Man-crafted religions aside, personal biases are welcome. I'm looking for new perspective on the matter.

Love, as we know it, is simply a chemical reaction, right? It's an attraction to procreate? It's a strong emotional response that man named "love" - but it's simply romanticized in modern culture and entertainment...

Is it deeper? Are we all connected in a way that is beyond human comprehension? In a nihilistic way, I've led myself to believe that "love" is nothing more than attraction.

Please help me break this cynical view and shed some light on your own beliefs.

I think there's a big difference between romantic love and platonic or familial love. Romantic love is definitely exaggerated in media and built up to be an impossible ideal. It's true that a lot of romantic love is a series of chemical reactions - first from attraction to one time sex to long lasting bonding that stems from secretions of oxytocin after multiple sexual encounters. There are sociological theories that state that romantic love and marriage is nothing but mutual exploitation that persists only so long as the exploitation is equal. I've also read that love is very different for men and women, as you might expect. Women actively feel the love chemicals which supposedly affect their perceptions while men simply get accustomed to being with a certain woman. Personally, I think real love stems from good, solid people who commit to making the relationship at least work, if not happy. From people who are willing to give for each other and who don't fold when things get difficult. From common interest and a willingness to work together. It's a complicated partnership, where you have to be willing to put in a lot of effort.

Platonic and familial love is different and I think more pure than romantic love. The affection we feel for friends and family is often less complicated by other emotions in the ways romantic love can be. It doesn't deal with the complications of sex or jealousy and it's often not as difficult or demanding as romantic love. The familial love we feel for our children I think is the strongest. We are willing to give everything and expect little to nothing in return. Many people would say that freely given, boundless generosity is the definition of love.

I think there's a big difference between romantic love and platonic or familial love. Romantic love is definitely exaggerated in media and built up to be an impossible ideal. It's true that a lot of romantic love is a series of chemical reactions - first from attraction to one time sex to long lasting bonding that stems from secretions of oxytocin after multiple sexual encounters. There are sociological theories that state that romantic love and marriage is nothing but mutual exploitation that persists only so long as the exploitation is equal. I've also read that love is very different for men and women, as you might expect. Women actively feel the love chemicals which supposedly affect their perceptions while men simply get accustomed to being with a certain woman. Personally, I think real love stems from good, solid people who commit to making the relationship at least work, if not happy. From people who are willing to give for each other and who don't fold when things get difficult. From common interest and a willingness to work together. It's a complicated partnership, where you have to be willing to put in a lot of effort.

Platonic and familial love is different and I think more pure than romantic love. The affection we feel for friends and family is often less complicated by other emotions in the ways romantic love can be. It doesn't deal with the complications of sex or jealousy and it's often not as difficult or demanding as romantic love. The familial love we feel for our children I think is the strongest. We are willing to give everything and expect little to nothing in return. Many people would say that freely given, boundless generosity is the definition of love.

I didn't even think about that - familial vs. romantic. I definitely agree, the bond we have with our family (not even by blood, per se, but those close and familiar to us) is much more pure and even, in a way, more natural. Who knows if sex and love were ever supposed to mesh, who knows if humanity was meant to be monogamous or if "soul-mates" exist. If there are "soul-mates" don't you think the relationship would be on a much more friendly level, than sexually-driven? When you see old couples, they definitely have an element about them, something pure - like they're one. It's interesting.