Romanticism

[Sky]

Debate I started having at work with co-workers. Ya see, I'm the only guy working the morning shifts, so it tends to lead to conversations like this with my female co-workers ever since the other guy working with me left.

Anyway, today seemed to be, "Bash on guys" day at work. Not in a mean way, really, but enough to get me thinking, I approached them with the idea that some guys could be romantic, which was pretty much disregarded. We debated the subject a good hour, no side really gaining an edge over another, so it's in my head right now, and I'm curious.

Is romanticism dead? Or is it still amongst us? Personally, I think it is, I see people doing things for others in loving ways to show they care, and not just idly "being together" with someone.

Ball's in your court guys, discuss away.

[Contention]

You bring up a very smart point with what you have laid onto the table Sky. A lot of women in todays time often raise the question as to whether or not if men have any true "Romantic Emotion". Many women look down against things, usually stating that no man could truthfully reach a "Romantic State". Majority assume that men are creatures, merely made up of flesh and bone. Their familiarity to the human race, and women at all, seems somewhat short-coming. Explaning that "masculine" events include watching TV and constantly playing video games. Remarking as well that men are always on the run, always out with their friends, and unable to catch any "obvious" signs. Even in educated discussions, women are always first to imply that any "intelligent-sounding" poem of the past could not be written by a man. That, underneath it all, he had to have some type of women over his shoulder to help him through. Is this true? No one really knows, but at the rate they "justify their causes" it seems very unlikely. However, throughout time, it has never really seemed like men were always thought on the lower bar of things. Until lately, in recent past eras, have men truthfully been debated. Perhaps its the consequence of all those years with "superiority", or maybe it's just the bickering of a simple unhappy women.

Deeply situated in the past, many may have heard tales of poetic masters and scripters. Those of which were mostly men, men whom had more than just a "soft" side. Even in the days of yore, where knights and kings were growing fast, the treatment of women was still a very open subject. If you have ever opened a history book, you may have heard of Chivalry. Or, in definition, the codes of which all knights would follow when around a lady. It was their way of controlling themselves when with damsels. They wanted the best view possible, and these "morals" were very strict and forboding. Usually in arguments of today, most women will pull up some refrence from this time period. Commenting that even "bold and burly" knights had certain values in treating ladies well. They felt that it properly established a mans conduct. Yet, beneath all the glitter of the armor, one can not ignore the "masculine" fashion of those times. Women were still properly seen as material items, not people. They weren't treated with the highest of respect, and many of them were merely thrown around. Also, codes of Chivalry were inacted diffrent through opposing classes. A knight may treat a noble women with must gesture, but when it came to any poorly peasant, such would be double-taken. Not to say that a man can't not love, but they hardly emit the such in public settings. Chivalry was just another way for man to flaunt his ego; to give himself a good sign of charity. Think of the rules like an "instruction booklet" that you may recieve with little knick-nacks around the house. Women, were no diffrent in those times.

As time grew, the perceptions of women were hardly, if at all, altered. The era of "Gentlemen" is not as "Gentile" as some may aquire. Once again, the Gentlemen "acts", were nothing lesser than the codes of Chivalry. They were indeed, the same as history had once exposed. Certain mannerisms were given to men, and they followed them with fruitful gestures. Women, however, were still taken as mere dolls; things that could be owned and forgotten with time. They had no statue spot in the role of the world, at least in the eyes of all men. Publically, men were always cut short with their show of emotions. Privately is where the true justice had always shined. Many women wonder how any "man" could ever propose beautiful poetry for his bride. For, they feel that all men are grotesque and lack literature; finding themselves on the proper 'guise for education. Nothing can really say what seperates men and women emotionally in the mind. Men always seem to be very quiet with their feelings when around others, and only quite fluent when they find the person they trust. Women, on the other forte, can speak of any ordeal openly. They feel that the help of all others, can somewhat build a guiding rope between friends. Who is right, and who is wrong is something that can not be trully decided. As well, women are usually capable of displaying their love no matter what the situation may be. Something, "masculine" in the mans mind, has always led them to be quite "silent" about the matter. This frustrates women, and often causes "petty" fights, but it's unavoidable. Something, unknown, just seperates the thoughts of love between both sexes.

These diffrences in illustration of emotions often cause women to look down on men. Though it's not to say they don't deserve their view. They've been through much, while men have always fought to hold the sceptor. You always hear the stereotypical guide of men from the hands of women. Those quotes which employ that all "men will drink beer, and often watch sports". Though, this is not true to every single tee. Almost like how all men believe women focus on money. There will always be conflict between the way that both sexes think. It's also a true show of love. Because, even in marriage; you may not agree with everything your wife or husband does. It's the "managing" that shows your adoration, your truth, and your respect to one another. Men have a Romantic side, it might not be all showing, but everyone has deep love far in reaches they might not even know.

[Yoshiken]

Of course romanticism is still amongst us, but as much as I would like to deny it gradually diminishing, I can't. I am finding that as the years go by, more and more individuals are finding adoration to be a simple ideal that does not have much depth. I wish I could see more of society show that they care and not just say that they care. I am not saying that everyone acts like that, but it does seem to be growing ^^.

[Fluory]

Of course romanticism is still amongst us! There are those people who do value intuition and emotion, and will write sto-

...Wait.

Romanticism -- An art style which emphasizes the personal, emotional and dramatic through the use of exotic, literary, or historical subject matter.

I feel like I have the wrong romanticism.

I'll assume you mean that people who stress love rather than sex/materialistic gains, then. Then my vote is kind of wrong, but there was no "I think it's getting better nowadays" option.. But anyway, I actually think that romantics are stronger today than they were in olden times. People often seem to look at times such as the twenties with gilded goggles -- it's not entirely accurate. Back in the day, women were opressed and had very little say in things. It's true. And the same greeds were always out there, and always as readily heeded to as they are today.

You'll have your people who truly appreciate love and can be romantic, and you'll have your abusive, sex crazed men/women. I wouldn't quite say it's in the decline, per se -- as trends pass and constantly change; this sort of thing can never be linear.

I think that the relationships we have today often take on more depth than ones in the past when you consider how women were not really considered equals, the fact that a lot of marriages were arranged, (coming closer to modern times, now) and the generally more free-thinking environment of today. There's ups and downs all abound. Romantics exist, love is real, et cetera.

[Yoshi]

I was always under the impression that those "traditional" romantic ideas were from the 1800s or early 1900s. I dunno whether they got popular through some kind of book, or through meetings, or through long discussions over choice wine or if everyone got a special memo that told them how to do it, but I don't think that these ideas of romanticism were made from a sort of universal agreement on how to treat people. More likely from either an upper class or from philosophers.

All the same, though, what I think they do is represent an ideal, or at least ideal in their mind, relationship between a man and a woman. Most of what I've heard about the traditional romantics involves skipping over all that stuff about how one was supposed to beat their wife to keep them in line, and if they didn't then they were seen as weak by the rest of the guys. The "rule of thumb" to the sized stick with which you could beat her and all of that funky disco.

I don't think it ever really existed in any practical sense. True love does exist, but those little actions many people associate with it - whether from dramas, soap operas, poetry or movies - don't.

[plebanshiren]

It's still here, as it has always been, though I looked back into history, and discovered that people back then were as into romance as we are now, I think it's who you hang around with is where you can get your impression of romance, if you hang around with a rough bunch, that think all a woman (or a man) is good for, is sex, then you're going to think that it doesn't it exsist, it's very common in my school. But if you go somewhere nicer, more cleaner, then you'll see it everywhere, I learnt this through experience. School and work places can be very bad for lack of romance, so personally, yes, I think it still exsists

[Yoshi Vert]

Real romanticism (litterature, kind of drama) does not exist anymore. People have forgotten its real sense and nowadays tent to qualify romanticism as a kind of "old-school" kitsch behaviour. From the mid 80's to 2000's media started to bury "false romanticism" and love began to be linked with sexual related things/ideas. But I think that in a few years, the false romanticism will be back (like terminator... and it already starts...) in the media.. for how many time ? It'll end when people will be fed up. Moods of Mode.

[Electrometer Prime]

Romanticism does exist, but I haven't heard much about it lately.

[Rackinac]

Very rare. Very. This is coming from the girl that hangs out with a bunch of guys that make farting noises/perverted statments to impress a girl. It doesn't work. I have not met one romantic guy yet. So, it does exist. Just barly. By next couple of generations, it'll probably be wiped out.

P.S. Romantic movies don't exist anymore. Trust me. Watch an old romance movie, it's good and very cute. New ones are like... LOL, SEX IS ROMANTIC! No. Romance is a guy with respect for a woman. Not to mention, there is always 'love at first sight' thing going on. It's not that romantic. Love has to blossom, like a flower. Now that's cute.