"Love hegemony oppression": Have you ever been troubled by the concept of "there must be love in life"?

How many do you agree with these views?

It must not be true love to make love located in friendship; only a relationship with romantic will be called "intimate relationship"; if you don't want to give up your career for love, it is not enough to love; One of the closest feelings together cannot be compared with other feelings; if a love cannot go to marriage, it is a failure; the most beautiful love is to accompany the right person for life, until they are unsatisfactory; these are in life; these are in life; The very common ideas are the paradigm of love for love. These paradigms stipulate that love should have, and often believe that they are suitable for everyone.

If there is one or several of the above views that cause your opposition or even disgusting, then you probably have experienced the pressure that these paradigms may bring to personal life. These pressures may come from the environment of friends, parents, relatives, or life, making people who do not love feel their "information" (not comparable/low one, etc.).

Of course, if you agree with all the above views, you may also have questions: Is there any problem with these views? Shouldn't love be like this?

Not in a hurry, today this article is not refuted by anyone about love. However, today we really want to discuss. In addition to the above -mentioned love views that generally recognize the society, some other voices about love have always been ignored because of this understanding paradigm.

In fact, the excessive myth of love has oppressed each of us unconsciously. Look at today's point of view:

The sacredness of love,

Give love a "hegemony"

Love, especially the love between heterosexuality, is in the eyes of Elizabeth Brake (2011) at the Professor of Philosophy of the University of Rice. It has some kind of "hegemony".

She believes that there is a set of "AMATONONORMATITY" in society. Love is romantic, lined up, long -lasting, and higher than all other emotions. At the same time, this model believes that people have such love happier and everyone is pursuing such love.

Love model penetrates every corner of our lives. It may be reflected in people's concepts of love. For example, we often go to marriage with lovers by default, but rarely imagine with their friends or siblings for life; ; We can also accept friendship for love, rather than sacrificing love for friendship.

In addition, this model also guides the attitude of talking about related topics when I am in daily life -

1. Everyone will be interested in falling in love

2. The default lovers relationship is closer than friendship relationship

3. There is a problem with love that does not get married by default

Behind these conversations, the assumptions of love models about love: the importance and intimacy of love is higher than any other relationship, and love and marriage are the "norms" in our life trajectory. Everyone must obey.

The daily term has already implied these presets--

Use "partner" to refer to lovers, even if we sometimes bring us long -term companionship may be friends, siblings, and even pets;

"Intimate Relationship" refers to love/marriage. For other important interpersonal relationships, it is rarely called "intimate relationship; intimacy;

One person and friends are intimate, if there is no lover, it is also "single";

Native

Seeing this, some people may think that this is too small, but it is just a habitual idiom, but everyone is used to a mainstream understanding of love, and no one forces others to understand love in this way. What is there? What about the relationship? Why is it called "hegemony"?

Social love supremacy, where is domineering?

Brake believes that when the love model of society puts love on all relations, people will lose their imagination of other relationships/life models.

Choose a lifetime with the best friends without choosing a marriage. Do you not be happy?

"Single -old women", even if they are actively choosing a single, do they have to bear the eyes of others or critical or sympathy?

It is also difficult for us to imagine to stay in the native family for a lifetime, and accompany the brothers and sisters of hands and feet for a lifetime.

When we give other relationships for love, we also limit the potential of other relationships -it is difficult for us to know what the friendship of life is like, and it is difficult to imagine how a person lives better than having love, because these narratives are these narratives It is missing in our culture (Larosn, 2017).

While sacrificing the potential of other relationships, the love template does not necessarily make love better. The sacredness of love sometimes bits our perception of love.

In love, we emphasize the search for the "other half" of the final marriage. The hidden assumption here is that before we found our partners, we encountered the wrong person. This makes many people feel anxious in the relationship of marriage to marriage, and thinks that they are paying opportunities.

In addition, the myth of love has also raised our expectations for love, thinking that the ideal partner should be a person who always meets our needs (Brown, 2017). But true love is like life, it is broken, not continuous, even in good love, contains a lot of disgust and hateness in good love -the love myth of this society does not help us prepare for these moments. Essence The reality is that it is difficult for us to find someone who satisfies this expectation. Friends and loved ones may know some of our parts than lovers. Excessive expectations are too easy to lose in love, and it is too easy to stimulate our frustration and dissatisfaction with lovers.

It is not love, but the love of the model.

Behind the "Love Supreme Template",

In fact, it is another more common hegemony

As mentioned earlier, "Love Supreme Template" often pays attention to love between the opposite sex. In this set of models, not only other relationships such as friendship and affection are absent, but the relationship model of a minority group is also absent. Brake pointed out that "love supremacy" is actually an extension of social heterosexuality.

Heterosexuality treats the romantic relationship between heterosexuality as the norm of love, and is used to giving men and women a clear and opposing role. Heterosexuality also has different templates for the love of men and women -for example, we advise men to say "you need someone to take care of yourself" when entering marriage, and to women, they are more inclined to say "you need someone to rely on."

In "Gender Trouble", Butler pointed out that society builds dual gender as "former discourse" and constructs a natural fact that does not need to be demonstrated. The essence is to ensure the heterosexuality of society, thereby continuing the reproduction of the social population. Therefore, the heterosexual stories of men and women who seem to be righteous are actually a system to ensure its operation.

In the influence of heterosexuality, we have been taught how to keep distance, get along, communicate with the opposite sex, and communicate with the opposite sex. The default romantic sentiment and sexual attraction will only occur between the opposite sex, and the same sex will only produce friendship.

The process of education also consolidates the model of love first, and affects the understanding of non -heterosexual groups for its own relationship. For example, love between homosexuality is often accompanied by the distribution of male and female sexuality, 0 (bottom) usually refers to the female image in the relationship, and 1 (TOP) symbolizes the male image in the relationship. It seems that the two parties or many parties in the relationship cannot be established in the gender role of men and women, and there is no love for love, and people will not know how to act and live in the relationship. (What kind of gender scripts do we hold in love? Click to read: The sisters say that TA does not love me and advise me to break up. Should I obey?)

How should we jump out of this intimate paradigm framework?

When we write this article, it is not wrong to criticize the intimate paradigm. We want to let everyone know:

As an individual in society, our consciousness and cognition sometimes do not exist in the brain, but more of the construction of social culture and discourse.

The intimate paradigm hegemony is such a social construction. In addition to the magnificent definition of love status, there are many details of the guidelines of the behavior -we will see people's evaluation of the behavior of others' love on the Internet. "Love you", these more detailed norms, further let people lose their freedom to feel and develop love, and are bound by social discourse.

When the dominance of love is shaped by discourse, the socialization of the society is closely integrated, and the system of marriage and property is closely integrated, and children's schooling, medical services and other systems have become a legitimate relationship that society recognizes.

With such a set of standards, people living in it will live without thinking about this "inertia thinking", ignoring other voices and possibilities. Those who cannot meet this standard live in doubt and criticism from themselves and others; or they feel that they compare with others who meet the standards, which lacks some kind of happiness.

If you find that you do not agree with the values ​​of love supremacy, or feel that "why we must obey the established standards of society", then congratulations, you can start trying to break out of this framework.

When we notice such a common assumption in social and culture, we have been on the way to fight against this assumption. The purpose of this confrontation is to make everyone living in society more free -the possibility of happiness becomes more abundant, and the probability of people to realize happiness will also increase accordingly.

Psychologist TARTAKOVSky (2018) said that the question of "which one is better" is more important than the question of "which choice is better". Perform your real needs for life and rely on the actual situation you are facing, and actively give more diverse relationships. Who said that spending a lifetime with your best friend is not a kind of happiness?

I hope everyone will bravely explore things that really worthy of your enjoyment.

References:

- END -