Relationships, Love and the Status quo-Lekan Oladipupo

This might seem somewhat away from the scope of activism, but then, we can not obviously neglect some social realities especially at points where discussions call on them as they affect us and our behaviors.

Discovered with time and events, is that some persons, if not many, are 'happier alone than in relationships'. Even marriages have conceived in them problems forcefully subdued sometimes by intolerable tolerance of the victims(couples) in order to protect the marriage and the societal norms.
Who possesses what right over what, the ego of people, all seem to be the matter in many affairs.

Beginning with relationships among youths, persons get tired, fed up and sometimes intolerant to their dating partner  despite their mutual allegiance to love as the foundation of their relationships. It appears that many ladies see guys as perpetual and unrepentant cheaters (maybe yes), and the guys see ladies as unsatisfiable beings, materially and emotionally and as cheats too (maybe this is true also). There are times, in fact, that both could exhibit the above characters for certain reasons and conditions but still attached to someone sincerely or deceptively and or whether so as to bank on a reserve, and or all.  Exclusively, I will not shy away that there are exceptional cases, which on a but, are not in themselves isolated from the identified situations and conditions.

But what exactly is the problem? People lay allegiance to love to justify relationships, some say it is the utmost and important pillar, and yet the relationships and marriages still collapse. Some persons sincerely admit that love is illusionary, that what matters or that encourages the love is material possession (maybe money, survival and satisfaction, etc).

At first, what draws an individual to a lady or guy is the beauty or handsomeness, a beauty that can sometimes be obvious to many and all, or that kind of beauty which lies in the eyes of the  beholder alone (which could be ugly to many as well). Whichever way, there must be the existence of a thing before it is loved in however category of the love stated above. There is a material existence before love.

In another view, someone, lady or guy can be attracted to material possession of another, and of  course, the love begins. This means that a person is always loved for one reason or the other that is materially obvious. It could then vary from character and attitude too to other things. It is as well not a one way thing.  People can tolerate an intolerable character just to be with someone whom they love for his or her possession of beauty or other material things, some can in fact adjust their characters to suit the other person just to be with them, and in the case of marriages, it is to sustain the marriage.

In the real sense too, and in the long run of relationships and marriages, what sustains them is not necessarily the illusionary love, but a love of reasons which can span through character adjustments, tolerance, economy to material possession. If material existence and possession now seem to be the basis and survival of relationships over love, should we agree that love is an illusion and that it does not exist? Or if it exists, it is rather tied to something?

If love and relationship are about satisfying our feelings, wants, then a lady or guy that is attracted to, or loves a wealthy person should not necessarily be seen as a gold digger or being covetous. It is where the satisfaction is.

From another view, those who can be patient while in love with a 'poor' person are of course patient for a future of economic fortune too. What happens if in the future, the expectations of fortune appears bleak, will the love remain? If it does, there must have been a level of economic satisfaction obtainable and not necessarily abject misery. Then if economy, satisfaction are the bases, why is the relationship and marriage contracts necessary? After all, those things have been reduced to affordability. Aside for the urge of reproduction and close connection to the offspring, which even, can still be done without formal marriage or relationship obligations, what remains is the cultural or societal expectations. The marriage and family thing.

However the cultural and societal ideas are seemingly challenged on daily basis by individuals' decisions against marriage, battle of ego in relationships and marriages, frustrations and breakups by the time the illusionary and early love fades. The cultural norms as to who possesses the right to say and decide what, are gradually replaced by who possesses the economic chance and material resources in relationships and marriages.

If people are happier being just individuals and satisfy themselves through whichever means, as much as the satisfaction can be afforded or bought, where then is the place of love and essence of relationships and marriages that mostly even restrict the satisfactions? Because, even the acclaimed feeling of love is sometimes denied of the lover by certain economic situations arising from unfavorable systemic and economic arrangement.

If men cannot but cheat, because they see that for what is fine, there is a finer, for an attitude, there is someone with a better attitude, and physiologically, the male are prone to sexual urge than the female; and the women cannot stop being unsatisfied and cheat as well for similar reasons, we should be looking for the right synthesis to arise from the opposing thesis and antithesis of the matters. Something is forced.

If everyone can be okay on their own and be satisfied as much as they can, it should not be a challenge nor castigated because of the societal norms. The society is not and cannot be static.

At the same time, if the idealistic love, relationship, marriage and family must be enjoyed by what they mean to us, then the conditions restricting the satisfactions must be challenged and addressed, it must not be forcefully tolerated.

Basically, it appears that the love is not just enjoyed, but enjoyed in its fullest form when there is money. Therefore, the love feeling is only sweet, sweater and sweetest among the rich class of the society. It appears we have been robbed of not just our economic sustenance and rights, but even of the satisfaction we ought to enjoy from love.

We must see that world is evolving, the contradictions in the status quo are exposed on daily basis. We must not force a continued existence of the status quo that denies us of everything, it must be changed. The Socialist change is a change for real 'love'.

Oladipupo Olalekan (Machiavelli) is not a 'Psychologist', but a Marxist. Marxism is a Science of liberation, in its physical, natural and socio-economic phenomena and characters.

By Oladipupo Olalekan Machiavelli .



No comments

Powered by Blogger.
close