But I understand the difference...

>but love is a construction and you clearly are down with the
>romantic ish.

Romance is just a part of what I am down with when it comes to love. I knew love before I knew anything else.

>IMO romance is an aspect of a love
>relationship not something that is fundamental to love.

I agree.

>let's be real. what the hell is romance? and i'm not talking
>about some description about hearts fluttering, astute
>listening, or being swept from one's feet. i mean, what is
>it?

When I was 6 I fell in love with my shaggy dog, Felix. We were a team, Felix and I, and no one could come between us until some grown ups took him away. That was romance, too.

>romance needs to be critically analyzed and understood. folk
>like to ascribe cutey-pie affectations of romance but don't
>get into the meat and potatoes of what it means to be
>romanced or romantic.

Romance is temporary. Being in a relationship makes it permanent. We pass through attraction, infatuation, courtship, and intimacy...it all part of this search for spirit. I've learned that the psychological manifestation of love is temporary, romance-based and attached but I knew spiritual love first. It was peaceful, freeing, based on my soul. The latter is timeless and overcomes all things.

Peace to you!