Sunday 4 May 2008

The Unattainable One

On the ball comment from Eve on this post.

'I've been wanting the same thing... (and I think most women do, and barter sex for intimacy)...
one thing that comes to mind, though, is that 'she loves you' seems to be easy enough for you to find. There'd be women enough who'd play the role, but they wouldn't be 'the one', which is why it's still just a fantasy, i guess...'

Bang on, Eve.
Loved it as a comment.

I think women think it's only women who barter sex for imtimacy, but men do it too.

I think we barter a lot, just to feel someone close.

But is it the right someone?

And Eve's comment certainly resonates with me, as do Oestrebunny's comments in the previous comments thread.

I think there are two levels to love, and we lose sight of that.

On the one hand, my standards really aren't that high. I can be charming enough, I'm a salesman after all, and I often don't really stop to take thought. I'm used to highblown language.
One level, it's true that I tend to be fairly indiscriminate in my favours. I think Love isn't an easy thing to describe, and being a fairly tactile and open person, in some senses of what that means, I can sling off 'I love yous' left, right and centre.

And it's usually true IN THE MOMENT. I have a terrible habit of saying 'I love you', when what I really mean was 'I loved what we just did.'

When they ring me next day when I'm down the pub flirting with the barmaid, then no, now I decidedly DON'T love them. Now they're being annoying.

Part of the problem is, the female sex is truly amazing. Women are such lovely creatures, potentially. Most of them, have something loveable about them- God made them that way- most women between a certain age range, if you talk to them long enough, and they respond in a manner which suggests that they're thinking what you're thinking, it's hard not to try and direct the situation towards a course of events the ultimate object of which involves the pair of you sharing a bed.

And it isn't just because you want sex. It's actually the intimacy you want.
And do you love them?

But do you LOVE them?
Not REALLY. Not like that.

You love the fact that they hold you close in that minute, that they speak to you softly, that their anatomy fulfills all the correct criteria, but hell, they could be anyone really.

Of course you love them. They're FEMALE and they're holding you in their arms.

But it doesn't make them The One.

There is, I concede, a huge dichotomy betwen the women I'm happy to share my bed with, and those I hold as an ideal that in a perfect world, I'd want to share my life with. To go even further, the two are generally mutually exclusive, in practice.

And regrettably, I have lived for many years under the following assumption;

I had The One, I lost her at nineteen and will never find her like again. So make do with what you CAN get. There might be someone out there you can at least live with, who'll love you, and even you don't necessarily love her the same way at first, in time you're bound to fall in love back.

It doesn't work of course.

I got engaged at 22 to a women who I did feel a lot for. The lot was, she was head over heals about me, and well, that's always an attraction.
But living with her turned out to be a nightmare.

Did I love her? Yes, but not in the way that I actually felt I was getting a good deal out of the situation. I saw her as someone I had become responsible for- that I was obligated to try to love her, because she loved me.

And the reality of the situation became apparent every time I left the house.
The need to escape Claire, the need to feel she hadn't got control of my life. In a sense, I was MORE determined to find comfort in the arms of other women, than I would have been, were I to be single.

I actually found I NEEDED other women, to be able to unburden myself to, about just how stressful it was living with Claire.

It is true, I think that I have often been attracted to women who seem to need me. I suppose I feel somewhere that if I can't find the one I really want, maybe at least I should do a good deed and settle down with someone who needs me.

But that's a mistake really, because it isn't actually a role you can fill, unless your heart is in it, and in my case, it never has been.

Don't get me wrong- all relationships have good points and that's what keeps you in them. I was with Claire for two years, it chugged along, most of it, most of the time, was liveable in an anaethetised sex, shopping and visiting country homes type of way, a sanitised semi-detached IKEA version of life.

If you want to lie to yourself, it's Love, it's fulfillment.

And how many times over and over again do I repeat this cycle?

I'm not actually the total whore I might appear. I think, on average, I've been involved, one way or another with about four women a year, I suppose. That's not really that much to be fair. It depends what you include, really, or how you define it. I'm not sure these things are that easy to define. I rememember once standing with this girl at the bank and she started talking about 'my girlfriend'. I wondered who she meant, and then I realised she was referring to herself. I was a bit taken aback, because I didn't see her as such.

I suppose I only really class a relationship as being a situation where you are actually sleeping with someone several nights a week. I don't think you can take it as being serious otherwise.

As for commitment, well, yes, I have definite issues on that front.

I suppose there are a lot of women out there who might justifiably say I've led them on. The Chimney Sweep says if there is one black mark I might have on an otherwise meritorious life history, it is the whole loving and leaving thing.

In my defence, I've argued; I went into these things with the best of intentions, it's not my fault they failed the tests when they arose.

And maybe this IS the problem. The fact is, I AM actually demanding a fairly tight set of criteria, so much so that only someone really special COULD pass.
But the real point is, if they were 'The One', you'd know without them being put to the test, that they'd pass.

I think I've spent too long not realising the obvious point; my own logic has been flawed.
I couldn't conceptualise what 'The One' actually was. Too many ideals involved, was she the Virgin Mary, was she Freya, was she some kind of Dana Scully figure, or a Liz Hurley type? Was she all or none of these?

What deep down was I looking for?

And I think of late, I have the answer to that.

I know exactly what 'The One' is. I can conceptualise 'The One' so clearly, that I don't need to retain test procedures anymore. I can see what a woman would need to be, to tick every single box.

I've seen the gist of the answer to my own question.

I think there is a sound reason why I have a completely unattainable vision in my head- so I won't attain it.

I think that was the answer all along.

Of course, that raises as many questions as it answers.
But I haven't got quite that far yet.


Anonymous said...

Let be left field on this one - just get off your arse, go out, get a shag. Then stop boring the world with your angst about not being able to get a shag.

Anonymous said...

> And it's usually true IN THE MOMENT. I have a terrible habit of saying 'I love you', when what I really mean was 'I loved what we just did.'
Heheh. I have the urge, but refrain. Because 'I love you' should mean commitment; it shouldn't be a lie, or used carelessly, cos then - what's the difference between the words that you use to a stranger, and to 'the one'...? :-)

> In my defence, I've argued; I went into these things with the best of intentions, it's not my fault they failed the tests when they arose.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions :-) I still maintain that intention is not enough; I wouldn't get into a relationship with a guy who just had 'intentions' (that was my ex; a world of intentions) - what counts is success... just doing it, not talking about it... it's good that you've figured out some stuff... so now ignorance is no excuse - musn't repeat the mistakes ;-) Don't lead anyone on, don't start anything you can't finish (my dad told me that! Am as guilty as you of this crime; but have learnt that really, best make it clear to them from the start. It's a pity if you do have to sell stuff to them; there, your principles would probably clash, i know...). Would be the right thing to do; and would save potential trouble too, you know :-)

Anonymous said...

Baht at- As seems to be your usual way, you completely miss the point...
The point is about the dangers of pushing the wrong ideal in the wrong places.

Eve- But is it a lie? I mean, in a sense, I love pretty much most people. Just not in the way it's supposed to mean.

The point, perhaps, is I'd never actually say it to 'The One'. Deep down I think I recognise, that if someebody WAS idetfiable as 'The One', then by defintion, it wouls offend my sensibilties to feel desire towards them, and I would suppress such desires. The reason is preety simple- the ideal DOES have religious connotations from my perspective (everything does, in fact), and this means that to me, I subconscuiosly EXCLUDE the only women I'd really actually want.

Well yes, you are right about intention. I think it's only kind of recently occurred to me, that by definition, all these situations are of necessity doomed to failure. They are, because they're built on a false premise- that people obviously totally wrong long term, can be fitted into a slot they will never fit into.

The reality, of course, is twofold.

One of the main reasons I think I repeat all this over and over again, knowing deep down it's not going anywhere, apart from three months of brief exhileration, and then working out a viable exit strategy, is I do actually enjoy the chase. I enjoy the whole lovey dovey stuff, the freshness, the starry-eyed stuff. Then I always end up realising they are totally wrong as a long term fixture. Sometimes the exit strategy goes unhindered. Sometimes it causes absolute chaos.

Some would say, it's because I ALWAYS go for the ones who will be wrong. I think there is something in that.

Thing is, if somebody totally right was staring me in the face, I'd back away.
And that's the bit I've only really started to address- why it is I'd back away.

Because I would.

Anonymous said...

There will come a time when you won't back away, you might not see it now, but when it happens you'll be like a kid in a lolly shop, you will want more.

Anonymous said...

Nunya- Crushed IS a predator who begs all women to marry him , but as he stated to me he 'works on assumption ALL relationships will only last 2 mths and he is figuring out the end in the beginning'- READ:mind game player, emotional predator of women who enjoys hurting them but plays the victim behind their backs as he decimates their character .
'The ONE' for him is SIGMUND FREUD.

Watch how this will be censored by the man who does not beleive in censorship.!

Anonymous said...

Nunyaa- I'm not sure about that, actually.
You may be right, in the sense that TIME is always the key. Usually I just resent the time involved- I've never yet met a woman where I wanted to spend MORE time with her than I was, it's always been me trying to reduce the time.

Ubermouth- Just this once, I'm not going to delete your comment.

I'm going to answer it.

I have no intention of marrying any woman, ever. Never have, never will. I don't hold with the institution.

Secondly, we never met. You might have viewed it as actually being a relationship- but it wasn't. Relationships take place in reality. It consisted of a possible agreement to meet, circumstances permitting.
Now personally, I agree, I DO enter all RL relationhips, if you call them that, on the assumption they will end in two months.
Why? Because by that time, you'll know the answwers to the questions that really matter- normally.

It's reasonable to assume that they're not going to make the grade and be prepared for that. It isn't unreasonable at all. It's good common sense.

Firstly, you'll have got a yea or nay from your mates. That's crucial. I won't continue with somebody who gets just one thumb down from just one mate.

Secondly, you'll have established whether or not they'll fit in. Are they going to be taking up too much time, or are they going to reasonable?

Now you failed on both counts. Neither of those factors are my responsibility- and obviously I can't speak for the outcome of either of those at the begining.

Nor can I be responsible for unforseen events.
When I started speaking to you, I wasn't blogging so much. Also, my job demands weren't so significant.

In August, I started a very demanding job- plus this blog needed more attention. I had to prioritise and decide which things in life were important. Blog- Pub- talking to some woman on the phone- there isn't the time for all three. Something had to give. And talking to you on the phone just really weasn't constructive- even if you had been 'The One', I'd have asked for a total cessation of contact at this point, on the grounds that there just wasn't time.

The fact is, it just wasn't practical and sometimes people have to be objective.

But you'd already proved you weren't somebody I wanted to meet, because of your inability to put blogging over and above personal relationships. And that in itself, was worrying.

Lastly of course, was the notorious phonecall to D. You could never come back from that. Not only was that a final proof that you couldn't observe boundaries, that you couldn't respect the sanctity of my personal relations with those I live with, but more importantly, it resulted in a thumb down to my ever meeting you, from not one, but two of those close to me.

At which point, further contact was totally pointless.

But you insisted on carrying on. Why? We'd already established, you didn't give a damn about my blog, you didn't see that it was more important to me than any relationship ever could be, nor would you.

And you'd been firmly vetoed by the people I give the right to veto my personal relationships.

So don't try make out I did anything wrong.
I was 100% ethical all the way.

Anonymous said...

You just need to enjoy people for who they are unconditionally and see where that takes the relationship!

Anonymous said...

Well I know what you mean abt reaching for the unattainable. Sometimes I rather keep the romantic version of the figment of my imagination as an ideal since I know no one could ever live up to it, hence I wont have my hopes up just to have them all crushed to smitheerens...

Kinda like ikaros trying to reach the sun, you'll just end up burned and fall....