Turn on thread page Beta

Would you *ever* give up your ideal dreams/future/career for your perfect partner? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Ideal future or perfect partner?
    Ideal future
    49.38%
    Perfect partner
    50.62%

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Trust me, in my experience, meeting a person and falling in love with them - well, I didn't experience happiness, if anything I experienced sadness.

    So don't be too quick to judge that love = happiness.

    And yes, I can live a good life without "someone". Why ever not?



    Answered the above bit before reading this. But anyways, I can't count of "finding the right person for you". In fact, I don't care about finding the right person. Why do you say it as if it is necessary to "fall in love and get married" and what not?



    Why can't you accept that it is not necessary to follow the "marriage-kids-death" route?
    Quite right, plenty of people don't want to be tied down by kids and marriage, but even that small percentage of people often have long term partners. It is the way I have been brought up and the people around me that I struggle to understand the concept of wanting to be alone, because in all honesty the only person who I know is in their 40s+ who isn't married/never has been married/without a partner for over 15 years, is my boyfriends aunt. And even she admits it wasn't a choice but how things just, worked out. She apparently was engaged to a guy who broke her heart in her early 30s and she has still not found anyone else she has wanted to be with over 15 years later! It's very sad as she makes no secret of the fact that she would have loved kids.

    The point is, I understand if life happens and people end up not being with someone, but I can't understand not wanting to. Maybe if you explained how you see you life, job, where you'd live, the type of life you'd lead, in 10 years time, completely alone (which of course you have chosen) then I might begin to understand better the thinking behind it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moody_bum)
    Firstly, because I would never expect anyone to drop their dreams etc for me. So why should it work the other way?

    Secondly, I have had these dreams and career aspirations for a very long time now. I know I want to be successful at what I do and don't see why I should drop years of careful planning for someone else.

    Thirdly and most importantly. I don't actually want to settle down. I want to travel and see sights all over the world and cannot see myself settling into a suitable routine for a very long time, it will be hard for me to find someone who appreciates this. People ask me why I still see myself single at 30 and would I find this lonely. They speak as though not having a partner means I will therefore have no contact with anyone else.

    I guess it comes down to how career driven I am. Happiness to me is succeeding in my career, meeting a guy is just an added extra.

    On top of it all I feel I would be settling for second best if I found someone who I had to drop my future for. I'm not really sure how to explain this, but the kind of partner I am looking for is someone who will understand that I also have plans of my own. It is also important that my partner be as keen as I am to travel and be just as dynamic.
    Just out of curiosity, do you think your opinion would differ any if you were with someone you loved very much, and had been with this person for a long time?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hayles101)
    Just out of curiosity, do you think your opinion would differ any if you were with someone you loved very much, and had been with this person for a long time?
    I wouldn't be with the person if I wasn't going to be able to pursue my own dreams.
    But in answer to your question and having experienced love first hand, no my opinion would not change. Love does not happen just once. Yes it would be hard leaving someone I loved, but if I didn't I would massively regret it later. I'd move on and then meet someone else. However if I didn't meet anyone else but having followed my dreams, I know that I would be happier than staying with someone just because I loved them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by undermyskin)
    What about ideal future?
    Well an ideal future without an ideal partner isn't very "ideal".
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Advanced Subsidiary)
    Yeah I know what you mean.

    I told my mum a couple of weeks ago that i'm not sure if I want to get married because I don't understand it's meaning. I just see it as a social construct that is essentially a waste of money.

    She said "It's not worth it."

    I can see why now.
    The apparent advantages of marriage are:

    *Helps you become closer together - in other words repressing your individuality? If you don't want to be with that person, you're pretty much implying that marriage forces you to be in a relationship you don't want to be in? Hardly a good thing.

    *Legal benefits for children - what if you don't want children? Also surely that implies marriage is just a legal recognition of your relationship as opposed to anything of emotional and traditional value.

    *???
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Planto)
    You're a little dense, aren't you?

    For something to be "perfect", all of its constituent parts must be perfect. Your partner is part of your future. If your future partner is not ideal, your future is not ideal. By definition. Therefore, your ideal future necessitates your ideal partner. It is not an "either/or"; one is inclusive of the other.

    This isn't me debating with you; this is me telling you that the question is absurd. It doesn't make any sense. It's not a matter of opinion.
    But I don't want a partner. I can have my ideal future without a partner as my ideal future does not contain my perfect partner.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    There's no such thing as a perfect partner ffs.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by hayles101)
    Quite right, plenty of people don't want to be tied down by kids and marriage, but even that small percentage of people often have long term partners. It is the way I have been brought up and the people around me that I struggle to understand the concept of wanting to be alone, because in all honesty the only person who I know is in their 40s+ who isn't married/never has been married/without a partner for over 15 years, is my boyfriends aunt. And even she admits it wasn't a choice but how things just, worked out. She apparently was engaged to a guy who broke her heart in her early 30s and she has still not found anyone else she has wanted to be with over 15 years later! It's very sad as she makes no secret of the fact that she would have loved kids.
    For me it is a choice, and I do not want to have children.

    The point is, I understand if life happens and people end up not being with someone, but I can't understand not wanting to. Maybe if you explained how you see you life, job, where you'd live, the type of life you'd lead, in 10 years time, completely alone (which of course you have chosen) then I might begin to understand better the thinking behind it.
    Could describe all of that in a single sentence: to have the freedom to do what I want without any burden.

    Do you think if you were married and had children you still would have the potential to do anything you want? No, you've got your responsibilities.

    For me, I can switch jobs as much as I want, can live in any place I want, change the type of life I want etc etc. It's not so much as "I want this and I want that", but rather "I will be able to do what I want when I want".

    Would you be able to move to a country for a few years, then move to another for a year, then another for 5 years if you had children? No, you'd have to think about their education and what not.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    If they were my ideal partner then it wouldn't be a choice I had to make...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Jacke02)
    Well an ideal future without an ideal partner isn't very "ideal".
    It's ideal for me. In the sense that having a partner is not a necessity.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    But I don't want a partner. I can have my ideal future without a partner as my ideal future does not contain my perfect partner.
    But does it contain little im so academics? :holmes:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    But I don't want a partner. I can have my ideal future without a partner as my ideal future does not contain my perfect partner.
    Right, but that isn't the question. The question is "ideal partner vs. ideal future". If someone wants a partner, then the question doesn't make sense because the ideal future necessitates the ideal partner. If someone doesn't want a partner, the question doesn't apply.

    Hence, we are back where I started - the thread is stupid.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Fusilero)
    But does it contain little im so academics? :holmes:
    So? Why do you think it's necessary for an individual to procreate? (For the general human race, yes, but is there anything lost if a few people choose not to?)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Planto)
    Right, but that isn't the question. The question is "ideal partner vs. ideal future". If someone wants a partner, then the question doesn't make sense because the ideal future necessitates the ideal partner. If someone doesn't want a partner, the question doesn't apply.

    Hence, we are back where I started - the thread is stupid.
    Since when does "the ideal future necessitates the ideal partner"?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Since when does "the ideal future necessitates the ideal partner"?
    How can you not understand this yet? If you have a partner and that partner is not ideal, then your life is not ideal, is it? It is flawed because an aspect of it is flawed. This also applies in the future tense. A future with a non-ideal partner is a non-ideal future by default. "The ideal future" implies that all aspects of that future are ideal. Your partner is an aspect of your future. Hence, if you want a partner and your future partner is not ideal then your future is not ideal. If you don't want a partner, then the question you are asking doesn't apply at all. Ergo, the question you ask is absurd because it is either nonsense or unapplicable, depending on who you ask.

    An example. "This salad is ideal, but the tomatoes aren't ideal," is an absurd statement.

    This is a very simple logical principle that someone of your 'academic ability' (lol) should have no trouble following. I don't really know how many other ways I can spell this out to you.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Planto)
    How can you not understand this yet? If you have a partner and that partner is not ideal, then your life is not ideal, is it? It is flawed because an aspect of it is flawed. This also applies in the future tense. A future with a non-ideal partner is a non-ideal future by default.

    An example. "This salad is ideal, but the tomatoes aren't ideal," is an absurd statement.

    This is a very simple logical principle that someone of your 'academic ability' (lol) should have no trouble following.
    But you seem to imply that YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PARTNER for your future to be ideal.

    In my ideal future, I don't need a partner, so why are you saying this bull**** that my life would not be ideal according to your principles?

    With regards to your analogy, what if I don't need tomatoes in my salad? I can still have my ideal salad without tomatoes. Just because everyone else has tomatoes, it doesn't mean I need them too.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    It's ideal for me. In the sense that having a partner is not a necessity.
    I'm so academic! How can you be so cold! I'm guessing from ur pink display picture thingy that your a girl.........................one day you'll find an ideal person that you would swap for the oxbridge badges on your display pic.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    But you seem to imply that YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PARTNER for your future to be ideal.
    Erm, no I didn't. In fact, I explicitly covered the alternative. Re-read the post properly until you understand it. Maybe write it out a few times and hand it in to your teacher:

    (Original post by Planto)
    How can you not understand this yet? If you have a partner and that partner is not ideal, then your life is not ideal, is it? It is flawed because an aspect of it is flawed. This also applies in the future tense. A future with a non-ideal partner is a non-ideal future by default. "The ideal future" implies that all aspects of that future are ideal. Your partner is an aspect of your future. Hence, if you want a partner and your future partner is not ideal then your future is not ideal. If you don't want a partner, then the question you are asking doesn't apply at all. Ergo, the question you ask is absurd because it is either nonsense or unapplicable, depending on who you ask.

    An example. "This salad is ideal, but the tomatoes aren't ideal," is an absurd statement.

    This is a very simple logical principle that someone of your 'academic ability' (lol) should have no trouble following. I don't really know how many other ways I can spell this out to you.
    "Would you rather have an ideal salad or ideal tomatoes?"

    Either:
    (a) Ideal tomatoes are necessary for the salad to be ideal.
    (b) You don't like tomatoes so the question is not applicable.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Since when does "the ideal future necessitates the ideal partner"?
    Depends on the person. If I don't end up with my ideal partner, it won't be my ideal future. If your ideal future doesn't involve a partner, then there's no such thing as your ideal partner, because the ideal situation is to not have one at all.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Planto)
    "Would you rather have an ideal salad or ideal tomatoes?"

    Either:
    (a) Ideal tomatoes are necessary for the salad to be ideal.
    (b) You don't like tomatoes so the question is not applicable.
    (c) Tomatoes are not necessary for the ideal salad as everyone has different thoughts about their own ideal salad.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 28, 2011
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.