On love and freedom

Happy 3rd month anniversary dearie!

On this occasion of the 3rd month leading a new life with my dear, I take aside some time to write on the revelations that love has given me.

And don’t worry, it’s not in the mould of “mushy joined at the heart, moving as one”, I’ll save those for someone special.

What inspired me was a particular idle, after-lunch talk with a friend one day. The topic revolved around one particular topic, love and relationships. It began as a discussion on the quality of girls in a certain hostel in a certain varsity in a sunny island of the equator, that progressed into a discussion the qualities of the girls you can find there. One thing lead to another and the topic veered into the territory of marriage.

“I want a wife who would stay at home, do up all the chores, and leave me free to find other flings.”

Friend said non-committally.

That was something that I did not agree with in the least bit.

How could someone entertain such thoughts? Isn’t the promise you will make when you marry inclusive of staying faithful and committed to one another?

(Before I proceed any further, I need to clarify some of my stances on the institution of marriage. I don’t believe that marriage is binding for marriage’s sake. In other words, I don’t believe going through the marriage unites the two hearts together. I believe in the power of the promise that two lovers make to each other on the altar that holds power over the rest of their lives.)

That being said, I felt it unethical to entertain thoughts of finding a wife just to take care of the households and wait on you. How was that different from hiring a maid? I mean, in my world, two people don’t go making vows just to have someone clean up the kitchen and raise the kids while you are at work.

Those, I believe are results of a union, that come from a need to raise a family, that stems from the promise of commitment to leading a life together.

The two parties have made a decision to thread this road together in a union. A union, regardless of its nature between two or more parties is always a matter of compromise and understanding. Family, friends, colleagues and which other forms of relationship that results in a union is all about compromises, it requires “give and take”.

I find that marriage is no different. Expecting a wife to be perfectly docile and condescending to the husband does not, in my books constitute a union. It becomes a demand. in this case, it is no longer a union between two willing parties, and devolves into a selfish ego-trip in that respect.

Love in my opinion must be between two parties who sacrifice and commit to each other. A couple, who through communication compromise to fit in their lives to raise each other up to greater heights than they could have ever achieved as individuals.

Ah, how I digress. Anyway, friend goes on to add that he understands the implications of his belief, but he thinks that the lifestyle he envisions gives him a freedom that “normal Singaporean men” do not have.

I felt very offended at that thought. He described the following scenario “where the husbands drive the kids around, wait on the wives hand and foot, and generally become a shadow of their former selves,” was to act as the platform for his argument that love was the end of freedom.

Let’s examine the freedom from his perspective.

True, that he has the freedom to flirt around and if lucky, bed a few of his flings. He is free to find a new one the moment that he find the present on boring or unattractive. He will not be obliged to restrict certain activities to just one partner.

And of course, freedom from my perspective.

Sure, you gain the freedom to move around the lady’s circle without any strings to hold you down, but I have freedom that he does not have. I have the freedom to put my heart at ease, knowing that there is a loving dedicated girlfriend there to support and talk to me. I am free in the knowledge that should anything happen to me, she will be there to kiss me and make it better.

You see, both views are talk of a freedom; it simply depends on how you view it. As I explain to people, and to friend, that I do not know which method is best. All I can do is to present the different perspective and perhaps my own view to help persuade and convince people of the merits of my system of belief.

Flirting around every night might appear fun and novel at the beginning, but the thing with flirting is that it leads nowhere permanent. The nature of a fling is that the relationship functions on a temporal level. There’s hardly any need or inclination towards stability. I mean honestly, they’re out there for a good time, and both parties should know it by now (I mean if they have had been at it long enough).

I find that emotionally taxing and difficult to sustain as a mode of living in the long term. Moving form one woman to the next, means having to accustom yourself to accepting a new person at every turn. Or, like most people in the “game” do, they fall into a certain routine. In short, the process of dating becomes an exercise in the skills of the playeur and his repertoire of tricks to impress the girls.

At the end of the day, being a playeur does not fulfill one spiritually. A playeur doesn’t search for the connection, the bond or the love. In a certain way, the one thing a playuer searches for is the satisfaction of the conquest. ‘Conquest’, that is temporal.

And as I’m headed off from here soon, I’ll leave it at here for now. =)