases.

(Note: obviously the way I phrase it, the bullet thing, could be confusing, as it may signal loyalty over love; e.g. maybe some of Hitler's followers would take a bullet for him. I distinguish the two cases in the sense that the bullet thing should be based on compassion. That is, I should see in my friends a willingness to similarly care for others, not just for me.
A striking way of knowing the difference is sometimes people can be shockingly loyal to one person to the point of willing to harm others for the one.....this can especially happen in romantic relationships, and it's a great example of the confusion that arises when you think there's 'something more important than' the so-called ordinary love)
 
Last edited:
charlatan said:
Yeah, I mean there's no denying romance can be a very passionate experience -- much as music or tennis can be (if those sound really silly to compare to the intensity of romance, just find out how some of the stars like Roger Federer feel about tennis....it's a deep, intense passion that is life-changing.)

What I think is baffling is ideas like automatically loving a romantic partner more than others in your life -- that, I chalk up to blind, unreflective following of convention, and the same goes for most of the jealousy and all that surrounding romance, ie it's no deeper than the sugar cravings we have probably....a primitive instinct, maybe exacerbated by the fact that once, finding a mate in the wild competitively was a prime need in the biological hierarchy. Ultimately I think the idea that jealousy is healthier in romantic relations than in friendship is silly/based on the mistake of thinking love is fundamentally different in either case.

I mention this baffled stuff because I have wondered like you what exactly people look for apart from what they get from friends/family. On the one hand, I get it -- just like one friend of yours may not share your intellectual passions, or your tennis passions, another might be someone you love but where there isn't a romantic spark. So in that sense, I get making a special deal of that to enjoy the experience of romance.

But OTOH as should be clear from the rest of my post, I far from view it as a necessity. I mean, ultimately *I* don't care if my friends share my passion for abstract topics, or for that matter any of my passions. My friendships are generally more of the 'would you take a bullet for me' type than about our interests.
In that sense, I don't think there's really anything different in essence/in terms of the things most important to me that I'd get, simply because love is the same in essence in all cases.

(Note: obviously the way I phrase it, the bullet thing, could be confusing, as it may signal loyalty over love; e.g. maybe some of Hitler's followers would take a bullet for him. I distinguish the two cases in the sense that the bullet thing should be based on compassion. That is, I should see in my friends a willingness to similarly care for others, not just for me.
A striking way of knowing the difference is sometimes people can be shockingly loyal to one person to the point of willing to harm others for the one.....this can especially happen in romantic relationships, and it's a great example of the confusion that arises when you think there's 'something more important than' the so-called ordinary love)
Click to expand...

Don't worry I understand the bullet thing, I actually would like a partner to be able to do that, especially if I was going to marry him. As far as friendships go, I can be pretty shallow, I've only had about three best friends in my life so far, everyone else has been fleeting so I stopped trying to hold onto friendships. I feel like friendships lack a devotion, unless you've actually grown up with the person, then they might even be considered so close to be like a sister or brother. But it takes years to develop that, since I moved I had to let go of my childhood friends. So I don't ask for a friendship to be like that, I'd rather ask for that in a relationship because there's much to lose.

I am an emotional person, sex is something more than just humping for satisfaction even if I consider it to be, I still bring my emotions to the table. That's why I'm not keen on one night stands. And then having a child too, to me, is a really big thing, although at the moment I doubt I want to have kids. I guess building any type of relationship is important but romantic relationships just have a lot of stack to lose so I wonder why we put ourselves through that, the lying and the cheating, is it all worth it? I find it weird that with family, things are easily brushed under the carpet but with anyone else it becomes a big deal. Is blood really thicker than water? I understand everyone has a reason for being in a relationship, but we are very fleeting, an attractive woman/man passes by and we're hung up, what happened to the forever? When people divorce, do they really realise what they are doing, and does it matter? Why are divorces more in the last couple of years than in the past, is it robots, dating apps, so are we really into romantic relationships or will they become meaningless in the future? Can romantic connections really stand the test of time, or is it the laziness of getting back into the dating scene that keeps people together?
 
Madgirl143 said:
Is blood really thicker than water?
Click to expand...

I read a while ago that the complete saying is actually "The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb." It gave me a lot to think about.
 
Marlize said:
I read a while ago that the complete saying is actually "The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb." It gave me a lot to think about.
Click to expand...

Really, that explains a lot. I've been walking around with half of the saying, thank you, now I feel a lot better. :smiley:
 
Madgirl143 said:
Really, that explains a lot. I've been walking around with half of the saying, thank you, now I feel a lot better. :smiley:
Click to expand...
You're welcome. Many sayings have been twisted over time. It's tragic, really. It looses it's edge.
 
I don't know that we 'need' intimate relationships, but we're in relationship of some kind with everything in our lives. We can use everything we're in relationship with to learn about ourselves. I enjoyed 27 years of intimate relationships, and now I enjoy being alone.
I don't know if that's an answer, but I enjoyed the opportunity to reflect on it.
 
Madgirl143 said:
Didn't know where to put this, so ended up here.

Is it weird that sometimes I don't see the point in being in a relationship other than for sexual reasons? Why do people spend their lives looking for one person when there's about 7 billion people in the world. Why do we shun others and admire others? What is the meaning of having someone to spend the rest of your life with? Don't people get bored or feel claustrophobic when they have to spend everyday with one person? I understand that we need companionship, but we get that from friends and family, so is there any other reason for relationships except sex? Do people think about these things or do they just follow their biological instincts?
Click to expand...

Sex as the only motivator? No, we're pretty well programmed that way. People spend their lives looking for a soulmate because they are idealistic. We shun/admire others based upon our learned values and biological programming. Lots of people get bored or claustrophobic spending every day with one person. Why not just kill two birds with one stone and sex your family (jokes)? Yes people think about these things.

I don't think we are inherently monogamous creatures, but that many people's adherence to monogamy is more social convention than biology. That's of course not an excuse to cheat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top