Answer TWO of the following:
Q1: In his quest to explain our reasons for falling
in love, de Sousa suggests that it “is the process of perpetual change that
will preserve the continuity of love” (71). How might this complicate the
notion of “love at first sight,” and even the idea that we fall in love from
the outside-in? Do you agree with this?
Q2: Is the concept of love itself objectifying to women? de
Sousa notes that “Some feminists have disparaged love as a cruel hoax, because
no single lover has the strength to overcome the tendency to ‘objectify’ women,
making their desirability contingent on their playing traditional and often
submissive roles” (69). Even in Stage Beauty, Kynaston suggests that
someone is always the man, and someone always the woman. So is the way we think
about and experience love inherently flawed? Is there a way to love as equals?
Q3: Freud suggests that many of our emotions, particularly
love, have more to do with “transference” rather than choice or reason. Do you
think this helps account for love at first sight? Falling in love with someone
who looks/acts like your father or mother? Or are we constantly seeking to fall
in love with our first love again? Could this be true for any of Shakespeare’s
lovers?
Q4: When we claim that “I want to be loved for who I am,”
what does this truly mean? What is your fundamental identity? And are you able
to see this as clearly as someone else (considering that anyone can see your
face better than you can)? As de Sousa writes, “Whose authority counts for most
in deciding what is most essential about you?” (58). What if you want to be
loved for your beauty, but someone else falls in love with you for your wit?
Are they seeing the “wrong” you?
I accidentally overslept for class but I felt super strong about these questions so I hope it's okay to post on here!
ReplyDeleteQ2:) I believe that love objectifies women. Maybe I just have a bitter opinion since I got my heart smashed to pieces AGAIN by the SAME guy. Anywho, I think that love objectifies women in the sense that women are seen as tender lovers and caregivers, but in reality we sometimes want to rip the head off of barbie dolls and eat some trail mix. As Kynaston states, "someone is always a man and someone is always a woman." Some days maybe I wanna be the man and not care for a day and just worry about me or maybe be a woman where I can be held and cared for. I don't think that the two could be equal as you need to be one or the other. You can't both be stand offish or else there won't be a relationship and you both can't be needy.
Q4:) Never thought of this before actually. I don't believe there is anything wrong if someone falls in love with the "wrong" you. I think that they just fall in love with another side of you that maybe you don't know of. Maybe they fell in love with the way you look when you're helping someone or when you're laughing with your friends. You don't see that. You only see what the mirror tells you and what you believe of yourself. Then they show you all the different ways to love you and fall in love with each piece of you. I don't believe there is a "wrong" you in the end.