Sunday, May 27, 2012

I place a lot of value on short-term relationships.

This is likely not unrelated to the fact that they're the only kind of relationships I've ever had, but regardless, I don't like it when people find it incredulous that I can have been so substantially emotionally affected by people I only dated for a few months (or less). I'm sorry, was I supposed to be closed and fake during the first few months and only open up and be vulnerable when we had hit a certain point? Is that point six months? A year? Oh, this question is silly? Then sit down.

The Anti-Intellect waxes on this in a recent post:
Underestimating love was our first mistake. Thinking it needed years to do its thing. We forgot-–or, perhaps, never remembered–-that love could come in a week and completely rock our world.

I had to embrace that notions of eternity, however comforting, don’t afford us the opportunity to do justice to our intimate relationships. Our obsession with length rather than quality thrusts us into boxes of obsession that render us incapable of judging intimate relationships on criteria other than “duration.”
When it comes to relationships, “long term” or “short term,” if it ain’t about mutual pleasure, understanding and love, I ain’t checking for it. I no longer seek long-term-relationships just to be able to say that I am in one. While length can convey certain things, such as commitment and conviction, it shouldn’t be the be-all and end-all when we look at love and relationships.
I enjoy being in a place mentally where I can enjoy a relationship regardless of its duration. I can value a two week relationship just as much as I value a two month or two year relationship. I treasure love when it comes. Nothing in nature lasts forever: seasons come and go, rivers dry up, and night eases into day.  I’m not caught up in “forever.”

No comments:

Post a Comment