Modern Relationships - Essay Example

Love, Intimacy, and Friendship. Introduction  This paper explores the notion that modern relationships are more about intimacy than about love. In particular, the paper explores the loss of commitment in relationships resulting in intimate sexual relationships such as friends with benefits, liquid love and casual love. The paper uses the work of relationship theorists Zygmunt Bauman, “Falling in and Out of Love” in Liquid Love: On the Fragility of Human Bonds and Sherry Turkle (2011), ‘Introduction’, in Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other to illustrate the dominance of intimacy over love in contemporary society. A social evolution has occurred where people have new and changing values leading to a situation where relationships are more flexible and dynamic. Bauman (2003) discusses how human are unwilling to take the risk of breakups and heartbreaks in the relationship and thus prefer forms of relationship that are lower on commitment but high on intimacy. On the other hand Turkle (2011) condemns contemporary relationships noting that people prefer relating to robots and technology that do not ask any commitment from them. Discussion In Zygmunt Bauman’s (2003) Liquid Love, intimacy is shown to be more dominant than love in contemporary relationships. According to Bauman (2003), the weakness of the human bond causes conflict, that makes intimacy more relevant than love. While love calls for a permanent tightening of human bonds, intimacy allow for a loosening of these bonds. As seen earlier a new form of relationship where ties are not permanent and nothing is risked is on the rise; Bauman (2003) refers to this love as ‘liquid love’. In these relationships the traditional notion of love “till death do us part” has been done away with. According to Bauman (2003) love has lost to intimacy in two distinctly post-modern forms of relationships: : the ‘top -pocket’ relationship, and the ‘semi-detached couple’. ‘Top pocket’ relationships require that emotions and love be set aside. This allows the relationship to be easily discarded, just like a handkerchief from a top pocket. In the views of Bauman (2003) these relationships thrive on a lack of commitment. This absence of commitment is supported by the justification that the less one invests in a relationship the less one is likely to lose. According to Sears (2007), one of the new intimate ways of relating is called ‘friends with benefits’. In this type of relationship people who are close, have sex without having to commit to each other as a couple. Friends with benefit relationships avoid typical relationship labels such as boyfriend or girlfriend. One of the perceived benefits of this type of relationship is that it avoids the drama that results in one being entangled in a committed relationship or love. According to Bauman (2003) people who engage in friends with benefits relationships are seeking to avoid jealousy, heartbreak and self-doubt. However, evidence suggests that friends with benefits relationships are not resistant to the heartbreak evident in breakups of other types of relationships. In the views of Bauman (2003) Friends with benefits relationships occur among people who live in close proximity, especially students. Students living in halls of residence are likely to exhibit this type of relationships. In contrast to one night stands and hook-ups, Friends with benefits tend to be more stable relationships. This type of relationship tends to downplay the emotional involvement of the people participating in the relationship. In most cases people who participate in friends with benefits relationship tend to value the friendship more than the sex; this renders the notion that sex and friendship cannot coexist faulty. Friends with benefits relationship are also destroying the myth that women cannot have sex with people they are not in love with (Hughes, Morrison and Asada, 2005). In friends with benefits relationships the evolution of gender identities and sexuality is evidenced with women becoming more pragmatic. According to Stepp (2007), the increasing equality between the genders has led to relationships further being inclined towards intimacy rather than love. The ‘plastic love’ defined by Bauman (2003) has been made possible by advances in contraceptive technology. Women can now engage in sexual relationships without the fear of becoming pregnant (Milhausen and Herold, 1999). Formerly, love and sex were intrinsically linked in the minds of women (Hird and Jackson, 2001). In fact, sex for a long time has been referred to as the act of “making love”. Through this increase in women power two new types of relationships have emerged “pure relationship and plastic love”. Pure relationship refers to a relationship where the parties stay in as long as they are satisfied emotionally and sexually. On the other hand, Plastic sex refers to situations where sex is just for pleasure only and no emotions are involved. Plastic sex also came about because of the need to limit the number of children per household as a result of population pressure.  On the other hand, ‘Semi-detached couples’ refer to relationships where people share intimate moments when they feel like it, but they live completely independent lives. According to (Grello, Welsh and Harper, 2006), the main aim of these relationships is to avoid the responsibility of starting and maintaining a full and intimate relationship. In the views of Lehmiller, Vanderdrift and Kelly (2011), love as it was defined traditionally has been dissolved. In contemporary society new models of relationships are more acceptable. Bauman (2003) points out that love is paying the price of a society that is unwilling to take the responsibility of being fully committed to a relationship and risk the heartache. In the view of Turkle (2011) people are also escaping the responsibility of engaging in full intimate relationship in virtual reality environments. People now expect more from machines than they expect from the people they love (Turkle 2011). According to Turkle (2011) this reliance on technology comes about as an effort to cover for our own imperfection in relating with others. Turkle (2011) shows how people are avoiding the responsibility of real human relationships using technology. The example of Roxxy, a talking sex robot is given. Roxxy is preloaded with up to six girlfriend personalities. Turkle (2011) argues that a person who can invest in a talking sex robot is desperately lonely but is not willing to take the risk of engaging in complex human relationships. According to Turkle (2011) people will continue foregoing real human interactions in favour of technological toys that can understand what we want without us having to put in any effort of our own. According to Turkle (2011), modern society has a growing intimacy for inanimate things like robots. Children playing with a digital pet “Tamagotchi” identify with the “needs and “feelings of the robot”. Another example is where Edna, an 82-year-old grandmother cares more for a robotic doll rather than her own 2-year old ?granddaughter. In the views of Turkle (2011), people are starting to treat inanimate objects as people and substituting them for human love. Turkle (2011) presents the argument that people regard online interactions with people as objects. According to Turkle (2011) the social media technology is a trap where people do things that they think won’t affect their lives withour realising these are recorded to be stored forever. According to Turkle (2011) the advance in technology, or rather the way people prefer to use it, is leading to a world where intimacy takes precedence over love. In the views of Turlke people can no longer express their full range of emotions as they are constrained by gadgets and platforms. One of the features of modern communication that is affecting relationships is the preference for texting over calling, Turkle (2011) equates this to talking to a person who is absent and inattentive. Turkle (2011) says an apology on Facebook is the same as apologizing to Facebook but not apologizing to the person who is wronged. The views of Turkle (2011) are further elaborated in Pettman (2009). According to Pettman (2009), Japanese men are so addicted to technology that it is alleged they date an algorithm. Otuku a Japanese man flirts with a virtual woman on his handheld device. The knowledge that the girlfriend is not real does not diminish the erotic charge and psychological impact Otaku feels by exchanging text messages with her (Pettman, 2006). According to Samuels (2009), men who date virtual women are likely to cry and become devastated if their advance are spurned. Conclusion In contemporary society, the traditional concept of love is losing out to other more dynamic and changing forms of intimacy. It has been shown that people no longer need to be in love in order to engage in intimate relationships. People are more likely than ever before to engage in intimate relationships without committing themselves emotionally. The relationships that gives precedence to intimate interactions over emotional commitment include plastic sex, sex with benefits, relationships with gadgets such as a sexual toy etc. People today prefer to deal with others on an impersonal level and this has extended even to marriages where there are couples who spend time away when they feel like they want to. Intimacy has also become more predominant with women becoming more sexually expressive. Although women still prefer to have sex when they are in love, cases of sex with no strings attached are increasing. Therefore, contemporary relationships are defined more by intimacy rather than love. In contemporary culture, examples of relationships that are defined by love intimacy not love are numerous. In USA, the rise of the “baby mama” culture shows the spread of relationship where people raise children without being married or even cohabiting (Hunter, 2011). In popular American reality TV show “Keeping up with the Kardashians” celebrity Hip-hop musicians “ Kanye West has a baby with Kim Kardashian but they are not married (McClain, 2013). This is a good example of Semi-detached couple as Kanye and Kim live completely independent lives. Recently it was alleged that Kanye West was sexually involved with Canadian model Leyla Ghobadi while his relationship with his “baby mama” Kim was still going in (Bull, 2013). In sex and the City another American TV series the state of modern relationships is illustrated. In the First season Carrie the main character is in a relationship with John James Preston who has already been divorced once (Baxter, 2009). John is unable to commit fully to his relationship with Carrie, regularly being involved with other women, and causing Carrie endless breakdowns. After the relationship breaks up Carrie goes on to have many other sexual relationship with different men, sometimes seeing more than two men at time (Edlund, 2005). Similarly, the other four women whose lives the show follows have numerous sexual relationships for the duration the show runs (Arthurs, 2003). Samantha for example has extremely brief sexual relationships and at various points seduces several men to sleep with them. References Bauman, Z (2003). “Falling in and Out of Love” in Liquid Love: On the Fragility of Human Bonds, Cambridge: Polity, 2003. Grello, C. M., Welsh, D. P. & Harper, M. S. (2006). No strings attached: The nature of casual sex in college students.Journal of Sex Research, 43, 255-267. Hird, M. J. & Jackson, S.(2001). Where ‘angels’ and ‘wusses’ fear to tread: sexual coercion in adolescent dating relationships.Journal of Sociology, 37,27-43. Hughes, M., Morrison, K. & Asada, K. J. K. (2005). What's love got to do with it? Exploring the impact of maintenance rules, loveattitudes, and network support on friends with benefits relationships. Western Journal of Communication, 69, 49-66. Journal of Sex Research, 48, 275-284. Lehmiller, J. J., Vanderdrift, L. E. & Kelly, J. R. (2011). Sex Differences in Approaching Friends with Benefits Relationships. Milhausen, R. R. & Herold, E. S. (1999). Does the Sexual Double Standard Still Exist? Perceptions of University Women.The Journal of Sex Research, 36, pp. 361-368. Pettman, D. (2006) “Love and Other Technologies” in Love and Other Technologies: Retrofitting Eros for the Information Age, New York: Fordham University Press, 2006, pp. 16-41. Pettman, D. (2009). ‘Love in the Time of Tamagotchi’, Theory, Culture & Society, 26, 2-3, 2009, pp. 189-208. Samuels, A. (2009). Carnal critiques: promiscuity, politics, imagination, spirituality and hypocrisy.Psychotherapy and PoliticsInternational, 7 Sears, L. W. (2007). Brennan Lecture: The "Marriage Gap": A Case for Strengthen Marriage in the 21st Century.New York University Law Review,82. Stepp, L. S. (2007).Unhooked : how young women pursue sex, delay love and lose at both.London: Riverhead Books. Turkle, S (2011). ‘Introduction’, in Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other, Basic Books, New York, 2011, pp. 1-17. Read More