"Be happy by yourself first" = the biggest lie.

[NGC1300]

We hear it all the time. "You have to be happy and content by yourself before you can be happy with someone else". Or, "a relationship shouldn't complete your life, only enhance your life".

 

What the....????

 

If people could be perfectly content by themselves, then nobody would enter into relationships. There wouldn't be any incentive; only liability.

 

So stop telling people that are depressed due to failing with women (or men) that they have to be happy by themselves first. Few people in society are, unless they're Buddhist monks or something.

 

It is terrible advice, and often hypocritical of the person giving this advice.

[scatterd]

If you are not happy with your self how can someone be happy with you? Nobody wants to be with someone who is not happy that they have to fix. I am very broken right now and I know with in myself where I need to be I gave someone the same advice because I have been there and I want to get back to where I was before the Marriage. It is not cruel to tell someone how to get where they are feeling confident and can live in this this cruel world. I am sad also I am divorcing after 21 years and I am ill. I want to be back to the point where I can live with out some else making me happy because he is not doing it for me nor would I expect anyone to else to do it for me.

[AVarma]

We hear it all the time. "You have to be happy and content by yourself before you can be happy with someone else". Or, "a relationship shouldn't complete your life, only enhance your life".

 

What the....????

 

If people could be perfectly content by themselves, then nobody would enter into relationships. There wouldn't be any incentive; only liability.

 

So stop telling people that are depressed due to failing with women (or men) that they have to be happy by themselves first. Few people in society are, unless they're Buddhist monks or something.

 

It is terrible advice, and often hypocritical of the person giving this advice.

 

I think it just means that you shouldn't fall apart if you're not in a relationship at the moment. It makes sense. Most people tell me that they met their SO when they weren't actively looking. You have a better chance of meeting someone you click with that way. Then again take anything I say with a grain of salt.

[regine_phalange]

Yeah, I mostly agree. It's one of these generic responses that seem deep but after all they are not.

 

There is a quote from the movie Angel-a: "It's hard to love yourself when nobody reflects that".

 

Even when you are in a place in life where you have nothing and have reached rock bottom, you can bond with another person who happens to be gentle, understanding or just been in your shoes before. If you meet someone unsuitable then you'll feel even worse around them and you won't want them close, you'll want to be alone. I've been in a hard place in different phases of my life, dating different people, and I felt different with each of them. Some gave me strength, others made me feel bad about myself, some were just neutral.

 

"Love yourself" is a safe answer, but the thing is that loving or just accepting one's self is not happening with a click of a button, it's a gradual process, and still the need for romance will be there. This "self-sufficient" mentality, I find it a bit antisocial. We need each other and that's a fact.

[Robert Z]

We hear it all the time. "You have to be happy and content by yourself before you can be happy with someone else". Or, "a relationship shouldn't complete your life, only enhance your life".

 

What the....????

 

If people could be perfectly content by themselves, then nobody would enter into relationships. There wouldn't be any incentive; only liability.

 

So stop telling people that are depressed due to failing with women (or men) that they have to be happy by themselves first. Few people in society are, unless they're Buddhist monks or something.

 

It is terrible advice, and often hypocritical of the person giving this advice.

 

 

I agree. I would imagine that like most things, the degree to which a person needs someone else falls along a spectrum, from those who sincerely desire near or total isolation, to those who make someone else their entire life. I tend to be more towards the latter. And this is true of friendships as well. I have had a dozen or so very close friends in my life but never really valued acquaintances as friends. I've never been good at casual friendships. I tend to invest myself heavily with the people I care about. And I am like this in love.

 

 

We all need personal space. But I think it is a matter of degree. I like to be with the one I'm with. There are plenty of activities that I might enjoy but not so much if I'm alone. I want to enjoy them with someone else. To me, that is a part of the basis for any relationship. And you don't have to lack self love to not enjoy bowling, or skiing, or hang gliding [or whatever] alone.

 

This specific issue came up quite a few times with my sb. She has always tried to encourage me in building a new life. But she constantly made the point that my life is my work and I don't have a life to share with someone else. I need to build a new life and then share it. But after careful consideration, I realized that my answer to that is that I want to build a new life with someone. I don't expect someone else's life to become mine any more than I would expect mine to become hers. My experience has always been that with new love, we discover a new life together. And each one is unique. My life with my first several loves were completely different, and far different than my life with my ex.

 

 

Again, back the notion of doing things alone and being happy, I survived 12 years of near total isolation and managed to do well for about six of those years. But I'm here to tell you, and just barely, loneliness can kill you.

[Satu]

Nobody can love you more than you love yourself.

 

I consider that to be 100% true.

 

YMMV.

[ThaWholigan]

It's not terrible advice, it's correct.

[evanescentworld]

We hear it all the time. "You have to be happy and content by yourself before you can be happy with someone else". Or, "a relationship shouldn't complete your life, only enhance your life".

 

What the....????

Permit me to illustrate:

 

The advice given on a plane, with oxygen-mask instructions, is put your own mask on first, before helping your neighbour with theirs."

 

What the advice basically means is that you're going to be of precious little help in helping anyone else, if you're turning blue, gasping for air or choking to death.

You have to be in a safe and conmfortable situation, before giving assistance elsewhere.

 

It's the same with 'being in a relationship'.

If people could be perfectly content by themselves, then nobody would enter into relationships. There wouldn't be any incentive; only liability.

No, we're a gregarious lot, we humans. We like companionship, togetherness, and affection. And actually, it's when we feel so good about ourselves, that we actually WANT to share that more....

 

So stop telling people that are depressed due to failing with women (or men) that they have to be happy by themselves first.

Well, sadly, it happens to be true.

I don't want to be a depressed guy's remedy. I'm not a nurse-maid, therapist, cousellor or Life-coach. I want to be with someone who is 'comfortsble in their own skin' not someone who's withdrawn into a depressive shell.

 

Few people in society are, unless they're Buddhist monks or something.

Or...just....Buddhist....

 

It is terrible advice, and often hypocritical of the person giving this advice.

No, it's very good advice, but sometimes, admittedly, a person is in no shape to listen.

But sometimes, it's all we've got.

There's no point HELPING someone wallow and stay stuck where they are, is there?

[Robert Z]

I think you all need to reread what the op says.

 

 

You have to be happy and content by yourself

 

 

That is not the same as being happy with or loving yourself. You can love yourself and still be lonely.

 

 

Or is it being suggested that we don't crave companionship as a natural function of being human? We most certainly do. Either the comments are off topic or seriously misguided.

[evanescentworld]

I answered that very point in my post.

[ThaWholigan]

I think you all need to reread what the op says.

 

 

 

 

 

That is not the same as being happy with or loving yourself. You can love yourself and still be lonely.

 

 

Or is it being suggested that we don't crave companionship as a natural function of being human? We most certainly do. Either the comments are off topic or seriously misguided.

I read what the OP said. And to be honest, I hate reading posts like that - it's a cop out. I understand depression is tough and not easy to deal with, but having a GF/BF ain't gonna take that away. Being happy by yourself means that even if a relationship isn't forthcoming, you're not gonna break down and die because of it, and being happier by yourself makes it MORE LIKELY for you to find companionship. It's hard to be with a moany person. Maybe if you're lucky you can find someone who's as co-dependent as you and you can then achieve "happiness".

 

I will keep telling people this advice because I'm not going to enable someone to perpetuate their own unhappiness and reliance on external validation. We all desire intimacy, but I'm happy enough on my own that I'm not going to be depressed if I don't get it. I only wish people were self-aware enough to learn how to cultivate it. Alas, we aren't.

[Robert Z]

Two years ago,Chicago psychologist John Cacioppo wrote a book about loneliness, about how the need for social connection is so fundamental in humans that without it we fall apart, down to the cellular level. Over time blood pressure climbs and gene expression falters. Cognition dulls; immune systems deteriorate. Aging accelerates under the constant, corrosive presence of stress hormones. Loneliness, Cacioppo argued, isn’t some personality defect or sign of weakness—it’s a survival impulse like hunger or thirst, a trigger pushing us toward the nourishment of human companionship. Furthermore, he wrote, “people who get stuck in loneliness have not done anything wrong. None of us is immune to feelings of isolation, any more than we are immune to feelings of hunger or physical pain.”

 

...“But what I knew,” Cacioppo says, “was that no matter what social species you’re talking about, all the way down to fruit flies, if you isolate them they die earlier.” Scientists have shown that to be true of mice, rats, pigs, squirrel monkeys, rhesus monkeys, chimpanzees, and rabbits. A 2008 study by two biologists in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that genetically impaired fruit flies survive longer in the presence of other flies. “That’s probably not due to social control from friends and family,” Cacioppo says. “There’s something more interesting and more direct.”

The University of Chicago Magazine: Features

[NGC1300]

You have to be happy alone, despite the fact that most people enter into numerous relationships in their life?

 

Again, that makes no sense.

 

If people were happy alone, nothing would be gained from entering into a relationship where someone else must now be focused on.

[NGC1300]

being happier by yourself makes it MORE LIKELY for you to find companionship.

 

If I'm happy alone, why would I even bother with a relationship at all?

[ThaWholigan]

The University of Chicago Magazine: Features

That specifies social interaction overall - I think we can all agree that isolation is unhealthy overall. I should know, because I've isolated myself from people very often.

 

However, placing so much of your self-worth and happiness on romantic relationships is a futile endeavor. Unless some people are just predisposed to feel that way if they don't have a GF. If that's the case, well boy, I don't know what to tell ya - but it's not a good thing and you should probably get help for that. Because there will be times when you don't have romance in your life, and you'll have to deal with it.

 

I'd like romance myself, but I know that it's unlikely to happen for me right now. Despite this, I'm not unhappy. But maybe I'm projecting and thinking everyone should be like me, who knows. If you're (general you) comfortable wallowing because you're doing without, I suppose that's your right.

 

But part of me will still think it's stupid, and you're better off taking the advice.

[ThaWholigan]

If I'm happy alone, why would I even bother with a relationship at all?

 

Um....because you want to share that happiness? It's not an either/or situation you know. If you're happy alone, and someone comes along and brings more happiness, you're going to veto that because "I'm already happy?". It doesn't work like that.

 

You think people who enter relationships are all unhappy when they don't have one?

[Robert Z]

Actually, I think you are missing the point.

 

 

Well, sadly, it happens to be true.

I don't want to be a depressed guy's remedy. I'm not a nurse-maid, therapist, cousellor or Life-coach. I want to be with someone who is 'comfortsble in their own skin' not someone who's withdrawn into a depressive shell.

 

It depends on why he is depressed. You are ignoring the one thing you bring to the table without any liability at all to you - you. If he is depressed because he wants someone in his life, it doesn't suggest that you need to fix him. If he is depressed because none of his dreams worked out, then you might have a problem.

 

 

You are arguing that there is something wrong with not wanting to be alone. That point is specifically refuted in the academic article I linked. That desire is perfectly normal.

Edited January 17, 2015 by Robert Z

[evanescentworld]

Two years ago,Chicago psychologist John Cacioppo wrote a book about loneliness, about how the need for social connection is so fundamental in humans that without it we fall apart, down to the cellular level.

He's absolutely right. As I stated in my post, we humans are gregarious animals, we love company.

 

Over time blood pressure climbs and gene expression falters. Cognition dulls; immune systems deteriorate. Aging accelerates under the constant, corrosive presence of stress hormones. Loneliness, Cacioppo argued, isn’t some personality defect or sign of weakness—it’s a survival impulse like hunger or thirst, a trigger pushing us toward the nourishment of human companionship.

Yes, but the whole point is, his article is about general human interaction with other beings, people, society in general. he's taking about segregation and isolation.

These are also classic torture methods, or punishments in prisons...

 

WE are talking about intimate, one-on-one relationships, here...

 

Furthermore, he wrote, “people who get stuck in loneliness have not done anything wrong. None of us is immune to feelings of isolation, any more than we are immune to feelings of hunger or physical pain.”

Nobody is saying that the depression is the person's own fault.

But depression is combattable, providing the person puts in the work.

Depression and loneliness are subtly different conditions... intertwined, no doubt.

 

...“But what I knew,” Cacioppo says, “was that no matter what social species you’re talking about, all the way down to fruit flies, if you isolate them they die earlier.”

Are you suggesting we are insinuating that depressed people are being ostracised and isolated?

Often, they do this to themselves, as a result of their depression.

Rarely, have I met a gregarious depressed person.

 

Scientists have shown that to be true of mice, rats, pigs, squirrel monkeys, rhesus monkeys, chimpanzees, and rabbits. A 2008 study by two biologists in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that genetically impaired fruit flies survive longer in the presence of other flies. “That’s probably not due to social control from friends and family,” Cacioppo says. “There’s something more interesting and more direct.”

The University of Chicago Magazine: Features

The tome/article may be scholarly, but in this context, is inaccuarte and not entirely on-topic....

[Robert Z]

... Heck, just not having a sex life is enough to drive some men right over the edge. I know this led to a very deep and years long depression for me when I was married. And that depression is what eventually spiraled out of control.

[evanescentworld]

(Sorry about the mish-mash with the quotes feature in my post... hope you can interpret my responses ok).

 

Robertz, absence of sex? loneliness? Depression?

 

Aren't we throwing everything into the tumble-dryer here, under one banner?

[ThaWholigan]

Actually, I think you are missing the point.

 

I get the point, I just don't agree with it.

 

 

It depends on why he is depressed. You are ignoring the one thing you bring to the table without any liability at all to you - you. If he is depressed because he wants someone in his life, it doesn't suggest that you need to fix him. If he is depressed because none of his dreams worked out, then you might have a problem.

 

Well, yeah it kinda does in a way. His happiness is completely dependent on the other person if that's the case - that's not a very attractive proposition unless you get off on people being dependent on you for happiness.

 

You are arguing that there is something wrong with not wanting to be alone. That point is specifically refuted in the academic article I linked. That desire is perfectly normal.

 

It is normal, but it's not going to make me depressed if it's not happening. So why is it so depressing, that the idea of trying to cultivate some level of contentedness is angering? Are we supposed to say "yes, continue being unhappy until you get a relationship, that will help ;)"? I don't think that's the right thing.

 

Everyone wants to be with someone, but the fact is wallowing in your loneliness and generally being a moany bastard is NOT going to get you what you want. The reason why people advise you to be happy by yourself, however erroneous you think that advice is, is because the opposite is more detrimental overall. You have to be really really attractive to others physically, or just plain lucky enough to find someone who thinks you're endearing in spite of your dependence on the other person and loneliness.

 

That will be my last word on the topic - I hate to see people lonely, but I hate it when people wallow even more and then chastise others who dare to suggest that it can be better and to try and cultivate some happiness within.

[NGC1300]

Um....because you want to share that happiness? It's not an either/or situation you know. If you're happy alone, and someone comes along and brings more happiness, you're going to veto that because "I'm already happy?". It doesn't work like that.

 

You think people who enter relationships are all unhappy when they don't have one?

 

So you concede the person in a relationship may be "more happy" than those alone.

[Rejected Rosebud]

I don't believe that a person who can't live a full and rewarding life without a mate would be a very good mate, including myself!

[ThaWholigan]

So you concede the person in a relationship may be "more happy" than those alone.

They "may" be, sure. I might be happier in a relationship too!

 

The point I'm making is that I'm not unhappy without one.

[evanescentworld]

So you concede the person in a relationship may be "more happy" than those alone.

Yes.

But a person who is already happy, contented and joyous, will be even HAPPIER in a relationship.

 

Our point is:

 

It is a mistake to think that being a relationship will make you happy, and that you will gain happiness by being in that relationship, if that's what you are counting on.

 

you need to have achieved a personal level of contentment and self-acceptance, and manifest that, first, for your relationship to be happy, and not a dependent one.