Skip to content

ExpatSingapore

Home Message Board Contact Us Search

ExpatSingapore Message Board 25 May 2012, 8:03:55 am *
Username: Password: (or Register)
 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Singlehood vs. relationship  (Read 2722 times)
crop circle
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 62


View Profile
« on: 04 February 2002, 4:56:00 am »

I know this topic has popped up elsewhere, but it would be nice to start a new thread here.

I am a single bloke in his late 20's.  Many of my friends, both males and females, have been or are getting married.  So every time I get a wedding invite, I become sentimental.  To tell you the truth, I rather enjoy being single.  <I've got a date coming up next week that may lead to something--commitment?  NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!>

Would love to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Pro's for staying single:
**FREEDOM
**FREEDOM--DOING WHAT I LIKE, GOING WHERE I LIKE

Con's for staying single:

**loneliness (sometimes)
**romance

Logged
ExpatSingapore Message Board
« on: 04 February 2002, 4:56:00 am »



 Logged
bluemousemonkey
Full Member
***
Posts: 104


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: 04 February 2002, 9:19:00 am »

Crop circle - do you mean 'no' romance, as a con? Or does the presence of romance threaten your lust for the myth of FREEDOM? Unsure here.
Logged
crop circle
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 62


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: 04 February 2002, 14:44:00 pm »

Oops, the lack of romance is a con for staying single.  And it is not the myth of freedom.  A relationship by definition requires compromise, and compromise means the "loss" of absolute freedom.

I dont know about the ladies, but most guys are not ready to surrender their absolute freedom until say their late 30's, and nowadays probably the early 40's.  I guess guys dont really grow up until later in life.  In the immortal words of one prominent US politician who was outed for cheating on his wife, he committed a "youthful indiscretion."  He was 43 when he had the affair.

Logged
maxthecat
Full Member
***
Posts: 178


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: 04 February 2002, 15:20:00 pm »

Call me a pathetic sicko, but I much prefer commitment and all the happiness and sense of purpose it brings to life.

I do miss my exciting bachelor days at times though .... and the peace and quiet and ample free time when I wanted it.

In my perfect world, my wife and kids would live next door.

Logged
bluemousemonkey
Full Member
***
Posts: 104


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: 04 February 2002, 18:01:00 pm »

Tell me about your version of 'absolute' freedom - surely as soon as you relate to anybody or anything for that matter, you're already in a non-absolute realm. What constitutes the optimum amount of freedom for you, so that you could then tolerate a romantic incursion into that?
I'm curious because I really do believe that the notion of 'freedom' (in Western-style relating anyway) is a long clung-to myth that some men rabidly protect themselves from acknowledging the truth of because they might then get to feel too connected with their unplumbed personal depths - if they are there, of course. You know ... where intimate relating is too much like a mirror made of lasers - or something like that, to be able to withstand the white-hot self visibity.

[This message has been edited by bluemousemonkey (edited 04-02-2002).]

Logged
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: 04 February 2002, 19:34:00 pm »

I wasn't ain a relationship for so many years - lonely - yeah and bored - i got bored of one night stands and meaningless partying.  Now I look forward to going home to be with my fiancee - it makes the day some how brighter.  It can sometimes be difficult because there are of course obligations when sharing your life however the cost is certainly worth it
Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
nualum
Full Member
***
Posts: 179


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: 05 February 2002, 0:48:00 am »

In my opinion, one of the risks of freedom from marital responsibilities till the late 30s or early 40s is that the person become so unbelievably selfish, self-absorbed, and shallow in human relationships that he/she probably is no longer fit for an intimate relationship with another human--and perhaps not very well suited to society at large.

I use the word "unbelievably" on the basis of my own experience. For many years, when I would meet or hear about men my daughter went out with, I could not believe their behaviour or their attitudes. Narcissistic certainly comes to mind. Irresponsible also does. Even the brilliant ones with fantastic academic credentials seemed so shallow--because all they seemed interested in was themselves. While I would not generalize to all people who have avoided marriage until late, it does seem to me that there is a risk of becoming an a-social human.  

Logged
rubber ducky
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 93


View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: 05 February 2002, 10:03:00 am »

methinks the greass is always greener on the other side.
Logged
london babe
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 77


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: 08 February 2002, 22:37:00 pm »

the grass certainly is greener, so true.

when im in a long relationship i yearn for the free fun life i see friends having.....the freedom to please yourself etc i also used to think ( this isnt very nice) 'maybe i can do better'  ie, a better model!  terrible i know.

then when im living that fun free life ( as in the last 3 years) i long for the comfort of a warm body at night, a shoulder to cry on and some one to just share a small triumph or special moment with......

what to do?  

Logged
carolklc
Full Member
***
Posts: 125


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: 17 February 2002, 16:07:00 pm »

singlehood Vs a relationship.
Interesting topic that never seems to invoke some sentimental feelings.

As a single person, you have less responsibilities than you otherwise would have if you were involved in a relationship.  Each person is unique and that will be the basis of incompatibilities in behavior which can sometimes be frustrating.  However, being in a relationship you will have to compromise and accept the individual differences to avoid an estranged relationship.  Some may view it as a loss of freedom whilst others view it as a noble cause.

Being in a relationship helps to build a person's character which he alone would find no reason to do.  Living with another creature of a totally different biological and mental makeup can be quite a challenge and it is sometimes a struggle.  Isn't this the basis of love?  

If we look at nature, noone stays alone. So being single all your life would be less fulfilling and unnatural, wouldn't it? A look at Maslow's hierarcy of needs will see self actualisation as a need of the highest form, and how could you achieve that if you cannot love.  

some may argue that being with friends or short term relationships can also achieve that.  However, i feel that friendships whilst nobel is not going to be as self scarificing and nobel as being with a lifetime partner and also a family of your own.  short term relationships are a waste of energy.  Everyone needs to love because it is a need.  To do that, you need to anchor your feelings of love to one person constantly. That is how you build it up.

I do believe that singlehood is the best way to go when you struggle to establish your career.  This way you stay focused and at least you get somewhere. It will also ensure a better time for you and your partner later with less financial worries.  When both of you are more established, settling down would seem appropriate because then you stay commited and focused on the idea of building a family of your own to further plant the seeds of love.

Take a look at the movie, Gladiator, starring Russell Crowe. Maximus had to fight in several battles but what he desired most was not power as the Protector of Rome, but to return to his family and the farm.  That is where he draws his joy. He prays, "Whisper to them that I only live to hold them again, for all else is dust and air."

As a General he could enjoy a good career with Marcus Aurelius and Commodes, but he wanted to go home to his family.  At the end of the movie, he did that and he was happy.  
This draws me to the same conclusion that no man is an island and love is the meaning of life.  Staying single all your life is unnatural and not fulfilling.  Find it with someone you truly love and admire and want to be with, and you will have the happiness which life has to offer.


Logged

Hilcrest Park , Singapore
dolphin
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 84


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: 06 March 2002, 16:06:00 pm »

This is an interesting topic to discuss.  Some people prefer to be single throughout their life, just want some kind of short-term romance and not commitment 'cause afraid to loose their freedom.

Some people prefer to have a companion throughout their life so they could share bitterness as well as success with each other.  Not afraid of commitment 'cause they both know that they've to give each other some breathing space.  This requires a lot trust.

So, why don't you ask yourself if you're ready to make this commitment?  Do you understanding the significant of a long-term relationship?  Are you ready to be sincere to her/him?  The most important question is do you know what you want in life (a family, career, freedom, lovers & etc)?

Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines