Some people desire marriage for all the same reasons dogs chase cars.
|A happily married couple — as delightful as this looks, marriage is not for everyone.|
One of the biggest lies propagated in western society is that everyone should be in love with somebody and that love is universally accessible. Nobody tells you however that love has a set of very specific requirements. Some people do not have these qualities in their personality by default and will probably never develop them. Some people should stay single. They are just not mature enough to identify themselves—and that's precisely where this post comes in.
Knowing when to stay single
How do you know when to consider staying single? When you've had a string of unsuccessful relationships? When you've had your heart broken one too many times? When you've hit 30 and you haven't gotten married yet? When you've divorced more than once? Not necessarily. Your success or failure at relationships is not a determinant of whether you should be in a relationship, despite that you have been well programmed all your life to want to get married.
One of the reasons so many people are getting divorced is that we were largely conditioned to want marriage, but society is no longer preparing us for such a thing. As a result, there are many more personalities not suited for marriage vying for just such an opportunity. These people have character flaws that render them unable to sustain a meaningful relationship. They're relationship addicts. They are incomplete personalities that should stay single as they:
Love attention more than love itself.
If you are the kind of person who thrives on being the center of attention, then giving it to someone else may prove to be particularly difficult. If it is rather easy for you to make friends with people who fall for you without trying, then what makes you think that you would value the attention of just one lover out of many? You're not after love. You're after a dopamine fix.
Desire to be loved much more than their desire to be a lover.
Self gratification is the primary inciter of relationships and is simultaneously the number one cause of their demise. That is why I once wrote some time ago that love is selfish. Nobody has ever fallen in love just to please someone other than themselves. Love is the only parasitic human propensity that successfully masquerades as an invitation to a symbiotic relationship.
Thus, it is not difficult to understand why relationship addicts are usually the first to call an end to a relationship when they feel like their lover is not meeting their daily quota. The really surprising thing about these people is that they are never usually cognizant of the neglect they typically afford their partners. They are essentially black holes of unrequited affection.
Don't want children
|The biological function of a relationship is to produce offspring. Everything else is irrelevant.|
The purpose of love is to produce offspring. Everything else is an incentive to do so. Thus, the reason why people are so intrigued about love is that they are biological machines consumed with the propagation of their DNA (even when they use contraceptives and interrupted coitus). Relationship addicts by extension are only fixated on the incentives of love, not its purpose. They are nothing more than hamsters that want the pellet without ever pressing on the lever.
I'm not saying that if you don't want kids that you shouldn't get married (although that's quite technically the same as buying a BMW M5 just to drive to the 7-11 at the corner of the street). Rather, people who are addicted to being in love are more likely to use marriage as a pretext for a secure relationship. It amounts to little more than an expensive way to date someone.
I'm not even talking about a big obnoxious wedding fit that is for a king. I'm talking about any marriage (including one fit for a pauper). If you're going to put your signature to an agreement that basically says that you will love your spouse even if they turn out to be a total tool ("for better or worse"), then what better way to demonstrate that than putting a bun in the oven?
A relationship addict is not looking for that kind of investment. What they really want is the job security without the job. They want to come home to a lover, not a primitive, cooing, snotty, noisy, genetic progeny that they have to use their concert ticket money to buy formula for. No, what they want is the joy of being a boyfriend or girlfriend forever. But since society frowns on cohabitation and being single sucks, what better way to solve both problems than marriage?
Be very wary of these types. They will lie to get into a marriage and hold on their childless status as long as it suits them. They don't have a maternal or paternal instinct to speak of. That DNA marker was never activated when they were born. That's why they're not trying to get you pregnant (or won't allow you to get them pregnant, as the case may be). They enjoy being married and childless. Any excuse they provide is just to stall. It is not going to happen.
Before you get married, make sure you find out first if your lover wants kids. Anything less than an emphatic 'yes' is nothing more than a carefully guarded 'no'. A man who talks about being fearful of being a good dad does not have a paternal instinct. A woman who wants to conquer the world first and maybe have kids after age 40 does not have any maternal instinct. Do not try to compel them. They are actually doing you a favour. Walk away. Walk away now.
Being bored of a TV series, a favorite dish, a style of clothing or even a flavor of the week is not fundamentally different from becoming bored of a person. All of these things serve exactly the same purpose—to provide their lover with a sense of satisfaction. Thus when the novelty of one's satisfaction in that thing wanes, it means that the love for it is eventually withdrawn.
Thus it's not much of a leap from becoming bored of a thing to becoming bored of a person. It then stands to reason that people who bore easily cannot fall in love, because the very nature of their consciousness is such that they love novelty more than love itself. Everything in life for them, including other people, are passing fads of interest. They just cannot tell the difference.
Are driven by an insatiable sexual appetite
I recently met a young woman who has a child from a previous relationship. She confided to me that she is frustrated with not being able to find a husband. This is despite the fact that almost every man she has ever slept with has since moved on to becoming married. It's like she was little more than their training wheels. I told her the reason for her failure is that she has a raging sexual appetite — something most men are only willing to exploit, but not retain.
Needless to say, she got upset.
Months later, when her 17th relationship failed (yes, I'm counting accurately) she came back to me and admitted that I was right. Right now, she's bouncing between two men, only one of whom knows about the other - who is actually engaged. No this is not a script from some day time soap opera. This woman probably suffers from acute satyriasis, but that is not the point.
The point is that her relationships all fail for the same reason, despite whatever gloss she puts over it. Even her son's father married someone else, because he knew she was a slut — a word she used to describe herself, sobbing between tears of guilt. Men may exploit a slut, but they rarely keep them as wives. The converse is also true of promiscuous men. The reason for this behavior is fairly simple: Sluts are only faithful to their addiction, not to their supplier.
Enjoy their own company more than that of others
|Some people genuinely enjoy their own company. — Source: Baisers Voles|
Sociopaths aside, some people genuinely love their own company to the point where the very thought of inviting friends over makes them cringe. Usually they will give you some pathetic excuse to avoid company such as their residence being unkempt, or having other plans, or not being interested in that kind of activity, (and the list goes on)—anything to dissuade the idea.
You will also get other kinds of rejection from these people when invited to a social event, in the form of: "Well that's not really my scene", or "I don't like that type of music" or "I'm fiscally challenged" or some other tidy escape clause. If you're even remotely like that, then being social is not something you genuinely enjoy. Being in a relationship automatically requires being social. Lone wolves may have reproductive cells, but it doesn't mean they must be used.
Believe gender roles are irrelevant
There are some people in the world who feel compelled to start a relationship, but are not compelled of the necessity of gender roles in relationships. This is especially true for feminized men and their rather aggressive female counterparts. Individuals from either of these camps champion the stay at home dad and the super woman as though these types were common in the gene pool. Of course, they are not. Therefore any argument defending such is irrelevant.
A non-assertive male isn't sexually attractive to most women. Such men remind them of other women. Similarly, a strong independent women isn't sexually attractive to most men either. Such women remind them of other men. A common fallacy is that this is about insecurity or ego. While that makes a popular counter argument, it ignores a very basic principle of gender:
Women are largely attracted men who behave like the obnoxious masculine jerks they are. Men by contrast are drawn to women who assume the docile, feminine, nurture role. Sexual attraction is a function of the same forces of nature that create magnetism, electricity and motion. There have to be polar opposites at work here, or no sexual chemistry will ever occur.
So if you're a nice guy, remember to include your spine on your way to the titty bar. If you're a sexy girl with a big ego, keep your mouth shut and look pretty to keep your males interested. If this makes you feel like you're betraying your character, then do us a favor and stay single. You weren't designed to be in a relationship anyway. You will only make someone miserable.
Have irrationally high standards
Gentlemen, have you ever heard one of your buddies obsess about one particular feature of women? They are commonly men who love breasts. I love breasts myself, but I'm more of a legs guy. Nothing gets me going like a woman in a short skirt. Even so, even if a woman does not have great legs, I can still appreciate her other qualities as I can't love only a pair of legs.
Sounds reasonable, right?
However, some men have a mind block in this case. I've had some of my single, age 30+ male friends turn down perfectly good looking, highly intelligent, incredibly fun women who dug them like a crack whore mining for cocaine just because their breasts were not big enough, or their waists were not small enough, their buttocks were too small or too large and other trivialities.
Now women are equally guilty of turning down perfectly good men because they were geeks or lacked shampoo in their hair. Women are no less able to love with their eyes before ever learning to love with their hearts. The obvious omission in both cases then, is that they forget that there's no transformation a little love can't afford. Your irrationally high expectations are born of an obsession that is virtually unquenchable as there will always be someone better.
Instead of running several evaluation processes concurrently, these people use a sequential methodology. So if the girl isn't cute, none of her other attributes are evaluated. If the man isn't rich, she won't even take the time to see if he has a decent personality. These kinds of people are not looking for a relationship. They are nothing more than glorified trophy hunters.
Use relationships as weapons of vengeance
You were dating a woman for years. Somehow, your relationship didn't work out. It was a bittersweet breakup. You meet someone new, but they lack the pizzazz of your ex girlfriend. You marry this woman because she is 'safe', but not because you loved her. She lacks the wild excitement and explosive chemistry you had. It's just not the same as it was with the ex-girl, but you marry her anyway just to move on from your ex-girlfriend. She's a vengeance spouse.
People have vengeance marriages all the time. The thing is, men are less likely to have such relationships than women. Men would rather hook up with a temporary lover to quickly replace the ex girlfriend. It's replacing sex for sex. Replacing chemistry however, is nearly impossible. That's why lots of women try to find an emotional replacement for that one guy who really rocked her world. This explains why they quickly marry another after a really nasty breakup.
They need some semblance of a permanence that resembles what they had before. Such women use the new husband to fill the emotional void her ex boyfriend vacated. She will still continue to maintain a platonic relationship with the guy she broke up with. But if she is of the vindictive sort, the husband becomes her bragging tool — a way of declaring she doesn't need the ex anymore. That's why she has to make a very concerted effort to ensure that he knows.
It is her final insult.
The poor husband however, is unaware that he is being used in her sophisticated game of trump as an uncomplicated doll to dangle in front of her ex boyfriend. As far as he can tell, his wife is just a "really mature" person who could move past the intensity of her past flame to see them as just another friend. The naivete of the replacement husband is critical to her ploy.
A man's vengeance marriage is a whole lot more obvious. You usually find a man who just got through a bitter divorce marrying a woman that is 100x hotter than his ex-wife. She is much younger, prettier and has none of the physical imperfections of his wife. She is usually quite a perfectly symmetrical bombshell from head to toe. (See Shaquille Oniel's new girl for example). The new girl is usually so explicitly incredible that he doesn't even need to tell the ex-wife to get his vengeance kicks. The ex-wife will find out on her own. He's just happy she's replaced.
The new girl however will often find herself subjected to criticism, not of her appearance, but of certain personality deficits that he has since come to take for granted in his ex. Similarly, the new guy will now find himself subject to greater and greater pressures to live up to some expectation of his new woman that he can never seem to get right. Your breakup is imminent.
So if you have an ex girlfriend who is married who still calls you or contacts you in any way, now you know why. If you're married to a woman who insists on keeping in touch with her ex boyfriend, now you know why. If your husband constantly compares your flaw to one of his ex-girlfriends' assets, now you know why. If your husband still hasn't deleted his stockpile of ex-girlfriends' pictures or still keeps her as a contact on Facebook, well, now you know why.
You're probably in a vengeance marriage.
They don't love you. They love what you do for their previous relationship.
Are single, but very wealthy, famous men
|His mistake wasn't getting caught — it was getting married.|
I never quite understood what the point was of rich, powerful men taking up wives, when the image of marital stability wasn't quintessential to their riches or their power (as is the case with politicians and pastors of super churches). I'm not saying that rich powerful men can't fall in love. It does happen. But the large majority of the rich, powerful men who stay married are those who were in love before the fame and wealth; not with so many hot gold diggers about.
Why would you let all those hot dripping thighs go to waste?Why would you let some woman take half of all the money you worked so hard to achieve? It makes no sense at all. If there's one thing that I have learned about women and money, it's this truism: While you will always lose money when chasing after women, you will never lose women when chasing after money.
That brings us to the point of this section:
Women are typically sexually attracted to powerful men. As so eloquently described by one female friend of mine: "being the woman this powerful man invests their deepest interest is an incredible ego rush", which is not surprisingly why powerful men draw the attention of so many females. In that position, without having formed any meaningful relationship before, how does a powerful man with money, pick only one woman from the finest the gene pool has to offer?
While power and money only turns average women into divas, it also brings out the true man lurking inside. Some men will deny this, (and that is expected), but if any man had enough money and power, he would own these females just as much as he owns land and property. Between the ego rush of being able to give females whatever they want in return for all the sex he can get from the finest women from the gene pool, why would any man give that up?
A man who falls in love after becoming rich will soon have to decide between them. But a man who falls in love before becoming rich doesn't think he has to. Whatever comes first tends to be valued the most. That's not the nature of men necessarily — that's human nature. But it is most powerfully accentuated in the context of a relationship as rich men do not need wives.
...not when they're going to cheat on them anyway.
Have legalistic tendencies
Every successful relationship is based on a delicate balancing act of give and take. However, many of the people who get into relationships measure the value of what they give versus that which they take with such extreme precision that what they take ultimately becomes under valued versus what they give — even if that's not really the case. The reason is simple:
Anything priceless is devalued once a price is attached to it.
This legalistic tendency makes it impossible for blind trust to do its job. If you are prepared to have a legal arrangement for your marriage, you probably shouldn't be getting married in the first place. There's nothing that screams "I really don't trust you" like a prenuptial agreement, which is one of the many reasons why I said earlier that rich men do not need to have wives.
If you think it is necessary to sign a prenuptial agreement, then don't bother getting married. That's like saying I love you, but what's mine is mine. It's like riding a bicycle with a seat belt. It's like sky diving in a wind tunnel. It's like buying insurance on your insurance. You are not really entering a marriage. You are just starting a business relationship with an escape clause.
Ruining the Marriage Institution
I'm not saying that if you fall into any of these categories that you are unlovable. Most of you will find love—but most of you will also lose it. Just because you have the ability to fall in love, it doesn't mean that you should therefore pursue a relationship. Sadly, the average person doesn't have the emotional intelligence to determine that it's not that they're doing something wrong why their relationships always fail, as much as it's that they're wrong for relationships.
Some people desire marriage for all the same reasons dogs chase cars. If you don't know why dogs chase cars, then that it is precisely because it is irrelevant. Sheep dogs have no concept of what a car is while the dogs that do have no idea what the function of a car is. Even if a dog were to be transported inside a car, it gains nothing from chasing it, aside from the obvious camaraderie gained from his fellow mutts who're also engaging in the same pointless activity.
In the same vein, marriage is a cultural efficacy that is as effective as saying grace before a poisoned meal. It is neither a ubiquitous right of passage nor a fundamental requirement for happiness. It doesn't enhance the human experience any more than signing a legal document. This is probably why most women live for the wedding day and not the marriage that follows.
They are chasing the glamor, not the function.
The reason people chase marriage is because it is a social norm. One is seen as a respectable person when they are married. Back in the day, one is seen as a far less respectable person if they become divorced. But that is no longer the case, as the world has gradually caught up to what marriage really is. The value of marriage is highly over glamorized. It makes people who shouldn't get married want to take the plunge. That creates a problem for people who should.
|While everybody wants to be happily in love, only very few people want to change to facilitate that.|
That's the problem with relationship addicts. They are people who value the benefits of being loved over the sanity of the lover. They are people who want the love, but not the lover. You can spot relationship addicts fairly easily. They are the unusually selfish, narcissistic, vindictive, antisocial, impatient, insatiable, avaricious, petty and belligerent personalities that would not stop short of defiling the very institution of marriage to satiate their insufferable propensities.
If you know someone like this (and if, you are unfortunately married to someone like this) do the human gene pool a favour and lock their DNA out of the system. Not only are these people poison for the institution of marriage, they are ruinous to otherwise perfectly normal people. They create men who lack the ability to love and who women lack the ability to trust. They ruin the appeal of marriage to children and create the overwhelming cynicism now surrounding it.
Sharing your life with someone you love is an amazing experience. But what if the people who can get married become involved with people who shouldn't get married? That is the recipe for a bitter divorce. It makes victims of otherwise normal individuals who now have an emotional scar from dealing with someone who should never have been allowed to love in the first place.
■ E-mail: accordingtoxen[at]gmail[dot]com