Analysis Of Laura Kipinnis's Book Against Love

871 Words2 Pages

In her book, Against Love, Laura Kipnis explains her views on love and why she is against it. She begins with an explanation of how maturity plays into love; maturity in love is seen as the willingness to settle down while immaturity is not wanting to commit. Then she gives a tour of love throughout history, stating that romantic love didn't exist until only a few centuries ago. Also, Kipnis believes that advanced intimacy, one of the essential things to keep a relationship healthy, isn’t good and an overall scary experience. Lastly she lists off an endless list of arbitrary things that you can not do in a relationship anymore. Kipnis contends that if it helps a society to have its citizens believe that it’s shameful to start over, or that wanting more from a relationship is illicit, grizzly acts of self mutilation are clearly needed. However, I believe that love is, in essence, unnecessary. One can live their entire life without …show more content…

Love is pointless because most of the things it provides can also be provided by platonic friends. Also, platonic friends usually won’t require a restriction of freedom to attain things such as companionship or a feeling of self worth, which love provides at the cost of required sacrifice. Kipnis, however, believes that love is “most essentially human” (P 1). Kipnis, despite being against love in her essay, still acknowledges her view that love is an essential thing for humans. Essential is too strong a word to use for love. I think that love itself is pointless to search for, but if you stumble on a pure love that provides more than it steals, then it’s certainly something to pursue, and possibly consider marrying them. I don’t think that this makes love an essential thing, but instead it’s the want and the need to reproduce that is essential to being human; this goal of reproduction is most attainable when you’re married, so a pure love helps the goal

Open Document