House of Eratosthenes

Buck links to an emotionally-charged epistle written up by a test-tube babymama. She gave up on the Prince Charming and insisted on having a princeling anyway, as did her girlfriend, and while her tone is far from hysterical it’s clear she counsels the newer generation to veer away from her footprints.

Well, don’t we all, sometimes.

Don’t worry about passion or intense connection. Don’t rule out a guy based on his annoying habit of yelling “Bravo!” in the cinema. Overlook his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics. If you want the infrastructure in place for a family, settling is the way to go. Based on my observations, in fact, settling will probably make you happier in the long run, because many of those who marry with great expectations become more disillusioned with each passing year.

I can’t be too tough on her here, because my observations have been pretty much exactly the same. In fact, I notice divorce is an inevitability for all married couples, save for the ones that die quickly — or — the rare couplings that somehow obtain that elusive Holy Grail of genuine mutual respect.

“Settle” for a fella, after being torn for weeks on end about whether or not he’d make you “happy”? Good heavens, for his sake I hope not.

But perhaps she has something else in mind. Perhaps what she has in mind is…that Holy Grail. True compromise, with another human being, as an equal.

Obviously, I wasn’t always an advocate of settling. In fact, it took not settling to make me realize that settling is the better option. Whenever I make the case for settling, people look at me with creased brows of disapproval or frowns of disappointment. Not only is it politically incorrect to get behind settling, it is downright unacceptable. Our culture tells us to keep our eyes on the prize, and the theme of holding out for true love permeates our collective mentality.

Women do not suffer from any special handicap in decision-making here…at least, no handicap beyond what society has thrust upon them. How often do you hear a lecture that you should respect a “woman’s choice” about something? About as often as you demonstrate less than complete obeisance to whatever that choice is…even in matters where her choice directly impacts yourself, or others. And how often do you hear of a blunt and honest assessment of how well a woman has decided such a “choice”? In polite company, never, or as close to never as real life can summon any behavioral pattern. It is anathema to proper manners.

And so the female is someone we allow to decide things completely, without compromise, and once she has so chosen we do not criticize. Women aren’t goddesses, and they aren’t fools either. They’re people — no better, no lesser.

Why do women reject some men and accept others? Because of something called “true love”? As the subject of such approving and snubbing “choices” I have a great deal of trouble accepting that; and, it seems to me, as a somewhat-old guy who’s spent more of a lifetime outside of marriage than most of the fellas, it seems I might know a thing or two about this. The women who accepted me, that was out of “true love”?

Well, with the latest one — of course!

Perhaps with some of the previous ones as well. But all of the previous ones failed. And I can’t help but think, looking back on it, that one common thread in all the failures was in definition. They “loved” me…”settled” for me…why?

This gets into an unpleasant article in the set of female compulsions that, under the best of circumstances, might be discussed in private between mothers and their daughters — it is not explored in open company. The “love” a woman has for a puppy that was once abused…a no-talent twenty-something rocker dreaming of “getting the band back together”…a beautiful teacup in need of some glue for the handle that has broken away. The love for the “project house.” The fixer-upper.

The man who is only ninety-nine percent complete, has the woman wrapped tightly around his finger. He can’t get along without her help, and for that reason, her imagination runs away with fantasies about nursing him back to health. Her vision is not that he is complete and whole…her vision is that she will make him that way. It’s a vital ingredient — the most important ingredient, is the one that is missing. Waiting for her to toss it in and make it all better.

Her search for this seems to be a product of evolution. It is certainly wired into her psychological makeup, as a feminine being capable of this “love.” One wonders how survival of the fittest culminates in this. But it must. Perhaps the children conceived from such a union, a quid-pro-quo between mama and papa, end up being stronger and more capable of perpetuating the species? It must be so, for that is how we have been built. A lady comes into the age of marriageability, and develops an eye for misfit boys who are as misfit toys.

There is very little “survival of the fittest” here, or whatever there is, is tempered by something that is exactly opposite. Visualizing the boys as toys, the maiden seems unerringly attracted to the ones that, once wound up, march around in a circle — getting nowhere until her therapeutic treatments straighten out the legs and associated workings again, calibrating them, tuning, synchronizing. The ones that already march in a straight line, she might be looking right at ’em, but she can’t see ’em.

It is the timeless father-in-law’s lament.

So my verdict on this thesis is: Partial agreement. I don’t think single women, by-and-large, need to decide more quickly or take more time to reach the decision. How long she takes, is not the issue. The issue is the factors involved in who she chooses. Based on what I have seen in an unusually long and complicated career as a single guy, single women should pay closer attention to what, exactly, is closing the deal in whatever way she feels it should be closed. She should pay attention to what’s going into her decision, because nobody else is.

Yes, it seems like her girlfriends care. But they don’t. Not so much about her long-term welfare, anyway. For that, you need a coupling…a true, genuine coupling. Two people who see each other as real people, each of whom is cared for by the other, deeply, while forsaking all others. Take as much time or as little time to stumble across it as you need, but that’s the prize, and there is no substitute.

Excellent post.

IMO, most women (and men for that matter) actually believe the stereotypes on TV. The definition of settling is choosing someone who is not like a TV character. They believe society will judge them harshly if they choose a Bob Dole over a Bill Clinton (perhaps not the best analogy).
- wch | 05/15/2008 @ 12:35

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

SettleWednesday, May 14th, 2008

Settle
Wednesday, May 14th, 2008