[ SECRET POST #2896 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2896 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #414.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I have had that mercenary thought - marry for money and get rich in the divorce - except that if I marry for THAT much money that it's worth marrying the crud-ball, then he'll probably do the math and decide that it's cheaper to kill me than divorce me. And so I don't marry the rich old man.

[kallanda_lee]

Honestly the older I get, the more I understand people who do.

[(Anonymous)]

You understand people who marry for money, or you understand spouses who decide that murder is cheaper than divorce? I suspect it's the former, but the ambiguity of your comment did make me LOL.

I have to admit, I'm not terribly romantic, and while I wouldn't marry specifically for money, meaning I wouldn't marry someone I despised thinking that the money would compensate, when watching movies I do often think "that guy adores you, and would look after you, that's good enough". But the romance movies always go for undying passion rather than practicality.

[kallanda_lee]

HAHA, both to be fair, though I meant the former.

Marrying for money is something I might even consider, however killing for money is one step too far for me. If i were rich, i just wouldn't get married.

I am actually a romantic, and have known that passion - but I'm also a realist, and wen I look at couples that have lasted for 10, 20, 50 years - that passion has died out, and the ones who stick together are mostly just good friends above all else.

[(Anonymous)]

I think sometimes people confuse "passion" and "love." They can happen together and in the early parts of a relationship, they usually do. But they're not the same thing at all.

Passion is all chemicals. It's attraction and lust. Love involves those things, but it's something that has to be worked at, and a lot of times you have to make a conscious choice to still love someone. I guarantee those couples you mentioned still love each other in a romantic sense and consider themselves more than friends, but it doesn't look that way to a lot of people because it isn't the same kind of love that's felt early on.

[kallanda_lee]

Oh, I'm not saying they see themselves as just friends. I'm saying that the friendship/companionship aspect of the relationship has become more prominent versus the passion/lust. Both were probably present at the beginning, though, just in other proportions.

[kaffy_r]

As someone who's about to celebrate her 33rd anniversary (going on 34th if we take the time living together into consideration), I can tell you that being best friends with the person you love is, as far as I can see, a prerequisite to a long relationship. One can fall in love, hard and strong - which I did - and still not make it in a relationship. You truly do need more than love, or more than romantic love. Luckily, I also fell hard in like. And I can tell you that, with the two things still going strong, the passion is still there. And the laughs, and the comfort.

[kallanda_lee]

Well, that's great to hear. I only ever been in relationship with people I considered friends first - though personally I do struggle with dwindling passion over the years. I'm just one of those people who really enjoys the "crazy in love" phase.

Also happy birthday!

[kaffy_r]

Thanks; I was mostly agreeing with you that friendship is a necessary base of long term relationships (which I got out of your original comment; if that wasn't what you were actually talking about, my apologies. And the reality of at least my long relationship is that passion does indeed wane - and then suddenly and wonderfully waxes. You just end up realizing that the passion cycles, just like most everything in life.

Thanks for the birthday wishes; my actual birthday was back in September. My Best Beloved and I met in January of 1981, moved in together in May of that year, and got married in December of that year. It has been the weirdest ride of my life, and one I am so very glad I fell into.

[kallanda_lee]

That sounds pretty wonderful, actually ;)

[(Anonymous)]

While the romance movies are unrealistic in going for the undying passion, I can tell you from experience that being with someone who adores you and who would look after you but who you don't have feelings for really isn't all it's cracked up to be. It's boring and stifling honestly, and it means either having a lot of sex you don't want to have or making it so that someone who wants to doesn't get to have sex at all.

Practicality should play a part in deciding who to be with, but if you don't have romantic feelings for someone, it's really not a good idea to be with them in that way.

[othellia]

I can tell you from experience that being with someone who adores you and who would look after you but who you don't have feelings for really isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Thank you, seconded.

[(Anonymous)]

I know one person who more or less married for money. She's older, and I think that in a different time and place she wouldn't have married at all, but those were the expectations. I think she figured that if she had to get married, she might as well marry rich. But, it seems to have worked out for them and they're happy enough, as far as anyone can tell.