Talking to El Marqués, we were exchanging impressions about several friends of each one who are getting married or even having kids. The annoying thing about it was no one is older than us, but they took the BIG STEP when we don't even have a girlfriend.
We both were surprised since our friends' espouses don't seems to be especially smart, charming, pretty or at least industrious. When we asked our respective friends their reasons to get married, they didn't claim to be deeply in love or mad about their couples but in a state of trust and comfort with their future wives. Is this the end of the road? To marry someone which main attribute is to be known well enough to inspire trust and comfort? I can't speak for El Marqués, but I think I would be bored by someone like that, even before the wedding. My point is I don't visualize myself marrying someone who doesn't inspire me stronger feelings than just trust and comfort.
In first place, I would like a woman in permanent evolution, someone who learns about things I don't know and, for example, surprises me with the new article that is writing, the new art that is learning or the new stage in her career that is attaining. No matter how long you have met this woman, I think you'll never be able to claim to know her entirely.
In second place, I would like a woman who takes care about her appearance. I'm not asking for someone who spends half life in a gym or in a hairdresser's shop or on a surgery table but someone with healthy enough habits like to be good looking without have to hide herself under tons of makeup or fancy clothing. However, if she looks like a prom queen, I won't be mad at it at all. .. ;)
In third place, such a woman has to be quite challenging. Since I'll feel compelled to deserve her I think I would be strongly encouraged to improve myself. I know this should be a goal I try to achieve for my own sake (independently from who I am with) but I believe the process is easier if you have a couple who shares your main goals and is the living proof of why you are trying to attain them.
In fourth place I would put the feeling of trust and comfort as a reason to marry someone. It's quite important since a marriage is exactly like a business where you need a partner who doesn't let you down, no matter how hard the circumstances could become. Notice I didn't forget this reason our friends argued; I just don't think it for itself is enough to get married.
In conclusion, I would marry a girlfriend whit whom I fell in love AND improves herself permanently AND encourages me to be better than I am, not just someone with I feel comfortable or due I'm too lazy to start again the difficult process of find someone I really like.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
A dreamed mate
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
What can I say that you haven't said? It's insightful and I agree with (practically) everything. When I started reading I thought of something and in the next paragraph I found it.
Now, about the need of trust and comfort: our tastes in women and a bit different from the average and it reflects our views on the world and the way we deal with it. We (both you and me and most of our friends) try to improve everytime, seek out new experiences, like to be challenged, don't like social standards per se, etc. It's quite natural that we look for women with similar traits.
And what a joy when we find them.
Nice writing. It’s good enough for me to think that pointing out it’s flaws (grammar-wise) would be rude, but then again I think that’s the only way to improve, and I know we’re friends enough and u’re adult enough to take it as advice, not criticism. First thing is, the title is misleading. When I read “a dreamed couple” I thought you were going to talk about two people you knew who had an ideal relationship. But then I read the article, and I think what you meant was “partner”, not couple, because couple only has meaning when talking about two, not when talking about your significant one. Check out Grey’s anatomy on Sony entertainment (sunday nights), they have lots of names for your perfect partner, like “mr McDreamy”.
Getting beyond that, I think I strongly agree with your friends, and thus disagree with your view. Visiting the points you make:
Your first point: “a woman in permanent evolution, someone who learns about things I don't know and, for example, surprises me with the new article that is writing, the new art that is learning or the new stage in her career that is attaining. No matter how long you have met this woman, I think you'll never be able to claim to know her entirely.”
I think everyone is in permanent evolution. No matter how long you have met anybody, you’ll never know them entirely. Actually, you don’t even know your own self entirely, because we are all targets in motion. Although you play the evolution card to legitimate your claims, the reality of what you claim is that the woman shouldn’t let you get bored with her, or perhaps should give you reason to be proud and/or show her off. To be constantly surprised, will require that either you delight in the normal changes of her/your life, or that she actively pursues to surprise you every now and then. The first option sounds unlike your persona, and the second option is a clear path to doom. Believe me, I know.
On your second point, about looks, I think we all want a good looking partner, we’re genetically programmed to pick up a healthy looking spouse and -after all- looks are the advertisement of the genes. However, when it’s about choosing a life partner, its important to honestly give up on those demands. Do not impose them on your partner. Sooner or later beauty will vanish. She won’t be able to lose weight after a pregnancy, you’ll grow old, bald and fat (etc). Trust (read: love) that is conditioned (on you losing the weight after the baby) is not uncondicional (read “true” love). Its not a foundation for a lifelong marriage.
Your third point: “such a woman has to be quite challenging. Since I'll feel compelled to deserve her I think I would be strongly encouraged to improve myself”. OMG this is the recipe for disaster. Believe me: you don’t want to spend years thinking you need to “become a better person” to “deserve” your girl. There are two reasons for this, first: Love cannot be earned. “True love” is based on faith (unconditional trust), and cannot be earned trough action nor “becoming somebody better”. If there was not love in the first place, there won’t be more love after you become Brad Pitt’s nightmare. Second reason: you won’t be happy. That additional drive to improve yourself (which you now feel you need), will actually make you unhappy if the reason you feel it is “to deserve her”.
About the fourth point, “Trust” of which you say: “I just don't think it for itself is enough to get married”. Well, I think this is the one and only reason that will make a true marriage, the ones that only death does part.
In any relationship, including marriage, people change. College girls don’t want to hook up with high school boys. Grad men don’t look for a college student gf. You don’t want the same things you wanted yesterday. She won’t want the same things tomorrow, specially after she has had children, gained enormous power, and started looking for new aspects of her life.
The only thing that can make a real marriage is trust and faith. You both have to accept that you will change, and you both have to trust (and compromise) on accepting and loving each other as you change with time. This kind of faith, which removes all fears, which turns mistakes and undesired changes into just nuances, is the only thing that can hold you together for better or for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health til’ death. One day you will both be old and not so pretty, one day you won't be so easy to surprise, or you wont like surprises anymore (heck, Hugh Heffner gave up sex!!), you might even get sick, or become poor. In the future, none of the stuff you said will matter. You can meet right now a girl as industrious/surprising/interesting as Martha Stewart, as good looking as Britney Spears, as challenging as Angelina Jolie, and yet, if there is not that one thing, a relationship-marriage with her is much less than ideal.
Mmmm You make some points, but underneath it all theere seems to be an overestimation of the existential meaning of marriage. As I understand it, it is not such a cosmic event that changes the nature of individual consciousness or anything like that.
Of course there is the blasting experience of infatuation, that changes deeply the chemistry of our brain and make us to live in another world for a while, but marriage has something to do with being in love, but it is not all about it.. Marriage is a social agreement, intended for everyday, prosaic life, and not to live a torrid affair.
Of course when one is in love one wants to live with the other person, but infatuation cannot last for more than three or four years, usually much less: there are biological reasons for that. There can be such thing as everlasting love, but it cannot be a torrid passion, but a learned way of changing tougether in time. Marriage is, in time, more about rationally building a very close relationships, than to let the passions run wild, even when passion is necessary as a tool of the reason in that building task.
I do not intend to write on behalf of your friends; I am very much against surrendering to easyness. We all are programmed to let go of our life when we had raised our children, and become useless and sorry leftovers at a certain age. Usually work does not let men to fall into that state completely, but it became the standard to be somebody at work, and become a sorry leftover at home. And most people seem to wisely choose a wife to take care of the leftover, because deep inside they know that is what they will become.
On the other hand, I myself want to struggle as much as I can to avoid the dangers of easyness, and try to chose a rather challenging person to share my life with.
I definitely agree with Lanark.
Post a Comment