L-O-V-E: The New Four-Letter Word

1/28/2006

In the advent of speed dating and eHarmony, as well as The Rules and He’s Just Not That Into You, and my personal favorite, Let’s Face It- You Weren’t That Into Him Either, has the definition of love changed?

No longer do women believe that it takes twice the amount you were with someone to get over them. It’s simply not socially acceptable anymore. It’s not politically correct to say a man broke your heart; if he broke it, that means we gave it to him. (Sorry- he “stole” it, right?) We’re not allowed to take a breather from the dating scene in fear that we may get cycled out completely. Although women today are single, forty, and supposedly loving it, it is still frowned upon to say, “I don’t want to date.” Imagine the awkward lull in conversation. It appears we are at a threshold in the dating world- don’t let men break your heart, but don’t stop dating. Which will it be?

Are women becoming more desperate or just more resourceful? Should love have to be resourceful, or are women today not even looking for love? Love has taken a backseat to something safe. Maybe it's not groundbreaking and maybe we don't care. If he's there in the morning when we wake up, why complain? We don’t believe in fairy tales anymore and we can’t grasp that someone can sweep us off our feet. This sort of thing is reduced to childish stupidity, and maybe it is. But if we don’t believe in fairy tales, then we don’t believe in love at all. Maybe it’s not the conventional fairy tale with a white horse and whatnot- but a fairy tale in that a man and a woman can just fall in love and just be happy. Why is it so wrong to believe that?

A lot of women, myself included, are calling this new mentality a reality check. Why, after dating dog after dog, should I believe that the next guy is “The One”? Why, when I realize every shortcoming all my exes had, should I sit and cry over them? Logic is against actions like that. And isn’t that the definition of insanity- doing the same thing over and over expecting different results? Ladies, I hate to say it, but love is insanity. If it were rational, would it be so amazing? Would we read about people taking bullets for their lover? Would we watch movies like The Notebook and imagine ourselves in the cast? It’s hardwired into women to want that sort of thing. To fight it is to fight biology. But admitting we want love like that… well, it’s not easy.

In a society where women are encouraged to go for careers rather than car pools and Wall Street over a wedding day, it is no wonder women are anti-love. And it’s not just anti-love, but anti-romance and anti-men. We say we don’t want men that send us flowers because “it’s a waste of time and money.” We say we don’t want men that open doors because “this is 2006 and we can do it ourselves.” We say we don’t want men that pick up the check because “we probably make more money than they do anyways.” Are we losing sight of what our heart really wants?

But who am I to say what’s wrong with women today? I regularly say that I don’t believe in love. I don’t admit when men break my heart; I keep my chin up and throw myself back on to the dating treadmill (at least in public; at home I may be feeding the stereotype of the heartbroken woman with her Ben & Jerry’s). When people ask my future plans, getting married and having kids is never a part of those plans. I don’t like feeling submissive, subjective, or stupid, and love makes me all of those things. By not believing in love, I can have my cake and eat it too. He can be in love with me, and I’m able to just be with him. And isn’t it better that way?

I worry that my children (I’m not admitting I might have them, mind you) will simply fill out a lengthy survey about their ideal mate and then walk down to the courthouse to meet that mate the next day. I don’t want love to be boiled down and simplified for them, because love is the one thing we shouldn’t understand. I want my daughter to experience heartbreak many times over because it will make her stronger; heartbreak defines us and gives us character. I want her to be able to cry over romantic movies and be wide-eyed over puppy love without feeling like she’s doing her gender a huge disservice.

If being heartbroken is not allowed, the heart will never be whole enough to give to someone else. Who fills in those holes our previous love left? We give pieces of ourselves to the people we love, and we don’t get those pieces back. When the love ends, we have to rebuild. But today, the restoration process seems to be almost extinct. A string of other men and one-night-stands are not a recipe for feeling better when someone has left a bowling ball in your chest. Ignoring pain is never the solution.

Ghosts of past loves lie in bed with us long after someone else has begun lying next to us. And they will stay there, nestled in the middle, until we find a new love that has surpassed the dedication we used to know. It’s just the way the heart works. It doesn’t mean we still love them, it just means they have set some sort of a standard (however low or high that standard may be). It just means that heartbreak and love do exist, no matter how much we want to pretend they don’t.

Being in love, feeling love, and giving love are probably the only ways to feel fulfilled in this world. Because at the end of your long, stressful, power-woman day, should it be so wrong to want to come home and find flowers on your doorstep?