Personality Cafe banner

Are you more of a hard or soft romantic?

  • Soft Romantic

    Votes: 10 58.8%
  • Hard Romantic

    Votes: 7 41.2%
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,544 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Would you consider yourself to be a hard or soft romantic? I might narrow this done in future polls more by types, but let's start here!

Just a couple of the first descriptions I found in search if you want definitions:
(not that you have to agree with them, I don't entirely, but I'm too tired to search for better ones:).

Soft romanticism equates somewhat to sentimentality, being maudlin, puppy-dog eyes, gazing at your lover over candlelit, hallmark cards, sweetness, baby talk, cuddliness, cute talk, and so on.
Hard romanticism equates to putting your life on the line, living on the edge of death, intensifying experience to the utmost to feel alive, tempting death, tempting love, spitting in the face of love.
(source: https://www.stellarmaze.com/infj-vs-infp/ )

I think those are both a little extreme, but perhaps extremes are good ways to get feelings across.

As an INFJ, I identify much more strongly as a hard romantic. Perhaps especially as a 4w5?

How about you? And do feel free to expand more than tired me:)


edit: perhaps sum it up as softness vs intensity?


edit #2:

some things I'd associate with...

Hard romanticism:
Beethoven
Mahler
Mozart
Crashing ocean waves, the fearful beauty of being near them
Galloping a horse up a hill
Hitchcock
Casablanca
African Queen
Walks in the crisp, biting wind
Turandot


Soft romanticism:
Debussy
Rachmaninoff
some Mozart
Gentle elegant ripples, the peaceful beauty of their presence
Resting one's face against a grazing horses neck
A Patch of Blue
Sabrina
It Happened One Night
Walks in gentle, warm breezes
La Boheme
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,562 Posts
Honestly, I don't think I'm particularly romantic at all. Neither of those options appeal to me. Soft romanticism is way too corny, while hard romanticism is way too intense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ButIHaveNoFear

·
EvilShoutyRudolph
Joined
·
5,099 Posts
Neither! I don't do romance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Honestly, I can't see anything so romantic as surviving together. A tribe of two faced against Jumanji proportions of obstacles? Yes and yes, please. (but only if we got to be sentimental when not facing the wild together)

In real life, one of the most romantic things I've ever heard was a couple that kayaked from Maine to Florida over the course of a year, primitive camping and all. I feel that hits the best of both worlds - the intense exertion and physical capability of paddling, and walks on the beach to stretch after, LOL.
@justjay , curious what you would say, you Marine poet, you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,454 Posts
I like the word associations idea that you did there.

I voted "Hard Romantic" because I'm a very passionate person and I find intensity exciting. Intensity > gentleness in my world. I love power struggles and the emotions/sensations that come with all of it. However, I don't think it's healthy to be addicted to these things of course (don't get me wrong). And I don't think intensity should ever be a substitute for intimacy as sometimes happens in relationships. I just see these things more like nice additions or bonuses. But other aspects of the hard romantic probably don't apply to me and there are some soft things I do like. I'm not all hard edges. Any how, I understand it's all made up categories anyway.

At the risk of appearing stupid (I usually roll my eyes at things like these), I'll post this because I relate to it but this is within the context of a loving/committed relationship for me:
 



 

·
Registered
My vehicle is INFP, 9w8. Vroom vroom!!
Joined
·
1,632 Posts
I don't think I'm romantic at all! I like to tease and play games with people, and I like to give people gifts and keep a catalogue of inside jokes and memories with that person. I like to be simple, childlike, and untroubled because most forms of inner intensity are really uncomfortable and not pleasurable for me. Though I would risk my life for someone, it's more a feeling of great personal insult than the feeling of "Ohhhh, I simply can't live without you!!!!!!" It's more like they're a part of me, so I protect them like myself. But it's not some romantic thing that anyone would want to make a movie out of. Maybe a news story though: Home Invader Threatens Family, Wife Chews Attacker's Arm Off. See more of this story and the horrific images at 10.

I voted soft romantic since I don't like to live on the edge. I'm content to make someone smile and not live in the throes of passion—jealousy, anxiety, pain, longing—I don't have enough brain space to submit myself to such uncertainty and stress!! I'll give treats, provide entertainment, and laugh a lot, and I'll be passionately joyful and physical. It seems like a simple philosophy, but it causes a whole lot of trouble...
 

·
Registered
ENTJ; 8w7; Persian C
Joined
·
9,448 Posts
Hard; but not for the reasoning I particularly care about "romanticism," at all per se, there is nothing much romantic about myself, very black (&) white in this regard, and I certainly would skip all of it, if such displays were not requirements for distinctive landmarks to highlight some reminder between platonism/romanticism, like a humanoid getting upset over forgotten anniversaries, 'taking trips together as requirement(s) because we love each other' &, things like that, I see no relevance in acknowledging anything like this - let alone acknowledging our 'romantic' feelings' for one another repetitively, but I selected "hard", as it implies something innate to who I am as a persona, which has always been to somewhat to self-sacrifice for defenseless agent(s). Well, a big portion of my life career revolves around some of the values within 'hard romanticism', thus if follows elsewhere in other facets.

I cannot think of any rational reason to live other than (altruistically contributing to defenseless agent(s) by utilizing any intellectual / physical capacity I present / maximizing the agency of others (&) protecting weak-humanoid(s)) who lack the necessary capacities to do so on ones own,) not affectionately but through rewiring of any defects present, but I am a humanoid of opportunism - which seems to be reflective in "hard romanticism," -- not that it is romantic, I was once a "hard romantic," for some ladies dog that darted across the street. Almost killed myself running after that stupid creature; but I am more altrustic with humanoids than animals. Death means nothing. Death does not scare me; death is devoid of pain/suffering - meaning only means in certain contexts while living - I can be reckless with my life at the right times & also paradoxically withholding, "living without death fears," does not entail living stupidly - but I contend the loss of agency of existing agents is infinitely more important to than believing in the haunting falisities of 'after death' regrets via 'disembodied consciousness' hovering in ones night terrors.

On another cue, I do not think "hard romanticism," is 'romantic' at all, it is something else entirely -- and 'soft romanticism' is just normative ritualized behaviors. I haven't any attractions to 'soft-romantics' either, I find them a bit distrustful (&) phony when out of my analytic-mind. For reasons unclear, this humanoid is afraid to even step on a boat because of the 'sharks' and other strange irrelevancies + irrationality unrelated to their very clear lover in distress in need of immediate assistance or assistance in general -- How can such a humanoid be deemed trustworthy with anything requiring dire attentiveness -- cuddling can happen with anyone - that is the easiest part, now why am I here exactly, eh?

Why commit to any specimen in this age where 'soft-romanticism' et al, is a norm. I am willing to give a kidney to this specimen - and in reverse, this humanoid is 'baby-talking' me to death. Not romance; just high-functioning irrational love darling. But then, I realize most humanoids simply are not into this form of devotion, 'hard romanticism' is, indeed, illogical - selfish - impractical - ritualized stupidity + ape-thinking. In many degrees, I am not either. I am shallow with everyone, to some degree. The soft stuff. There is no need for hardness in a sugarcoated world of honeyed fluff and delusions of lust, just throw in the sugar - and spin with (X)-punches until sweetened; altruistically self-sacrificing when need be. There is far worse humanoid(s) spreading their ape-thinking inducing more [mass] damages than an unidentified corpse rotting into the ravaged soil of a battlefield.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
759 Posts
Hard romantic. As I read your description, Beethoven came to mind ... and then I scrolled and saw you listed him as such. Perhaps an alert 5th Symphony, filled with fiery passion and intensity, or Florence and the Machine's Kiss With a Fist, or Bjork.

Cutesy, soft romantics makes me a bit bilious. I don't mind poetry and candlelit dinners, but baby talk and acting cute is best left for kittens and puppies and baby goats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snowflake Minuet
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top