Quote:
So, here's my question. What really is the value of committing to a relationship for the long haul, beyond the point where you are both equally committed to treating each other very well, even if that means that a "relationship" only lasts the course of a pleasant shared meal or maybe through a few months of mind-blowing sex? I guess I'm kind of asking a big question which is "What is it within human beings that makes us cling to relationships beyond the point of comfort?" Is there some little pump in the brain that sends out a chemical that tells us to fear the end or lack of a pair-bond? If this is so, why is it any different than the kind of chemicals that send us into a whirl of magnetic sexual attraction? Is it simply that we see the manifestation of the pair-bonding chemicals as being more socio-culturally acceptable, more acceptable to "others" and the maintenance of generally held mores, than the chemicals that promote sexuality? Is it all about the children or the child within who needs protection and comfort?

Good questions Mojo.
I always said to myself when separated (even though I was probably full of sh*t) that I would enjoy just having short-term but very intense R's with men who I was attracted to, and when the R became more work than it needed to be , I'd just move on to the next guy. ;\) This is fantasy world to a degree I guess. It sounds like it would be great but I'm not so sure that way of life would be fulfilling long term. I think people do want to pair-bond for the long haul because it takes time to get to know someone and the longer you spend with someone, the closer you naturally become (unless the R is all f-ed up to begin with).
I'm sure you are taking this point of view now because it is all still very new (being free from the M) but maybe in a few years you will see things differently. Want someone to grow old with maybe. Who knows.

LFL