Sexual desire is an acute emotion, not a mere biological drive like hunger and thirst. We know that despite their differences, sexual desire and love overlap a great deal in the brain, activating specific, related areas. Along these lines, it has been found that people are reluctant to label their feelings in a romantic relationship as “love” if they do not feel sexual attraction toward the person. Although sexual desire includes both attractiveness and praiseworthiness, the emphasis is on physical attractiveness. Accordingly, sexual desire calls for less complex capabilities than romantic love does.10
The two—romantic love and sex—are often found at opposite poles. Romantic love is considered one of the most sublime human expressions. Sex, for its part, has been associated with vulgarity and disgust, even degrading the partner into a commodity. As one woman put it, “I’ve always hated knowing that men wanted to have sex with me without any emotional involvement. I think I trigger sexual desire in almost every man, and it has nothing at all to do with love.” Nonetheless, some people fiercely criticize various sexual relationships but still consider sexual exclusivity to be the hallmark of romantic love and see its violation as the ultimate desecration of the romantic bond.
Because of the close relation between romantic love and sexual desire, we cannot be as unromantic about sex as we are about eating. Nonetheless, sometimes sexual desire still has nothing to do with romantic love. Contemporary Western society might equate love and sex, but the excitement of novel changes reduces sexual intensity in lengthy monogamous romantic relationships. As Wednesday Martin quipped, monogamy sounds like monotony, and while we may judge an adulterous woman harshly, we have to admit she is anything but boring.11
And here we come to a tricky question: If sex does not lie at the core of romantic love, why do we demand sexual exclusivity in romantic relationships? It seems that from a psychological perspective, the gravest violation of the romantic bond is an affair involving significant intimacy with another person, rather than superficial sexual interaction with someone. However, sexual activities often entail emotional intimacy, which is indeed important for romantic love and can pose a threat to the partner’s main relationship. The essence of love is not the sexual activity itself but rather the emotional intimacy, which is sometimes—but not always—associated with it. Although sexual relations do not require love, profound romantic love usually includes sex. When sex is combined with profound romantic love, it is part of the ongoing intrinsic meaningful experience of love that facilitates flourishing.
Of course, there is sex without love. In the case of commercial sex and other purposive sexual relationships, sex is an instrumental activity in which the other is used as a means to satisfy one’s sexual desire or to gain wealth, status, or attention. Sex without love can also have an intrinsic value, but this is typically an immediately rewarding, relatively short-lived experience requiring few or no profound human capacities. By itself, this pleasure cannot sustain the individual’s flourishing in the long term. This is the difference between a fleeting pleasure and a lasting treasure. We should be careful, however, not to claim that sexual interactions are meaningless. Such interactions increase our well-being in the sense of increasing positive affect and meaning in life, and decreasing negative affect (e.g., having a stress-response dampening effect).12
The limited value of sex without love is reflected in the morning-after effect and in the specter of sex addiction. In these cases, superficial pleasurable activities have a negative functional value, since we excessively pursue them instead of engaging in activities that are better for us. However, sometimes sex without love can generate profound love in which sex is part of the ongoing intrinsically valuable experience of love.
Put sex and love together, and you can come out with some very happy people. However, love is a much greater predictor of happiness than sex and different sorts of attachment—including marriage, which is not a good predictor of happiness at all. Yet sex is not the essence of love. There are women who have not experienced an orgasm for many years, even though they love their partner. Some people experience intense sexual pleasure by having casual sex with people other than their partner, whom they love and respect. Love can also reduce sexual intensity, both because some people are too shy to be sexually free with the partner they love and respect and because familiarity can decrease sexual attraction.
The role of sex in romantic love is complex. James McNulty and colleagues, who studied the connection between marital satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and frequency of sex in the first five years of marriage, found that all three variables declined over time, though the rate of decline in each variable became increasingly less steep. Generally, spouses’ own marital and sexual satisfaction were correlated; likewise, spouses’ own sexual satisfaction and frequency of sex were positively associated with one another. Yet marital satisfaction did not directly predict changes in frequency of sex or vice versa. These findings suggest that sexual and relationship satisfaction are intricately intertwined.13
Sexual desire, and attraction in general, take front-burner status during the initial stage of a romantic connection, when they act as a kind of magnet between the two partners. Indeed, whereas sexual desire declines with time, friendship increases over time. However, sexual activities between the partners generally enhance the romantic relationship, in the sense of drawing them closer to each other.
Long-term profound love, which involves a high degree of both attractiveness and praiseworthiness, also involves a high degree of friendship and sex. Friendship grows deeper as it is a major element in the profound connection between the two that has developed over time. Sexual desire typically diminishes over time; however, in long-term profound love, this decrease is more limited. Thus, a married woman who is having an affair for the first time in her long marriage says, “The best orgasms I get are with my husband, although I can have faster and more orgasms with my lover. There is something unique about sex with my husband; I guess we have had more practice.” Oftentimes, novelty increases sexual quantity, while familiarity enhances quality and uniqueness.
The perspective of Zen is noteworthy here. In discussing the importance Zen gives to time and familiarity, Philip Sudo states that no matter how familiar we are with each other, we cannot get bored if we truly pay attention to the complexity of the other. He makes this argument for lovemaking as well, saying there is a level of depth that genuine lovers can only experience after sharing a great deal of time together. They are like musicians, who, having played together for many years, come to know each other very well.14
Intensity and Profundity
We cannot be happy if we expect to live all the time at the highest peak of intensity. Happiness is not a matter of intensity but of balance and order and rhythm and harmony.
THOMAS MERTON
Something that is profound extends far below the surface and has a lasting effect. Profound emotional experiences have a lingering impact on our life and personality. Profound activities, however, are not necessarily pleasant activities. Some writers and artists—we might think of Vincent van Gogh, for example—experience great agony in the process of creating their works. In such cases, profundity typically involves deep, meaningful satisfaction in overcoming difficulties while using one’s most distinctive capacities.
In the romantic realm, we can distinguish between profound and superficial phenomena by paying attention to romantic intensity, on the one hand, and romantic profundity, on the other. This is a distinction that is frequently overlooked. Romantic intensity is a snapshot of a momentary peak of passionate, often sexual, desire. Romantic profundity goes beyond mere romantic intensity and refers to the lover’s broader and more enduring attitude. External change is highly significant in generating romantic intensity; in romantic depth, familiarity, stability, and development are tremendously important. While romantic novelty is useful in preventing boredom, romantic familiarity is valuable in promoting flourishing.15
The profundity o
f a romantic experience differs from the intensity with which it is felt; profundity involves certain types of activities that take place over time. What the temporal dimension adds to romantic profundity is shared emotional experiences and interactions. In moving from mere romantic intensity to romantic profundity, it is not only time spent together that matters, but also time spent on activities during which the partners flourish. Thus, the joint activities that promote profound love require time to do. If time is available, but the activities are missing, we wind up with an experience that is not profound.
Romantic profundity involves friendship and sexual desire. Friendship takes time to develop and involves mutuality; although we speak of unrequited love, we do not speak of “unrequited friendship.” At the beginning of a relationship, romantic intensity depends mainly on physical attractiveness. Over the years, the focus in a romantic relationship shifts from romantic intensity to romantic profundity and from sexual desire to the yearning to be with each other. Romantic profundity is not threatened by a low frequency and intensity of sexual activity but rather by a low quality of shared interactions, mutual support, and intimacy.
Following the intensity-profundity distinction, we can differentiate between fleeting pleasure and lasting satisfaction. Superficial pleasure is an immediately rewarding, relatively short-lived experience requiring few complex human capacities. Superficial experiences affect only the surface and are limited in their scope and impact—although their impact can become rather negative if we engage in them excessively. Profound satisfaction involves optimal functioning, using and developing one’s main capacities and attitudes. Part of profound satisfaction is the ability to overcome problems and make progress. While laziness can provide fleeting pleasure, work and activities yield profound satisfaction. Gorging ourselves on consumer goods can give us short-term pleasure, but it is unlikely to make us substantially happier people.
The Development of Sexual Desire
When I first met and sat beside my lover, I felt immediately the urge to touch him, which was strange, as it had never happened to me before.
A MARRIED WOMAN
We have learned that romantic intensity, as typically expressed in sexual desire, is brief, while romantic profundity often grows deeper with time. Time, a frequent enemy of romantic intensity, is a long-standing friend of romantic profundity. Nonetheless, the full picture is complex.
Gurit Birnbaum, who presents a model of the development of sexual desire over time, agrees that sexual desire tends to be strong during the early stages of a romantic relationship before subsiding gradually, with many couples failing to maintain sexual desire in their long-term relationships. However, she also claims that desire is not inevitably doomed to die with the passing of time, and not everyone will eventually lose sexual interest in their partner. Although sexual desire influences the initiation, development, and maintenance of the romantic bonds, its contribution varies over the course of relationship development. Specifically, sexual desire contributes most at the earlier stages of the relationship. Hence, the intensity of sexual desire by itself cannot predict the success of long-term relationships.16
Birnbaum argues that sexual desire functions as a gatekeeper in relationship-development processes. Sexual desire also has a relationship-maintaining function—this can be particularly important when other aspects of the relationship fail to reinforce the romantic bond. Unlike in the sports arena, sudden death is unusual in the relationship arena: when relationships end, they generally die over time. Sexual interactions can slow down this process, and in some cases, even prevent it. Engaging in shared sexual activities adds novelty and creates opportunities for development and self-expansion. It seems that sexual profundity is mainly expressed in a greater awareness of the partner’s unique needs, as well as a readiness to invest effort in nurturing the partner and fulfilling these needs.17
My Heart Has a Mind of Its Own
The heart has its reasons which reason does not understand.
BLAISE PASCAL
I don’t think when I make love.
BRIGITTE BARDOT
When the heart and head clash, we are witnessing a conflict between acute emotions—which are personal, partial, and relatively brief—and intellectual considerations—which are broader, more objective, and have longer-term validity. The intellect is concerned with the general and the stable, whereas acute emotions are engaged with the particular and the volatile. With such differences, one might wonder whether the heart and the head could ever be integrated into one single system. The fact is that they are integrated, and the interesting question is how it seems to work.
There is a long tradition of degrading the value of emotions. In this tradition, which radically informs our culture today, emotions in general, and romantic love in particular, are seen as obstacles to clear thinking and thus optimal living. The fact is, however, that the emotional response is often the best response. While they are not always practical, emotions are deeply embedded in matters of the heart. We don’t do well when we keep emotions under lock and key—but we fare equally badly when we allow emotions to overwhelm us. We should aim at a balance that combines thought and emotion. The popular notion of “emotional intelligence” refers to such an integration.
The heart-head conflict is especially obvious in romantic love, which has often been considered a type of addiction, disease, or, at best, irrational behavior. Despite the crucial weight of the heart in romantic matters, the common and celebrated wish to give complete priority to the heart over the head is often unwise. Following our heart might not always involve acting according to our long-term concerns. Moreover, how can we identify what the genuine expressions of our heart are? Certainly, not all emotional states are genuine expressions of profound love—some of them are superficial experiences that we would not want to endure in the long term. Similarly, being too rational, to the point of neglecting the romantic element, is harmful: it is often irrational to marry for merely intellectual reasons. Considering the larger, long-term picture is indeed rational, but ignoring the immediate, short-term element of passionate love is not rational at all. After all, it is in the immediate present that we actually live.
Commenting on La Rochefoucauld’s remark that “the head is always fooled by the heart,” Jon Elster asks: Why should the heart bother to fool the head? Can’t it just get on with it and do whatever it wants? By way of answer, he suggests that it is important to our self-image to believe we are ruled by reason rather than by passion. Elster terms this tendency “addiction to reason” and rightly points out that it makes those who are so addicted irrational rather than rational. A rational person would know that, under certain conditions, it is better to follow her emotional intuition than to engage in elaborate intellectual gymnastics.18
Importantly, the heart-head conflict is not a clear-cut dichotomy. Thus, emotions involve intellectual considerations, and intellectual considerations are influenced by emotional input. Nevertheless, this distinction will help us better understand the two systems.
In the romantic realm, interestingly, we also see the opposite tendency: the heart is sometimes fooled by the head. We can speak of an “addiction to romance” in which people convince themselves that they are staying in their marriages because they still love their partner, while they are really staying because they do not want to pay the cost of leaving. Along these lines, people might choose to marry because of the financial and social status of their partner, as in the case of the “sugar daddy,” while convincing themselves that they are marrying out of love. Often, it is considered more meritorious to marry for romantic reasons than for cold, deliberative, and intellectual ones.
Despite current romantic views, then, the head does manage to . . . well . . . stick its head into romantic decisions of the heart. Although romantic love and the intellect seem worlds apart, romantic love is not the irrational beast it has been made out to be. It actually seems to be rather reason-dependent.19
Romantic behav
ior takes place in a world of dead ends and forks in the road, and the head serves as an indispensable GPS. The heart might point to an ideal place, but the head should explore the road ahead, anticipating painful potholes along the way. To make good decisions, we need to engage both the head and the heart. In the romantic realm, the heart should be given considerable leeway, as we love to please our heart, but not exclusive value, as we also love a comfortable life. Even in the choice of romantic partner, which seems to be the exclusive terrain of the heart, the notion of finding the “right” partner implies that the intellectual head should be involved in the search. The romantic heart is often considered to be short-sighted, and its wish for long-term love should be assisted by the head, which is better at taking the long view.
Philosophical Models of Romantic Love: Caring and Sharing
My God, these folks don’t know how to love—that’s why they love so easily.
The Arc of Love Page 6
