If "love" is primarily conditional on transactions, wealth, education, etc., then it's not really love. So what's the point?

wtknight · 2023-10-08T04:37:54+00:00

Re-flaired CMV as this post is making an affirmative claim

SamuraiGoblin · 2023-10-08T07:17:34+00:00

A doctor gets paid for treating the sick, but it doesn't mean they don't have empathy and a passion for healing.

Two things can be true at the same time.

bottleblank · 2023-10-08T04:52:16+00:00

Everything is ultimately transactional. Even nature.

Plants produce fruit so that animals will eat the fruit and crap out the seeds somewhere else. The plant gets to reproduce, the animal gets tasty food, everybody's happy.

But, see, there's the key: tasty, happy. The animal doesn't care about the fact that it's helping a plant population grow and thrive and spread. It cares about the tasty fruit. It enjoys the fruit. It's sweet and nutritious and feels good to eat. The plant doesn't care whether the animal dies of malnutrition either. But it's beneficial to both of them to provide each other something so that the other is willing to participate in that deal, so they both get what they need.

So we come to humans. We have hormones that encourage us to seek out relationships and sex, we feel warm and fuzzy when somebody "loves" us (whether you believe that's a thing or not, I'm referring to the sensation that we call love, transactional or otherwise), we feel inclined to keep doing that, and doing it more, because it feels good.

Same with sex. There's no mechanical reason why sex should have to feel good, it could feel like getting a medical injection as far as nature cares, just as long as it gets the job done. But it feels good to encourage us to keep doing it, so that we survive as a species.

Which means, when it comes down to it, even if it's ultimately transactional, we enjoy getting the warm and fuzzies from other people and (hopefully) want to give them the warm and fuzzies so that they want to keep giving them to us. It's mutually beneficial, on the most basic level.

Sure, society kinda throws a spanner in the works by introducing things like money and rent and laws and marriage and whatever else, that messed with things a bit and can make things much more complicatedly transactional.

But at the root of it the key factor is that we can make each other feel good in ways that trigger our happy chemicals. It's why we have them, it's why we feel the way we do when our bodies release them, so it's why we seek out experiences with other people that reward us with them.

I don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with that. It's how we are, it's that way for a reason, and (although I might struggle to find situations where I can enjoy the benefits of it) the fact is that we're humans, we're always going to be humans, and we might as well indulge that which makes being a human enjoyable. That's what it's there for - so that we feel inclined to keep being human.

kevie_in_houston · 2023-10-08T05:04:07+00:00

This reminds me of a conversation that I had with my grandfather. He said "You know it is true love if she still loves you when you have nothing."

WilliamWyattD · 2023-10-08T04:53:22+00:00

And women would say you only like me for my fertility, beauty and the sex that flows from it. If my face gets cut up tomorrow you will treat me differently. When I age, you will not see me the same way. If I miscarry and become sterile, you will want a woman who can have kids. How is this not also transactional and conditional?

Romantic love is eroticism in fancy clothes with some nice accessories. But there are other, less conditional forms of love. But they take time to develop and don't have that intense burn feeling of erotically charged 'love'. That 'real love' is the magic, and is hard to define or create. Not everyone gets to have it. It often comes from shared experiences over time, challenges weathered and overcome together, etc.

SianOiseau · 2023-10-08T04:38:34+00:00

*Some bluepillers agree with it.

If I remember correctly currently ~45% couples either have similar incomes or a woman earning more, so it isn't that rare situation for men and women. I think there was a recent pew research on the topic.

Also I'd assume that among couples where men are primary breadwinners a good share of them do love each other and enjoy their lives together. Just as the rest of the couples. Fulfilling your duties or your responsibilities generally doesn't make your life meaningless, it usually works the other way around.

All love is conditional if you view the way you treat your partner or having certain qualities as conditions. Even kids are loved on the condition of them being your kids and not behaving totally pathological. Religions teach us to love unconditionally, but at the point where you can love everyone without any conditions, it's not really romantic or familial love, it's something entirely else.

Everything is transactional if you view basic interactions as transactions. Whether it makes sense for you is a personal decision.

I know my close ones love me as long as I behave like yourself and treat them well. It would make sense they'd stop loving me if I suddenly changed the way I carried myself to something utterly unpleasant, although they'd probably try to fix me and figure out the issue first. In a way you love a person the way they are now and treat you now. When they change, they're a bit another person.

Swordfromthecement · 2023-10-08T06:15:06+00:00

You have to decide that for yourself. For some people there is no point.

Everything in life is transactional. Just because something is transactional does not mean it is antagonistic and resentment filled.

AngeCruelle · 2023-10-08T07:46:10+00:00

I understand the claim that wealth is a transactional condition but I'm having a hard time seeing how education is. Where is the transaction taking place if a woman is seeing a college-educated barista?

BoomTheBear86 · 2023-10-08T09:02:21+00:00

All love is subject to conditions.

It doesn’t diminish the value of it however, that comes down to what the conditions are.

Conditions that pertain to our human dignity and respecting it, also nurturing etc tend to be equated with “real love” whereas conditions that instead satisfy superficial desires tend to be viewed as “lesser”.

At the end of the day it’s up to individuals to work out what their conditions are.

sad_asian_noodle · 2023-10-08T08:46:40+00:00

Not sure about that.

Half of my parents' marriage, my Mom made substantially more than my Dad. The other half, my Dad did.

I did not see any shift in respect or love. They operate as a unit.

Ylduts · 2023-10-08T06:11:43+00:00

It’s not though. People make terrible transactions in relationships constantly.

januaryphilosopher · 2023-10-08T10:57:15+00:00

While it is possible to disagree with the red pill but think men have to provide for women, it certainly isn't the only alternative to the red pill. I don't think that men must provide for women, I don't even think most people think that. (I'm not sure what your "spoken evidence" is supposed to convince me of here.) The dominant cultural narrative currently, at least in the first world, is one where both partners should provide things in the relationship and while they provide for their children if they have any, neither is dependent on the other for personal provision. (There's also quite a rosy view that this has already happened.) And it's not considered to be the basis of love, it's just how you work out practically how to build a life with the person you love, and loved before money or any other providing came into it. The only necessary transaction for love is this: you provide me with love, and I provide love to you. (But without anything else, you'd be loving on the streets.)

MotherPermit9585 · 2023-10-08T13:09:14+00:00

I’m actually the “breadwinner” in my marriage and most of my female friends also make more money than their husbands. While this is statistically less common, it’s becoming less unusual with time and newer generations. This means that our husbands have to do more around the house and with childcare than more traditional men. Sometimes it does lead to conflict around divisions of labor but most of us are happy and wouldn’t trade our relationships for tradcon ones.

I would agree that all relationships (not just romantic ones) are conditional but not that they are transactional. For example if your parents are always putting you down and being verbally abusive to you, you’re not going to want to spend the holidays with them. It’s the same in a marriage. You have to be a net positive in someone’s life, enrich the quality of their life or they’ll look for what they need elsewhere.

JNRoberts42 · 2023-10-08T10:26:22+00:00

Most people prefer to spend their life with someone with similar values, not the other guy.

“Don’t reject me because I do not work or take care of my own basic needs, don’t reject me because I lack goals, drive, independence, or a desire to live apart from my parents. Don’t reject me because I’m not motivated to leave my home and maintain my social sphere. Love me for who I am, a man whose life diverges completely from your life, your experience, your values, and your goals”

Safinated · 2023-10-08T14:17:12+00:00

The point is to mutually and satisfactorily transact

Life is pretty good for me, certainly better than the alternative

babazuki · 2023-10-08T22:37:44+00:00

Children don't have to do anything to be loved because children are helpless and can't give anything back. Their parents are capable of taking care of them, so the parent must take care of the children to show love and be worthy of love. The parent is a neglectful asshole if they don't perform and take care of their kid. That's the condition for a an adult to receive love as a parent.

A small animal receives love without having to do anything because it's incapable of doing anything significant. It's just a cute animal. A pet owner is capable of taking care of it, so the pet owner must do that to worthy of love and not be seen as an asshole neglectful owner. That's the condition for the pet owner to receive love.

A simp will love another adult that is capable of reciprocating love, but doesn't do it. Because the simp held on to the immature idea that people are just deserving of love no matter what.

Love between two adults that are capable of doing things for each other requires that both of them do things for each other. Neither of them are babies. They can't just sit around and get love with no reciprocation. The one that does nothing to receive love is an asshole, the one that gives love for nothing in return is a simp.

If you're a man, your body has no other purpose than to work. That's what the male body is for. It's big and strong and has no capability to create or nurture children. It works. It's supposed to provide resources for a family.

If you want to be loved as a man, that's your condition to receive love. You must provide. You should also find a mate that recognizes and appreciates that and reciprocates in return.

That doesn't make love fake or transactional. You both just have to sacrifice for each other because you're adults and you're capable of it. You're immature assholes if you hold back from each other and just expect love for nothing.

LeNoirPetit · 2023-10-08T10:56:54+00:00

Start dating ugly, disfigured women then. Give unattractive women a chance otherwise what’s the point?

BunnyFlopped · 2023-10-08T11:34:22+00:00

Love is not unconditional. You need to be able to bring something to the table and that is dependent on the dynamic you have with your partner.

I am interested in providing for my partner. This means I expect him to equally be able to cook/clean/and do housework.

In the situation you’re describing it’s very likely that the women do 100% of home maintenance in exchange for men providing financially.

Does this mean men are incapable of love because they want women to do housework? No.

It’s also why you see a dynamic shift between men and women in the west right now. Women are more educated, earning more, marrying less, and they are less likely to want children. Men and women are starting to perform a lot of tasks to the same extend and are starting to be expected to pull the same weight in all aspects of the relationship equally.

AceOfSpadesGymBro · 2023-10-08T11:36:10+00:00

I'm sorry, can you point out what law says that men must be providers for women?

Wide-Illustrator2906 · 2023-10-08T07:13:17+00:00

Real love isn't transactional or based on qualifiers. It's based on a mutual fondness and desire to see each other happy and fulfilled.

MassiveAd1026 · 2023-10-08T05:26:15+00:00

Men being the provider is a traditional gender role, that’s expected from men. Even if women have radically changed, since 1950 and abandoned their traditional gender roles. Society desperately needs men to keep playing theirs.

zaph239 · 2023-10-08T09:19:59+00:00

This was a point made by the French writer Houellebecq. He said that sexual freedom destroyed the idea of romantic love. Love is the illusion that only that person can male you feel that way, only that person can give you pleasure.

Love was a necessary lie to keep couples together as they got old and fat. This is source of feminists and female rage. That blew up when they undermined what they saw as the oppression institution of marriage but didn't take into account how women decline as they age.

Monogamy and marriage are an oppressive prison for a 19 year old woman, with massive value in the sexual marketplace. For a fat 45 year old, they are a protection against competition from younger and more fertile women.

Valuable-Marzipan761 · 2023-10-08T06:40:02+00:00

Because both of you get somethingkpositive from the relationship. If anything, it being transactional makes the point clearer.

_Ad_Astra_Abyssosque · 2023-10-08T08:06:47+00:00

There's nothing inherently wrong with transactional love if both parties are happy and benefit. Its a symbiotic relationship. So when they stop benefiting you, leave. If she gets fat. Leave. If she nags too much. Leave. If she has a high body count. Leave. You are free to draw that line wherever you want.

Honest740 · 2023-10-08T09:36:59+00:00

There is no point and life is a cruel joke. Embrace antinatalism

Whiskeyjack1982 · 2023-10-08T12:00:48+00:00

Now you're getting it.

You can still enjoy life. You can still date women. They will fall in love you, enjoy it while it lasts. Its only fleeting, eventually they will fall out of love and thats when they start making demands. The relationship becomes transactional.

Just never get too attached to one woman think of them as replaceable. Invest as little as possible in the relationship. Use them because thats what they are gonna do to you.

In this way you can get female validation and companionship. Its better than nothing.

You will never get never ending romantic love, only Chad gets that.

DumbWordsmith · 2023-10-08T14:08:09+00:00

What's the point of doing anything when you're just going to lose all your material possessions, memories, and personal relationships when you die? Eventually, even the most impressive "legacy" will be wiped away.

Love is just an illusion nature uses to get men to move mountains for women. It's the same trick nature uses to get men and women to move mountains for their children. In some cases, it may be worth buying into the illusion; in other cases, not so much. That's up to the individual to decide in the moment.

Independent_Score217 · 2023-10-08T17:22:12+00:00

There is no point. It's a bad joke, and men are the punchline.

SierraMistSoda · 2023-10-08T04:30:11+00:00

That's part of love. Men protect and provide, women support and nurture.

AutoModerator · 2023-10-08T04:18:56+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Substantial_Video560 · 2023-10-08T10:13:57+00:00

You're right. What is the point of love?

not-a-dude-at-all · 2023-10-08T11:10:50+00:00

It's a different kind of transaction I'd say. It's more about "I'll stay with you until X and Y are true", but not "I give you X, you give me Y in exchange".

grillopie · 2023-10-08T11:38:20+00:00

picking a partner has a transactional nature, but the feelings of love are inherently non-transactional. it essentially acts as a force against a pure transactional relationship. a purely transactional relationship would mean people are constantly negotiating with others to see if someone else can offer more of the transactional stuff. i don’t think most people would call a relationship like that loving.

love adds value to the specific partner, to act against a purely transactional approach. it keeps you with your partners, even when you should be giving up if you were purely pragmatic. the basis of relationships is partially transactional, but love itself is the non-transactional part.

throwaway164_3 · 2023-10-08T14:06:14+00:00

The point is sex, companionship, emotional and physical intimacy is fun and healthy.

RepresentativeMark16 · 2023-10-08T15:51:19+00:00

Adult relationships should be transactional. Or if you wanna be less cynical relationships should be mutually beneficial and conditional. I disagree with your argument that there is unilateral or even majority agreement among straight women that men need to be more educated or wealthier. Especially from the jump.

PMmeareasontolive · 2023-10-08T16:04:54+00:00

Don't get too thrown by the word transactional. Relationship is, basically, a synonym for transaction. Otherwise, love would be utterly random. Why love one person rather than another? I suppose you could say that you are supposed to love your family unconditionally. Or your clan or tribe, or religious group. But how would you love a person w/o having some basis in relationship/transaction?

Sometimes people say they "love the person, but hate the action" when someone commits a crime. So I guess that's a different way of viewing love that we might choose: love absolutely everyone unconditionally. But we'd still have to have boundaries about what kinds of behavior are acceptable or desired around us.

I understand that there are some relationships that are too one sided. They are inconsiderate or even manipulative; the transaction feels like one person using the other as a means rather than an end in themselves. There needs to be more words to describe these kinds of variations.

anon12101 · 2023-10-08T16:37:13+00:00

Exactly

MidoriEgg · 2023-10-08T17:21:21+00:00

When you really really love someone. Like when you trigger whatever primal part of your brain it is that activates limerence , you really don’t care about what they can provide for you or their status is or whatever. But tbh I think that type of infatuation isn’t always the best for building long term relationships and a community.

TSquaredRecovers · 2023-10-08T22:15:30+00:00

Asking a man to hold his weight in a relationship by earning an income (same as the woman) is not the same thing as expecting him to be the provider. It requires money to live in this world, so, yeah, people need to be working. Unless a woman is looking to be a Tradwife, it’s completely reasonable that she have the expectation of her partner working as well as herself.

allnamesweretaken5 · 2023-10-08T23:18:40+00:00

Life is transactional. This isn't a Disney movie.

AnyIntroduction3288 · 2023-10-09T03:51:41+00:00

So I’m guessing you’re ok with a relationship without sex? Right? Because she shouldn’t provide sex in exchange for lobe. Or with an obese and unattractive woman?!because you love her for who she is, and looks don’t matter right?

harmonica2 · 2023-10-09T07:37:31+00:00

I'm less educated than my gf and earn less than her and she is cool with it. Why do modern women who are trying to be more feminist, have to care about how much money a guy has to make, when that is kind of a non-modern way of thinking.

Appropriate_Lab3882 · 2023-10-09T20:23:37+00:00

there is no point. live for you

Appropriate_Lab3882 · 2023-10-09T20:24:59+00:00

love doesn’t exist i don’t think.

Title	If "love" is primarily conditional on transactions, wealth, education, etc., then it's not really love. So what's the point?
Author	LifeIsAVeryBadJoke
Upvotes	35
Comments	111
Date	October 8, 2023 4:18 AM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/172pyar/if_love_is_primarily_conditional_on_transactions/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/if-love-is-primarily-conditional-on-transactions.1234348 https://theredarchive.com/post/1234348

Comments