Contemporary Love

I described romance in unromantic military terms, anticipating Part Two, which I've subtitled, The Battle of the Sexes. The goal of romance was said to be the winning of affection from someone we desire (grand strategy); the primary strategy, persuasion; and, the tactics employed to put the strategy into action was left to Part Two.

Winning (or, of course, losing), implies reluctance, selectivity, and competition. Thus, the ideas of "battle" or "conquest" come into play.

Not new concepts as the history of literature demonstrates. We may desire affection from a particular individual, but unless (and often even if) there is a strong, immediate, mutual attraction, in most cases that affection has to be won.

The process, or tactics, by which that affection is won is often referred to as "courting". The person desiring affection makes that desire known directly or indirectly and engages in various forms of conduct intended to persuade the desired person that he or she is worthy of his or her affection.

The Big Picture

Many scientists explain this phenomenon in biological terms. According to this point of view, the mating ritual is nature's way of enforcing selective breeding. Beefing up the gene pool. Observation of the mating habits in the animal kingdom seems to support the theory. Males, for example, compete for the affection of the female, often literally fighting among each other to demonstrate their worthiness.

A variation on the theme of Darwinism. Survival of the fittest. Males and females choosing mates among available choices that will most likely contribute to the production of the fittest offspring.

The impact of Darwin's theories should not be underestimated. Darwinism caused an intellectual revolution with respect to philosophical, religious and political thought. Unfortunately, it has also caused a great deal of pain, suffering and bloodshed.

Survival of the fittest. The animal kingdom. Observation. On its face, Darwinism is compelling. It seems there is a "natural law" that makes survival the fundamental reason why living things are as they are and do what they do.

But this is a superficial point of view. It assumes that mankind is identical to the peacock, buffalo and goldfish. It assumes that what is deemed "strength" and "fitness" in the animal kingdom is equally applicable to human beings.

The attributes that lead to success in the non-human animal kingdom are often war-like in nature. Physical strength, courage, aggression, unrelenting violence. In fact, in many species traits such as tenderness or mercy would be a definite handicap. If you believe that mankind, being a part of the natural animal kingdom, is subject to exactly the same principles as non-human species, you are a short step away from declaring that might makes right and that all's fair in love and war.

"Might makes right" may be applicable to the lion kingdom and may be an important part of what constitutes a healthy lion community, but is that true for mankind? Not necessarily. While healthy individuals and communities are what survive in nature, what is "healthy" for some species is not necessarily a healthy state in all.

Throughout history, human societies have practiced superficial Darwinism and lived by the sword. Without fail, each one of them eventually either died by the sword or fell to decay.

That we are part of the animal kingdom is undeniable. But failure to understand that we are something more than our animal kingdom relatives is a prescription for disaster. A healthy human community thrives on cooperation and reasonable efforts to advance the well-being of the community, its individual members, and the environment in which it finds itself.

Not that a certain degree of competition and aggression aren't healthy qualities. They are essential, within certain limits. Without them we'd be sheep.

Lions do lion things by instinct. When confronted by adversity or desire, the question for a lion is simply what can it do to prevail. What makes us so different from the lion is the second question that arises when we meet with adversity or desire - what should we do - what is the right thing to do?

Our raw animal instinct is tempered by our human emotions and ability to reason - the traits that define us as human and set up apart from the rest of the animal kingdom. We are both lion and man. The question that faces us, being both lion and man, is what attributes do predominate and what attributes should predominate.

Over time, only healthy species survive. A healthy species is one that is in tune with its finest, unique traits, and its environment. In order for mankind to become a healthy species we need to conduct ourselves in accordance with what makes us truly human - our peculiar ability to reason and feel. Human "fitness" isn't dependent upon military or economic strength, but upon the willingness to exercise the tools of reason in accordance with compassion and cooperation.

This isn't just a "nice" attitude. Considering the growth of the human population and the progressive development of technology, it's an attitude that will become essential for the survival our species. We will survive through cooperation, not conquest.

It's difficult to overcome the lion in us and apparent foolishness to advocate reason and compassion inside the lion's den. Our basic animal instincts pull us toward decisions that laugh at reason and compassion. But it's precisely our ability to overcome that pull that marks us as human. It's all that protects us from destruction.

Romance - the smaller picture

It may be that the scientists are right and that it is animal instinct that initially ignites our desire for affection from a particular individual. But, as in the discussion above, once ignited we decide whether to conduct ourselves as lion or human.

If we conduct ourselves as lion, winning is our only goal no matter the cost or means. We buy fashionable clothes and play the peacock; we butt heads with our competitors and play the buffalo; and we tout our bank balance to seem the shiniest goldfish. We lie. We scheme. We make every effort, honest or otherwise, to appear worthy of our target's affection.

If we conduct ourselves as human, our desire for the other person engenders an honest concern for them. We take an interest in their well-being. We want to see them grow and flourish. We desire their affection, but not at the cost of their harm. And we want them to see in us something admirable and desireable that is not transitory like clothes, physical strength or the strenght of our bank balance. If we have not confused affection with lust, we hope they find in us traits that make us decent human beings - honesty, courage, compassion, and the ability (and willingness) to reason.

How does this help us get that first date? It removes fear. I'll leave how it does that for Part Three.