I

"learned" this when I was a teenager but didn't quite know the reason why. In answer to the question "What is the difference between this or that kind of love?".

The reason for this sarcastic remark is rooted in simple statistics which weigh upon two undeniable facts of human relationships.

Namely,

1) We are willing to accept any degree of ectasy, joy, etc. from another but will tolerate only a limited amount of suffering generated by that person.

To accept unlimited quantities of suffering from another individual is to become the slave of that individual ... one loses his autonomy.

[Like the velocities of individual air molecules at room temperature ... They are not constrained by any particular upper limit but they can't go any slower than "zero" mph.]

2) Those who bring us joy have also the power to bring sadness and disappointment. Joy and suffering are "ying & yang". They come in equal quantities averaged over extended periods and actually define each other.

Hence, the probability is that someone who excites our passions will also bring such suffering as to be intolerable ... and the relationship ends there. Not always true ... just most probable.

Mickey Rooney made a statement to the effect that "We don't marry the one we love. We marry the one we like." Here, the probability is that the partner who is more of a friend than a lover has the greater chance of not exciting our "defensive rejection" and thus sticks around long enough to make it to the altar.

Note ___________ The male modus operandi is best represented by the scalar-Maxwellian distribution. Men are like dimmer switches ... they have gradations. A man's fundamental philosphy of love would allow him to bed one woman most of the time, a few others fairly often and many others once in a while. A woman on the other hand is Gaussian like an on-off switch ... only two possibilities. He loves me or he loves me not. Once the man has offended enough to push her mind to the negative ... it's all downhill with virtually no possibility of ironing it out. Male and female "love philosophies" are completely incompatible. Nature favors the female philosophy because of the long term requirements of parenthood. And philosophers-theologians are quick to rationalize nature's choice into their worldviews. However, in the absence of death (if everyone simply lived indefinitely), both views would be equally viable and correct. This is why the male will not give up "messing around". It is his nature. And this has been pointed out by other men.

	Web ebtx.com