Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site batman.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!oakhill!cyb-eng!batman!john
From: john@batman.UUCP (John Orth)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.nlang.india
Subject: Re: love and arranged marriages
Message-ID: <106@batman.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 18-Jun-85 15:34:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: batman.106
Posted: Tue Jun 18 15:34:42 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Jun-85 01:52:00 EDT
References: <1795@ut-ngp.UUCP> <1645@amdahl.UUCP> <835@gloria.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Burroughs Austin Research Center, TX
Lines: 21
Xref: watmath net.women:5966 net.nlang.india:449

> ["Will you love me in November as you do in May?"]
> 
> > By the way, ever wondered why the "arranged" marriages hold on while
> > those based on "love" have a greater probability to breakup ?
> > I think it is because when the basis of "love marriages" (i.e. LOVE)
> > evaporates, so do the marriages. On the other hand the "arranged"
> > marriages keep on going strong because they never were based on
> > such fragile a thing as "love".
> 
> It's a strange sort of love that evaporates.  Ordinary love rises
> and falls like breathing.  Anyway ... if their love has evaporated,
> could not the partners simply pretend that the marriage was arranged?
> 
> I admit that this ignores the "Love Tao:" if you expect love, you'll
> get an imitation of it; if you don't expect love, you will get it, but
> you won't know you've got it.
> -- 
> Col. G. L. Sicherman
> ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***