[QUOTE 3767760, member: 10119"]I know a couple of couples who married because somebody in the relationship got a job abroad that they wanted and marrying was the way to make being together in a not-long-distance relationship/continuing to live as a family feasible. Why is 'I want to risk leaving everything and everyone I know behind and get hitched so that we can continue to live together somewhere half a world away while you take up this incredible opportunity' unromantic? Or 'marriage isn't a big deal either way to me but I know and accept that it is important to you and am therefore perfectly happy to do it because I love you and your well-being and happiness matter and I love you and respect your opinion, even if I don't particularly share it'?
I think the popular conception of 'romance', with its anatomically incorrect hearts, genetically distorted roses and overpriced hallmark moments, is a pile of (mildly passive-aggressive) socially compliant hollywood-nourished rose-tinted wombat doo-doos.
I think it is a lovely thing to buy a bunch of flowers for someone who likes flowers. Or to take a cup of tea in bed to someone who likes cups of tea in bed - or to never ever take breakfast in bed to someone who hates crumbs in the sheets. Relationships, as far as I'm concerned, work with mutual trust and respect, fairness, honest communication - that kind of stuff.[/QUOTE]
Great post. Just my thoughts below.
Never bought into the term "relationship" which carries so meanings to so many people that it has become a public bus for folks to jump on or off at their convenience.
Romance on the other hand is a clear, distinct , mutual and amazingly has no legal basis or interpretation and does not involve the state. Only you and the person that you are involved with would know the meaning of romance. It also need not be commercialised the "the hallmark" way. And yes, trust of all things.
And it is unfortunate that the Hollywood movies of this genre is such a drawcard for those who want one, had one and never had one.