The ubiquitous 'perfect' partner, the one who we are all faithfully searching for, and few dare to ask, 'Does he/she really exist?' For to do so, would be the equivalent of signing oneself up for a lifetime of eternal solitude. Quelle horreur!
A friend of mine recently went on a quest to find the perfect mate. Being a pragmatically minded woman, with very specific criteria for her 'perfect' mate, she deduced that it would be most sensible to sign up for a dating website. Believing the likelihood of her finding a man who plays three instruments, has an IQ of 140, is arty, likes her three fav obscure books and prefers to holiday in Rio would be more attainable from a database of 20,000 people then by meeting him randomly at a pub. Miracle of all miracles happened. She found this individual, who in theory, was her 'perfect' match. They dated for three months and then they broke up. "How could this be?" you might be exclaiming in disbelief. They were the perfect match! Well, they didn't have any chemistry. Mr. Perfect did not excite the senses. He was a nice guy, fine looking, and met all the above criteria, but when they were together, there just weren't any sparks.
We could conclude many things about my friend's situation. Firstly, if there is no chemistry, there is no relationship. And, secondly, the 'perfect' person does not exist: He/she is a figment of your imagination. (And since I am already crushing your dreams, I might as well tell you that there is no Santa Clause either.) The best plan of action is to stick to a few fundamental points which are imperative for you in a partner, and once you meet someone who matches those, just hope that you'll be so swept away by their positive points, that it will help you put up with their less fortunate points. Alternately, I hear the convent is still taking applications.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I can't believe you think I'd go for anything less than 145 ...
Interesting article about this in the New York Times actually, incorporating anthropology and maths algorithms - and also backs you up in a way, in that it's not about the perfection list but about personality similarities (not interest similarities) -
"Drawing on previous evidence that personality similarities predict happiness in a relationship..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/29/science/29tier.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=login&adxnnlx=1201691239-zubE4A/+TMoLy/MQejVNsA&oref=slogin
... and we dated for a *year* (hey, but we're still friends, that's important)!
Yes, Matterson, God forbid that you could never stay friends with someone that you have dated. And, I want to thank you for giving me so much material to write about!
Post a Comment