The person you think you’re looking for is likely not the person you actually are going to love. The person you’re actually going to love is real. They’re out there, and you can meet them.
Often enough, you’re probably waiting for love–it’s not like it might not be there. To give a little credit to myself here, before I am a cynic; I am a romantic.
It just so happens it’s much more conversational to express something like cynicism than it is to muse about romance, so I often get labeled by the former.
I don’t want to break it to you, but the odds you met the one person you’re absolutely meant to be with out of almost 8 billion is incredibly low.
Logistically, you have almost no shot at meeting that person if with add a constraint like proximity.
Most of us reading are grown-ups, our fairy tale stories aren’t exactly something to count on. Here’s how to deal with who you will fall in love with, instead.
If I haven’t already lost you, I’ll explain my proposal. If you spend your life trying to find your mythically designated true love, I suppose that’s romantic.
However, what if you fell in love with someone–and loved them so much more than this person you believed you were so fated to meet? How would you rationale your love between the two?
We often think our romantic notions in our early days are strongest and most impactful.
However, I will guarantee you that as far as our cognition goes–the depths at which we understand love in our more experienced years will trump our childish, idealistic versions.
You probably learned about math as a child. We spend a lot of time just learning numbers. While that has its uses, go find a math geek and listen to them ramble.
Their investment in their mathematical education lead to both a further appreciation for the concept and an enjoyment in its actual practice.
Isn’t it romantic to think sure, you could spend your whole life looking for that concept that’s so important to you, but suddenly it’s not something you’d care to do? Not even the concept lives up to your actual experience.
That’s what’s really romantic to me. That’s what brings the excitement to social gatherings, what keeps you catching glances and nervously making small talk.
That’s also what makes romantic gestures like surprising your significant other with gifts or unexpected acts of kindness have appreciation to them. None of those things are from childhood and yet they’re so effective in communicating your love.
We have a bit of biology going against us. While our personal coming-of-ages vary, we mainly progress through the same steps. Our brain doesn’t do the sorting out for us. This can mean having to cross some hurdles from your past.
The odds are, if I ask you to think of that one person, you would be able to conjure up that person who taught you about love–for better or for worse. You may still feel like they’re that person.
Let’s not forget, romance doesn’t exactly care much for convenience. Some of you may be reading this and have no experience with it. Some might experience it today.
Love is often more fickle than our honest pursuit of it.
Those heartstrings of ours always manage to get tangled up nicely within another’s.
My point is, that person is your primary source for a concept that would and should evolve with time. You begin to scratch at the surface of your complexities as you grow; many of us spend a lot of time itching that.
I’m going to say that to some degree, we all still hold our partners–current or potential–to these standards from this person.
This person was your first “mover.” They set you in motion and had a significant impact on the path you’re on emotionally.
What we often don’t recognize is that although they were your first “mover,” we are living Rube Goldberg machines. That initial movement is important, but we’re constantly being moved, shaped and directed in life.
I’m all for the wonders of imagination, but if love’s something you really value–you’ve got to love what’s real.
Happy Valentine’s Day!
Barton Kleen
Executive Editor