Sunday, January 20, 2008

Warning: Impending attack on sacred social institution

Yes I'm in full-on rant form, and this time i'm not just ranting on some new social trend of the last decade or two, this time I'm taking on one that dates back to at least Elizabethan times.......the ethics of love.

Love, let me remind you, is an emotion. A physical state of being. Yet my society has turned it into an ethic. And not just any ethic but the ethic of highest standing and the one to most live your life by.

Personally, I think if one moral is going to guide people's lives it should be responsibility, and a balanced responsibility at that. And when I see the moral of love praised over responsibility it infuriates me to the core. I was just reading an article comparing Hilary & Bill Clinton to Amy Winehouse and her husband. The article gave Amy the moral highground over Hilary because Amy really loved her husband. I mean really, what's that got to do with anything. If Hilary stayed with Bill to further her career, it deserves the same moral worth as Amy staying with her husband because she loves him. It's an emotion. Do they not get it. And given the fact that the Clintons have done so much more for the world than those beacons of irresponsibility Winehouse & her generic junkie husband, means the Clintons should be praised more.

Let's go back to 92/93. This is where it all started for me and the twisted ethics of love. I was on a train with two female friends – A & B. A had been in a relationship with a man who abused her, he had children with two other women and she had previously aborted his child. She was now thinking of getting back with him and seeking approval. B – newly loved up and big into it anyway, replied – you have to follow your heart. It was a moment of flabbergast for me. I don’t think I said anything at the time but I remembered it forever. The relationship was beyond the stereo-type of all things wrong, yet it was ok because that ever present moral of morals – love - said it was ok to back to hell.

Another example that drives me to fury is the distinction between love and lust; namely – lust – evil, base sin; love – sacred ethic. If a man leaves his family for a leggy blonde it’s crude and irresponsible. If he leaves because he was in love with another, it’s ok because you have to respect the laws of love. Given the fact that lust is an addictive emotion, while love isn’t, surely one should have more sympathy to the victim of lust.

I can even confess that it's the one thing about the Harry Potter series that annoys me.

It just annoys me so so so much. I hate the stupid ideologies of my society. Why I can’t I rule the world and change everything.


  1. Because you wouldn't let anyone breast feed, and then we'd all be even further up shit creek.

    And I'd have to assassinate you...

  2. And you'd have to get though me first.

    And Milan, I'm not sure who told you it's OK for a man to leave his family for love. Almost everyone will tell you that it's never ok for a man to leaves his family for any reason.

  3. It doesn't make any difference Milan, if a person (male or female) leaves their family for any reason it is wrong, it's the leavers responsiblity, they have to live with themselves for the rest of their lives and deal with whatever that will bring into their lives, good or bad. I think they know it's wrong, even the ones who justify it or who do it for a "greater good", personally I think love and lust are interlinked in a romantic relationship and you can't divide them up into lust and love or value them differently. They are what they are, we don't need to give into either of them, we make a decision. That's the great thing about being human. Free will!

  4. worms....can...I think I have to look this way now.