Myth 8: Opposites Attract

            The Bad Boy and the Innocent Girl. The Princess and the Scoundrel. The Millionaire and the Maid. The Chauvinist and the Feminist. Hollywood says they’re all matches made in heaven; but science says otherwise. 

Origin of the Myth

            The Myth: That people with totally different personalities or values tend to attract each other.

            It’s difficult to say where exactly this myth emerged from, but this is one tale that has been around for a long time. It even appears in Tristan and Isolde, one of the earliest Western Romances that we know of.

            Opposites-attract couples that initially hate each other are great fodder for romances and comedies, alike. Why? Perhaps because it is so much more entertaining to watch two people fall in love if it’s difficult for them. How else would we end up with great quips like these:

Princess Leia to Han Solo:

 Why, you stuck up, half-witted, scruffy-looking Nerf herder!

Hermione to Ron: 

Just because you have the emotional range of a teaspoon!

The Great Leslie: I only wanted to kiss you!

Maggie DuBois: Why?

Leslie: Because I love you, that's why!

Ms. DuBois: Ha!

Problems with the Opposites-Attract Theory

            While watching opposites attract (or rather, collide) is certainly entertaining, it’s not true to reality. Most people choose a partner who is similar to themselves. As an example, “[i]n a 2009 study of online daters, respondents claimed to want someone who represented their opposite, thinking it would balance them out. But even though they said they wanted someone different, the people they contacted actually had very similar personalities to their own” (Edmonds). Even those people who are trying to find their opposite very often attach to someone who is their match.

            This is probably because choosing a partner with similar values, beliefs, and personality typically makes relationships more successful. “Although a popular idea is that two highly different individuals complement each other’s strengths and weaknesses, the literature on premarital predictors of marital success suggests that one of the strongest predictors is similarity in attitudes, values, beliefs, and personality characteristics” (Cobb). One of the best predictors of marital success is similarity, not opposition

            The fact that similar partners have more successful relationships makes a lot of sense. If you and your partner can’t agree on anything, then how are you going to achieve success in your relationship? First of all, you probably will disagree on what a ‘successful’ relationship is in the first place, and then you will disagree on how to get there, leaving you gridlocked in the relationship. If, however, you agree on what a destination – what a successful relationship is - and agree on a path - ways to achieve a successful relationship - then you might actually get somewhere.

            Perhaps this is why “researchers find that we tend to seek out people who think and act like us” (Edmonds). It is much easier to work together with someone who has a similar world-view, values, beliefs, and personality as we do. Thus, “In a 2003 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences…If people thought they were attractive, they wanted a similarly attractive partner. If people thought they were wealthy, they wanted a partner of equivalent status. If people weren't close to their family, they didn't seek out a person who was” (Edmonds). We are attracted to people who are like us, socio-economically, physically, mentally, etc. And research indicates that this is actually a good thing.

Conclusion

            Although the Romantic Myth tells us that opposites make good matches, this is only true because opposites-attract stories have a high entertainment value. In terms of actual relationships, similarities in belief, values, personality, etc. can help strengthen a relationship and make it last. The bottom line is that no matter what you do, you’re going to end up with someone who is radically different from you. They come from a different family, with different traditions, are of a different gender, had a different education, and on and on. Even with someone who is very like yourself, you will have strong differences that are sometimes difficult to overcome. So finding someone who is remotely similar to yourself can help decrease the number of bumps in the road, giving you a smoother drive on the road-trip of your relationship.

Sources

1. 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

2. Edmonds, Molly. “Do opposites really attract?” Discovery Fit & Health. Accessed Oct. 17, 2012. http://health.howstuffworks.com/relationships/love/opposites-attract.htm

Myth No.7: The Perfect Me

I can’t get into a relationship until I’ve got my own life totally straightened out; I need to be more in shape, making more money, be a better communicator, and overcome all my emotional baggage.

Origin of the Myth

The Myth: that you need to be perfect before you can be in a relationship. “Someone with this belief thinks, ‘Until I feel completely confident as a future spouse, I should not get married’” (Cobb). Or “Until I have everything under control in my life, I shouldn’t be in a relationship”. This myth’s origin is trickier to pin down than most.

            Studies suggest that this brand of perfectionism (called self-oriented perfectionism) is more common among women than it is among men. This could mean that women are inherently more self-critical. It could also suggest that women have been conditioned to be more self-critical by societal forces

             (Because we all cook in 6'' Gold heels, right girls?)

            

            Current divorce rates may also be to blame. Since people fear divorce, they want to be perfectly prepared before ever getting into a relationship. So people put off relationships until they felt perfectly ready – in essence, flawless.

            We also see perfection in the Western Love myth. Just think Disney Princess. As examples, Snow White, Cinderella, and Sleeping Beauty (Aurora, or Briar Rose, if you will) are all extraordinarily talented. They sing, dance, and cook. They look gorgeous, to boot. And they are all perfectly sweet, understanding, and wonderful – with no emotional issues, despite troubled childhoods. They’re the kind of girl that’s so perfect you have to either love or hate them to bits. And it’s those girls that we perceive as achieving ‘Happily Ever After’.

Even Rapunzel - raised for years by her kidnapper, is still totally perfect!

    

            We even find the roots of this trend in the earliest Western romance, Tristan and Isolde. Both lovers are essentially flawless to begin with. Tristan is a model knight, and Isolde a model lady. It’s not until they drink a potion by accident that their lives go a bit haywire. They start out pretty darn perfect.

Defining Self-oriented Perfectionism

            First, a little note. When we’re talking about self-oriented perfectionism, we’re talking an unusual degree of perfectionism. We’re not talking your average person who thinks: “I need to get my life in order before I start looking for a boyfriend”. Relationships require a degree of maturity, emotional stability, financial stability, etc. Responsible people prepare for relationships; it’s natural. Self-oriented perfectionists aren’t just preparing for relationships:

“The self-oriented perfectionist is seldom satisfied with any aspect of performance or appearance. Difficult goals are set as a way of validating self-worth. If achieved, this perfectionist garners little satisfaction, instead moves to the next difficult goal.

In a relationship, the self-oriented perfectionist will set impossible standards for her appearance and behavior, dismissing praise and compliments of the partner and enjoying little satisfaction from achievements. While the self-oriented perfectionist will tolerate flaws in others, she will give herself no lenience for errors and failures.” (Looper)

    

Problems with Perfection

        Why is it bad for people to want to be perfect before getting in a relationship? Loads of reasons:

1. Because then they’ll never get into a relationship.

            People aren’t perfect. It follows that if you’re waiting to be perfect before getting into a relationship, you’ll never get into one. At the very least, you’ll put off relationships that would be great for you, because you’re too busy seeking self-perfection. (Cobb).

2. Demanding perfection prevents vulnerability, damaging relationships.

            If you’re trying to be perfect all the time, you’re going to put up walls to protect yourself. You don’t want the guys you like to know that you’re not perfect. Heck, you might not even want your best friends to know that you’re not perfect. This means that you’re not opening up and sharing your problems, or making yourself vulnerable. “All relationships require connection. Connection can only happen when someone risks vulnerability.” (Sommer). By putting up barriers and refusing to be imperfect and vulnerable, perfectionists miss out on relational depth.

3. Lack of self-esteem and other emotional issues, which affect your relationships.

            Obviously, if you’re beating yourself up over not being the perfect girlfriend, 

best friend, daughter, wife, mom, or husband, father, son, etc., it’s going to affect how you see yourself. Self-oriented perfectionism can be associated with lack of self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and other mood disorders. These emotional issues can impair existing relationships, or keep you from seeking a relationship out in the first place.

4. Expecting higher standards of self and others.

            Self-oriented perfectionists have high standards for themselves in relationships. It follows that they will expect more of those they are relating with. Studies show that self-oriented perfectionists focus on  “areas of communication, trust,  and support,  suggesting that these  perfectionists  have  high  relationship  standards  in  these  particular  areas”. (Flett).

5. Difficulty in interpersonal relations.

            Studies suggest that “perceiving that significant others require perfection of oneself […] is associated with problematic interpersonal behaviors. […U]nrealistic expectations for one's self, one's partner, and for the relationship have also been implicated in the development of relationship problems” (Haring).

The Good News for Perfectionists

            If you are an unhealthy perfectionist, there’s lots of help, out there. Just google “perfectionists” and all kinds of books, therapists, and support groups pop up. It’s something you can change about yourself, and there’s plenty of resources out there to do so.

Conclusion

            Just relax, yo. While being prepared for a relationship is a good idea, you’re never going to be Disney-Princess-Perfect. An important part of relationships is for each member to help the other to become better. So you don’t need to be perfect going in! You’ll lose half the fun of the journey – or maybe never take the journey, at all.

           

Works Referenced

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.

Flett, Gordon L., Paul L. Hewitt, Brenley Shapiro and Jill Rayman. “Perfectionism, beliefs,

and adjustment in dating relationships.” Current Pyschology 20.4 (2001): 289-311.

Haring, Michelle, Paul L. Hewitt and Gordon L. Flett. “Perfectionism, coping, and quality of

intimate relationships.” Journal of Marriage and Family 65.1 (Feb. 2003): 143-158.

Looper, Jerry. “Relationship Advice for the Perfectionist.” Suite 101 (25 May 2009). http://jerry-lopper.suite101.com. (12 April 2012)

Sommer, Rhoda Mills. “Perfectionism & Shame Prevents Connections & Vulnerability.”

Rhoda Mills Sommer Therapy Ideas. http://www.therapyideas.net/perfectionism.htm

(12 April 2012)

Myth No. 6: The Perfect He or Perfect She

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>

Myth no.5: “Love is composed of a single soul inhabiting two bodies.” – Aristotle

            Once upon a time, you were part of a whole soul. But somebody split you in two. You are a poor little half-soul, and you will never be complete until you run into your other half. Good luck finding it in a world with a population of 6.9 Billion, spread over 7 continents and more than 190 countries.

Origin of the Myth:

            The myth that we are each half a soul, searching for our other half, goes all the way back to Greece – maybe beyond. As seen above, Aristotle seems to have endorsed the idea. However, this may have been more poetry than philosophy; Aristotle was an artist as well as a theorist.

The Symposium

            The idea did pop up in a theoretical work written by Plato, The Symposium. The Symposium outlines a (fictional) dialogue about love between Socrates and some of his friends over dinner. Each man at the table makes a speech about love, ending with Socrates. Plato uses Socrates as a mouthpiece in his book to explain the true meaning of love; the other men’s ideas are impliedly misguided and inferior to Socrates’ theory.

Aristophanes, Comedic Playwright

One of Socrates’misguided dinner guests is Aristophanes – a famous comedic playwright. Before beginning his speech (covered from 189-193), Aristophanes warns the guests that his ideas about love are pretty absurd, and then begins his tale…

The Myth of Aristophanes

           In primal times, mankind began as beings composed of large round bodies with two faces and two  sets of limbs, facing away from each other. Because they were so spherical, they wheeled around like clowns, doing cartwheels. There were 3 sexes of these original, powerful beings: the all male, the all female, and the “androgynous” (male and female). These double-beings tried to reach heaven, to make war on the Gods. Zeus didn’t like this much. But instead of destroying them entirely, he crippled them by chopping them in half, effectively separating the two bodies. He then commanded Apollo to patch the beings up, which he did – sewing the skin together and leaving a seam (the belly button) as a reminder to mankind of its attempt to take over the heavens. Since that time, people run around looking for their “other half” because they are trying to recover the power they once had as the double-beings they were. Aristophanes ends by warning men to fear the Gods, lest they split us in half again and we have to go around with half noses.


Aristophanes' Primal Beings

            After this, Socrates and his buddies have a good laugh at Aristophanes. How could anybody believe such a preposterous tale about powerful, spherical, cartwheeling double beings? Well…

Aristophanes in Modern Times

The “soul mate” or “one and only” ideal is still very prevalent in our society. While most people don’t agree with Aristophanes’ myth of people being physically split in two, many believe that there is only one other soul or person out there that is “right” for them to marry. Such a view excludes the possibility that there are a lot of people that you could build a wonderful life with, and you have to pick from among them. This myth says that there is one person, and one alone, out there in that big world that will make me happy, and I’ve got to find them because if I marry someone who isn’t my one-and-only perfect match, I'll be miserable forever.

The One-and-Only: A Constraining Belief

Modern sociological research has found that there are beliefs present in our society that make finding a significant someone much more difficult and frustrating. Sociologists refer to them as constraining beliefs.

“Constraining beliefs about mate selection are defined as personal beliefs that may (a) limit one’s choices regarding who or when one marries, (b) encourage exaggerated or minimal personal effort to find a suitable mate, (c) inhibit thoughtful consideration of interpersonal strengths and weaknesses and of premarital factors known to have an influence on the success of marriage, and/or (d) perpetuate mate selection problems and frustration and restrict options for alternative solutions for problems.” (Cobb, 222).

Basically, there are beliefs out there that will goof up the way that you go about finding someone to be with. And guess what? The one-and-only idea is one of them:

            “A belief in a ‘‘one and only’’ soul mate may encourage a search, not for a good companion (one of several right choices), but for the one right companion; such a search may invite passive waiting and possible blindness to compatible candidates.” (Cobb, 222)

            “The belief that somewhere in the world we each have a soul mate or ‘‘second half’’ […] is constraining, because it requires a person to know when his or her ‘‘one and only’’ is present. How this insight is accomplished is not clear. It also may invite passive waiting for the magical moment to arrive while good marriage prospects are overlooked.” (Cobb, 222-223)

In summary, the belief that there is one, and ONLY ONE right person out there for you may result in the following difficulties during the dating process: (and these are only a few – I’m sure if you get creative, you can think of other ways it can get us off track)…

1. Confusion over how to find one’s soul-mate. How do you know if this person is the one and only right person for you? Are you supposed to get heartburn, wobbly knees, tingling toes? Does the world stop and go into slo-mo and start spinning with a fuzzy, dreamy effect around the edges and romantic music playing and fans blowing???

2. Passive waiting. Rather than getting out there and finding a suitable partner, individuals may just laze about, waiting to bump into their soul-mate, because they are under the impression that they will immediately be able to sense their soul-mate once they run into them.

3. Turning down good offers. Individuals may pass over perfectly good opportunities for solid, long-term relationships, because they don’t have a confirmation that this person is their one-and-only.

My Personal Beef with the One-and-Only

Let’s say that we don’t live in a world populated with 6.9 billion people, spread all over 190 plus countries. Let’s build ourselves a much simpler scenario. Let’s say that the whole world is a village, with 10 people in it of suitable age to settle down together – 5 men, and 5 women. And we will make another huge assumption, that they are all monogamous, heterosexual people, who actually want to pair off rather than remaining single, or pursuing careers, etc. Ok. And each of them has their soul-mate among the 10 people in the village – a “right” girl for every guy, and guy for every girl. However, as yet none of them have identified which person is the right one for them.

What happens when one of the guys goes fishing in a thunderstorm and gets hit by lightning?

            Oh, dear. Well, we have 5 gals and 4 guys, which means somebody is gonna have to be single. Now, if the “right” girl for the deceased fisherman stays single, everybody else has a shot at happiness, but her chances are gone. But what if she’s cute and talented, and bakes really good cookies, and happens to be a good friend of one of the 4 remaining fellas – so he marries her? That means we’ve got one couple that isn’t right for each other, and who won’t find happiness together. We’re down to 4 gals and 3 guys. Now, the gal whose perfect match has already been snatched (but she doesn’t know that yet), may end up single and the other 6 people will match up correctly. But what if she’s brilliant and an excellent pianist and brings home a lot of money – so she marries one of the remaining 3 fellas – and on down the line.

            Not even in our perfect village is it guaranteed – or even probable – that everyone will match up perfectly in their 1:1 ratios. How much more complicated would it be to find an actual soul-mate in our world? Think about the complications:

            1. The world’s population, spread over the Earth’s enormous surface. 6.9 billion people, in over 190 countries and spread across 7 continents, separated by oceans, deserts, etc. We say it’s a small world…but even with the internet, finding a perfect 1 amongst the 6.9 billion is not going to be an easy task, especially considering that we speak over 6500 recognized languages. And once you find them, how do you get to them? What if their country is torn by war and political unrest? And once you do end up in the same place, changing citizenship is hard, etc.

            2. Class & Culture issues – people typically marry others with a similar economic and cultural background. What if one half of the soul is filthy rich and the other a beggar on the street? What are the odds they’re going to run in the same circles and become one whole soul again? And that’s assuming, that they’re even in the same region.

            3. Sexuality – what if your other half gets confused about his or her sexuality and it no longer matches yours?

            4. Deaths and injuries – people die young all the time, or are maimed and injured in such a way that its much harder for them to find and catch a suitable mate.

            5. Mental handicaps – what if your perfect mate is born with or injured in a way that limits their mental capacity?

            6. Attractiveness – what if your perfect mate is mistakenly attracted to someone else because they are initially more appealing due to talents, appearance, money, power, etc?

*Some of you may be thinking: but if they’re your other half, they will match up with you perfectly in terms of beliefs, class, mental capacity, etc. That is what makes them right for you. I will be discussing that idea (that there is a person out there who is perfect for you) at a later time. Right now, I am only challenging the idea that there is a 1:1 ratio of “right” matches – one right woman for one right man – we are ignoring, for now, the issue of whether they are actually suited for one another in terms of tastes, etc.

And those are just the beginning! What a nightmare of a goose chase. If it is true that there is only 1 right person for each of us out there, then a lot of us will be left settling for someone other than Mr. or Ms. Right. And then we’re stealing away someone else’s right match, and they steal someone else’s, etc – and soon enough, the whole world is miserably paired up with the wrong person. What a depressing thought.

            For those readers who do believe in some kind of loving Diety or Dieties, ask yourselves: Would they really only put one person down here that I can be happy with, when it’s so impossible to find that one other person among the 6.9 billion, or when they may already be gone due to death, disease, or some other misfortune?

Conclusion: Soul Mates are for Sissies!

            The soul-mate idea, that there is only one right person out there for you, is a big fat cop-out. It puts the decision of who you will be with in someone else’s hands. So it’s not your fault if you can’t find someone to be with, or if you accidentally marry the “wrong” person and need to break up a perfectly good marriage because suddenly you do find your soul-mate, etc. Because if it’s true that there are many people out there that you could be wonderfully happy with, and it’s just up to you to choose which, then who you choose to be with is your responsibility. You can’t pin the success of your relationship on anything or anyone else but you and your partner. It’s our job to build our own happy relationships, because we chose to get into them in the first place. And if we get out of a relationship, that was our decision, too. While this settles a much greater burden on our own shoulders to build our own successful love relationships, and get out there and find a suitable match – isn’t that so much better than someone else picking for us? Unlike the 1:1 soul-mate scenario, pretty much everybody’s got a shot at happiness in relationships, not just the select few who find each other.

            Plus, the soul-mate myth is ultimately not as romantic as reality. Think of it this way: What would you rather say to your loved one?

            A. You are the other half of my soul, so I have to love you and be with you.

            B. You are a wonderful person that I have come to love and appreciate, and I want to spend the rest of my life with you, through thick and thin.

            Isn’t B so much more romantic? When you think about it, the one-and-only idea is a farce. It’s trying to be romantic, but it falls short when challenged by the realities I listed above. But the idea that you chose to be with this person because you love them and want to ride lifes' rollercoaster with them – well, that’s as romantic as it gets. That is the kind of love that can truly ride our life's challenges and “conquer all” – not this sissy, soul-mate garbage.

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>

Myth No. 4: “Love Hurts”

       It’s not true love if its not killing you. If your love isn’t with you, you should feel tortured by their absence. And when your love is with you, you are so happy to see them that you are already depressed at the thought that they will have to leave. Love just sucks, all around.

History of this Myth:

            The idea that romantic love is actually a painful experience came to the English literary tradition during the Renaissance. Petrarch, in particular, did a lot to introduce this idea into our Romantic myth. He compares love to freezings and burning fires, soft lightning, sweet agony, etc. As such, his writings portray romantic relationships as uncomfortable at best, and downright torture at worst. During the Renaissance, English authors like Wyatt (who translated Petrarch), Shakespeare, and others picked up on the idea that love is a painful thing, and wrote it in to their poetry, plays, and tales.

            In addition to the belief that love is painful, the idea that love is worth dying for has also been passed down in the Romantic tradition. Now, I don’t mean "love is worth dying for" in the sense of saving someone you love from death. I mean the idea that if you have a “true love” and they either die or don’t requite your love, death is your only option. This is illustrated in many of the great romances, which end in the deaths of the lovers either by suicide or heartbreak: Romeo & Juliet, Anthony & Cleopatra, Tristan & Isolde, Wuthering Heights, etc.

            So what we have inherited in our culture is the myth that love is torturous, and that if we have true love and then are deprived of it, death by suicide or heartbreak is our only option.

This Myth, Today

            Twilight is probably one of the best examples of how this Romantic myth has continued in our culture, today. To illustrate, here are some thoughts on life after a breakup, from Bella Swan:

“It’s like a huge hole has been punched through my chest. But In a way, I’m glad. The pain is the only reminder that he was real.”

      "I'd rather die than be with anyone but you"

“You can have my soul. I don’t want it without you”

      "I could not do anything else[…] If I stopped looking for him, it was over. Love, life, meaning…over.”

“The waves of pain that had only lapped at me before now reared high up and washed over my head, pulling me under. I did not resurface”

“There was just one thing I had to believe to be able to live – I had to know that he existed.”

“I wanted to be stupid and reckless, and I wanted to break promises.”

“it had been more than just losing the truest of true loves, as if that were not enough to kill anyone…”

“I felt myself sinking down into depression, drowning in it…”

Some of you may be thinking: Wow, she must really be in love if it’s affecting her this way.

Others may be thinking: Girlfriend needs some serious therapy. She's cracked and completely dependent.

            If you are in the second camp: bravo for not buying in to the romantic myth. We all know that relationships have their ups and downs – but if your relationships are as up and down as Bella and Edward’s, there are some serious issues at play.

            If you’re in the first camp – here are some thoughts for you to chew on…

Dangers of believing that Love should hurt:

1. It may keep you from recognizing a good relationship when you’ve got it. It is wrong to believe that a relationship isn’t a good one, just because you don’t feel like killing yourself when its over, or because you feel comfortable in the relationship. I’ve known people to be scared away because a relationship was “too easy” – and because it wasn’t complicated, they didn’t believe the relationship had any value. But ultimately, serious relationships (long-term relationships and marriages) need to be pretty comfortable so that we can live full and happy lives. If you constantly feel tortured because you just love this person so much, you are not going to be able to accomplish much in life.

2. Staying in an emotionally or otherwise abusive relationship. If a person believes that “true love” is supposed to hurt, then he or she may put up with abuse because they think pain is a part of the true love package.

3. Depression – people may feel justified in acting depressed or leaving depression untreated if they see it as a natural outflow of relationships. Bella, for example, emotionally checks out for three months of her life because of a break-up, and does not seek treatment. In fact, she wallows in the pain because she feels it is the only way to hold on to her ended relationship. Taking that model seriously is unwise.

4. Suicide or Self-Harm – if people genuinely believe that their death or injury is an honor to love, that is a problem. Teen suicides and self-harm such as cutting are serious issues, and encouraging such behavior as proof of ‘true love’ is unacceptable.

Reflecting on Suicide, Self-Harm, and Depression in Meyer’s Twilight 

            Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight series glorifies depression, and dangerous or suicidal behavior as evidence of “true love.” When Edward breaks up with her, Bella participates in dangerous behavior (motorcycle riding, cliff diving, etc) in order to feel closer to Edward. She also spends months in a depression that borders on catatonic. And when Edward believes that Bella has died, he makes a concentrated effort at suicide.

            In an age plagued by teen depression, suicide and self-injury like cutting, Meyer’s novel is irresponsible. As teens enter the dating game for the first time, many of them feel that their new boyfriend or girlfriend is their one, “true love.” Meyer’s novels teach teens, by example, that suicide, depression, and dangerous behavior are natural consequences of a break-up or end of a relationship. Meyer’s story is insensitive to her young audience when it portrays suicide and self-injury as a necessary element of the ideal relationship. Meyers’ characters often look on death as a relief (“Death is easy, peaceful…Life is harder”), and her books not only reference suicide (“I guessed he considered me old enough now not to shoot myself by accident, and not depressed enough to shoot myself on purpose”), but even show characters attempting it – all within the context of a romantic relationship between two teens. This is unacceptable.

            Some may excuse Meyer’s story by arguing that it is modeled after classic romances like Romeo & Juliet or Wuthering Heights where the characters do literally “die for love.” However, most of these romances were aimed for (literate) adults. The Twilight machine, on the other hand, has targeted Meyer’s story at teen and pre-teen girls through movies, advertising, paraphernalia, websites, et cetera. Classical romances were not marketed to a specific audience as part of mass money-making schemes, like Twilight. This story is being pushed on a very young audience, and they are eating it up.

            Parents of young Twilight readers should be aware that the books contain this disturbing message, so that they can counter it. Parents should make it clear to teens that suicide, depression, and self-injurious behavior are not the natural consequences of loving relationships. They’re just drama for story-writers. When real people break up, they move on and still live full and happy lives. Life is not over because some pimply 15 year old dork breaks up with you. Life wouldn’t be over, even if the world’s most perfect guy broke up with you. Life goes on.

Romance Myth No.3: "I want your love, I don't wanna be friends!"

          You can’t possibly be attracted to your loving and capable best friend. Ew. You have to love a “mysterious” person that you know nothing about. And even when you start dating and eventually get married, be careful not to get to know them too well – friendship will suck all of the romance right out of your relationship.

Let's say I'm...Bella Swan. I've got a choice to make:



             

Jacob Black:

attractive friend who does anything for me and loves me to bits, but who I've known since I was a kid.

 

 
Edward Cullen:
A thrilling guy who's a total mystery to me.

(& sparkly to boot.)

 

And the winner is...

Of course it's Edward. How could it be anyone but Edward? He's a mysterious vampire man with a tragic past. He even murdered a few people, just cuz he needed lunch – wow. That’s excitement: dating someone who just might kill you at any second, because he loves you so much. Who can resist? So you see, Jacob had to get shafted, because he was a  friend – and the Romantic Myth says: friends are boring!

Why Friends Can't Win in Romance:
Robert A. Johnson explains this phenomenon in his wonderful book, WE: Understanding the Psychology of Romantic Love (which you should totally read, by the way):

“When two people are ‘in love,’ people commonly say that they are ‘more than just friends.’ But in the long run, they seem to treat each other as less than friends. […C]ouples refuse each other the selfless love, the kindness and good will, that they readily give to their friends […] People can’t ask of their friends that they carry all their projections, be scapegoats for all their moods, keep them feeling happy, and make life complete for them. Why do couples impose these demands on each other? Because the cult of romance teaches us that we have the right to expect that all our projections will be borne—all our desires satisfied, and all our fantasies made to come true—in the person we are ‘in love’ with.” (p.198, emphasis added)

Romance: The Selfish Love
In other words, Romantic love makes us into “Me Monsters”. Romantic love is ultimately “egotism, the use of each other to create passion for its own sake [… It’s] about seeking a so-called love for the sake of my fulfillment, my thrills, my dreams coming true, my fantasy, my ‘need to be loved,’ my ideal of the perfect love, my security, my entertainment.” (Johnson, p.142).



Friendship & Selfless Love
Romance is “all about me.” But Friendship is based in what we might call human love, selfless love, or Charity.  Johnson further explains:

"If a man and woman are friends to each other, then they are ‘neighbors’ as well as lovers; their relationship is suddenly subject to Christ’s dictum: ‘Love thy neighbor as thyself’.”
(p.197)

     Romance “produces drama, daring adventures, wondrous, intense love scenes, jealousies, and betrayals” (p.133). Friendship creates human relationships between flesh-and-blood human beings, because people choose to “love each other instead of being ‘in love’” (p.133). Being in love is something that happens to you. Loving someone, being a friend to someone, is something that you choose to do.
     Thus, “Romance and friendship are […] natural enemies with completely opposing motives. Sometimes people say ‘I don’t want to be friends with my husband [or wife]; it would take all the romance out of our marriage" (p.197). That is true - friendship, and loving concern for the other person, will take all of the me-centered 'romance' out of a relationship. But this is not a bad thing:



"It is true: Friendship does take the artificial drama and intensity out of a relationship, but it also takes away the egocentricity and the impossibility and replaces the drama with something human and real.” (p.197)

What this means for you:

Feelings of Romance (or ‘being in love’) are centered in the self, and tend to change over time. They are a sandy foundation upon which to build a relationship. Friendship, selfless love, Charity – this kind of love is the bedrock upon which we can build our strongest relationships. The choice to love someone and be their friend is a choice that you can make, every day. So make friendship, or selfless love, the foundation for your loving relationships, and let ‘Romance’ and ‘excitement’ be the occasional candle-lit dinners and starry evenings – the cherry on top.