I wrote these ‘notes’ in 2013 when I was in my 20s. It was originally published on a blog which is now discontinued. My thoughts since then have evolved, but I am still publishing them here because I think it’s largely valid.

True love—as opposed to romantic love—is comprised of respect, empathy, and compassion. One's ability to love truly grows in direct proportion to wisdom gained through understanding life. And that's the only way.

Romantic love is everything love should not be about.

Attachment—the kind that entails pining and mental agony—between man and woman is romantic love, which being mating drive is about sex/reproduction. Love that depends on the sexual act for its expression (i.e. romantic love) is but a sexual desire in disguise of love. Be ruled by sexual desire and prepare to be miserable.

Is it because we fall in (romantic) love that we have sex (to express love), or because we have to have sex (so that the species continues) that we fall in love? Reproduction is the primary function of any organism. So the latter, doubtless, is true. Thus, there's nothing great or special about romantic love.

To indulge in purely romantic love is to surrender whatever autonomy one has and leave oneself at the mercy of brutal natural/biological forces—because one doesn't develop romantic love for reasons palatable to one's mind, and one would lose the feeling in the same way. Where the head doesn't have a say, the indulgence is of the animal nature. That's why romantic love is such a waste of life for the creatures of intellect.

Romantic love is a huge psychological cost to pay for sex. Romantic love exists because in the evolutionary past, sex meant producing offspring whose survival was best ensured when the parents stayed together. Hence, the mechanism evolved which made the mating partners "fall in love" with each other so that they could concentrate their mating energy on each other exclusively. In our times, however, sex more often than not means pleasure, or fulfillment of bodily need, consciously keeping an offspring out of the way. Even when it means producing offspring, the environment is good enough for the offspring to survive without the parents being together. Romantic love, therefore, is redundant.

True love, unlike romantic love, is maintained at a psychological cost of defying the natural forces for greater goals (family and life-long companionship). Only the best and the greatest human beings can achieve it.

Advisably, one should not make any important decisions in life when under the effect of romantic love. The tragedy is, we are tempted by nature to make the most important decision of life—about life companionship or marriage—in that state.

People in "love" don't want to be together when the "spark" is gone. Let me break this: The spark is like a high one gets when one is drunk. The reality of a relationship begins where the spark ends. For a fulfilling, long-term relationship, one should choose one's partner for reality, not for the spark. If one is lucky, the spark may remain, but that's secondary.

If romantic love can not be bypassed, it should follow—not precede—a commitment that is based on good reasons like matching thoughts and interests, common goals, etc.; or even practical reasons traditional arranged marriages used to be based on are better than romantic biological pull or a mere crush. For a couple united through arranged marriage or because they have common goals in life, developing romantic love for each other subsequently is a good way to be in "love".

True love (respect-empathy-compassion) and passionate sex can rarely survive together on their own for long. Sexual passion requires romance, and romance thrives on mystery—not honesty and sincerity. Mysterious (i.e. dishonest, insincere, aloof) assholes are, therefore, more successful at scoring women, and keeping their passion alive, than dutiful betas. There is, thus, a trade-off between true love (respect-empathy-compassion) and (passionate) sex.

Faithfulness in a relationship is possible, but it is not natural. And if people join together because of biological pull—popularly known as romantic love—it is next to impossible, because this "love" is by nature impermanent. That's the reason in cultures of the past it was condemned. Today, faithfulness is only possible if two persons are living by conventional wisdom (which is hardly seen) or they are highly philosophically developed and rational enough to not be ruled by biological instincts.

When romantic love becomes a valid basis for marriage, the era of marriage is reaching its end.