Analysing Love

Love ... this is what people keep doing these days, its so common. Whenever you get a little friendly with a person, the most obvious question is, "Do you have a girlfriend?" This somewhat says that its necessary for someone who has come out of his/her childhood to fall in love. Is it some kind of fashion?

I am a guy, so most part of this article, I'll look at it from the "man's point of view".

When some person tells another that he loves her, what implications does it have? Does it mean that if the other one feels the same then they'll have a valid license to please each other physically till one of them or both think its no longer possible to remain "in love". If not physically, then we can talk about pleasing each other by talking sweetly.

If we say, love is friendship, then how does the "sex" part of it get explained. Friends generally can be really close, care for each other, love each other, etc, etc. But, love (as defined generally) is not just friendship but a little more. Does that mean that friendship is "inferior" to love, and that every friendship is actually just a hit and trial process to get into love with your friend?

Boys generally think about falling in love with girls which are "at a minimum required level of beauty". Any girl below it, is rejected without any consideration. That can be explained with the natural phenomenon of selecting the "better, stronger, healthier" partner so that the offspring is good. But, are we really talking about offsprings here? And when in todays world, we have such so-called unnatural phenomenon of homosexuals and all, how are we justifying based on "natural tendencies"?

A little more mature people look for someone who understands them, who cares for them, whom they are comfortable with, etc, etc. Don't all these parameters fit into a best friend too? Then, when you have a "best friend" who fulfils all these requirements, whats the need of a "lover".

When we are in love, we are "allowed" to do certain things. If we carefully judge, then getting close physically is the ONLY thing which one can't do with a best friend. So, this should mean that a LOVER is better than the best friend. Why is the best friend called "best" then? And generally, a person's best friend just remains his friend, and someone whom he just got impressed by seeing once or twice becomes "the lover". How right is that?

Ok, so lets sum it up. Friendship is an intermediate step to Love, and a LOVER is better than your BEST FRIEND. But, most of the time, your BEST FRIEND is not your LOVER. This leaves me with so many questions in mind. If someone tells me that she loves me, what should I say? Is it not true that my best friend(of opposite sex, to remain in the "normal" category) is a more deserving person for the post of LOVER? And if making someone a LOVER just adds the "physical" sense, then I don't think love is for me, how cheap can it get?

You might wonder why am I after all the people who are in love. Simple, because I am single. They're busy "doing it" and I am free to analyse.