Epiphany ...in the "soul mate" journey

[thespacey1]

Hey LS. So I've been having random thoughts about what the "meat" of relationships, really is. I don't think I've come up with some phenomenal ideal, but as I reflect on relationships I realize that a soulmate perhaps isn't always the person who has so much in common w/us. Maybe I'm late making this observation, but can anyone else relate to the notion of having only a few things in common and only a few shared interests being best to avoid a premature plataue or just frequent boredom of your mate?

 

I say all that mainly because I've dated a few guys that were pretty cool dudes. Treated me nicely in terms of going out and stuff, but Im starting to realize that the guys who i seemingly had so much in common with, also turned me off a bit in the long run with regard to our outing's, activities and overall getting along. I'm starting to think that maybe a few of those guys tried too hard to be "into" what I was into and wanted so much to be seen and heard regarding those interests, that it became a bit annoying in the long run.

 

Most dudes like sports. I'm NOT a sports fan. Tennis , basketball and canoeing are basically what I dig mostly and i can't pretend to be into anything further than that. I know some chics who pretend to be all into sports just to be with "the fellas" and they end up looking real silly,stupid actually. So, its the same when I've dated guys who find out I'm into certain kinds of music(heavy), foods or ways of life. It's annoying when they get all EXTRA with whatever it is, especially when it's merely for attention or to control. It might be cute early on, but in the long run it manifests itself as being about a guy/people who just need lots of attention& control. And it gets old fast.

 

That's great in the quest to impress, but as time goes by and the dude starts trying to play all the music he thinks i might like or trying to be everywhere you are to get attention, etc i just wanna walk away and say "sit down somewhere". Am I wrong for being annoyed by that? I wonder if I just get annoyed easily by attention seekers&control freaks? Isn't it good when your mate gives you something different to look forward to learning about...rather than feeling like they need to compete for.attention btwn you and your interests...???

 

Feedback welcome. I'm still learning, so I hope I don't sound too hostile with my " observations"...

[TaraMaiden2]

There's no such thing as a 'soulmate'.

 

There's no such thing as 'the one'.

 

The moment you quit seeking an ideal, life gets better.

[thespacey1]

There's no such thing as a 'soulmate'.

 

There's no such thing as 'the one'.

 

The moment you quit seeking an ideal, life gets better.

 

Point we'll taken taramaiden... Please expound.

 

I often say similar things to myself and wonder if that means just for me, or is monogamy still possessible in or world, marriage, etc? Seriously... I think there are people who we gel with more than others but as we change and/or get bored we want and need different things and sometimes get afraid, etc. I don't know. A soul mate may be possible for some. I won't rule that out, but I know for me I need someone who's different from me not just like me.

 

My last guy tried bring more like me than not. Then when I saw who he really was finally, I realized he's probably not for me... Like at all. Just wish I'd seen it earlier.

[TaraMaiden2]

Point we'll taken taramaiden... Please expound.

 

I often say similar things to myself and wonder if that means just for me, or is monogamy still possessible in or world, marriage, etc?

Monogamy is most definitely possible in a marriage.

If that's what both people put their minds to.

My opinion is this:

If you decide to go through a specific ceremony, vowing to stay with one person for the remainder of your life, then put your money where your mouth is, and stick to it.

 

Frankly, I think it's an awful lot to ask.

 

It's like picking your very favourite dish, in the whole world. The one thing which lights up your face and makes you "Mmmmm!!" at the mere thought of it - then being told that this is all you are ever going to be able to eat, for the rest of your life. Only this. Nothing else, not even a drink of water. Every meal, every snack, every in-between quick bite: All just that food.

 

You'd get pretty sick of it, pretty quickly, no matter how much it makes you smile initially.

 

So... we're supposed to stick to one person, and one person only, come what may? No-one else, not even a 'nibble'...?

 

Like I said: A lot to ask.

But if you decide to commit to that - then that's on you to keep up with, standard-wise.

 

If you find that there are things going wrong in the relationship, it's important to summon up the courage and talk about it.

Even if the only solution is to break up, it's better to do it with honour and dignity, rather than between someone else's legs, because your spouse, for whatever reasons, no longer floats your boat.

That's not a good way to behave.

 

Never put treacle pudding and custard on the same plate as chilli con carne and rice.

 

If you get my drift.

 

Seriously... I think there are people who we gel with more than others but as we change and/or get bored we want and need different things and sometimes get afraid, etc. I don't know. A soul mate may be possible for some. I won't rule that out, but I know for me I need someone who's different from me not just like me.

What we need is someone who has the same values and principles; who considers the important things in life - Religion, children, morals, personal humane standards - on the same level, more or less, as we do.

However, in matters of taste, likes, dislikes, interests, hobbies, and friends, we need to allow - and cultivate - an independence, to a healthy extent.

 

The three main components in ANY loving relationship are

(effective) Communication

Trust

Respect (for both self and partner)

 

Get those three right, and it won't matter whether you're with Prince Charming or Quasimodo. If the company is right, it all gels....

 

My last guy tried bring more like me than not. Then when I saw who he really was finally, I realized he's probably not for me... Like at all. Just wish I'd seen it earlier.

Yes, I agree. It's more important to be confident enough to be yourself, and not put up a false front, a façade of someone you hope they will like.

It's unsustainable...

[Gaeta]

I don't think it's necessary to have a lot of common interests I think it's more important to have similar life style and common values.

 

I have never dated men that had the same interests as I. I am not big on watching sports, I am not interested in car races, I don't fish and I don't drink beer.

 

That being said it's important to me that we have the same life style as in we both are early risers, we're active, we eat well and common values like family is important, communication is open, we're generous of our time etc.

 

I think it's great when we both have our own interests and bring something different to talk about at the end of the day.

 

Of course you can get in each other's interests IF the curiosity is genuine but don't pretend or force yourself ever.

[thespacey1]

I definitely agree on two people having common values. Yep.

 

I also think that monogamy can work when two people are deliberate in their intentions, rather than going on to the next step (marriage) just because that's what's expected by others.

 

The different interests is just important to me because in doing assessments of my relationships I've noticed than when a guy pretends to REALLY like something only because of me, it seems sweet at first but its really indicative of other things. Like why does he feel the need to not be honest about his interests? How far will he go before he IS honest about his interests? Do his interests totally go against my values and everything else I stand for?

 

Just being reflective about my interactions with the men in my life. Observations about how they respond to me; their dislikes and well as likes, are resignating with me a lot lately.

 

I want to be with someone who:

 

-Is comfortable being with himself and his interests

-Is humble

-Is confident, but not an attention seeker

-Is calculatedly adventurous

-Has overcome some type of struggle (unless its possible to have character without overcoming a struggle...not sure).

-Is not a people pleaser.

[thespacey1]

You all have some pretty good point though and I appreciate them all. Keep your thoughts coming...

[TaraMaiden2]

I definitely agree on two people having common values. Yep.

 

I also think that monogamy can work when two people are deliberate in their intentions, rather than going on to the next step (marriage) just because that's what's expected by others.

 

The different interests is just important to me because in doing assessments of my relationships I've noticed than when a guy pretends to REALLY like something only because of me, it seems sweet at first but its really indicative of other things. Like why does he feel the need to not be honest about his interests? How far will he go before he IS honest about his interests? Do his interests totally go against my values and everything else I stand for?

 

Just being reflective about my interactions with the men in my life. Observations about how they respond to me; their dislikes and well as likes, are resignating with me a lot lately.

 

(resonating....)

I have discovered, in my long and somewhat varied experience that guys are all for independent, strong, opinionated, intelligent, articulate and knowledgeable women. Somehow, somewhere along the line though, they still want the upper hand, final word and sense of control.

It seems that a lot of the men I have attracted, have been drawn to me by the above qualities (I have them, but they're no superior to other peoples'....) yet after a while, they have wanted to exert their own personality OVER that.

Well ain't nobody got time for that...!

 

I want to be with someone who:

 

-Is comfortable being with himself and his interests

-Is humble

-Is confident, but not an attention seeker

-Is calculatedly adventurous

-Has overcome some type of struggle (unless its possible to have character without overcoming a struggle...not sure).

-Is not a people pleaser.

You've just described my very best male friend.

Unfortunately, he is also a Buddhist Monk....

[thespacey1]

(resonating....)

I have discovered, in my long and somewhat varied experience that guys are all for independent, strong, opinionated, intelligent, articulate and knowledgeable women. Somehow, somewhere along the line though, they still want the upper hand, final word and sense of control.

It seems that a lot of the men I have attracted, have been drawn to me by the above qualities (I have them, but they're no superior to other peoples'....) yet after a while, they have wanted to exert their own personality OVER that.

Well ain't nobody got time for that...!

 

 

You've just described my very best male friend.

Unfortunately, he is also a Buddhist Monk....

 

Lol,funny... A monk though,seriously? Lol. You're funny.

 

You're right though, ain't nobody got time for all that performing and male ego strutting. Its cool sometimes because I LOVE a manly man. But you're obviously a bit more emotional (attitides.com) than me and b*tching &complaining and trying to get me to like everything you do, ahhh "you need to sit down somewhere!" ...just chill out dude and be me strong yet sometimes moody man.

[thespacey1]

...plus, I don't think monks are adventurous at all are they? I'll research.

[TaraMaiden2]

...plus, I don't think monks are adventurous at all are they? I'll research.

 

It depends how you define 'adventurous'.... (I did mention my BMF's status as a tongue-in-cheek humorous way....)

 

He has been trekking in Nepal, went to Japan on a lone holiday, and has travelled across Europe with nothing but a backpack, his lute and the bare essentials...

 

So he's definitely adventurous...! (But I'm going O/T....)

[thespacey1]

It depends how you define 'adventurous'.... (I did mention my BMF's status as a tongue-in-cheek humorous way....)

 

He has been trekking in Nepal, went to Japan on a lone holiday, and has travelled across Europe with nothing but a backpack, his lute and the bare essentials...

 

So he's definitely adventurous...! (But I'm going O/T....)

 

Wow, that's so cool... Really.I admire that. He sounds almost like me actually. Only I've never been to Japan. Would love to though. I've been other countries, alone, and love it...

 

Im a pretty simple gal. You wouldn't always know it by looking at me, but I really am. This was another reason my ex and I didn't make it, I believe. My thread is over in the break up section.

 

Prime example of a difference that can cause issues depending on how sane you're mate is. Because I like nice things and may look like I'm into material things, men sometimes misjudge me (my last X did). So when it came to me nor being happy with him or the relationship in general, he would get mad with me when I'd remind him that all the "things" that he gotten me are lovely and much appreciated.

 

However, those things he got me and places we'd go would not make me stay with him, would not make me put up with emotional abuse and would not silence me.

 

I guess in the past it's worked with other females to some extent. But eventually I'm sure they got tired of his "crazy" too... Or he got tired of them for constantly putting up with all his "crazy".

[thespacey1]

I kind of veered off a bit in the last post, sorry.

 

My main point was that when one person values material things (is used to buying people's favor) and the other person is not, that fundamental difference can create a huge wedge... break up in many cases.

[infiniteQuest]

No, it's not wrong to be annoyed by somebody who's not being authentic most of the time. For me, authenticity is the only way to go in any kind of relationship. People who can't be authentic have a whole slew of issues that they need to work hard to bury under what they think is an attractive exterior.

 

As far as whether you should date somebody who's like you or who has different interests? It doesn't matter, it's on a case-by-case basis and there is no formula. Like others have pointed out, similar underlying values need to be a priority. If you have similar values and a similar outlook on the world, whether you're playing tennis together, or whether you go off hiking with friends and he stays home and plays video games, in the end you're able to come together and share and learn from the other's experience.

 

The "meat" of relationships is not in what you "do", it's what you do with the things you do. It's how you bring them into the relationship to enrich both of your experiences through the eyes of the other.

 

Incidentally this is why I believe in monogamy. Humans are infinitely complex, and if you can be curious enough to keep learning about yourself and your own partner, and pick apart the layers and observe their growth and their experience of life, there is absolutely no need or room to develop this deep of a connection with another.

[thespacey1]

Well stated I.Q. Thanks for those.words. I definitely do believe in monogamy, I just look at other people's relationships (marriages) and sooo many couples have either decides to "swing",have a secret affair or something else to break their vows. I didn't understand why and how. These are people from different socioeconomic backgrounds. I know that I determine how my own relationship/marriage will go but I just wonder sometimes if they know something I don't. Its sad...

[TaraMaiden2]

Well stated I.Q. Thanks for those.words. I definitely do believe in monogamy, I just look at other people's relationships (marriages) and sooo many couples have either decides to "swing",have a secret affair or something else to break their vows. I didn't understand why and how. These are people from different socioeconomic backgrounds. I know that I determine how my own relationship/marriage will go but I just wonder sometimes if they know something I don't. Its sad...

 

Not so.

You determine how your SIDE of your relationship/marriage will go.

 

You cannot predict that, no matter how well-intentioned, you prospective partner will always be in the same frame of mind.

 

 

As I stated in another thread, if you have a roomful of prospective wedding partners in front of you, and asked them -

 

"Would you think it best to discuss any issues and problems in a marriage, instead of cheating?"

 

They would all emphatically respond with a yes (I have done this).

 

Yet, it seems when it comes to suiting the actions to the words, a great many people, don't do as they had said they would.

 

As far as I have personally been able to ascertain, EVERY relationship has a situation where some kind of 'cheating' has happened.

 

Whether that cheating has been physical, or has led to an affair, or to what extent one might call the incident 'cheating', is greatly variable.

 

But every couple I have ever encountered where counselling was concerned, has known a hiatus in their relationship where a third party was 'involved'.

[thespacey1]

So, that takes us back to one of my initial questions... "What's the point of marriage?" ... if cheating is inevitable.

 

That's pretty sad.

[infiniteQuest]

So, that takes us back to one of my initial questions... "What's the point of marriage?" ... if cheating is inevitable.

 

That's pretty sad.

 

I don't think cheating is inevitable, it just comes down to some people valuing monogamy, and others not so much. You need to find somebody whose values (especially about monogamy) are compatible with yours.

 

You can check out this thread about monogamy in the other section : http://www.loveshack.org/forums/romantic/marriage-life-partnerships/539219-why-monogamy-important-you

[infiniteQuest]

Not so.

 

As far as I have personally been able to ascertain, EVERY relationship has a situation where some kind of 'cheating' has happened.

 

Whether that cheating has been physical, or has led to an affair, or to what extent one might call the incident 'cheating', is greatly variable.

 

But every couple I have ever encountered where counselling was concerned, has known a hiatus in their relationship where a third party was 'involved'.

 

I think this is why it's important to be able to discuss a broad and deep range of topics with your partner. It's the only way that you can make sure that you're both on the same page, despite both of you growing and changing. When you're able to share your views freely and express what's important to you, betrayal becomes a non-issue, and boundaries are communicated and negotiated from both ends.

 

Saying point-blank that cheating is inevitable is a pretty grim way of seeing things. Sure, perfect communication is no small feat to achieve, but that doesn't mean that it cannot be achieved or does not exist in any relationship, and that betrayal is inevitable. Then, there are degrees of betrayal. You might argue that small acts of betrayal are inevitable, but when you think about it, it's actually pretty simple to isolate what type of betrayal would break a person, and work around that in various ways to satisfy the partner's various needs.

Edited July 26, 2015 by infiniteQuest

[thespacey1]

I think this is why it's important to be able to discuss a broad and deep range of topics with your partner. It's the only way that you can make sure that you're both on the same page, despite both of you growing and changing. When you're able to share your views freely and express what's important to you, betrayal becomes a non-issue, and boundaries are communicated and negotiated from both ends.

 

Saying point-blank that cheating is inevitable is a pretty grim way of seeing things. Sure, perfect communication is no small feat to achieve, but that doesn't mean that it cannot be achieved or does not exist in any relationship, and that betrayal is inevitable. Then, there are degrees of betrayal. You might argue that small acts of betrayal are inevitable, but when you think about it, it's actually pretty simple to isolate what type of betrayal would break a person, and work around that in various ways to satisfy the partner's various needs.

 

Point well taken. Over the years I've assumed that, the man is the one who would be first to stray or want to stray. However, realistically I know if can be either party. And in thinking about my own self, I've even had to be more honest with myself... Am I strong enough to resist certain temptation, how would I handle adultery from myself or my mate? Or someone who's really tempting, coming on me. I have more male friends than female friends partially due to some of the work I do. (No, I'm not a pole dancer or a stripper).

 

I appreciate this dialogue.

[infiniteQuest]

Point well taken. Over the years I've assumed that, the man is the one who would be first to stray or want to stray. However, realistically I know if can be either party. And in thinking about my own self, I've even had to be more honest with myself... Am I strong enough to resist certain temptation, how would I handle adultery from myself or my mate? Or someone who's really tempting, coming on me. I have more male friends than female friends partially due to some of the work I do. (No, I'm not a pole dancer or a stripper).

 

I appreciate this dialogue.

 

I think the best thing you can do is acknowledge your temptations and desires, and open a dialogue with your partner. Don't be scared to be open to your own desires, and don't make decisions out of fear, but balance that with being honest and respectful with your partner.

 

In my previous relationship, I was very scared of desires getting out of hand and infidelity, and I always tried to talk about boundaries and the shape that those desires take with my ex, but somehow the conversation didn't flow. He kind of nodded to what I said, said his version of things, but in the end I was never reassured that we were really on the same page. So I felt very insecure most of the time, and it ended with a breakup and him sleeping with someone else the next day.

 

After 3 weeks of NC, I realized that he was never really open with me. I am always open to conversation, but I suspect that he was either lying to himself, or didn't have the self-awareness or experience with different types of desires and how they can be handled, which probably lead to the conversation not being able to flow. In the end he decided that monogamy wasn't for him, and I don't think there's anything I could have done about that.

[thespacey1]

Thanks, yeah you've made some good points.

 

I'm sure if I do every tie the knot, I'll make sure I maintain an item line of communication with my guy.

 

Right now though, that time seems a bit far down the road.

Thanks again for the input.

[TaraMaiden2]

This is why (in the UK) if a couple DO opt to marry in church, no matter which particular denomination it is, the Church insists couples attend pre-marital workshops.

 

I was heavily involved in first assisting at, then eventually running these weekend workshops, and I cannot express enough how invaluable they turned out to be.

 

The vast majority of couples who arrived to attend on the first day, would normally grumble they didn't NEED to do this, it was pointless, they'd been living together for years... some even already had children.... or had been married before, they knew the ropes, thank you very much.....

And I swear to you as I live and breathe, by the time they left on the Sunday evening, were so damn grateful they'd attended because they saw and appreciated their partners in a new light, felt so much more able to communicate and were overwhelmingly glad the course existed.

 

This was over a matter of 4 years, but one couple actually called off their wedding altogether. One couple suspended it and delayed it for a time, until they felt more on the same page, and one couple, unable to do anything to delay the inevitable, actually booked counselling sessions for when they returned from honeymoon.

 

The stories I could tell you.

4 years taught me so much about people.

And about me.

[infiniteQuest]

This is why (in the UK) if a couple DO opt to marry in church, no matter which particular denomination it is, the Church insists couples attend pre-marital workshops.

 

I was heavily involved in first assisting at, then eventually running these weekend workshops, and I cannot express enough how invaluable they turned out to be.

 

The vast majority of couples who arrived to attend on the first day, would normally grumble they didn't NEED to do this, it was pointless, they'd been living together for years... some even already had children.... or had been married before, they knew the ropes, thank you very much.....

And I swear to you as I live and breathe, by the time they left on the Sunday evening, were so damn grateful they'd attended because they saw and appreciated their partners in a new light, felt so much more able to communicate and were overwhelmingly glad the course existed.

 

This was over a matter of 4 years, but one couple actually called off their wedding altogether. One couple suspended it and delayed it for a time, until they felt more on the same page, and one couple, unable to do anything to delay the inevitable, actually booked counselling sessions for when they returned from honeymoon.

 

The stories I could tell you.

4 years taught me so much about people.

And about me.

 

This is very interesting! Do you mind sharing such questions or topics surprised the people who "knew the ropes" or made them discover something new?

[TaraMaiden2]

It was more a case of making them aware of important issues that they took for granted the other partner would agree with, without actually having had a conversation about it...

 

For example, we distributed a workshop work manual, but we also distributed certain individual pages of this manual,during the workshop itself.

 

One of these pages was a list of priorities, ranging from 'having regular sex' to 'I want children' and also aspects of everyday life, like 'I would move if my partner had to move location for their job', and 'money is very important to me'... 'attending church regularly is what I would like us both to do' and 'if I needed to stay at home to look after the children, I would'....all kinds of personal preferences which always affect the other person...

 

On the page in the workshop manual, they were in no particular order.

 

However, we gave everyone a duplicate page, cut into strips, with a different priority on each strip.

Then, we separated the couples, got the guys to put their strips in the order they prioritised preferences, and the ladies did the same.

 

Then, they numbered each strip in order of priority, gathered them up, met up again, and laid them side by side, in their specific orders of priority.

 

The differences in the couples' priorities actually stunned a few of them into silence.

 

They never knew.... they just didn't realise..... "WTF...?!"

 

The men overwhelmingly led with sex, jobs, money and material things.

The ladies were very family-orientated, and the disparities in some of the lists were frankly (to some) worrying....

 

I'll never forget one workshop.

A middle-aged couple were attending as per requirement.

They were both extremely dissatisfied and irritated they had been obliged to come.

See, they literally had grown up together. They had known each other since young childhood as neighbours, meeting at months of age... going to primary AND secondary school together... even university.

 

Then she met someone and married him and had a family.

He did the same. they kept in touch throughout and often had outings and holidays together with their families.

For totally unconnected reasons, both marriages failed, and they then decided to get together.

Bear in mind they're now both in their 40's....

 

So we've broken the attendees into manageable groups and I'm leading one small group with this couple, and we start talking about political, social and religious views - and the guy was coming out with all kinds of fairly forceful comments and views he had on several matters... bringing children up (discipline), race discrimination, sexual discrimination, religion, and honestly? Her face was one of stunned astonishment.

At the end of one rant, she turned to him and actually said "Oh. My. God. I've just realised I don't know you AT ALL!"

 

That was one hell of an eye-opener for her....