Single forever by choice-Why?

[alphamale]

who says being part of a couple is the only way to be normal? i am a whole person. i genuinely feel no need for a relationship right now. that may change, but if it doesn't that's fine. i am quite happy alone. and i am as committed to this way of life as if i had made a vow to honour it.

I would agree with this 100%. I have no need for a relationship with any woman. I am totally self-sufficient. I like my independence over and above anyone or anything else. Whenever I am with a woman it's because I want to be with her. To me there are pros and cons to both sides.

[basscatcher]

I would agree with this 100%. I have no need for a relationship with any woman. I am totally self-sufficient. I like my independence over and above anyone or anything else. Whenever I am with a woman it's because I want to be with her. To me there are pros and cons to both sides.

 

 

WANTING and NEEDING

 

They are very key words to whether we should be in a relationship or not.

 

I use to NEED a relationship. I felt like I couldn't do anything without someone.

 

Since my divorce almost 9 years ago I feel I WANT to be with someone.

It's so much about needing that other person to do things for me. Its about wanting him to do things for me and mostly with me. I like the partnership of the relationship. I like sharing in activities and communication with another person.

 

I would prefer it to be with a SO so I have my experiences condensed mostly with one person whom I can share it all with. Not scattered amongst 20-50 different friends.

 

I like building on a foundation and keeping what I can in one place.

I want to share with someone. I want to give, I want to grow, I want to learn from each other.

 

Its about wanting NOT needing.

 

I am self sufficient, I take care of myself AND my son alone. I maintain my own home and I have found my own means of getting things fixed withouit a husband.

 

I proved I dont NEED to have a husband. I want to have a husband.

 

If it happens that I meet someone whom I believe is compatable with me I will be accepting to have a spouse again.

[EnigmaXOXO]

Wow, BlueTuesday!

 

You have reached an elevated level of consciousness that would take most people a lifetime (probably even several) to achieve.

 

When you revealed that you were only 34, my jaw dropped to my lap! (I've been reading your other posts, too.)

 

Sorry to "gush" all over Pada's thread … but I'm in absolute awe and feeling so happy for you…

[bluetuesday]

Wow, BlueTuesday!

 

You have reached an elevated level of consciousness that would take most people a lifetime (probably even several) to achieve.

 

When you revealed that you were only 34, my jaw dropped to my lap! (I've been reading your other posts, too.)

 

Sorry to "gush" all over Pada's thread … but I'm in absolute awe and feeling so happy for you…

 

awwww, shucks.

 

yes, i have been working on this for the last... several thousand years, would be my best guess. i do feel that i'm finally getting somewhere!

 

x

[BareGoddess]

I admire people like BlueTuesday. I've met others like you. It's not for me though. I would never choose a life alone without someone special in it. I've gone down both roads and would always pick the one that includes having a companion if I had my choice.

[bluetuesday]

WANTING and NEEDING

 

They are very key words to whether we should be in a relationship or not.

 

I use to NEED a relationship. I felt like I couldn't do anything without someone.

 

Since my divorce almost 9 years ago I feel I WANT to be with someone.

It's so much about needing that other person to do things for me. Its about wanting him to do things for me and mostly with me. I like the partnership of the relationship. I like sharing in activities and communication with another person.

 

I would prefer it to be with a SO so I have my experiences condensed mostly with one person whom I can share it all with. Not scattered amongst 20-50 different friends.

 

I like building on a foundation and keeping what I can in one place.

I want to share with someone. I want to give, I want to grow, I want to learn from each other.

 

Its about wanting NOT needing.

 

I am self sufficient, I take care of myself AND my son alone. I maintain my own home and I have found my own means of getting things fixed withouit a husband.

 

I proved I dont NEED to have a husband. I want to have a husband.

 

If it happens that I meet someone whom I believe is compatable with me I will be accepting to have a spouse again.

 

 

i am not sure whether what i am about to say is simply playing at semantics, but i would classify NEED as something necessary in order for a person to be fulfilled. if you feel lonely without someone, if you don't feel right being alone, if you feel incomplete in any way, what you are asking a partner to fulfil by their presence is a need, in my opinion.

 

it is not about needing someone else to pay the mortgage, or help raise a child or provide some other material lack. it is about feeling the loss of another person to the extent that you seek a partnership whenever you don't have one. that, to me, is need.

 

wanting is different. and it's a state that's only possible when it doesn't matter to you if you have a partner or not. it is only possible when you can take or leave something and feel the same - then choose to have it. so IME, anyone who seeks a partner is probably fufilling a need. just my opinion. no offence intended to anyone.

[amaysngrace]

I would never choose a life alone without someone special in it.

 

 

I live my life alone AND have someone special in it...ME

 

I also agree with what BT said. I go out when I want, I have friends to do things with, I meet guys and enjoy their company.

 

The only difference I see between the guys I attract now and the ones I did when having a relationship was important to me is that I no longer attract needy, clingy men. I think men like that wouldn't even think to approach me anymore.

 

And I'm more than fine with that!

[Outcast]

my life is much fuller, i believe, than a life devoted to forming and sustaining a relationship or a marriage.

 

I think it's sad that so many people think that marriage will diminish them rather than grow them.

 

wanting is different. and it's a state that's only possible when it doesn't matter to you if you have a partner or not. it is only possible when you can take or leave something and feel the same - then choose to have it. so IME, anyone who seeks a partner is probably fufilling a need.

 

Um. That doesn't scan. You're saying it's theoretically possible to want but refuse to believe anyone does. Must people always opt for 'that which is not like me is wrong/wrongheaded/lesser'?

 

This is starting to sound like the 'kids-no kids' discussions only this time those who choose to live solo are considering that to be the superior choice. Perhaps it suits you very well, but it doesn't mean that people who WANT a relationship are somehow inferior.

 

It has been my observation that people who live alone too long get kind of selfish and self-involved and less tolerant of others; I think it's not all that healthy for people to do.

 

Yes, you have to sacrifice sometimes, compromise, put up with things when you are in a partnership. Meaning you learn to be greater than your self. If all you do is please you, is that really the best life you can live?

 

The person who used to be the Dalai Lama's secretary (I think it was) and translator quit being a monk to marry and have kids. I heard him speak here in town. He said overall it was much harder to do than it was being a monk.

 

So perhaps staying alone is a less brave way to live?

 

Just hoping to cast a bit of light on some other options in terms of how to view this issue.

[basscatcher]

I think it's sad that so many people think that marriage will diminish them rather than grow them.

 

Um. That doesn't scan. You're saying it's theoretically possible to want but refuse to believe anyone does. Must people always opt for 'that which is not like me is wrong/wrongheaded/lesser'?

 

This is starting to sound like the 'kids-no kids' discussions only this time those who choose to live solo are considering that to be the superior choice. Perhaps it suits you very well, but it doesn't mean that people who WANT a relationship are somehow inferior.

 

It has been my observation that people who live alone too long get kind of selfish and self-involved and less tolerant of others; I think it's not all that healthy for people to do.

 

Yes, you have to sacrifice sometimes, compromise, put up with things when you are in a partnership. Meaning you learn to be greater than your self. If all you do is please you, is that really the best life you can live?

 

The person who used to be the Dalai Lama's secretary (I think it was) and translator quit being a monk to marry and have kids. I heard him speak here in town. He said overall it was much harder to do than it was being a monk.

 

So perhaps staying alone is a less brave way to live?

 

Just hoping to cast a bit of light on some other options in terms of how to view this issue.

 

I have to agree with you Outcast.

I was very impressed with you post.

Thank you.

 

I do believe there are some alternative reasons why one shouldn't seek a partnership with possible marriage but I don't think that its the majority in this world.

I tend to believe, in most situations, it is for selfish reasons why people chose to be single and not commit to another person to love, honor, respect, cherish and forsake all others.

 

Its so sad that society is changing its views on marriage. We really are becooming a me, myself and I society. No wonder we have so much dysfunction in the world.

[alphamale]

No wonder we have so much dysfunction in the world.

no PADA....that should be the US instead of the World. The US is screw up royally. Most of the rest of the world is fairly normal.

[basscatcher]

no PADA....that should be the US instead of the World. The US is screw up royally. Most of the rest of the world is fairly normal.

 

REALLY...!?!?

I disagree..

Other counties have their issues also..

I think the US is more selfish and self centered.. but other countries have their own faults which I won't personalize on.

[EnigmaXOXO]

I feel vacant and voided most of the time. When I'm in the moment I tend to just inhale as much as I can and I become more sensitive to touch when it happens my senses are on high alert..

I'm really feeling quite deprived. Its so far and few in between touches that my skins crawls sometimes.

 

You know Pada … I think I can empathize with you here… at least I think I know what it is your trying to describe.

 

It reminds me of a time when I was two years post divorce. I hadn't dated anyone seriously yet (wasn't ready) and was very happy and content (like you) with being on my own. Two of my married gal pals decided to drag me out the house for some girl time. Most of the evening was spent listening to them belly-ache and groan about their husbands. Then, during the course of the evening, they began teasing me about being celibate for two years … saying I was now officially a virgin again.

 

I reminded them it had actually been FIVE if you counted the three years prior to my separation when my ex an I didn't even touch each another. :o

 

Sparky … my five foot, ball-of-energy, friend who is nothing short of a nympho asked: "Five years? … Oh my god, don't you miss it??"

 

My honest answer was "NO." It wasn't the sex I missed, but it was affection. A genuine heart to heart connection with someone --- or something as simple and basic as a hug.

 

Funny how I would miss something I never really had to begin with. My parents weren't very affectionate with us kids, nor was my husband a touchy-feely kind of guy. I learned to live without it for thirty-five years and manage just fine … so why would I be missing that now ???

 

Nicky, my other friend who is very emotional and hyper-sensitive started to get all weepy on me. I felt bad until she explained that she wasn't feeling sorry for me … but that it reminded her of a time when she felt the same way during and after her first marriage. She was married to a "physically expressive" guy … but he was physically abusive (like your husband was) rather than affectionate. She said she remembered longing for that for many years before she finally met her current husband, Joe.

 

So I think I can relate to what you are feeling right now. And I'm now left to wonder if this is something people commonly feel after being alone for an extended period of time? … Or is it the residual affect of having experienced a physically abusive and/or emotionally vacant relationship???

 

What are your thoughts, Pada?

[Woggle]

I have to agree with you Outcast.

I was very impressed with you post.

Thank you.

 

I do believe there are some alternative reasons why one shouldn't seek a partnership with possible marriage but I don't think that its the majority in this world.

I tend to believe, in most situations, it is for selfish reasons why people chose to be single and not commit to another person to love, honor, respect, cherish and forsake all others.

 

Its so sad that society is changing its views on marriage. We really are becooming a me, myself and I society. No wonder we have so much dysfunction in the world.

 

It's the fallout from the battle of sexes. Men and women barely even like each other anymore and pretty much just want sex. There is too little trust for marriage anymore.

[basscatcher]

....My honest answer was "NO." It wasn't the sex I missed, but it was affection. A genuine heart to heart connection with someone --- or something as simple and basic as a hug..........

 

.......Funny how I would miss something I never really had to begin with. My parents weren't very affectionate with us kids, nor was my husband a touchy-feely kind of guy. I learned to live without it for thirty-five years and manage just fine … so why would I be missing that now ??? ............

 

......So I think I can relate to what you are feeling right now. And I'm now left to wonder if this is something people commonly feel after being alone for an extended period of time? … Or is it the residual affect of having experienced a physically abusive and/or emotionally vacant relationship???

 

What are your thoughts, Pada?

 

I have always craved that emotional and physical connection since I was a child.

 

I did have it in a previous relationship that lasted about 6 months that filled every vessel in me.

 

It was the most loving and affectionate relationship I have ever been in. I had recieved soo much love and affection. I was always getting hugs, kisses, back rubs, the gentle comforting touch of his hand on my low back as he walked by me. He would hold me when we slept. He kissed my forhead, cheek, lips, hand. He would look into my eyes and hold me so close. He would sit next to me instead of away from me on the couch or in another chair across the room. He would drape his leg over mine if we were watching a movie and my legs were up on the coffee table. I in turn naturally gave all that back to him in return.

 

He was my match. We were two peas in a pod when it came to time, interests, affection and emotional connection.

 

He had inner issues that lead him to move back to his hometown. (family, his 3 children, friends and familiarity.)

We occassionaly speak (email, chat, phone call) and he says the biggest mistake he ever made was leaving me. He says he was a fool. (he is also unhappily married to a mentall ill woman so I do not dream about him anymore. He is off limits.)

 

I won't take him back because he still has his inner issues, is married and I won't take the risk of him hurting me again because I know he has a long ways to go before he is healthy.

 

I personally have been very empty without that affection. I have found a litttle bit of it in my Alpha friend I have spoken of in these forums; although, it isn't complete and he doesn't want a relationship.

 

I've been out of a commmitted relationship for some time so I do believe the effects of longing for that emotional connection is rearing its head. Withdrawls if thats what you would call it.

I felt this before Charlie. Then after the rush of meeting Charlie I felt it while involved with him because he wasn't meeting that need of connection.

 

I do believe that there is a higher probability that persons who stay away from committed relationshihps are those who are more fearful of investing themselves emotionally because of abusive they suffered in previous relationships--whether it be from family or a former partners. Unless of course they have found a higher power of peace with themselves or a commitment to God as in the form of becoming a Monk, Preist, Nun and the like.

 

Emotional vacancy I believe will make a person more hyper-sensitive to longing for touch, companionship, intimacy, love, connection with another. Society doesn't help either. Everywhere you look you see couples holding hands, hugging, laughing, smiling, spending time together, Billboards, magazines, tv, all forms of media portray love, couples, partnerships.

 

It makes it really hard to not think about loneliness and not feeling touch, affection, and that relationship of sharing communication with another person from the heart.

[amaysngrace]

I tend to believe, in most situations, it is for selfish reasons why people chose to be single and not commit to another person to love, honor, respect, cherish and forsake all others.

 

Its so sad that society is changing its views on marriage. We really are becooming a me, myself and I society. No wonder we have so much dysfunction in the world.

 

Pada, I think marriages go bad because people are selfish. I think so many people rush into marriage with all these happy-ever after thoughts, thinking they can honour their vows and expect their partners to do so as well.

 

Oftentimes, children are brought into the mix. Some people put their children above themselves, and others do not. When mothers realize the fathers have not stepped up their thinking, they begin to resent them. (or, occasionally, vice-versa) I think often it takes having children for women (or men) to realize the person they've married isn't who they thought they were. But by then it's too late...the next generation is here.

 

I think we, as women, are programmed to be the more giving, nurturing gender. I think that if our husbands are not as giving to us as we'd like them to be, that's something we can live with.

 

But when they don't give what they should to our offspring, well then I think that's where most of us draw the line.

 

It makes us mad. So we have one of three choices: express our disapproval of the situation and encourage them to seek help, live with it and the pent-up resentment, exposing our children to dysfunction, or remove our children from that environment completely.

 

I blame society's expectations of us to marry on the overwhelming divorce rate. I think too many people rush into marriage when if they truly knew themselves, would refrain. I see nothing wrong or selfish with people who have taken the journey within themselves and realize that they just aren't suitable for marriage. In fact, I think it's admirable. If more people were like that, the number of marriages might slip somewhat, but so would the number of dysfunctional children brought into this world.

 

So in essence, the "me" philosophy is still there, but isn't it better to have that attitude while single, rather than married?

[EnigmaXOXO]

It makes it really hard to not think about loneliness[/i] and not feeling touch, affection, and that relationship of sharing communication with another person from the heart.

 

I think we can debate the pros and cons of marriage vs. single life until the cows come home and it would still fail to address the real issue here … your feelings of loneliness.

 

People can feel lonely in a relationship or out of one. Doesn't matter if you're surrounded by caring friends and family … because what you're feeling goes deeper than that for you (I suspect).

 

I won't take him back because he still has his inner issues, is married and I won't take the risk of him hurting me again because I know he has a long ways to go before he is healthy.

 

I think it's good that you recognize the fact that your friend is now married and still have the introspection and where-with-all to understand he can not provide for you all of what you want or need right now. Loneliness can sometimes lead to desperation … and the risk of trying to fill those voids with all the wrong kinds of people. In the end, the only payoff would be feeling even more abandoned and emptier than you do now.

 

Are you still dating? … Trying to get out there and meet new people??

[basscatcher]

I think we can debate the pros and cons of marriage vs. single life until the cows come home and it would still fail to address the real issue here … your feelings of loneliness.

 

People can feel lonely in a relationship or out of one. Doesn't matter if you're surrounded by caring friends and family … because what you're feeling goes deeper than that for you (I suspect).

 

 

 

I think it's good that you recognize the fact that your friend is now married and still have the introspection and where-with-all to understand he can not provide for you all of what you want or need right now. Loneliness can sometimes lead to desperation … and the risk of trying to fill those voids with all the wrong kinds of people. In the end, the only payoff would be feeling even more abandoned and emptier than you do now.

 

Are you still dating? … Trying to get out there and meet new people??

 

Your right on Que with everything so far..

 

Yes, I go out but not really dating. How can I get a date when theres no one showing interest in dating. The men I meet are out for a one-niter and I don't put out like that.

 

I also have a shadow (Charlie) that likes to surface himself from time to time when I'm out with the girls and he scares other men away.

He knows I'm not happy about him shadowing me. I have told him this. He said he misses me and misses going out with me and my friends. I told him he needs to let me go. He doesn't want a serious relationship, he doesn't and wont try be affectionate, and he lacks inner personal communication skills. He is simple minded and I'm way too advanced in inner personal/intellectual communication skills then him. He can't follow me when I speak. He doesn't understand the words I use.

 

My gfs and I have been looking for new places to go out too but we still frequent the usual places and that is where he knows we go.

 

I believe it will take for him to see me with someone else--I think--that I'm moving on and he lost me.

He wants my company and attention but he can't provide the inner personal communication or affection in a relationship. He isn't a bad guy-- just not the one for me.

 

It's been hard finding a date. I have thought about taking my membership off hold with the dating service so I can start meeting others again.

 

I'm not completely sure if I'm ready to dive into dating again intentionally.

 

I have interests but I'm not sure where anything is going anywhere.

[genegri]

pada, you do not need a man to be financially sufficient, but it sounds like you need a man to be happy.

 

to be honest, you sound more needy than the average woman. i don't mean that's bad or anything; however, it does mean you not only need a man, but you need a much more affectionate than average man to be happy, which limits your choices.

 

some people simply do not need companionship to be happy, just like some people do not need to make a lot of money to be happy. you can call them selfish or unmotivated. but to me, it's just their personality. they just do not feel that much pleasure or satisfaction from interacting with other people the way you do. in fact, there are people who even get anxiuty when dealing with others.

 

i agree with you that compared with the rest of the world, the US is not one bit worse. marriages tend to last in other places only because people have fewer choices in those countries and they get stuck in unhappy marriages. i much prefer the US way. it happens in every country in its development course. more wealth brings more choices. and i think it's a great thing.

 

anyway, i hope you find a really affectionate guy who will make you happy.

[basscatcher]

pada, you do not need a man to be financially sufficient, but it sounds like you need a man to be happy.

Not even.. I am happy being single and not living with a man. I miss affection and having a partner to share with.

 

to be honest, you sound more needy than the average woman. i don't mean that's bad or anything; however, it does mean you not only need a man, but you need a much more affectionate than average man to be happy, which limits your choices.

I disagree on this also. I know women who are very needy and very winey and demanding of their men..

 

I am one who likes a kiss when greeted and saying goodbye followed with a nice hug. When walking in public like at a fair, strolling in a park, walking through a crowd and just once in awhile when we feel close.

I don't need a man to hang on me. If I wanted a coat on I would put one on..

 

When in intimate times its nice to have someone caress you, look in your eyes, kiss you affectionately, and just move slowly instead of making sex a hurry. The previous relationship I had what was very affectionate was above and beyound. It was awesome but I don't have to have that much.

 

some people simply do not need companionship to be happy, just like some people do not need to make a lot of money to be happy. you can call them selfish or unmotivated. but to me, it's just their personality. they just do not feel that much pleasure or satisfaction from interacting with other people the way you do. in fact, there are people who even get anxiuty when dealing with others.

I never said I was unhappy because I'm not in a relationship.

Being self absorbed and not wanting to be around other people because it causes anxiety is a problem. It's not healthy.

 

i hope you find a really affectionate guy who will make you happy.

I would like to find a man who can be affectionate but he won't make me happy. ONLY I can make myself happy. He can bring happy moments into my life being in it but happiness comes from oneself.

[genegri]

Being self absorbed and not wanting to be around other people because it causes anxiety is a problem. It's not healthy.

 

they are not necessarly self absorbed. in a way, they are more emotionally self sufficient.

 

 

I would like to find a man who can be affectionate but he won't make me happy. ONLY I can make myself happy. He can bring happy moments into my life being in it but happiness comes from oneself.

 

good for you.

[bluetuesday]

I think it's sad that so many people think that marriage will diminish them rather than grow them.

 

possibilities for growth are endless - and they're certainly not confined to marriage. if marriage suits you that's fine. if it doesn't suit me that is also fine. this isn't a question of who is right, but of who is doing what is right for them.

 

You're saying it's theoretically possible to want but refuse to believe anyone does.

 

i am not saying this at all. wanting is fine and i accept that many people do. i simply said that wanting when you always make the choice to accept, is needing by another name.

 

Must people always opt for 'that which is not like me is wrong/wrongheaded/lesser'?

 

you tell me.

 

Perhaps it suits you very well, but it doesn't mean that people who WANT a relationship are somehow inferior.

 

i wholeheartedly agree. i don't consider myself superior, but i do know what suits me. if i wanted a relationship, it would naturally follow that having a relationship suited me.

 

It has been my observation that people who live alone too long get kind of selfish and self-involved and less tolerant of others; I think it's not all that healthy for people to do.

 

oh dear, i hope i'm not like that! many people choose the single life so they can devote themselves selflessly to others without the distraction of a partner. mother theresa, for example. hardly an embittered, selfish, intolerant woman.

 

Yes, you have to sacrifice sometimes, compromise, put up with things when you are in a partnership. Meaning you learn to be greater than your self.

 

and the same can be true of the single life - although i must say that the reason so many marriages fail is because people refuse to live up to the standard you set out. it is not marriage which encourages a person to bow to the needs of others, but character. all journeys have challenge and compromise whether you take them alone or with company.

 

If all you do is please you, is that really the best life you can live?

 

why don't you ask married people, who marry because it pleases them? i don't think my life is easy, or better than anyone else's, i merely think it is right for me. and yes, i believe being true to yourself IS the best you can live.

 

 

The person who used to be the Dalai Lama's secretary (I think it was) and translator quit being a monk to marry and have kids. I heard him speak here in town. He said overall it was much harder to do than it was being a monk. So perhaps staying alone is a less brave way to live?

 

outcast, you are displaying the very tendency you accuse me of. you are using an example of someone who said 'marriage is better' to back up your belief that marriage is better - while suggesting that i am saying being single is better and gently berating me for it.

 

i will say one final time i do not think being single is a superior way of life. i merely think it is right for me. if you want to be married, be married! i hope you make a great success of it and grow from it.

 

i am married to the journey i am on. it challenges, frustrates and bewilders me, and each day it makes me a less selfish person. right now, it would be deeply unfair to drag someone along with me. that is all. i could not devote to them the time they would deserve because i am devoted to another way of life. it is no threat to the sanctity of marriage that everyone doesn't choose what you have chosen.

[blind_otter]

It has been my observation that people who live alone too long get kind of selfish and self-involved and less tolerant of others; I think it's not all that healthy for people to do.

 

I've heard women with children say the same thing about childless couples. Just an observation, not a judgement. I thought it was funny because a woman with children said the exact same thing to me the other day.

 

Yes, you have to sacrifice sometimes, compromise, put up with things when you are in a partnership. Meaning you learn to be greater than your self. If all you do is please you, is that really the best life you can live?

 

Well, yeah, in theory I agree. But there are plenty of ways to live in service to others sans matrimony. Mother Theresa comes to mind. I'm just saying.

 

The person who used to be the Dalai Lama's secretary (I think it was) and translator quit being a monk to marry and have kids. I heard him speak here in town. He said overall it was much harder to do than it was being a monk.

 

So perhaps staying alone is a less brave way to live?

 

That's the central question posed in the Korean Buddhist film "Why Has Bodhidharma Left for the East?". In that situation, the monk faced a choice between returning to the world and caring for his ailing mother, and staying in monestic isolation. I think it's a question that all of those who live a life of religious seculsion pose to themselves, and each reaches a conclusion on their own. It is harder to be "in the world" and pursue a life of faith, and religious rigor, than it is to be in an ivory tower, but that goes without saying.

 

And I guess it's a question of values and self awareness of your limits. If your passion is to pursue the religious life, and you know you would not be able to do this in a secular life, then you choose to be monastic and to put your religious pursuits above all others. If you know you can handle the extra external stressors, why not try to be secular but still uphold your faith?

 

So perhaps staying alone is a good option for those who know themselves enough to realize that a marital relationship would interfere with their aspirations.

 

But, barring the legal issues, I don't know why you can't have a fulfilling LTR without the institution of marriage. It's possible to have a lifetime companion without the benefit of marriage. More difficult, maybe. But what's so bad about chosing the harder path anyways?

 

And what about the idea of a mass sociocultural evolution towards partnerships rather than the institution of marriage? I mean, take the whole gay marriage controversy. One christian writer mentioned on the radio months ago that she objected to gay marriage because the institution, religiously, was designed to govern partnerships involving bringing children into the world.

 

So she had no objection to a legal partnership between same sex couples, but felt the institution of marriage was sacrosanct.

 

There's a whole other set of associations that comes with "marriage", that maybe aren't acceptible to everyone. But that doesn't make a fulfilling longterm partnership an impossiblity. IMHO.

[Outcast]

to back up your belief that marriage is better

 

Um. That's not my belief; nor did I say it. I am asking the question as a question that it may be taken into consideration. Posing a theory if you will.

 

I've heard women with children say the same thing about childless couples. Just an observation, not a judgement. I thought it was funny because a woman with children said the exact same thing to me the other day.

 

I'm speaking from observation. I have some longtime single friends who started to close in on themselves; they would 'never' do x or y for someone else, had zero desire to compromise at all, etc. etc. By their own reports. And the Xs and Ys were simple things; not matters of giving up one's identity or soul. But accommodate another they would not do even if what was required was minimal.

 

But there are plenty of ways to live in service to others sans matrimony. Mother Theresa comes to mind.

 

I find it hilarious that everyone's citing Mother Theresa. Were you planning to move to Calcutta and take care of the dying? Thought not The reason she's celebrated is because she was rare among humans.

 

But, barring the legal issues, I don't know why you can't have a fulfilling LTR without the institution of marriage.

 

Don't know if you're still replying to me, but I never said you couldn't . I'm talking about single vs partnered or however you want to term it.

[EnigmaXOXO]

The reason she's celebrated is because she was rare among humans.

 

Shoot.

 

I think anyone who's learned the secret to finding true peace, happiness and contentment within themselves (by giving purpose & meaning to their lives) is RARE among human beings.

 

And that's why I celebrate for Blue and others like her.

[blind_otter]

I find it hilarious that everyone's citing Mother Theresa. Were you planning to move to Calcutta and take care of the dying? Thought not The reason she's celebrated is because she was rare among humans.

 

Well of course she comes to mind easily. She was the further extreme of what I was referring to. But if I used Ms. Wilson who teaches english at a poor high school for the past 25 years and has selflessly given herself in service to my local homeless shelter as my example, you would have no idea who I was referring to.

 

But there are a lot, I mean a hella lot of ways to serve your community. Not as publicized but still valid.

 

And IMO married people really haven't cornered the market on learning how to be less self-involved. Otherwise that 50% infidelity more than 50% divorce rate wouldn't exist.

 

I'm just saying.