For Love

Have you ever felt in love? What did it entail? Love is seen as a necessity by today’s society. Life without love is seen as a miserable failure, since if a person is not loved or cannot love, then probably they hate everyone around them, and everyone hates them in return. People have emptiness and longings inside of them, and love often times becomes the most plausible way to satisfy those longings. In the essay, Against Love, by Laura Kipnis, love’s dark side is revealed, and appears to be quite ugly if anything. Kipnis makes two major claims, that love is entirely economic and does not always satisfy those who long for it.
Kipnis claims that love is more an economic matter than a personal matter. Kipnis makes valid claims that before the 18^th century, families were arranged to be economic. Families arranged marriages between individuals such that the newly created family could sustain itself and hopefully the existing family. Kipnis goes on to say that love is all about meeting the expectations of the significant other. Too many needs and not enough catering towards needs are also described as the key destructor of any relationship as well. Meeting the other’s needs could make you seem like a lovable person, and that meeting their needs leads to the state of psychological maturity. As this is carried on, advanced intimacy begins to take over from there. This involves “opening up” which, as described, is basically sex. “Opening up” is said to make a person feel tied to the other, and even vulnerable without them. This can lead to complex negotiations and strict codes of conduct. Yet, this is not the case in every relationship. People do have needs, and in relationships, both partners strive to satisfy their own as well as each other’s needs. With everything taken care of, the two people get drawn to each other’s abilities of satisfying both sides, which leads to attraction and sexual matters. Kipnis then claims that after sex, couples get drawn to each other to the extent that they begin to create codes of conduct, which were almost described as military. Yet, these rules are created for the welfare of the relationship; they are to keep both partners involved with each other and their needs. If a rule is considered unfair by any partner in a relationship, they have the exclusive right to appeal to it. Of course, that is how love may seem on the outside. On the inside, it is a completely different story to be experienced when the time comes. That is how love may not entirely be an economic matter.
Kipnis makes a second claim, that love does not always have the capacity to satisfy any one person. The point is made that in relationships, there is always some give and take. Yet, when there is too much take and little give, or the other way around, love can get ugly. This is true in a way. People wish to be treated equally, so a rational distribution of helping and being helped could be the key to achieving equality. Everyone wants others to put time and attention into themselves, since they will feel invisible without it. Some people are better at carrying this out than others. In order for love to succeed, a person must be aware of their capabilities, and find someone who is in need of them, and whose needs are not too overwhelming. In that way, love could be the ideal way to satisfy a person.
Kipnis made two major claims, that love is entirely economic and does not always satisfy those who long for it. I personally see love as an abstract concept. There is no clear definition to it, making it open to interpretation by everyone. Some may see love as receiving a box of chocolates. Others may consider another’s presence in itself to be love. It all depends on a person’s surroundings and their own personal worldviews. If a person grew up being abused by their parents, they would have a very different idea of love apart from someone who was raised by their parents almost on a high pedestal. That is love, and how it may be interpreted.