The whole idea of romantic relations may be a social construct

I had this wacky train of thought come to me.
Hope viewers of this post find it entertaining/interesting.

The whole idea of romantic relationship is a societal/cultural/civilizational/human-organization based construct.
If all humans just lived wild,
Males would randomly have sex with 100s of women, and probably have 30-40 children each or more.
The male would not know who his child is.
Also, there seems to be no easily observable causality linking the sexual act to the consequence of pregnancy, and the consequent children that come from that.

There is just a wild instinctual desire for the male.
Similarly women too feel this same wild desire, in certain time periods, and depending on their mood they may run away, resist, or allow the sex to happen.
The man in his prime years would probably be more motivated, since he can easily manage to do 1 or 2 every day without any time-off periods.

The things is, after the sex, the woman too may not be able to causally connect the act of sex to the pregnancy that happens after.
Could she not take it as something that just naturally happened from God?
So the causality is not known from either side, male or female.

The female would bond with the child from the oxytocin and breastfeeding period, and that bond may result in the child and mother recognizing each other.
But there is no way the child will know the father, and neither will the father know.
It could be anybody.
If the woman has had sex with 5 men in a day, and gets pregnant, how would she have any idea who caused the child OR if the 5 acts had anything to do with the child at all?
The first symptoms of pregnancy after all come much later, probably a fortnight later at least, right?

Another aspect is that, if the child grows up away from the mother from a young age, it is doubtful if the mother can recognize the child.
The child may recognize the mother, because her age may not change her appearance as much in the 15-45 zone, but even that may not be easy.

So it seems like the entire notion of civilization/society is to regulate birth and to ensure the spread of resources to everyone.
By putting the responsibility on the father, the father is deterred from following his raw instinct and seeking new mates.
Similarly, a responsibility is also put on the mother, to take care of the child for much longer than she might have otherwise done.
The socialization/enculturation/civilization process is to suppress the sex instinct’s wildness, and instead redirect it into the structures of society, that is, to gain status/position/rank and then seek out the opp-sex of similar status/position/rank etc.
This I guess spawns the whole matrix of mating/romantic fantasy and social status/rank/position/specialness.
The fantasy of being the elite and mating with other elite,
Like the notion of kings/queens, emperors/empresses, prince/princesses and so on.

Names are used in societal organization to TAG the person.
It is an identifier similar to your debit card number, social security number and so on.
Similarly even the roles of mother/father are tags society puts on folk.
Like XXX is the mother of XXXX —–OR—— XXXX is the father of XXXX.
Also the agreement of marriage itself, is really a contract/agreement that serves the children who will be born from the mating of the 2.

Marriage was essentially a system created for the bringing up of children.
Nowadays people use it for companionship, but that is a conscious contract of sort, and it does not have much binding, since both the parties are independent.
It is only the child that is born helpless, and needs a lot of nurture at least till the age of 10.

There seems to big rift in the way “natural biology drives/impulses/instincts” operate and in the way we view everything from the “societal/cultural/civilizational lens”.
The former is generally subsumed into the latter in the process of socialization.
I guess, based on seeing the consequences, ramifications, and aftermath, birth causation etc. – Wise people with vision created systems such as culture/society/civilization to organize and regulate the different drives so that the system could serve in the longer term as a win-win for everyone.
Society/Culture then seems like a long distance vision of how people can live together and mutually fulfill all their needs .
As more needs get satisfied, people may become conscious of finer and subtler needs, which would gradually make their way into modifying society’s formal or informal structures.

Some thoughts on dating

This is a very vast subject,
And no matter what I write here,
I’d still only be scratching the surface.

In my understanding,
All relationships/dating/romantic pursuits,
Are about mutually fulfilling needs.
At a broad level, the needs might be:
Emotional, Social, Psychological (Companionship),
Physical, Financial…and so on.

I feel the root of all of these needs starts from early childhood,
From the relationship with the parents.
How did the parents reflect the child?
In the formative stage,
A child knows itself only by parental reflection/mirroring.

If the parent treats the child like a satellite,
(Like an extension of themselves instead of an independent entity),
That has to revolve around the planet,
Which is the parent in this case,
Then that creates the co-dependency dynamic.

If the mother/father is herself/himself profoundly needy,
They may project the role of the hero/savior/martyr to the child.
Due to this, a role-reversal would take place,
Causing the child to be the caretaker/peacemaker/emotional-regulator for the parent.
This would create the hero/martyr/savior dynamic.

In other cases,
The child may be conditioned to be overly dependent on the parent,
And the parent would encourage that to keep them dependent/enmeshed.

An opposite kind of enmeshment is also possible,
Where the parent depends upon the child from an early age,
Causing the child to be unusually independent early-on,
And assuming adult-like responsibility from a very young age.

There are many more cases like this,
Which then create a plethora of possible dynamics.
I feel it is these dynamics that are once again enacted in romantic relations.
The role-plays conditioned early on,
Perpetuate themselves in future relationships for most.

Whether negative or positive,
The dynamics go on unless deeply introspected.
Essentially the holy-grail sought in these romantic relations is:
If original dynamic was positive: To perpetuate that same successful dynamic with the other, and have that pattern simply live on.
If the original dynamic was negative: To once again find someone to trust, and then attempt to get our narcissistic wounds healed through their positive reflection of us.

Generally, I observe, that if the original dynamic was positive,
The person has very little trouble finding a partner and continuing it.
Trust comes easy, it happens seamlessly somehow,
And suddenly in a wink of an eye,
You see them all settled, happy, continuing their shtick(lol).

Most of the drama however, happens in the latter case,
Where the original dynamic was negative.
I feel the reason why this case is so difficult is because,
Not only was there a lack of trust to begin with from both sides,
But also, each of them continues to be still attached to their parent(s) in a negative way.
After enduring huge amounts of narcissistic injury, they buried all of their hurt/shame/anger/sadness…and so on,
And all this buried resentment and unprocessed parental enmeshment/attachment,
Makes both of them project their own ‘unfulfilling-parent’ onto the other.

For each of them:
The real quest is to get a cocktail of the following validations from the other:

Emotional/Self-esteem/Achievement/Specialness,
/Significance/Importance/Greatness/Worth/Value,
Trustability/Lovability/Likeability/Attractiveness,
Intelligence/Status…and so on.
It is a quest for redemption:
To be seen in a positive light,
And granted entry into a better world,
That is now finally safe for them to enter.

But in order to get the above,
They first have to become vulnerable to the other,
And open themselves up to a new internalization.
But to have history not repeat itself, and double the hurt,
They would have to test each other first.
And this testing part is where things break off eventually.
Because:
1. Usually nobody passes their tests (far too steep).
2. Secondly they attract partners who resemble their parents (the ones who created the issues to begin with).
It then becomes a sort of negative-prophecy that keeps repeating.

The quest could be worded as:
“How do I find an other,
Who is safe/trustable/adept/and wants my best interests?,
Who gives me the positive-reflection of myself I have longed for,
Who thereby opens up a new safe world for me to start thriving,
Which is the opposite of the hellish in-between ambivalent place I am in now.”
Most of the time, such an other is never found or never passes the tests,
And therefore results in “serial-monogamy” or other forms of disguised-despair.

Imo the only way out of a negative illusion like this,
Is to wake up (to awaken).
Unfortunately, it is not as easy to change a negative illusion to a positive one.
The only way out is to make EVERYTHING conscious.

All experience is maya/projection

The external reality is a kind of mysterious screen,
On which any movie can be projected.
The source of everything we experience is projected from within.
Things like your possessions, your relationships: like your wife/husband, friends, your children, things you love, stuff you are attached to, your home, are all projections.
So it is possible that a person living in a jungle in Africa may be feeling/thinking/experiencing in a similar way as a person living in the heart of Tokyo city.
Even though every single thing in their environment is different, a similar reality may be experienced.

A romantic essentially feels the same, no matter how he paints the enactment of that feeling.
The sexual lust feels the same, no matter whom it is projected on.
Any place could become your home, if you shift your projection to the new place.
The capacity to shift projections is one of the greatest powers.
All object essences are projected.
Believing that objects have inherent essences contained in them separate from you, is the biggest illusion.

If you are unable to shift your projections, then you stay attached to the original time they were flashed into you.
Attachment itself happens when there isn’t enough power to shift the projection.
It then stays with the person we first projected that feeling on.
That is what is generally called programming/conditioning.

Imagine if an old movie is remade with today’s technology and actors, everything is different, but the movie essence is the same.
Only the props have changed, the same drama and relationship is playing out.
So the implications of this are that:
# 2 people could be living just next to each other, but living in totally different experience worlds.
# Also, 2 people from completely different physical environments could be living a similar experience.

In your internal space, the projection potential is either present or absent.
And when you have it, you can project it on anything or anyone you want.
Its like when you have the love potential in your heart, and it is unblocked, it can be projected on anybody or anything.
You can keep the enactment of the projection at the fantasy level alone, or bring it down to the physical world, if such a choice/power is available to you.

Drugs like marijuana can temporarily vastly enhance your energy/power to access projection potentials and project.
Like I could ask you to look at a tree in front of you, and tell you to love the tree with all of your heart OR hate the tree with all of your heart, and you can experience both directly for yourself.
You can clearly witness how you modulate your experience with your intention.
You can even do this exercise when sober.
The drug only vastly enhances the power of that projection ability because it amps the available energy.
This is the basis of how on LSD, many people report to see the whole world reflected in an ordinary object like an ashtray.

It is like how a newborn experiences the world.
Every object in his/her environment takes on numinous projections.
Really, the experiences we have later in life are pale shadows of the peak experiences that were had at that time.
Those experiences set the tone for our relationship to the world itself.

From this level, there is no such dichotomy between the imagined and what is called real.
Every single thing you experience is real.
There is no such thing really called the physical world.
Everything that you experience is projected.
What a fantastic ride/illusion it is!, to believe the physical world exists independent from you.
It is a mind-boggling magical spell.