A self-pity party... all are invited

[kevyn]

So I've been through anger, bargaining and depression (well I'm still in depression, actually)... don't see how denial's gonna work, but I'll be glad to get to acceptance. In the meantime, however, I have a question:

Is there truly someone for everyone? Or is that just a self-serving myth we tell ourselves and others with broken & lonely hearts, because the truth might just be too frightening to bear?

Is it possible that some people are just meant to be alone, no matter how much they try not to be?

What if not everyone has a "soul mate," or if you just missed them? What if the man of your dreams thinks you are too complicated and messed up to be involved with? Does that mean empty anonymous sex or celibacy are the only options left?

What if some men truly are islands?

Comments

Re: 37 years old and still single... is that something to be alarmed at?

[kadyg.livejournal.com]

>I am beginning to think there is something about me that makes me incompatible with all potential partners, and once one starts to suspect that, how can one NOT think there is something "broken" about me (And yes, I do think there is something "broken" about me.)

Careful, that's my friend you're talking about there.

Actually, I'm with pocketllama on this one: There are someones for everyone. (What am I up to now, 5, 6? people that meant a great deal to me but wouldn't work for the long-term?) And so what that all of your relationships have ended? Please keep in mind that Society tends to call a relationship succesful only when one half dies. I also think that soul mates are created, not found. And some couples never get there, but it's still a successful partnership.

For prospective: Liz Taylor has a whopping 8 divorces under her belt. Do you think she's shuffling around in her jammies wondering what's wrong with her? No! She's hand-feeding Michael Jackson - which is much sadder.

XOXO

Re: 37 years old and still single... is that something to be alarmed at?

[kevynjacobs.livejournal.com]

> Please keep in mind that Society tends to call a relationship succesful only when one half dies.

I've been thinking about this statement this week, and I don't define a "successful" relationship that way. Successful, to me, is when a relationship is reciprocal (Three of the men I loved were straight), NOT Long distance (Four of them were that), loving, sexually compatible (a biggie for me), and for an extended period of time (let's just say a year-and-a-day, for the sake of argument).

Are these criteria I put on successful relationships too unrealistic?