Having watched Blue Valentine to the point of being religiously obsessed with the movie: I found the idea grew upon me. For anyone who was able to decipher the embedded meaning accurately, it was reasonable to become highly skeptical with the idea of love. While Blue Valentine is less a warning against love itself, the film perfectly depicts how misguided and unstable (most) relationships are often not meant to last for long. The over-romanticization of relationships devastatingly result in high expectations that at times never seem to be fulfilled consequently making either (or both) of the partner fall out of love (or the “state of infatuation”).
Blue Valentine is like a tear that will hinge inside my heart forever for its raw, emotional and much heartfelt message. That aside, the movie also did substantially well in manifesting my interest in writing about a topic that seems to have never been highlighted before: a critique of most university-relationships.
To remain cynical at the very least and in my own humble observation, university relationships follow a nebulous pattern of toxic emotional dependence blended with other forms of manipulation techniques that yet again challenge the very notion of “real love.” In a more unfortunate scheme of things, while some commitments do end up for the wellbeing of both partners, others continue for their lack of realization.
Before we ponder on the discussion above any further, it becomes necessary to have a brief overview of the types of straight relationships that are prevalent in LUMS (or any institution for that matter). Most usually begin towards the start of the first semester when perhaps the need for emotional validation and attention peaks. While craving psychological comfort under the arms of another person is a natural and a reasonable feeling to have, the question that subsequently arises is whether the relationship is a means to that end?
To put that into perspective, a relationship that is perceived as a long-term commitment, characterized by a reciprocation of emotions demands a lot of paperwork be done. When commitment becomes an impulsive decision, more often than not, that results in guilt piling up for the later part of the relationship. Guilt not just for being with the wrong person (although that is the core reason) but for sacrificing a whole range of things including friendships, academics and above all mental health.
Relationships at LUMS begin with an unhealthy (toxic) dependence on the other partner where usually the female bears the brunt of male emotional manipulation. Whether it is about the guy failing a quiz or his inability to get over his ex, the girl, unfortunately, ends up as the emotional laborer girlfriend. The relationship then progresses to the point where the man feels entitled to his ‘dependence’. And anything falling short of his expectation usually comes at the cost of psychological toll for the girl (in the form of ghosting etc). Any attempt that is thereby made to call-out the prevalent toxicity is sidelined because the girl is manipulated to accept that she does in fact have the “perfect-irreplaceable” guy.
Take a step further from the first type and let us not forget that there are also relationships existing at LUMS based upon “male social excellence.” Yes, my reference is towards the AC and JT group who somehow falsely equate the idea of ownership of a particular female with the trophy for social achievement because doing so earns them the needed validation from their BROS. In case you aren’t already aware, this trend is generally carried forward from high school where the infamous AC-JT rivalry manifests in various other problematic forms. This type usually ascribes the characteristics of its predecessor but will often end after the sheer realization that there are far better goals to be achieved than the continuation of a meaningless enmity.
While I sit to pen down the types of relationships, I have observed over my time at LUMS; I realize I might be missing numerous other mainstream forms. Take the example of having a crush on someone that at times, fortunately, yields a positive outcome for the infatuated person. But that is beside the point because the initial task of writing this piece was to recognize the toxicity ingrained within most commitments.
Having said that, I take no pleasure in stating that in LUMS, chances for a new relationship to start immediately after a breakup remain substantial.
Long story short, jump out of one relationship and step onto another.
Understandably so, for the individual involved, the breakup did cause an unspeakable amount of pain that can now be viably alleviated by finding solace in some other person. This phenomenon remains controversial to say at the very least and has always been the center of conflicting opinions. While the proponents support any immediate measures to heal the wounds of the past relationship, opponents stick with their assertion of giving space to oneself post-breakup.
I tend to associate myself with the latter school of thought solely because it’s highly unfair for the other partner. When I started this article by arguing that a relationship requires emotional reciprocation, it is meant to work to-and-fro. With the trauma and flashbacks of previous relationship appearing (in)frequently during the current commitment, there are likely to be impediments towards a full investment. But unfortunately, this form of relationship has pervasively found itself within the LUMS confinement.
Yet, the issue of obstructed emotional investment isn’t just the full depiction of the broader problem in hand. The “new” relationship often becomes a way of garnering attention and aggravation of the ex-partner as a way of showing how swiftly the said person has moved on with someone “better.” This infuriating behavior then sparks an unnecessary war, where the person irked the most ends up losing the game. All at the expense of the non-realization by the new partners who are unable to comprehend why the “affection” intensifies at times and plummets moments after.
Conclusion?
There is no conclusion. The article might have given a small glimpse of how most relationships at LUMS appear, defined by a “tale of unrecognized toxicity.”
To stay clear upfront, I do not hold anything against relationships as such. With half of my extended family from LUMS marrying within the LUMS community, I perhaps even consider this piece to be very ironic. The main goal of writing this was to highlight how a number of couples at the university are not even considering the basic elements for a healthy commitment. Eliminate all the prevalent problems I mentioned in this article, and what you might have is a perfect relationship exemplified. A piece of advice will always be to account for the mental-wellbeing of your significant other as well as of yourself because that seeks no compromise at all.