Not nuts. The myth of "only marriage for LoVe" as swallowed whole/acted upon by women is relatively recent in historical context. Political, business, and practical considerations ruled in the past. (Practical, in that males had access to assets and higher paying labor, and women needed to eat.)

The more practical position of: people find affinity/love for rare, individual persons they encounter, be they opposite or same sexed, which (mostly female) classical writers of old described, was most definitely displaced in the early to mid twentieth century by the insistence of "real romantic love between the sexes".

I view it as reactionary propaganda against said female writers (like Virginia Woolf, or Louisa May Alcott - whose independent lifestyle men would abhor - she became JKRowling "fuck-me"-level rich) to cause women to seek the impossible "romantic love" from males. Again, male projection of a man's all-consuming need of another to be "complete", onto women, IMO. I submit, most women are much more practical, in that their demands on relationships are fewer, appreciation greater, and understanding of the transitory nature of relationships much better than most men's.