婚姻制度的起源和消亡

婚姻（家庭）制度的产生可以追溯到几千年前父权社会的建立（有人把几百万年前类人猿的交配也算作是婚姻，我认为这个是不太靠谱的）。婚姻制度的发展基本上沿袭了杂婚、群婚、对偶婚，最后到一夫一妻制婚姻的顺序。

人类社会刚形成的时候，需要把男和女配对起来性交(交配这个词就是这里来滴），这个显然是为了繁衍后代，增加人口。因为当时人类平均寿命就20来岁，死亡率是非常高的，如果不疯狂的大量的造人的话，出生率低于死亡率，人类是要灭绝的。

当人类明白他们的生死存亡在于性交的频率和效率以后，每个人都很积极主动。除了吃饭、睡觉还有狩猎，人们把其余的所有时间都用来做爱了—当然，不做爱也没其他事情可做，那会没有娱乐消遣一说的。然而，即使这样分秒必争，也没多少时间的。第一大家寿命本来就很短，适合造人的年龄不过就是短短几年时间。第二还要去干活呢，修房子，狩猎什么的。总之，最后用在做爱的时间并不多。这就要求性交有很高的效率才行。

高效率的性交取决于高效率的男女配对。这个配对的机制，便是人类婚姻的最原始的初衷。

这个配对过程，一开始杂乱无章的。成年男子只要精子一形成，基本上旁边抓到谁就射给谁，不管是男是女，也不管别人是否已经射过，或者这个妇女是否已经有身孕了。甚至有时候出去打猎的时候，精子形成了，就直接射给温顺一点的动物的也是常有的事。

人类畜牧的传统就是从这里开始的。英文里面的畜牧业叫做animal husbandry，直译过来就是“动物丈夫”，其实一开始的含义就是指的兽交。羊是人类最早驯服的家畜，主要也是因为这种动物不仅温顺，还和人的个头相近，性交起来方便而已（新西兰很多地方至今还保留着和羊性交的传统）。羊因为被家养的早，在古代历史上就占有比较重要的地位，西方很多宗教对羊都很推崇备至。大部分宗教祭祀的时候，用的就是羊血。圣经里甚至写道耶稣曾经自称为羊(lamb)，可见当时羊的地位是很高的。

这个人兽滥交的阶段可以算作是婚姻的最早形式了。瑞士人类学家Bachofen称这个阶段为“杂婚”时期。杂婚虽然大量的增产了人口，但是也导致了严重的近亲交配后果。 很快大家就意识到，乱搞不光增加出生率，也增加畸形儿的出生率，因此这个系统不可持续。

随着人类社会的发展，杂婚系统很快演变成了所谓的“群婚”系统。

在群婚系统里，一般5到8个男人组成一组，和相同数量的女人组成配对。这个配对过程相比“杂婚”的配对过程，虽然效率低了一些，但是可以一定程度上避免近亲交配。然而这个新的配对系统也带来了新的问题。万一几个男人的精子都同时成熟，他们又同时要求和同一个女人性交怎么办？那会可不是什么文明社会，往往出现大家为一个女人都打得头破血流的情况，有时候还有死伤。

这个时候人类已经发展了不少，社会有一定的规模了。为了解决群婚带来的问题，一群比较有威望的男人领袖聚在一起，最后大家商量决定在群婚的基础上，进一步改良婚姻制度。

改良后的婚姻制度被称为“对偶婚”，就是我们现在所说的纳妾制度。即允许一个男人有一个主要的配偶，保证了他的基本性交权利，然后再允许不同的男人，共享一个或者几个妾，以最大程度上增加性交机会。

纳妾制度存在时间很长，范围也很广，在不同的地区还发展出了不同的形式。在古中国文明，纳妾制度不仅是传统，更是受律法保护的。在中东文明的大部分地区，妾的地位非常低，是可以像奴隶一样买卖的。恩格斯的婚姻起源于私有财产的论调就是从这里发掘出来的（很显然，这个论调有很大的片面性）。纳妾制度在伊斯兰文化里演变成了一夫多妻，每个妻子基本上有同等的地位。犹太教传统上也允许一个男人拥有好几个配偶，但是他们的妻和妾的地位稍有差别。

一夫多妻和纳妾在古代是很自然的一个现象。因为当时男人一般在外从事危险的狩猎等体力活，环境恶劣，死亡率很高，寿命短，而女人一般在家里煮饭养孩子什么的，环境相对安全，寿命长。这就导致了当时成年男女的性别比列严重失调，女多男少。一夫多妻多妾就不足为怪了。这个现象在后来的很多性别考古学（gender archaeology）研究当中都被一一证实了。

一夫多妻或者纳妾制度在人类历史中扮演了极其重要的角色。直到今天，这个制度在一些国家还有实施。在中国，纳妾制度存在了好几千年，直到20世纪初还有很多人纳妾。那时候的民国政府虽然宣布纳妾违法，但是纳妾太普遍了政府也没办法，只能要求政府雇员尽量不要纳妾。中国的纳妾现象真正的消失是在上个世纪50年代。共产党上台以后，发动了一些大规模的社会运动，并颁布了婚姻法，雷厉风行了几年，纳妾现象终于消失。

所以我们现在所说的一夫一妻的婚姻制度，其历史不过就是几十年，算是一个刚起步社会制度。一夫一妻制虽然刚开始没多久，但是它背负着了广义婚姻制度数千年的历史包袱，早已疲相尽露。

婚姻制度或将消亡的趋势可以从三个方面看出来。

第一，世界范围内的结婚率下降,预示这人们对婚姻制度的兴趣不断降低。

这方面的统计和报道很多。欧美日等国家的结婚率在过去50年中持续下降，而离婚率却逐年上升。美国很多大城市的结婚率不到50%。在所有的新的婚姻当中，约有一半最终将以离婚收场。日本香港台湾等国家和地区更是有约三分之一的女性终身不结婚。有人开玩笑的说，现在唯一还对婚姻还有热情的，只剩下同性恋了。

第二，越是文明发展程度高的国家，结婚率越低。越是受教育程度高的家庭，离婚率越高。

发达国家人们更注重自我，因此愿意结婚的人少。受教育程度对婚姻也有很大影响，一方面现在受教育的时间越来越长，导致结婚越来越晚，另外一方面，高学历女性独立意识强，愿意结婚的就少。随着更多国家追随着欧美日的脚步，可以预见世界范围内结婚率下降的趋势会持续很长一段时间。

第三，近年来兴起的婚姻多样化运动，进一步冲淡了传统婚姻的概念。

包括gay marriage，domestic partnership，trail marriage等在内的各种婚姻衍生形式在欧美的合法化，冲淡了人们对传统婚姻的定义的理解。同居取代婚姻在很多国家变得流行，婚姻制度摇摇欲坠。

人类的婚姻制度，从起源、发展到衰落，历时数千年。这个古老的制度一直以来的目的，归根结底还是为了控制男女交合的频率和效率。进入现代社会以后，婚姻控制性交的目的不再很合时宜。为了保留婚姻制度，人们赋予了婚姻很多神圣的外衣。例如婚姻是为了生儿育女，婚姻是为了老有所依等等。但是更多的人宁愿相信，现代婚姻是为了爱情。

现代婚姻是否是因为爱情，这个话题很大，我这里就不展开来说了。一般的结论是婚姻和爱情不相干。第一，婚姻不是爱情的必要条件。第二，爱情是有时效性的，和婚姻的永久性目的相抵触。第三，婚姻不利于爱情，“婚姻是爱情的坟墓”，这句话不是一点根据都没有的。

婚姻作为人类历史上最古老的一个制度，走到今天也很不容易了。世界范围内，从婚姻相关的各个社会数据来看，婚姻制度极有可能在未来的数十年间消失。等那一天到来的时候，希望那些长期困扰在婚姻里的人们，那些因为嫁不出去或者娶不到而烦恼的剩男剩女们，还有同性恋和奉行单身主义的人们可以尽情的庆祝一次。不光因为他们可以因此得以解放，更因为他们有幸见证了一个历史时刻，能够见证到一个存在了数千年的社会制度的消亡，总算是幸事一桩。

凤姐找爱之哥大行

转载：此文发表于2012年2月31日纽约时报第三版，作者匿名，应该是凤姐的一位仰慕者。

“Hi, I’m looking for a husband,” said Sister Feng, a famous Chinese Internet figure and the most hated reality star of China.

Sister Feng’s real name is Luo Yufeng, a.k.a “Sister Feng” (Feng Jie) or “Sister Phoenix.” She first gained attention from the Chinese media in 2009, after passing out flyers in front of a subway station in Shanghai, seeking a husband who must meet excessive requirements such as: “must be Tsinghua or Peking University graduate; must be majored in economics; must have international vision; must be 176cm to 183cm tall; must have never been married; must possess a Hukou from east coast of China and must be 25 to 28 year old.”

A few days after she distributed her Husband Hunting Ad , she posted the result on her blog, claiming that after seeing her Ad, the CEOs of Bank of China, Citibank China, Standard Charted, China Communication Bank, China Life, AIG China and so on, “approached me and expressed their faithful intention to marry me immediately. However, I thought they were too old and they may die on any day, so I refused all of them!”

Later, when she appeared on a local television program, she claimed that she was the most intelligent person on the earth “for the past 300 years and the future 300 years to come.”

Contrary to these exaggerated remarks is the razor thin grasp of reality she appears to possess. This is a young lady who was working as a cashier at a Carrefour store in Shanghai and she was far from the best-looking girl in China.

As of September 2011, sister Feng had relocated to New York City, where she is now working as a manicurist. After a short period of anonymity, it seemed she began testing her old trick of getting attention again. This time she was out to get famous in America!

Last fall, Feng was seen distributing flyers in the Financial District and Zucotti Park during the Occupy Wall Street movement. Perhaps she thought Wall Streeters were not as intelligent as Columbia University students, she moved her base to Columbia shortly afterwards.

In recent months, Sister Feng has made multiple visits to Columbia. Her most recent visit occurred on Wednesday, February 22, when she was spotted at the 116th street and Broadway gate of the university, distributing flyers to anyone who did not look like an Asian.

Earlier that morning, she had arrived at the Engineering Building, located on the north east corner of Columbia’s Morningside campus. In front of the entrance, she stopped a Chinese student and asked for his help finding the building’s fourth floor so she could “post an important flyer on the student event board.”

The Chinese student, who requested to remain anonymous, later told me, “Feng Jie came in her classic orange jacket and pink scarf. Her hair was dyed auburn and she was carrying her trademark pink bag too. I could not believe my eyes when I first saw her. It was like a super star asking a nobody for a small favor, very surprising and exciting!”

After posting the flyer at the engineering’s building, Sister Feng came to the campus entrance on the west side of 116th street where she started to distribute flyers.

The flyer read:

“I am looking for a Husband now, I am the hottest star from China. My name is Luoyufeng, Chinese call me fengjie, born 1985, I want my Husband very Interested in political and Economic, he would like to Dominate the world.

I want my Husband like this:

1. He must between 25 to 31 years old.
2. He will between 5.74 feet to 6.11 feet height.
3. He must never get married, no children.
4. He will graduated from a prestigious world, like Harvard, Yale, MIT, west point, Stanford, Oxon, and so so.
5. He must had a master’s degree.
6. He can’t been an Asian.
7. He would better have a house and a car.

I’m born in a poor family in Chongqing. When 16, I come to a Inexpensive Normal school which I never liked. I read a lot of books Between 9 to 20. I’m expert in Poetry and prose. In 2006 when I’m 21, I became a Language teacher. In 2008 when I’m 23, I resigned and come to shanghai for a better future. But I can’t get a good job there. There was no way to get more income except publicize myself, so I became the hottest star in china in 2010 when I’m 25. I came to the USA in the same year. Since there is over 3000.000 chinese man asked marry me, but none of them suitable.

Notice:

1. I am only 4.82 feet height, but I used to wear a High-heeled shoes. So I always looked like 5.08 feet.
2. I’m from china which Country control Family planning as their basal policy. I will follow it. So I only want 2 children if get married.

Email: shanghailuoyufeng@163.com
Mobile phone: 646-220-8171
MSN: shanghailuoyufeng@163.com
Facebook: shanghailuoyufeng@163.com”

The flyer was written in such poor English that Chinese netizens called it a “grammar mistake hunt.” A Chinese blogger, Fan Huang said, “Obviously this husband can’t be too much of a stickler for grammar. Perhaps she ought to find a German-speaking husband, since Sister Feng seems to be rather Fond of random Capitalization.”

The news of sister Feng’s Ivy League visitation quickly spread through the Internet. Once again, Sister Feng had entertained the world with her shocking actions and false sense of confidence.

However, some Internet analysts had a different view. “Sister Feng is indeed very smart”, said one of the analysts. He suggests that Sister Feng has utilized the minimum cost to gain the maximum of personal publicity, which could turn into profit. By February 26, 2012, she had 1,818,306, followers on Weibo, a Chinese Tweeter and the number of her fans is rapidly growing. She also received free publicity in the New York Post, the People Magazine and various other U.S. media outlets.

Already, she has been approached by companies for potential cooperation. In one case, she was invited to appear on a TV commercial for a hair shampoo product for one million Yuan. The company even drafted a slogan: “at least, let men admire you from behind”. The plan, however, had to be aborted at the last minute, due to “drastic opposition from the company’s employees”.

On another case, the American Chinese Television interviewed Feng Jie for a possible reporter job. However, the interview did not work out well for “unknown reasons”. Nevertheless, Feng Jie still gained a lot from her publicity. According to a person nicknamed Shao Ai who posted on a popular Chinese forum, Feng Jie has applied asylum in the United Stated last year based on the claim that she was the most hated person in China, and her case got approved last month. So Sister Feng solved the immigration status issue easily and gained permanent residency in the United States, ahead of many talented scholars and hardworking people.

Although she has listed her extensive criteria for a husband in the above flyer, it is highly unlikely she would pick anyone, even when they meet all the requirements.

After all, as she says, “’after gaining the green card’, my first priority now is making money.”

If you feel you are a qualified candidate with high confidence, you can always contact her at: shanghailuoyufeng@163.com

凤姐凤姐我爱你！

从来没有一个女人，让我如此的着迷。你的一举一动，一颦一笑，你那小巧的背影，粉红小挎包，一袭叛逆的黄头发，两片性感的小嘴唇。。。最特别的是你那冷酷的眼神，对整个世界也可以不屑一顾。

我仿佛航行在一片漆黑的大海里，
你就是那灯塔，帮我指路，
我仿佛游走在无底的地狱深渊，
是你帮寄存灵魂，
哦，我的宝贝，
你是迷魂的药，
你是偷心的贼，
哦，宝贝，
你是我的小野猫，小野猫！

The End of Marriage?

本文是关于婚姻制度的思考。俺头一次学习纽约时报的写作风格，虽然本人对这种装b的文风不感冒，不过不装不行啊，现在大家都喜欢装b，你不装，那你“不装”这个行为本身就是在装b了。

—题记。

At 8:30 in the morning, a long line has already formed in front of the main entrance of the Queens County Clerks Office in Kew Gardens, New York.

Even the chilly spring wind in New York could not blow away the joy written on everyone’s face. The soon-to-be couples, holding each other’s hands, anxiously waiting to enter the courtroom. Once they enter the room, all they need to do is pay a $35 fee and they will be officially married before a county clerk. It is such a divine moment for the men and women outside.

Although, they still have to wait in line.

On the other hand, to get a divorce in New York is much more complicated. Couples have to go to a court and lawyers are usually needed. Until 2010, New York recognized divorces only upon fault-based criteria, which means: you don’t need reason to get married, but you do need one to get a divorce.

According New York Department of Health’s vital statistics records, in 2010, a total of 67,051 couples got married in New York City, while in the same year, 27,833 couples got divorced. Nearly half of the number of marriages! People are rushing into marriage while at the same time people are rushing out.

Ancient Greek philosophers described the phenomenon of marriage as a “bird cage”: “birds outside want to get in, while birds inside want to get out.” It seems to be just as true today, only that more and more birds are leaving while less ones are getting in.

According to a new Pew Research Center nationwide survey, done in association with TIME, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, the marriage rate in the United States has been dropping steadily for half a century. Barely half of the adults in the United States choose to get married today.

Marriage is on the decline, worldwide. Asian Research Institute reports that a third of all Japanese women 30 or above were single in 2010 and half or more of those will probably never marry. In Taiwan, 37% of all women aged 30-44 were single in 2010 and in HK, 27%. So few Korean women choose to marry today that men call it “marriage strike”.

While less people choose to marry today, divorce rate has reached a historical high. In many western countries, nearly half of the new marriages end in divorce.

Something within the marriage system, which is based, in theory on a lifetime commitment, seems to have gone wrong, I believe.

Erwin J. Haeberle is a German social scientist. He has studied American’s marriage system and concluded that American marriage laws are “outdated” and “can no longer reflect all of social changes today”.

In his book “The Sex Atlas”, he proposed various possibilities of future marriage, such as: open marriage, temporary marriage, trial marriage, marriage in two steps, non-monogamous marriage, polygamy, group marriage and same-sex marriage.

Some of these proposals have already become laws in some countries. Same sex marriage and trial marriage, for example, which people, particularly in the West, have done informally since the 1960s. Even potential demolition of marriage has somehow also begun in the form of allowing looser social relationships, such as the “domestic partnership” in New York or similar “lifelong partnership” in France and Germany, to be defined as marriage.

In 2010, a new law was proposed in Mexico City, allowing marriages to automatically expire after two years if couples choose not to renew it. A similar law is also in discussion in the Philippines and a few other countries.

Bitter Lawyer, a website that jokes about the “funny laws,” wrote:

“Under a proposed “marital opt-out agreement,” couples will determine the time limit of their union, with two years being the minimum term and “’til death do us part” presumably being a bit longer term.”

Lawmakers from Mexico seemed have bet much hope in the bill. Lizbeth Rosas Montero, the bill’s co-author believes the bill would “reduce the divorce rate and lessen the burden on the court system”.

But if divorce is so troublesome, why do people want to get married in the first place?

To find the answer, I decided to do a research on the institution of marriage.

Friedrich Engels seemed to be the first one who had explained the institution of marriage in writings. In his famous book “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State”, Engels pointed out that family came after the industrialization of society from the rise of inheritable wealth, where women were considered as property of men. Lewis H. Morgan and a few other people’s work further support and complement Engels theory.

Independent scholar Christopher Dawson wrote, “The family, as we understand it, owes nothing to biological or sexual causes, but is an economic institution arising from the development of private property and the consequent domination of women by men.”

But Engels’ theory is almost 200 years old and perhaps outdated since the decline of marriage rate started only recently. What do experts think of marriage today?

I turned to history professor of Columbia University, Richard Bulliet.

Professor Bulliet is the author of several history books, among which the famous: “The Earth and Its People: a Global History”. The book has over 1000 pages and has explained the origin and evolution of human being in a great detail.

Professor Bulliet was very busy so I decided to interview him through email. Several days after I sent him my questions, he wrote me back:

“This is a very difficult question”, he wrote, “hence my delay in writing about it”.

“When Engels were writing, Europe conceived of marriage is a sanctified binary relationship that fixed in law crucial matters of paternity and transmission of property. But we no longer have that today. Marriage in the United States is waning, and less formalized parenting situations are gaining in frequency. Even though property still exists. Most American children today are born outside of a binary marriage relationship, and about half of the binary marriage relationships end in divorce”.

After explaining the origins of marriage, he concluded that Engels’s “property theory” of marriage was based on “partial, inadequate, and often mistaken knowledge” that the theory is nothing but an “imaginary sequence” which cannot be verified historically.

Modern marriage, after removing property as the core consideration, leads in two directions: one concerns parentage and another concerns a “pair-bonding relationship”, he said.

“Is marriage necessary for parentage in a contemporary society?”

Bulliet thinks “no”.

“Fostering, adoption, surrogate parentage, and systems of collective upbringing can in some instances be effective substitutes. A homosexual couple can be loving and responsible parents even if they cannot marry. Artificial insemination, egg implantation, and other ways of generating children without DNA derived from the married couple can produce loving and supportive homes. This includes, of course, undisclosed non-marital pregnancies in which a husband raises another man’s child without knowing it. Inheritance in these instances proceeds along lines associated with the marriage institution, but one can imagine other possibilities.”

“Its link with parenting may continue to diminish just as its link with property has already diminished. Marriage may eventually evolve into an institution that primarily attests to a desire for lifelong pari cohabitation”, he concluded.

By “desire for lifelong pari cohabitation”, did he mean “love”? Professor Bulliet left an open ending here.

Love is for sure related to marriage. I could see love was written on the faces of the couples waiting to enter the Queens country clerk’s office in Kew Gardens. I could see love from the faces of brides and grooms on their weddings. I have also seen love from the hugs and kisses of grandpa and grandma on their 40-year anniversary of marriage. Love indeed seems to be the reason for contemporary marriage.

But can love last as long as marriage that “till death do us apart?”

Helen E. Fisher, an anthropologist at Rutgers University who is recognized by the BBC as one of the world’s best-known researchers in studying behavior of love, defines love as a passion of “chemicals.” In her book, Why We Love: The Nature and Chemistry of Romantic Love, she wrote, “The human passion of romantic love does not last long.”

On the other hand, Elaine Hatfield, a psychology professor at the University of Hawaii who has been studying love since the 1960s, says, “Passionate love provides a high, like drugs, but you can’t stay high forever.”

If love cannot last through marriage, why weren’t people breaking up in the past?

Natalie Bennett, then deputy editor of the UK newspaper Guardian Weekly, believes she has found the answer to the question.

Bennett did a research and found that the current average length of marriage before divorce in the UK—11.5 years—is roughly equivalent to the average length of marriage in early modern Europe. Given the historic death rates, the median length of the partnership or marriage in the old times before one or the other died, usually, the woman of childbirth would probably have been about that.”

It seems that I accidentally found the reason of high divorce rate in today’s society, that is, short life span of love does not match the longer life span of people. It appears to be quite true, thinking that true lovers would never consider a divorce and divorce only happens when love depletes.

If love cannot support marriage through its full contract length of “until death do us apart”, what reasons do we have now to keep the institution of marriage today? Is marriage a necessary element for modern society?

To find the answers, I further researched to see if there is any reason for marriage to exist.

Since love is the blood of marriage and love is what makes marriage live, I first researched to see if modern marriage guarantees love. In the end, love can live without marriage, but marriage cannot live with love.

The results that I found were not very supportive to my assumption. It seems marriage displays no benefits for love; instead, marriage often becomes a barrier to love, especially when the marriages are arranged, a practice that is very common in China, India, Pakistan and many Muslim countries today.

In 2011, 19-year-old Siddqa and 25-year-old Khyyam of Afghanistan were sentenced to death by stoning after they tried to elope away from their arranged marriages. A bystander captured the execution on video and it shocked the whole world. The unfortunate young couple is just one example of victims of the modern marriage system. For them, marriage did not protect love; it destroyed it.

If marriage does not protect love, does it enhance love? Not really.

Following the wedding, often the idea that “now you are mine” leads couples to lose interest in each other. We hear wives complain all the time about how their husband become less enthusiastic and passionate after they got married, while men complain that women stop trying as hard and put on weight.

Other roles that marriage plays in today’s society are far from positive.

Marriage may cause confusion for older single people who were socialized to think that they have to have been married in order to be thought of as “normal.” People also complain about married couples getting bigger tax refunds then two single people, even when they do exactly the same work.

But to many people, the most frustrating aspect of modern marriage is perhaps the irreversibility of marriage. Once one is “married,” the best result he or she can get is “divorced.” Say goodbye to “single” forever.

The existence of the institution of marriage has revoked more and more controversy in today’s society. While many elderly people still have faith in marriage system today, young people seemed to be losing enthusiasm in it.

For an on-the-ground view of the issue, I interviewed students of marriageable age, for their sense of how they see the institution.

Yuki, 22, a student at the Earth Institute of Columbia University said, “the purpose of marriage is to prove its inappropriateness and then you can get a divorce.”

Liu, 22, another Earth Institute student from China said, “marriage is for green card.”

Their classmate, Huihui was quite serious with my questions and answered, “marriage is necessary for the purpose of bearing the next generation. It is a kind of social responsibility”.

In fact, Pew Research Center found that more than 40% Americans younger than 30 consider marriage passe.

“They see it as an obsolete social environment,” said D’Vera Cohn, a Pew researcher.

“In the 1950s, if you weren’t married, people thought you were mentally ill,” said Andrew J. Cherlin, a Johns Hopkins University sociologist who studies families. “Marriage was mandatory. Now it’s culturally optional.”

无痛失恋

Helen Fisher 认为，爱情分为三个阶段：Lust, Attraction and Attachment。 所以避免分手的痛苦有一个好办法，那就是lust一结束就主动走人，走的越晚伤心越多，最后就走不了了，成了爱情的俘虏，如果再被爱情抛弃，剩下的就是无穷尽的痛苦。

如果失恋是一种病症，那这种病一定非常严重非常可怕。我们见过因为失恋痛不欲生的，因为失恋一蹶不振的，因为失恋恍恍惚惚自暴自弃的，因为失恋醉倒在地铁里的，等等。总之，大家都有失恋过，其中的难过，每个人都有体会。

失恋对当事人如此打击，让人要死要活的，可是在旁观者看来，却完全没有感觉，只会觉得好笑和可惜，这至少说明失恋不是一种传染病，总算是大大降低了它对人类的威胁了。

治疗失恋最好的药是时间。 急性失恋需要很短时间就可以痊愈，慢性失恋需要较长时间也可恢复。总之，只要时间足够多，那一定是可以恢复了的。也许有人说，我都80岁了，还对20岁的时候认识的一个小姑娘念念不忘。如果真心是这样，那我看这个人的病情一定非常严重，60年的药量还不够，要再给他20年试试。如果到时候他还没死掉，也还不肯改口的话，那我看这个人不仅有失恋病，还有严重的神经病，治不好，死掉算了。

说起死亡，我就岔开一句，说说死亡。

人除了肉体，基于肉体存在的还有无数寄生物，还有思想，还有灵魂，还有亲朋好友对的印象以及社会位置等等，是一个大的系统。

所以人的死亡就是一个系统工程。这个的过程一般是这样的，先是肉体的死亡，例如是因为癌细胞漫延造成的—那癌细胞也是一种人体内的寄生物，所以肉体的死亡就是这些癌细胞寄生物的成长过程。它们会不断繁衍，会在人体的死亡里壮大，但是这些寄生物最终也随着宿主的死亡而死亡。

肉体死亡以后，所有原先依附在这个肉体上的，除了寄生物，还有思想和人们的印象和社会位置等等，也都要统统消失的。

思想的死亡往往紧随着肉体的死亡。当然有的名人，人死了，思想还留下来好久，例如马克思，尼采，佛洛依德什么的，但是最终只要有足够的时间，他们的思想也是要消亡的。

然后就是这个人曾经在社会中的位置。人来这个世界一趟，或多或少会在社会里占有他的位置，留下一点痕迹。从总统到乞丐，从默默无闻的老师到声名显赫的富人，每个人在社会里都有自己特定的角色。任何人一辈子也逃不出他的角色，即使是叛逆的人也逃不出他叛逆者的角色。世界就是一个巨大的混沌，所有的人都奋力给自己撑开一个小空间，以宣告他的存在。伴随着肉体的死亡，这个小空间也会越变越小，最后被混沌淹没，再完全愈合上，这时候这个人在社会里的踪迹也就消失了。

最后还有亲朋好友对这个人的印象。例如一个人死了，最开始是同事忘记他，死个同事算什么啊，不过是茶余饭后的谈资而已。然后朋友会忘记他，大家提到他也许会说“那个人是我好朋友，可惜却死了”，然后痛苦2秒钟，就该干嘛干嘛去了。最后忘记他的，是他的亲人。哪怕是再亲的人，伤心过一段时间也没法伤心了，生活总要继续下去，每年给他上个坟，跪在坟头哭着说“我们来看你了”，其实一年也来不了几次。

这样死亡的人，只剩下灵魂可以存在比较久。刚开始灵魂会守在肉体的旁边，在冰冷的墓穴里，靠回忆和宿主的快乐时光打发日子，一段时间以后，所有可以回忆的情节都给回忆过无数次了，灵魂就开始寂寞和无聊。这个时候灵魂就飞到墓穴外，在肉体的上空盘旋。随着肉体的腐烂，风干，化成粉末，再给风吹走或者吸入泥土里，灵魂终于再也找不到宿主了。灵魂对着一个空荡荡的位置久久不肯离去，却也没用。这个位置很快会给疯长的杂草掩盖住，或者给雨水冲成一条水沟，或者坟头会被平了做其它用途，甚至野狗会跑过去拉一泡屎也说不定，总之，足够长的时间以后，这个人所有存在过的踪迹都没有了，灵魂也只好放下对他的记忆，随风逝去。到这里，这个人才算是完全的死了。

说跑题了，还是回去刚刚的话题，说失恋，失恋又不会死。

失恋的病根呢，其实还是爱情。如果这个世界上根本不存在爱情，那不就没有失恋的痛苦了吗？就像如果这个世界上没有天花病毒的存在，那还怕什么天花？如果没有酒的话还怕什么醉？没有毒品的话还怕会上瘾？

所以说导致失恋的罪魁祸首在于感情。感情是一切痛苦的元凶，感情越深，失恋的时候就越痛。

不过男女的感情有时候也很莫名其妙的。有的人整天把“我爱你”挂在嘴上，却可能根本不懂什么是爱情；也有的人互相厮守了一辈子，却只不过是没机会离婚而已；即使看上去如胶似漆的小夫妻也不见得就有爱情，过点小日子，哪有想那么多。反倒是有时候一个眼神，一瞬间的心动，甚至炮友间的一句关怀的话，却倒是真真切切的爱情。

爱情这么不可捉摸，造成失恋往往不可预见。而没有准备的失恋常常更让人伤心，让人痛苦的要死。

失恋的痛苦也可以分成三个阶段。

第一个阶段是“受伤”，就像给心上捅了一刀，心疼啊，痛苦的死去活来的。 第二个阶段是“养伤”，就像伤口给包扎起来了，但是还是疼啊，不过经过前一个阶段的激烈情绪波动，这个阶段的反应就稍微平稳。主要的表现是茶饭不思，对生活心灰意懒。这样持续一段时间，终于到了最后的“恢复期”。经历了前面两个阶段的折磨，人身心疲惫，痛得久了，伤口也开始变得麻木，在麻木中伤口渐渐的好转，然后就痊愈了。

前面说了，这个过程有长有短，心理脆弱的可能第一个阶段没结束就挂了。心里强大的，或者失恋过很多次有免疫力了的，还有那些从来都生活在麻木的世界里的，像打了麻醉药一样，三个阶段都结束了都感觉不到痛。

总结一下。爱情是痛苦的根源，离的越远越好。如果不小心被爱情俘获，那尽量在lust阶段就抽身走人。如果lust，attraction，attachment三个阶段都走完了还没走人，那就要有准备迎接失恋的痛苦。失恋有三个阶段的痛苦，可以通过不断重复这三个过程来锻炼自己对痛苦的承受力。失恋的次数多了，就麻木了，麻木了，就没有了感情，没有感情了就感受不到痛苦，在我看来，这总算是件好事，无风险恋爱，无痛失恋么。