|
|
Kitzyma
|
 |
Likes it here |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 238
|
|
|
Being alone isn't the same as being lonely. Preferring to be alone most of the time isn't perverse. Not wanting a relationship isn't weird
This is obviously a minority view, and some may find it controversial.
The opinion:
There are a significant minority of people who do not share the desire for a soulmate and do not feel that being alone is undesirable. As a convenient label, let's call them 'singletons'. Singletons may be either heterosexual or homosexual, and not wanting to pair-bond is not the same as not wanting sex. Furthermore, this singleton minority is no more unnatural than the minority we refer to as homosexual. It is wrong for the majority to look down on singletons as somehow lacking or defective, just as it is wrong for the majority of heterosexuals to look down on homosexual people as somehow lacking or defective.
The reasoning:
Our success as a species is related in part to a reproductive strategy that invests a lot of resources on a small nummber of offspring. That strategy appeares to be made more effective, at least in some species such as humans, by tight family groups and pair-bonding of parents. Therefore, it would be expected that evolution would mean the development of an innate desire for pair-bonding in most people.
One might expect that a desire to mate with a member of the opposite sex would also be something that would be strongly built into our species, yet there is a significant minority who do not have that desire. Thus one might hypothesise that those lacking the desire (i.e. homosexuals) have some other benefit for the species as a whole. Alternatively, perhaps the lack of that desire is (like sickle cell anaemia) an unavoidable side-effect of some other characteristic that is generally beneficial. Whatever the case, there is no justification for the heterosexual majority to feel superior to the homosexual minority.
One can apply a similar argument to the fact that a minority of people are happier when living alone and have no desire to find a soulmate.
We evolved as social animals and our physical survival involves a mutual interdependence. Specialisation enabled the growth of civilisation, so in modern society there is a mutual interdependence between groups as well as between individuals - toolmakers rely on farmers for food, just as farmers rely on the tools. The advantages of such interdependence must have outweighed the disadvantages.
When monopolies arise, however, there are grave risks. If there is only one farmer, what happens when he dies? If all farmers are united in one group, what happens if that group refuses to provide food unless the toolmakers agree to its demands?
Investing all of one's emotional bonding into one person, giving them an emotional monopoly, carries risks. For the species as a whole, those risks of pair-bonding must be outweighed by the advantages, otherwise it would not have evolved as an important drive. For the minority of individuals who do not share that drive, the disadvantages to the those individual may become more important. However, if a singleton wants children and wants to live with those children, the advantages living with a partner and having someone to share the childcare, would probably outweight the disadvantages.
For a singleton who doesn't want children, the disadvantages of pair-bonding can be paramount. For example, there are frequent compromises, limitations of freedom, and occasional stresses involved in living with another person. Perhaps most important, though, is that having a soulmate and pair-bonding will almost certainly lead to eventual, though possibly just temporary, unhappiness. This is because, in one way or another, voluntarily or involuntarily, deliberately or accidentally, the person in whom you've invested your emotional happiness will let you down. e.g. If he/she doesn't leave you on purpose, he/she may well die before you do. It's not their fault, but the loss still hurts.
The majority might say that the near-certainty of possibly temporary eventual pain is a small price to pay for long-term companionship and fulfilment of their desire to be with a soulmate. However, for the singleton with no such desire, the price may be too much. Being in a relationship may be good and healthy for the majority who are suited to it, but can cause unhealthy stress for those who are unsuited to it.
The summary:
There really are singletons, just as there reallly are homosexuals. Neither group is sick and neither deserves pity. It is insulting and hurtful if heterosexual majority assumes that everyone is really like they are and if they believe that they should try to convert homosexuals to heterosexuality. It is insulting and hurtful if the majority who seek soulmates assumes that everyone is really like they are and that they should try to convert singletons to soulmate-seekers.
For a homosexual to succumb to societal pressure and pretend to be heterosexual can cause unhappiness, or at least discontent. Similarly, for a singleton to succumb to societal pressure and enter into a relationship can cause unhappiness for their partner as well as themselves.
[Updated on: Fri, 08 February 2013 23:25] |
|
|
|
|
[  ] |
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
