I got your point. But strictly staying within the hypothesis, which stressed one never ending lust with increasing wild passion, and burning lust, WITHOUT the diminishing return factor kicking in, and IS NOT ephemeral but is eternal, what shall we choose? I know, I would go for the second option too, being an overtly romantic by heart, I can not have two ways about love, whatever that is. People might think the lines are corny and what not, but all that shall matter is how our better half is feeling, because it is with her that we shall share our life. So I would rather be corny, and cheesy, if she likes it, than to pretend an egoist macho. After all when push comes to shove, the truth shall come out regardless. So I totally understand what you are drawing out there. But what I wanted to find out basically is, given the hypothesis of lust being enduring and passion undying; IF ALL THINGS REMAIN CONSTANT, which basically takes away Anna Nicole factor and her nonagenarian Romeo, what would an average human being choose? A human being, by nature is selfish, and each of our relationship is special to us because it satisfies our special needs. Thus, I was just wondering that, if the hypothesis stands, negating the diminishing return theory, then, will more people if not all, shall go for undying passion? Remember the hypothesis also has a basis which states, "if all things remain constant." Don't you think more people will go for pure lust in that case? IndisGuise:)