Are you SURE?
Read [link|http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/14756|http://www.americans...ail/assetid/14756]. That suggests to me that there could well be a biological basis to intertwining sex and emotion, and that effect can vary between individuals. The fact that the same chemicals that trigger fidelity in voles are known to be found in humans, and are known to be tied to sex, is even more suggestive.
Besides, if there wasn't some biological drive being tapped into by romance, I strongly doubt that it would manage to be as effective a trigger as it is in our relationships. I also doubt that it would appear in as many forms in as many cultures over as it does. Sure, the actions that are seen as romantic vary widely by culture. But there seems to be a fairly universal underlying pattern.
I don't know where you get your caricature of Elizabethan England, but I'd suggest re-reading Shakespeare. His poems provide ample proof that romance existed then.
Now I'll grant that the amount which romance is emphasized varies over time. Just as people's susceptibility to it seems to vary by individual. Clearly it is not all biology.
But that doesn't mean that there can't be a biological component.
Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
