I have been pondering this question ever since a conversation with my friend after DH and I got married.
We had a civil ceremony, and so wrote our own vows. They were loosely based on the seven promises that are made in the Hindu wedding ceremony and basically set out our promises to each other of how we will behave in our marriage.
I'm a bit reluctant to put them up in full as it will definitely out me to the people who came to my wedding, but they were in essence promises to take care of our physical and mental health, to manage our finances for our family, to grow as people and allow each other to do so, to try to make the right decisions in life, to raise any children to be good people, and to be kind and true to each other.
I asked my friend what she thought of the vows and she said that she thought they were good promises to make but that they were not very romantic.
I can see where she is coming from but the reason that DH and I did not make the traditional Christianity based vows is that we don't believe that it is possible to promise to love someone for ever, no matter what. That if the other person behaves in a way that is not loveable, you can't be bound by a promise to love. We see our vows as a promise to each other to be a loveable person.
Does this not count as romantic? What does it mean to be romantic? Is it the grand, overblown gestures and sweeping promises, or is it the little things that keep your relationship happy?
I would say that it is romantic that DH brings me a cup of tea in bed each morning and rubs my feet when we are sitting on the sofa at night.
Am I just hopelessly unromantic?