Skip to content

Soul Mates are Mythical Beings – Not Real People

November 20, 2009

Women, if you’re waiting for that One Special Amazing Soul Mate from Heaven, then Heaven help you. As Ralph Walden Emerson said, “How much of human life is lost in waiting.”

Soul Mate Schmole Mate. The only real soul mate is of the sole mate kind.

google images

Haven’t we been told there is ONE PERFECT soul mate, and that if we just keep keepin’ on, not paying attention, we will meet this person?  When we meet this ONE PERFECT person we will have the perfect everything – house, sex, and marriage – because that person is our destiny and we deserve it.

Hate to break it to you, ladies, but the idea of  ONE special man in the universe who is perfect for you is ridonckulous.    Waiting for the perfect man to fall out of the sky with your social security number tattooed on his forehead is not going to happen till hell freezes over.   And that won’t happen till Roissy either moves in and orders it, or gets married (whichever comes first).

What you need to do is reframe your romantic lil minds.  Imagine a bar of soap in your pretty brain cavity and scrub it out – be careful around the nucleus accumbens – don’t want to ruin that baby.

Wipe out all images of my knight in white shining armour coming to rescue me from my drab and dreary stepmother who is making me clean the cinders while my two ugly… and replace with reality aka the state of things as they actually exist.

6,692,030,277

That was the word population in 2008.  Let’s make that number a little bit smaller, shall we?

528,720,588

That was North America’s population in 08.

You get the idea, smart people.  There are A LOT of people in this world of ours – how can there be only ONE person who is right for you?  If half are of the opposite sex, and even if only 10% of the population was datable, then that’s still a fricken huge number.

If you have a one and only soul mate you might miss him because his hair was a mess when you glanced his way – and then what?!  You’re poop out of luck.  Blame the universe, if you want to.  Or, take responsibility for your romantic foolishness and accept  that you are picking a mate on things other than prince-like qualities from Grimm’s.  Perfectly imperfect men abound.  Enjoy!

62 Comments leave one →
  1. slayer permalink
    November 20, 2009 8:35 am

    No shit.

  2. November 20, 2009 8:57 am

    Considering the frequency at which soulmates encounter each other, it is suprising how they defy the 1/6,692,030,276 odds. ‘course, I forget to factor fate and destiny there. The number of people you are compatible with actually varies with how special, unique and flexible you are. I do think people have a ‘type’ rather than one possible human being in all the universe they could ever be compatible with. I do think it’s very useful to view the man you’re with as the only one for you; your ability to be compatible with other people does disappear the more partners you accumulate. In this respect, believing in a soulmate once you’re in a relationship seems to me a natural monogamy friendly female mechanism: it’s harmful when you’re not in a relationship or are hung up on a previous one.

    I think Cinderella gets an unfairly bad rap as damsels in distress go.

    She had a makeover, even did the Drop A Handkerchief move as Travis would’ve called it but, since she didn’t do things by half-measures, she dropped a whole shoe. The prince wasn’t closing fast despite all the less obvious indicators of interest.

    She also seemed fairly happy with her “oppressed” life, despite the occasional victimisation. She extracted more happiness than her stepsisters from their relatively liberated lifestyle.

  3. Nathan permalink
    November 20, 2009 9:05 am

    So, what’s the deal – did you guys redact Hope’s blogging rights?

    Yes. We all decided that if Roissy didn’t like her we didn’t either. If you believe this please contact me for some prime, ocean front property I have in my prairie province. aoefe

  4. November 20, 2009 10:02 am

    In this respect, believing in a soulmate once you’re in a relationship seems to me a natural monogamy friendly female mechanism: it’s harmful when you’re not in a relationship or are hung up on a previous one.

    Yes Bhetti I should have qualified – my post is about finding a man – not about discarding men like shoes once you’ve begun relationships. Practical, realistic women will intuitively understand this and what I’m saying goes without saying, but romantic, idealistic women need a good shake. I’m afraid there are far too many of the latter. It’s social conditioning.

    Monogamy and forever and ever amen is possible – but it’s not all hearts and flowers.

  5. Talleyrand permalink
    November 20, 2009 10:43 am

    Yet everyone wants a soul mate . . .

    This is probably harder for women to accept than men, since your tastes are simple, you only want the best.

    Our culture feeds this, it wants people feeling like there is always something better around the corner, that something new will make you happy: whether its a book, a movie, a car, food, a new significant other.

  6. Il Capo permalink
    November 20, 2009 12:49 pm

    aoefe: good stuff.
    Bhetti: there is also danger in believing in a soulmate in a relationship, if that relationship ends.

    I’ve met several girls who had broken up with [insert bad boy stereotype] for logical reasons such as: guy treated them poorly, cheated and didn’t even try to hide it, etc. These girls believed that [bad boy] was their soulmate and were therefore unable to be happy with anyone else. They could usually not hold on to good guys, some of them alpha, because they missed the incredible emotional swings that their “soulmate” provided. The more reasonable guys got fed up pretty quickly and moved on. I must add that the girls who fell for this kind of spell were usually the ones which -relating to your post on the matter- needed tempestuous relationships.

    I, for one, try to advice some of my girl friends to become more realistic as they approach the big 3.0. while single, but my efforts are usually futile.

  7. November 20, 2009 12:58 pm

    word population is 6,692,030,277? I seriously sat and tried to figure out how they calculated that, whether it was each word in a language or if a word had to be unique to a language to not be added to the total. (i.e. house and casa would count once or twice).

  8. Ferdinand Bardamu permalink
    November 20, 2009 1:21 pm

    Whenever I hear the word “soulmate,” I reach for my Desert Eagle. The concept is such bathetic, pathetic, new age crap that it makes me nauseous. It’s also an manifestation of modern narcissism – “I’m so awesome, there’s someone out there who’s just MEANT for me!” Ugh.

  9. November 20, 2009 2:14 pm

    Woman: “You are my soul mate!”
    Mr. Bardamu: “…”
    Woman: “Is that a gun in your pocket? Or are you –”

    Il Capo: The word soulmate is definitely a brilliant screening tool for tempestuous types.

    A) Girlfriends and not just girl friends, I hope!
    B) In terms of advice, concrete examples work best. For example, I have a very attractive relative who’s single at her age; she’s always used when warning against leaving it too long.
    Try ‘single older men are players who won’t commit or bitter divorcees, you need to get them young’. This angle works best for even the most deranged logic as its quite hard for a woman to overcome her social conditioning to opt for a younger man.
    Try ‘There’s a woman I know who was so attractive when she was younger. Then the light seemed to go out of her around thirty; stress, work, pollution, tanning, I don’t know. She got so desperate for kids that she married this guy she wouldn’t have looked twice at.’

    But, well, it takes more than a 5 second conversation to get the message to sink in. Especially when a lot of the media is pandering to women who’ve made the wrong choices for themselves and are trying to feel good about it.

  10. November 20, 2009 2:58 pm

    Great quote by Emerson, love it. :-)

    My mother tells me stories about college back in India. Girls would often drop out mid-way, when they got married.

    But my mom managed to finish college, get her degree and then marry my dad. She had numerous suitors throughout school but something would always happen to halt the match.

    I asked her how she lasted being single so long. Her answer, “Well your daddy was in America then…”

    She and my dad aren’t perfect matches at all in terms of personality or temperament. But my mother sees it as destiny – she was supposed to marry him.

    So I think some people, when they think of soulmates, they are thinking more of the person their destiny holds. Seen Slumdog Milliionaire? Some people feel, “It was written.” :-)

    A lot of time people will tell their friends, “If it’s meant to be, it’ll happen no matter what you do,” to help them get over heartbreak right…

    Otherwise the concept is kinda cheesy… ok very cheesy lol. It usually implies impossible pickiness and unrealistic (and disrespectful!) expectations.

  11. The Iconoclast permalink
    November 20, 2009 3:18 pm

    No, there’s not only ONE knight-in-shining-armor who would be great for you—but the numbers don’t work out as favorably as you might think. Take your 528,000,000 number and start DIVIDING:

    -divide by 2 to get MEN
    -divide by 2 again to get English-speakers, unless you’re fluent in Spanish
    –divide by maybe 2 again to get ones in your rough age band…you don’t want to be a Cougar, do you?
    -divide by maybe 5 to get ones that are a physical type that turns you on
    -divide some other number to get ones that are smart enough..pretty intelligent group of babes here, so for all of you, probably need to divide by at least another 5
    -apply other divisors for personality type, religion (if that’s a factor), etc etc etc

    The number remaining will be a lot less impressive than 528 million. And most of them, you’ll never meet, and of those you DO meet, in a lot of cases the chemistry won’t be there even though they fit your checklist.

    So there’s not just ONE…but the number who you’ll find sexually attractive AND that you can fall in love with AND would make good husbands from a practical standpoint AND you’ll actually meet…is probably a fairly small number.

  12. November 20, 2009 4:11 pm

    Isn’t that the problem, Iconoclast, that a woman holds out so long for the ‘soulmate’ feeling that she’ll not have the appropriate set of attitudes and expectations that will make it work with the chances she does get with men actually compatible with her? That she blames it on not finding the Right Man instead of her own internal processes? How can she expect Mr. Right if she’s Mrs. Wrong?

  13. The Iconoclast permalink
    November 20, 2009 4:49 pm

    Yes, I think so. I remember one woman saying to me that she had a wonderful boyfriend right after college//that she’d then thought relationships like that were pretty common & if she’d realized how RARE they really are, she’d have tried harder to stay with him.

    True for men, too, though not quite as sharply since age isn’t quite as much of a factor.

  14. November 20, 2009 6:44 pm

    what if you do find your soulmate? THEN WHAT

  15. aliasclio permalink
    November 20, 2009 6:57 pm

    Hmm. I would *not* advise trying to scare single women into marrying simply because time is passing and they might get left out of the marriage market altogether if they wait too long. First, it tends to provoke resentment; second, it can scare some women into selecting mates with whom a happy marriage is very unlikely; third, not all women want to get married and of those who do, some would really be better off not having children.

    I believe myself to have made many mistakes in the course of my romantic history and regret them, but I don’t regret waiting until my mid-40s to get married. Or rather, I’m not sorry that I didn’t marry any of the men whom I dated back in my 20s or 30s. I don’t believe I would have been happy with any of them (even those who were alphas), nor that they would have been happy with me. What I regret about those so-called relationships today is that I got into them at all, since they now strike me as a waste of my time and emotional energy, and that of the men involved, too.

    Meanwhile, I wouldn’t suggest that women ought to hold out for an alpha, but at the same time, I think it’s unfair to expect women to give up the possibility of marrying sexually attractive men (which is what Roissyites mean by “alpha”) unless we also expect men to choose women they find unattractive on the basis of their good hearts.

    I expect some might say that it’s all very well to have this attitude when you have finally managed to meet someone who seems to be an excellent match for you, but not much use to women who have not. I understand this feeling, but I still wouldn’t advise that women marry the first available man who is not a deadbeat or a drunk. You shouldn’t hold out for a “soul mate”, whatever that may mean to you, but neither should you ignore issues of basic compatibility in favour of a ruthlessly practical approach to marriage.

  16. gunslingergregi permalink
    November 20, 2009 7:18 pm

    ””””LILGRL permalink
    what if you do find your soulmate? THEN WHAT
    ”””””””

    Well between that and getting rich you have beat all the levels of life and now you can just wait to die lol

    Or take on the challenge of finding a few soul mates.

  17. СОФИЯ/sofia permalink
    November 21, 2009 12:31 am

    everyone i’ve been with has been my soulmate
    in fact, i’m still bffs with all of them

  18. November 21, 2009 1:14 am

    This is probably harder for women to accept than men, since your tastes are simple, you only want the best.

    For some reason, despite my own myopic and pessimistic views on the topic, for some reason, the notion of a soul mate had some allure to it since it inflated the idea that there’s some girl out there that would like me for who I am. The problem is that said soul mate could be some hideously ugly wreck, of a race and religion that I wouldn’t want for a partner, or would have some other feature that ruins her attractiveness.

    OTOH, if she wasn’t attractive, would she really be my soul mate?

  19. Il Capo permalink
    November 21, 2009 1:18 am

    @ clio: Type I error vs Type II error. I believe Type I error is so feared by most women these days that advocating risking type II error is actually desirable. Yes, the unlikely Type II error women will feel bad, but *on average* it is a better option than current state of affairs.

    You are arguing against Type II error because you estimate that it would have been bad for you, but that doesn’t make it generalizable advice. It seems that you are generalizing anecdotal evidence, or, at best, evidence that is not historically relevant.

    Note: Null hypothesis: this man is the best I can get vs other potential men or staying single.

  20. aliasclio permalink
    November 21, 2009 2:40 am

    Il Capo, I use anecdotal evidence here (and I did not claim it was evidence, btw), because I don’t see how statistical surveys could prove anything at all in a matter of this kind.

    I don’t think the way you’ve chosen to frame women’s dilemma is quite realistic either. What’s more likely to happen to a young middle-class woman today is that she will meet someone with whom she does fall in love, let’s say between 18-21. But neither she nor her “partner” takes the relationship seriously because they each believe that they ought to have more Experience, more Experimentation, more time on their own, before choosing to marry. They’ve been taught that it’s somehow declasse to marry too young, without money or a house.

    A little later than that, say between ages 22-26, the same woman will meet and perhaps fall in love with another man, and this time they do take it semi-seriously. But – here’s where the alpha/beta system fails to account for female behaviour – perhaps the man isn’t ambitious enough to suit her; or he’s in a career she regards as uncool – and she gives him up on the assumption that she has plenty of time. This is the woman Roissyites love to hate.

    Or else she’ll meet her bad boy alpha who will neither give her up nor ask her to marry him (this happened to several friends of mine). Score another for the Roissyites.

    Or she will have fun and adventure (not necessarily of a sexual nature) with her work and her friends, and not want to give it up. Score again.

    Or – and this is the most likely of all – though not yet very old, she’ll find that the mating market is something of a desert for women once they’re out of university, unless they’re in a highly sociable job. She tries, she hopes, she’ll meet whoever is available and decent, but nothing clicks. And Time Passes.

    The last is the real story of most women who remain single for very long past the age of 25.

  21. November 21, 2009 3:16 am

    Hmm. I would *not* advise trying to scare single women into marrying simply because time is passing and they might get left out of the marriage market altogether if they wait too long

    Nor would I advise women to do this. I was more addressing the silly notion there is only one fish in the sea for each of us. That attitude is prevalent today – media influence? – not sure. I’ve had my cake and have no real regrets about my past relationships – I’ve learned a great deal. I am in no hurry to get hitched – in fact not sure that’s a desire – but do believe a man is the whole of the sum of his parts and too many women concentrate on the parts. They expect the parts to be perfectly aligned with their parts making him him a perfect fit. There is no such thing fraid to tell ya.

    I was going to add a shopping for attribute list to this post but decided it would make it too long. Meaning there are more men with attributes you would find high on your list than you might think. I don’t think women should lose their romantic desires they should however add some realism to the mix.

  22. aliasclio permalink
    November 21, 2009 3:46 am

    Aoefe, I was thinking more of the remarks of Il Capo and Bhetti, above, when I wrote this comment, than I was of your original post, which I thought was perfectly sensible.

    I think the concept of a soul-mate does most harm to married people of both sexes who find someone who seems – temporarily – more exciting than their actual mate. It can then lead people to abandon their spouses and children, only to find that the relationship with the new mate proves as complex, tiresome, and full of demands as the original one did.

    Meanwhile, I do wish someone – a blogger, a sociologist, a novelist – could write a convincing explanation for why some people strike us as “soul mates” and others don’t. I know that some people, esp. men, think that this is female shorthand for “I want to have sex with him because he’s an alpha”, but that doesn’t quite seem to cover it.

    In my own more cynical moments, I think that alpha status has nothing to do with falling in love. Instead, it’s a matter of matching neuroses on the part of the man and the woman.

    Time to get some sleep.

  23. dana permalink
    November 21, 2009 2:43 pm

    While i do not believe in “one perfect soul mate”, my husband and i really do seem to be male and female versions of each other–mostly alike with a few complementary characteristics. from the day we met we were both interested in the same things (WW2, action movies, having mild aspergers syndrome, libertarianism), shared the same values and worldview. he is more rash and hotheaded than i, i am spock to his captain kirk

    people have foolishly and idealistically replaced the basic concept of “compatibility” with some unattainable Platonic Form of “Soulmateness”. this is the defining characteristic of our age–the inaccessible “perfect” being the enemy of the REAL “good”.

  24. Clarence permalink
    November 21, 2009 3:01 pm

    I first encountered the “soul mate” idea in Elf Quest graphic novels in the early 90’s. It was kind of cool, but remember -these were telepathic and magical elves!

    In reality two very highly compatible people can approach the ideal. But even they have to make compromises. That’s what life is about. My advice to women here (once they’ve decided on whether they want a child or not, I know some of you do, and some don’t) is to choose relationships with men who share the same life goals as you do. Two people who both want children for instance, are often better than a couple who have one who does and one who is willing to compromise on that point- even if the “cormpromosing couple” is more compatible in many other ways.

    What I’m saying is that you should choose a goal for your long term relationships and find someone who shares at least that goal for the relationship.

    Good post, aoefe.

  25. Clarence permalink
    November 21, 2009 3:03 pm

    Ack. IF I’m still not clear I’m saying rank your goals in order of priority. Do not compromise on the one or two most important ones, be flexible with the less important ones.

    Sorry, my writing isn’t poetic.

  26. dana permalink
    November 21, 2009 3:13 pm

    as my post before probably indicates–the only way for a WOMAN to find a MALE “soulmate” is to cultivate an interest in traditionally masculine hobbies, activities and interests. you will NOT be attracted to a man that shares YOUR worldview and interests if YOU are excessively feminine. women today have ghettoized their interests to such an extent that no straight male could join them in their world of shoes, horrible movies, oprah, spas, makeup, nanny state socialism etc

  27. November 21, 2009 3:32 pm

    dana —

    that’s not necessarily true. i agree that you will not be attracted to a man who shares your interests if you are excessively feminine, but i know plenty of men and women who have found extremely compatible mates by simply embracing these differences. certainly, all “soulmate” couples are not comprised of people who share exactly the same (masculine) interests.

  28. СОФИЯ/sofia permalink
    November 21, 2009 3:37 pm

    Actually, variety keeps things interesting. I’ve been out on dates with guys who have the exact same opinions as me, enjoy the same interests, like the same music, movies, etc. and it is BORING.

    I like to be challenged by someone, and some guys I’ve dated expressed the same thing. We learn from each other, and it also gives us time to do “alone” stuff.

  29. dana permalink
    November 21, 2009 3:38 pm

    lilgirl,

    i would venture to say they are able to do that because they have some bedrock principle or abiding interest they share in common that overrides the differences, like a strongly shared religion, a business they are devoted to together or neutral hobby/interest–like a shared obsession with skiing. there has to be a deep shared well of SOMETHING or the word “compatibility” doesn’t apply.

    you can only embrace differences and be compatible if the differences are somehow reconcilable–women have now created an entire philosophical/political worldview and embrace it that literally puts them at odds with if not in a state of actual enmity with the majority of men, mutually incompatible 1st premises can’t possibly lead to “compatibility” under any definition of the word.

  30. dana permalink
    November 21, 2009 3:39 pm

    sofia, thats very nice when dating, dating is fun and exciting

    when you are married and live with each other every day and want to stay together forever, those exciting differences become big thorns in the side of your relationship

  31. November 21, 2009 3:48 pm

    I am a believer you can find contentedness with a mate in a ltr relationship, to have that you need to have some likes and some differences. I wouldn’t be attracted to a man who was very metro-sexual and liked to shop for clothes, decorate our home and was worried about how he looked all the time (I am enough of that for anyone). I have only enjoyed sports when with a partner who has a passion for it – his passions inspired my interest and it becomes a fun thing to do together (i.e. watch hockey).

    Clarence and Dana you are making some very good points.

  32. November 21, 2009 4:03 pm

    dana —

    hey dude, i agree with you on that — obviously you can only embrace differences if they’re some how reconcilable, and i see where you’re going with this. however, having a crazy worldview that puts you at odds with the opposite gender != being excessively feminine and/or having very female interests.

    i enjoy the differences, certainly. the boy and i are a bit scarily like each other, but there are still big differences that we can both appreciate (he likes to shop for clothes, and i like to fix computers…haha).

  33. СОФИЯ/sofia permalink
    November 21, 2009 4:08 pm

    I have to side with LILGRL in this argument… basis for compatibility is important, but you can still maintain your separate interests. Being feminine is a necessary difference in most cases. Men don’t want to date themselves or other men, otherwise they’re not as heterosexual as they think.

  34. dana permalink
    November 21, 2009 4:51 pm

    lilgirl,

    you appear to understand what i am saying–you and epoxy seem good together, your attitude bodes well for your future

  35. Keith permalink
    November 21, 2009 5:19 pm

    “If you have a one and only soul mate you might miss him because his hair was a mess when you glanced his way – and then what?! ”

    And that’s the usefulness of the “soul mate” concept. You don’t want to go walking around with an overly strict checklist, to the point where you’re not open to new experiences with someone unexpected. With your checklist, you choke all the romantic surprise out of your life. The “soulmate” idea can be a nice antidote to that mistake.

    Yeah, people can misuse the “soulmate” concept, and take it too literally (there can be only one!) or reason backwards (I’m attracted to this person – they must be my soulmate!). But the “soulmate” idea encourages something important – too look for unique and distinct traits in people that would make you fall in love.

    Especially in this corner of the internet, people overestimate the “beauty contest” nature of love. Your mental model is that men walk around displaying alpha cred or social status, and women walk around showing their attractiveness. If that’s the entire extent of your model, you’re likely to end up alone, because you’ll be too caught up in competing in the beauty contest to actually fall in love. In addition, beauty contest traits are largely interchangeable. You can replace hot women with other hot women and men with other men. Falling in love involves some matching or mutual fascination with each others’ individually idiosyncratic traits. And if someone doesn’t love your individually idiosyncratic traits, they won’t be loyal.

    And if you spend all your time cultivating your “beauty contest” traits at the expense of your idiosyncratic traits, you’ll be desirable, but not lovable.

    Many a “beta” male induces far more loyalty from his women that many an “alpha” male, because the beta male has more unique and individual idiosyncratic traits that are less substitutable with other men. The alpha can easily be discarded for another alpha (unless he “marries down” far enough).

  36. November 21, 2009 5:50 pm

    Keith great comment – thanks.

  37. November 21, 2009 7:24 pm

    Re “checklists,” a couple of thoughts:

    1)Capt Chesley Sullenberger (hero of the airliner landing on the Hudson river) emphasizes the importance of “goal sacrificing” in aviation safety. In his case, for example, he sacrificed an important goal–saving a $50 million airplane–for increased certainty of a achieving an even more important goal: saving lives.

    Maybe the same concept is applicable with relationships.

    2)It’s probably inevitable that people will make lists of desired criteria–for relationships, jobs, employees, houses, etc–but these lists can miss the concept of Gestalt. Could you create a checklist for detecting great art? (If you could, you could probably write a computer program to produce it–but you can’t)

    A high match score on the checklist doesn’t really guarantee the spark.

  38. November 21, 2009 7:40 pm

    I agree David – the one thing you can’t predict will be there, even with all the great attributes is spark. There is nothing great about proceeding without some ignition. :)

  39. November 22, 2009 12:31 am

    Keith: The soulmate concept in the practical real word is misused by women who are addicted to emotional/sexual highs and suffer from severe bouts of rationalisation and self-justification.

    I actually bet myself that if I did a google search on the word, I’d find a cheating female in the top results and I did: http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/relationships/article2054747.ece

  40. November 22, 2009 3:48 pm

    aoefe, is this a picture of your legs?

    Considering the frequency at which soulmates encounter each other, it is suprising how they defy the 1/6,692,030,276 odds.

    While I agree that soulmates are a myth, I can see how the odds would be better than 1/6,692,030,276. If you assume that your soulmate has something of a similar background to you then the odds are a lot better. For example, I doubt my “soulmate” (if such a thing existed) would be a Kalahari bushwoman.

    None of this matters since soulmates are a myth like unicorns.

  41. Keith permalink
    November 22, 2009 4:01 pm

    @Bhetti

    “The soulmate concept in the practical real word is misused by women who are addicted to emotional/sexual highs and suffer from severe bouts of rationalisation and self-justification.”

    You can expand your statement according to the following formula:

    “The X concept in the practical real word is misused by X who suffer from severe bouts of rationalisation and self-justification.”

  42. Girly Girl permalink
    November 22, 2009 4:29 pm

    There is a Yale researcher and psychiatrist who (amongst others in the medical community) has proven the medical benefits of past life regression therapy. In many of those case studies, the spouses of patients were often present in past lives. So yes, while the person might definitely not be perfect for you, there can be such a thing as destiny.

    Today, we are taught that everything between you and another man needs to be perfect. Often, it is based on feelings of lust and sexual attractive that in the long run do not alone guarentee a happy life together. The kind of love that keeps people together is often a mutually altruistic one, the kind where you sacrifice for one another.

    What’s a LTR-type girl to do? In my honest opinion, hold out on the sex until you get to know the man better. You can have great sex with many types of men. But only a few of those will be compatible with you in terms of values, life goals, and interests. I followed this strategy and ended up engaged to my dream man.

    Things are definitely not perfect between us. We often have passionate arguments, and are both very stubborn. However, our common interests and family values hold us together. He knows me like no other person in this world, and has become for me a spiritual, intellectual and emotional leader. I would die a spiritual death if he ever had to leave my life.

    The trick wasn’t seeking holding out for the soulmate or ‘perfect man’. I never thought I would end up with someone from India who was closer to my height, ten years my senior and outside my past tendencies to date tall Russian men. Rather, it was holding out for an imperfect person I felt my heart and mind could love perfectly over a long period of time.

  43. November 22, 2009 4:33 pm

    PMAFT say it ain’t so! No such thing as unicorns? Life is over.

  44. November 22, 2009 4:35 pm

    Girly girl – well said. Congrats too on finding a good man and for the right reasons and with the right compliment of attributes (i.e. values).

  45. Tupac Chopra permalink
    November 22, 2009 4:47 pm

    Kweef:

    You can expand your statement according to the following formula:

    “The X concept in the practical real word is misused by X who suffer from severe bouts of rationalisation and self-justification.”

    Which is to say such usage is the relevant factor when discussing cultural and psychosocial trends.

    Unless you’re an aspie.

  46. Keith permalink
    November 22, 2009 5:02 pm

    “Which is to say such usage is the relevant factor when discussing cultural and psychosocial trends.”

    Wrong. The fact that people misuse concepts to rationalize this or that pre-existing belief is simply a universal, because that’s what a lot of people do. By your standard, you would have to discard all concepts, including evo-psych, since many people misuse evo-psych to rationalize their behavior and biases.

    As for girly girl’s points, for females, there’s a lot to be said for holding out on the sex, dating lots of guys, and allowing more than one date to see if there’s a spark. Well-socialized men with a strong sense of personal boundaries are not going to be as dominant upon first meeting someone.

  47. November 22, 2009 5:07 pm

    PMAFT say it ain’t so! No such thing as unicorns? Life is over.

    Sorry, aoefe, but this is a myth busting weekend.

    Bhetti —
    Is it me projecting or is there a swagger to PMAFT at the moment? Might his latest posts on The Spearhead and his own blog give us a clue?

  48. Girly Girl permalink
    November 22, 2009 6:36 pm

    Thanks, aoefe! I quite enjoy this blog, and find it fun to read. Keeps on bringing me back for more =)

  49. November 22, 2009 6:48 pm

    Keith

    You can replace hot women with other hot women and men with other men. Falling in love involves some matching or mutual fascination with each others’ individually idiosyncratic traits.

    Many a “beta” male induces far more loyalty from his women that many an “alpha” male, because the beta male has more unique and individual idiosyncratic traits that are less substitutable with other men. The alpha can easily be discarded for another alpha (unless he “marries down” far enough).

    This is brilliant. It’s closer to what I suspect to be true about the lovegame.

    For people who are totally clueless, it’s easier to improve your Game or GirlGame if you first focus on the simple basics (guys want beauty and youth, girls want dominance and manliness). But the reality is more complicated… I don’t think everyone gets that esp. in the Roissysphere. I don’t see enough guys talk about losing a girl to another Alpha, or a Beta with Alpha instincts who was therefore more “well rounded” or whatever.

  50. November 22, 2009 7:41 pm

    GirlyGirl:

    The kind of love that keeps people together is often a mutually altruistic one, the kind where you sacrifice for one another.

    common interests and family values hold us together. He knows me like no other person in this world, and has become for me a spiritual, intellectual and emotional leader.

    Rather, it was holding out for an imperfect person I felt my heart and mind could love perfectly over a long period of time.

    Lovely, so many insights. I wonder what you think of the concept put forth here:

    http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/11/02/the-art-of-loving/

    http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/11/03/the-art-of-loving-2-why-western-women-are-so-empty-unhappy/

    I love this blog for the discourse between us — I think of it as an attempt to figure out things through the collective insights, perspectives and wisdoms rather than a didactic exercise. We’re all so vastly different and each with our strengths/weaknesses.

    Keith:

    The fact that people misuse concepts to rationalize this or that pre-existing belief is simply a universal, because that’s what a lot of people do.

    This emotive concept receives particular spectacular abuse. I’m not sure how it could be proven, but I bet that increasing usage of words like ‘soulmate’ out of a relationship is correlated to women prone to tempestuousness and also relationships that are incompatible: their values are not in alignment but their lust for each other is.

    The more responsibility she takes upon herself to be a loving, practical and loyal woman rather than place the burden of blame of her own behaviour and feelings on external factors, the better the relationship turns out.

    Speaking of quibbling generalisations:

    Many a “beta” male induces far more loyalty from his women that many an “alpha” male, because the beta male has more unique and individual idiosyncratic traits that are less substitutable with other men. The alpha can easily be discarded for another alpha (unless he “marries down” far enough).

    Not that there has been an official agreement on this but we don’t really tend to use alpha/beta that much here, which is a good thing. It’s much too simplistic; in the roissysphere, all it demarcates is how sexually attractive a man is. While there can be the temptation of a whole construction of what type of personality this is (especially confining it to just one personality), it’s only one aspect of a whole, complex man. Therein lies all the problems.

    The assumption I have a problem with here is that a man who is real life alpha becomes some sort of caricature of a man that can easily be substituted. A woman who falls in love is a woman who falls in love: he is unique and cannot be substituted. When he ‘induces’ powerful sexual attraction, falling powerfully in love is much easier than the slow burn of companionship, which can be equally powerful and takes a longer time. Each real-life relationship is a combination of sexual/companionate love.

    Loyalty seems to me the function of two things: how attractive her man is to her and her own values. Where simplistic alphas might go wrong is in the latter and even neglecting the ‘companionship’ component of the former, where she doesn’t feel she’s in a relationship anyway. Although if he’s a simplistic alpha, isn’t he supposed to be leaving her way before she leaves him? (Ah, problematic terminology, problematic!)

  51. November 22, 2009 7:58 pm

    Bhetti I just want to say you’re amazing! (that’s all I have to say at the moment)

  52. November 22, 2009 8:19 pm

    Uniqueness & substitutability: I read somewhere (can’t find a link) about an anthropologist who was living with a tribe somewhere, and decided to tell them the story of Romeo and Juliet. After he got to the end, they were puzzled…why was it such a big deal to Romeo when he thought Juliet had died?

    “Why not just get another girl?” asked the chief.

    This story may be totally unfair to the tribe in question..for one thing, tribal people sometime like messing with anthropologists’ heads (as the local teenage girls may have done with Margaret Mead) and their reaction may have just been a put-on. But it does kind of represent the polar opposite of the one-and-only-soulmate worldview.

  53. Girly Girl permalink
    November 22, 2009 10:17 pm

    Bhetti,

    Thanks, and I have read both these articles. I agree with the conclusion that the author has come to, although in my opinion it is part of a larger spiritual disease. The West has for awhile now been breeding a culture of unhappiness that focuses only on the physical (material possessions, individualism and sex) rather than the invisible (charity, strong communities, higher-minded love).

    The economic statistics reflect this. Negative savings rates, high divorce rates instigated by women, men not defending their roles of leaders in society, gross overconsumption (McMansions, flashy cars, empty relationships, depletion of natural resources)… these are all symptoms of the same group mentality that indirectly leads to deterioration of male/female relations.

    I do believe the author’s claims about Western women not being able to love. As a group, my generation (young twenty-somethings) was not raised being taught how to sacrifice, stand up for other people, or to do the right thing in spite of any personal discomforts. Psychologists have even branded our culture and being one with high rates of narcissism. However, I do not believe this is limited to women. Men have partaken in this corrupted tango.

  54. November 23, 2009 7:01 am

    I’m going to assume those are LSB’s legs up there. :)

  55. November 25, 2009 3:40 pm

    1. I have to agree with Il Capo that Clio’s advice, while perhaps applicable to her own circumstances, is extremely bad for women in general. It seems common sense to advise single women to marry early because time is passing and they might get left out of the marriage market altogether if they wait too long. The empirical evidence shows that once a woman is out of her teens, her marriage isn’t any more likely to last the more she waits.

    2. There has been work on why people think others are their soul mates. If people only committed to another person based on a purely rational evaluation of their traits then you would abandon them when someone with better traits came along. So, we are programmed to pick people who are irrationally loyal to us.

    3. Nothing kills the soulmate illusion, for men anyway, than having lots of dating experience. It’s hard to think of any particular woman as all that special when you know there is another one around the corner who is just as good.

  56. November 29, 2009 10:48 am

    Some people have such discriminating standards that they practically are looking for a soul mate, because there’s such a vanishingly small number of people they are interested in, and there’s almost no chance of meeting even one of them.

    To most people there’s “plenty of fish in the sea” because they don’t particularly care who they’re with (until someone better comes along, and drama ensues).

  57. dadt permalink
    November 30, 2009 11:02 pm

    The latest on the scene is that we have not just one “soulmate” but multiple soulmates. LOL.

    I guess that myth was created because the first soulmate didn’t work out.

    At any rate I think it’s easier for men and women to fall in love with each other when they don’t have a lot of access to the opposite sex and their options are limited to nil, like in countries where there is a lack of dating culture and the genders are more or less socially segregated.

    We in the West are oversaturated. We no longer experience the magic of being in the presence of the opposite sex. It’s all “been there done that” for us.

    I think for true romance to return we will have to return to a more chastened way of life and not be so exposed to each other.

  58. December 1, 2009 3:25 pm

    “We in the West are oversaturated. We no longer experience the magic of being in the presence of the opposite sex. It’s all “been there done that” for us.”

    Nobody is twisting your arm and forcing you to hop from one short-term relationship or one night stand to another. I, for one, haven’t been there or done that, because I’ve chosen not to. And although I live here in the West, my options really are nil because of my very specific preferences, but in the absence of options I choose to be alone.

Trackbacks

  1. Linkage is Good for You: English Rose Edition « In Mala Fide
  2. ChickHughes» Blog Archive » Soul Mate Remake
  3. Soul mate or sole mate? « These boots were made for worship
  4. Linkage is Good for You: English Rose Edition

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 80 other followers

%d bloggers like this: