Bella DePaulo, Being Single & Appreciating It :D

[circlesinfinity]

I finally found someone who gets it. She talks about it being okay to be single and discrimination against singles in the media.

 

I think this is true. I have seen it online many times, when somone posts about being single people say "Oh, you will find love one day".

 

What if that person does not? And if they don't, what exactly is wrong with that? This is what she talks about!

 

Has anyone ever read these books by Bella DePaulo?

 

So far, I am SOLD.

[road]

I finally found someone who gets it. She talks about it being okay to be single and discrimination against singles in the media.

 

I think this is true. I have seen it online many times, when somone posts about being single people say "Oh, you will find love one day".

 

What if that person does not? And if they don't, what exactly is wrong with that? This is what she talks about!

 

Has anyone ever read these books by Bella DePaulo?

 

So far, I am SOLD.

 

 

So you are saying it is better to say: you are a loser and no one wants to date you then saying something kind and encouraging as you will find someone someday?

 

 

 

 

No one says you have to accept a date for everyone that asks you out.

 

 

However Bella reminds me of two things:

 

 

1- Aesop's fable of the sour grapes.

 

 

2- A women that has an unrealistic view of her self worth on the dating market. Where unless a man has the abs of an tighty whitey underware model, Hollywood leading man good looks, and the money to be in the top 2%, she will be highly offended if anyone that did not meet that criteria was to ask her out on a date.

[circlesinfinity]

So you are saying it is better to say: you are a loser and no one wants to date you then saying something kind and encouraging as you will find someone someday?

 

 

 

 

No one says you have to accept a date for everyone that asks you out.

 

 

However Bella reminds me of two things:

 

 

1- Aesop's fable of the sour grapes.

 

 

2- A women that has an unrealistic view of her self worth on the dating market. Where unless a man has the abs of an tighty whitey underware model, Hollywood leading man good looks, and the money to be in the top 2%, she will be highly offended if anyone that did not meet that criteria was to ask her out on a date.

You totally missed my point, I am not being pessimistic. I am just saying that it is okay to be single even if that means for the rest of your life.

 

How does that make someone a loser? Why do you assume someone is because they are single?

 

And I will address #2 and use myself as an example. First I have never EVER been shallow when it came to dating. If you look decent, take care of yourself and I personally find you attractive than I don't care how everyone else sees you.

 

I was never the type use someone as a "trophy". I have meet men who put me down even when I was minding my own business. I have been out with and dated men of various looks...and they all treated me bad or was disrespectful.

 

There is nothing wrong with me, I think I am attractive, I have always loved myself what got me depressed was the fact that I could not find someone who saw in me what I see in myself. I was honest and told who I thought would be the one this and he ended doing exactly what I told him not to.

 

So if ACCEPTING my fate makes me perceived as a loser, than I can't change peoples mind but I do want people to know that there is nothing wrong with being single!

[carhill]

Also, reading this article the author penned, she covers a potential trend towards looser associations from historically tightly bound coupling.

 

What I've found from my time on this rock is that, largely, people don't really care. We only perceive that they do. That can apply to a lot of aspects of living and choices we make. Yeah, a few might attend our funeral but that's about it. Everything else is transactional, which I don't conflate with care.

 

Hence, my advice is accept life, make choices one personally feels are fulfilling and pay less attention to others and, most importantly, one's perceptions of others as a motivating force in one's own life.

[preraph]

I haven't read that author, but I'm single and I could make a long list of ways we're discriminated against besides personally.

 

Home insurance: Like right now, I'm paying the same amount for personal property damage and personal liability on my home as a family of 6 would, even though my replacement cost would be one-sixth theirs (since I don't, for example, have six smartphones to replace but only one). And their chances of using the liability are multifold since they would have kids visiting all the time and any potential backyard accidents.

 

School and health: I'm paying for school for everyone's kids. I wouldn't mind paying some, but I shouldn't have to pay more than they are (they get deductibles for the kids). Likewise, healthcare. I'm paying (in my state) for theirs but I can't afford any for myself.

 

Utility bills: Even though the companies all tout energy conservation, the people who use the most get the lowest rates, while the person like me, who has not multiplied and created more little consumers and made a bigger footprint and has only one person in the house, using the least amount, has the highest rates, on all of them, water, electricity, gas. Then I have to choke back a remark when friends go on about how "green" they are when in fact there's nothing less green than multiplying. My footprint is much smaller than theirs, even if I made zero effort to be green. I've never said anything because they're friends, but it's hard not to when you get the occasional smug "I only buy organic" or whatever. I feel like saying "I only buy for one and don't spend all day burning fuel running my kids around." Not saying they shouldn't have kids or anything, but I shouldn't be paying more just because I'm one.

 

And the biggest consumer irony of all: Rewarding people on welfare by giving them more the more children they have. Its' completely the opposite. Once they're on welfare, for whatever reason (and there are many good reasons), at that time they should be encouraged to use birth control and definitely not paid more for each child thereafter. If people in the US didn't have such a stick up about birth control, that's where the money would be better spent. People without children are not eligible for welfare at all, even though they've paid into that fund their entire working lives.

[circlesinfinity]

I haven't read that author, but I'm single and I could make a long list of ways we're discriminated against besides personally.

 

Home insurance: Like right now, I'm paying the same amount for personal property damage and personal liability on my home as a family of 6 would, even though my replacement cost would be one-sixth theirs (since I don't, for example, have six smartphones to replace but only one). And their chances of using the liability are multifold since they would have kids visiting all the time and any potential backyard accidents.

 

School and health: I'm paying for school for everyone's kids. I wouldn't mind paying some, but I shouldn't have to pay more than they are (they get deductibles for the kids). Likewise, healthcare. I'm paying (in my state) for theirs but I can't afford any for myself.

 

Utility bills: Even though the companies all tout energy conservation, the people who use the most get the lowest rates, while the person like me, who has not multiplied and created more little consumers and made a bigger footprint and has only one person in the house, using the least amount, has the highest rates, on all of them, water, electricity, gas. Then I have to choke back a remark when friends go on about how "green" they are when in fact there's nothing less green than multiplying. My footprint is much smaller than theirs, even if I made zero effort to be green. I've never said anything because they're friends, but it's hard not to when you get the occasional smug "I only buy organic" or whatever. I feel like saying "I only buy for one and don't spend all day burning fuel running my kids around." Not saying they shouldn't have kids or anything, but I shouldn't be paying more just because I'm one.

 

And the biggest consumer irony of all: Rewarding people on welfare by giving them more the more children they have. Its' completely the opposite. Once they're on welfare, for whatever reason (and there are many good reasons), at that time they should be encouraged to use birth control and definitely not paid more for each child thereafter. If people in the US didn't have such a stick up about birth control, that's where the money would be better spent. People without children are not eligible for welfare at all, even though they've paid into that fund their entire working lives.

 

Wow! Your post is very informative! If you don't mind me asking, do you own a car?

 

I don't yet because I live in a city where it is not needed but I was talking to a relative about owning a car. They were telling me about the costs of owning one and how expensive it can be. I told them I would rather save my pennies on a driver (or use lyft/uber in the mean time).

 

What do you think about car insurance as a single person?

[preraph]

I live in a city where you must have a car. We have some mass transit but it is not comprehensive and is very slow to get anywhere. You could take a part time job to pay for a car in the time you'll waste using mass transit to get to your main job and back, let alone errands.

 

But that's in a big spread out town (Dallas). Cars are expensive. But I love a car.

 

Now if you're someplace that most people rely on mass transit because it's a small condensed city, then perhaps you don't need a car. There are places where it would be more trouble to find a parking place for a car than to walk to the station. But get away from the New England in the US and most other states and towns, you need a car and there's plenty of places to park because you don't live in a closet but a real apartment of house with parking.