Great relationships are only possible with a perfect partner. So I won’t commit to someone until I know they’re perfect. Alternatively, I will settle for somebody with money or looks until that perfect person comes along.
Origin of the Myth
As far as I can tell, this myth doesn’t have a single literary beginning. However, I can say confidently that it has now nestled comfortably into the light-hearted romance, or romantic comedy genre. Classic, or tragic romances – say, Romeo & Juliet, Wuthering Heights – have tragically flawed characters with serious issues. Romeo likes to rush things, and generally tends to over-react; he lives in a world of extremes, and ends his life in suicide. Heathcliff and Kathy of Wuthering Heights are selfish and miserable creatures who deserve each other only because they are both vicious, terrible people.
The characters of the light romance, or romantic comedy, have no such flaws. Take Pride & Prejudice, for example. Neither Darcy nor Elizabeth has any real flaws that the reader wants to hold against them. They are, for all intents and purposes, entirely perfect. Elizabeth is a less-wealthy member of the gentry (boo-hoo) – but that isn’t a personal flaw. She’s outspoken and intelligent, a flaw for Austen’s day, but not ours. And as for Darcy, the horrible man is *gasp!* shy.
Like dear Liz and Darcy, most characters in today’s romances have no insurmountable character flaws. The men are perfectly dashing, handsome, funny, cultured, honorable and *ahem* rich. The women are quick, witty, pretty, and (conveniently) less-rich. Note that the main character is more flawed than the romantic interest (i.e. compare the clumsy, depressed Bella Swan, and her *literally* luminous love interest, Edward Sullen…I mean Cullen). You see, if the main character is a little more imperfect (Bella), it’s ok, because the more perfect partner (Ed) is able to see past the others’ flaws, due to his or her glittering, marble perfection.
Thus, the light romance reinforces the myth that an ideal relationship requires at least one perfect partner.
The Myth, Applied
The following are taken from a list of 100 traits compiled by a certain Ms. McDonell-Parry. (See “Your Next Boyfriend: The 100 Qualities He Should Possess.” TheFrisky.com (1:00PM, 11/08/2008). http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-your-next-boyfriend-the-100-qualities-he-should-possess/). Ms. Parry asked her readers what ideal traits they desired in a partner, and compiled the traits into a top-100 list. This is what the ladies had to say:
My Next Boyfriend…
8. Will not watch ESPN endlessly.
9. Will not judge me for watching bad TV.
15. Will not wear a cell phone holster.
19. Will be content sometimes to spend the whole day in bed watching movies and eating takeout.
22. Will have goals, dreams, and the drive to achieve them.
28. Will be interested in culture, music, art, and travel.
41. Will want to go to sleep at night with me, and wake up beside me in the mornings, not on the couch.
45. Will love me for me—faults, imperfections and all—and love me all the more for them
47. Will lovingly accept my neurosis.
48. Will have the ‘we’ team mentality.
50. Will have a backbone in the relationship and not be afraid to tell me ‘no.’
62. Will not make me feel like I’m only second best.
72. Will appreciate that my child is my number one priority.
73. Will be able to deal with my pet.
Hopefully, one or two of you out there are rolling your eyes by now. But for those who aren’t already, let’s break down some of the problems with this list.
1. Hypocritical. See, for example, items 8 and 9. The perfect man is expected to relinquish his ESPN, but cannot complain if his lady remains addicted to “Jersey Snore” and “the Kartrasians.” He will be content to lie in bed all day, eating take-out and watching not-ESPN, but will also have goals, dreams, and ambition. (19 & 22). And despite the fact that his partner will not put up with such flaws as cell phone holsters (15), this perfect man must “lovingly accept neurosis” (47) and love his partner “all the more” for her “faults, imperfections, and all” (45). (And may I add, as a grammatical side, that I believe this woman had more than one neurosis, and that what she really meant was that her partner should lovingly accept all of her many neuroses).
2. Unrealistic. This perfect partner is expected to enjoy culture, art, music, and travel; to lovingly accept neuroses; to have a backbone; to have ambition and drive; to desire to go to sleep and arise at the same time as his lady; etc. One human being cannot possibly keep all of this up.
3. Selfish. This point goes hand-in-hand with the “hypocritical” analysis. One partner selfishly retains her faults (her ‘bad TV,’ ‘neuroses,’ propensity towards takeout, and horrible, yappy rat-dog) and expects to be “loved all the more” for them, yet shows no forgiveness for flaws in her partner (cell phone holsters, ESPN).
4. Emotionally immature. See 62: “Will not make me feel like I’m only second best.” Feelings of inadequacy are fairly common in this myth (see Bella Swan), and perfect, loving partners (Ed) are expected to erase the main characters’ feelings of inadequacy. Here’s the problem: it doesn’t work. If you believe you’re second best, no one is going to change your mind. Even a perfect partner cannot cure you of your negative self-view. In addition, one’s self-worth should not be tied to another’s action. In other words, if you’re feeling second-best, it isn’t your partner’s fault that you think so. Even if someone does something intentionally hurtful, you don’t have to buy in to their argument that you aren’t perfectly first place. The problem with 62 is that is illustrates a lack of emotional independence from the partner; the lady can’t feel first-place without her perfect man telling her she won the race.
Problems with seeking Perfection
1. Delays in relationship formation. The thinking behind the belief is that: “‘Until I find the perfect person to marry I should not get married.’ One who holds this belief may be constrained from making the decision to marry, because no one is perfect in every way, and may wait for a long time to find such a person”. (Cobb, 223) You can sub out “dating” or any other verb for “marriage” in the above quote, and it still makes sense. If you think you shouldn’t form a relationship until you find someone perfect, then you’re going to be waiting a loooong time.
2. This selfish/hypocritical view damages relationships. Asking for perfection from our partner is selfish. It shows an unwillingness to forgive faults, combined with an expectation that our perfect partner will put up with all of our ‘neuroses.’ This kind of pressure to be perfect while putting up with an imperfect partner is damaging. In addition, it places responsibility only on the ‘perfect partner’ for maintaining the relationship. The imperfect partner can sit back and refuse to improve, while the perfect partner carries the weight of the entire relationship.
3. This view stunts personal growth. It ojectifies and judges others, while excusing faults in the self. It values perfection in relation to you – asks someone else to conform to your problems and improve your life to be your perfect match, without requiring any improvement or concessions on your part. In addition, a perfect partner wouldn’t provide us an opportunity to grow, because they are flawless. Our partners’ flaws encourage personal growth in us, to compensate for their mistakes.
4. The big problem: how do we know what’s perfect for ourselves? We may be holding out for arbitrary lines we’ve drawn in the sand rather than a standard of goodness or stability or general compatability. We may be seeking out the things we perceive to be perfect for us (height, money, good looks, certain careers or ancestry, etc), when what we really need to become the best people we can be is something a little different – a partner who is too spendy, needs to eat healthier, or who isn’t good at writing. In other words, we shrink our own pond because we throw back everything but the ‘perfect’ fish we’re looking for, and end up missing out on a fish that’s a perfect fit for us.
Conclusion
Perfection ain’t all its cracked up to be. Don’t throw away opportunities at perfectly good relationships, just because they’re not practically perfect in every way.
Cobb, Nathan P. and Jeffry H. Larson, and Wendy L. Watson. “Development of the Attitudes about Romance and Mate Selection Scale.” Family Relations 52.3 (2003): 222-23 JSTOR. Harold B. Lee Lib., Brigham Young U. 27 Feb. 2009. <http://www.jstor.org>
