Picking the right(?) narrative
People who are unable to find a romantic partner:
- Tell themselves that the quality of the available set of potential partners is so low that it’s not really worth searching for one.
- Tell themselves that the above statement has no bearing on their own potential partnership quality.
- Tell themselves that a lot of ‘lower quality’ males/females are in relationships, so the decision to stay alone/single is their own.
- Tell themselves that potential partners have unrealistic standards, so the fact that they remain single is mostly other people’s fault.
- Tell themselves that life without a partner is simpler and easier – that a relationship is too much work.
- Focus on the downsides of relationships.
- Tell themselves that they’re not missing out on anything much and that the benefits of being in a relationship are exaggerated.
- Tell themselves that they’d not be happier if they were in a relationship.
- Tell themselves that they’d be much happier if they were in a relationship.
- Feel socially rejected and isolated, but attempt to compensate by seeking validation elsewhere (friends, career, hobbies, …).
People who’ve already found a romantic partner:
- Tell themselves that they’ve found the most awesome partner in the whole world (until the temporary insanity wears off)
- Tell themselves that they’re higher status than singles because they have a partner.
- Focus on the upsides of relationships.
- Tell themselves that the work a relationship requires is more than worth it.
- Tell themselves that they’d be very lonely if they didn’t have a partner.
- Tell themselves that they’d be very unhappy if they didn’t have a partner.
- Tell themselves that they’d be better off without such an annoying partner.
- Tell themselves that the downsides of being in a relationship are exaggerated.
- Feel socially validated.
- Feel socially isolated because interactions with the partner take time away from other types of social interaction.
…
I try to keep reminding myself that the resulting narratives are just that – narratives. They’re stories about the world, nothing more. Stories humans use to justify decisions we make, decisions we’ve already made, or perhaps decisions we’ve decided to make. There is no ‘right’ story, no ‘correct’ story which is somehow ‘objectively’ truer than the other. People without partners find their choice harder to justify because for hundreds of millions of years nature has given preferential treatment to the guys who made the other choice. Perhaps they’re less happy than people in relationships and so one might argue that the ‘looking for a partner-strategy’ will on average make the individuals better off. This however ignores group heterogeneity, search costs, and costs related to repeated social rejection as well as costs related to poor matching.
I’m leaning towards the ‘it’s not worth it’-narrative at this point. Which begs the question: Why the hell do I keep going in the first place? The hope that I’d some day in the future have a relatively normal life where you find a partner and get a job and all that stuff was a big part of what kept me from killing myself in the past. Remove the potential relationship and it starts looking real depressing real fast. I know what people without a partner who compensate with hobbies and work look like – I know more than a few of those people. I don’t want that life. But at this point the alternative isn’t very attractive either; settling with an intellectually incompatible partner (see khadijah & razib’s comments here) seems to be the only alternative outcome worth even spending time thinking about.
I know people ‘on both sides’ like to say that ‘if you don’t learn to love yourself you can’t expect to be able to convince others to’ (or something along those lines). For singles this is often coupled with an argument for not searching while ‘improving yourself’ – in reality just taking a break from getting/feeling rejected all the time. I’ve seen a lot of advice here, but not a lot which does not serve a very specific and convenient purpose.
I’ve been told that it gets easier. My friends and family do not have the type of problems I do regarding finding a partner; most have one. So they keep reminding me, whether they’d like to or not, of what I’m missing out on. Cutting links with these people would make things both easier and much harder – I have no plans of doing that, but in 10 years time? Most singles lonely people I know who’re significantly older than I am seem to mostly interact with other singles; it’d be naive not to assume that pain associated with this stuff might not at least be part of the explanation.
13 Comments »
Leave a Reply
-
Archives
- May 2013 (10)
- April 2013 (16)
- March 2013 (14)
- February 2013 (14)
- January 2013 (17)
- December 2012 (17)
- November 2012 (19)
- October 2012 (15)
- September 2012 (18)
- August 2012 (21)
- July 2012 (21)
- June 2012 (21)
-
Categories
- 180 grader
- academia
- Africa
- Agnotology
- alcohol
- alfred brendel
- anthropology
- archaeology
- Arthur Conan Doyle
- astronomy
- atheism
- økonomi
- bøger
- beethoven
- Bent Jensen
- berlingske
- bias
- Bill Bryson
- Bill Watterson
- billeder
- biology
- blogging
- blogs
- books
- Brahms
- bureaucracy
- Canada
- cancer
- Cartoons
- censorship
- Chess
- china
- Chopin
- citater
- Claude Berri
- climate
- comics
- communism
- cosmology
- creationism
- culture
- current affairs
- Cziffra
- Dan Simmons
- Darwin
- data
- dating
- David Copperfield
- david lynch
- demografi
- demographics
- demokrati
- den kolde krig
- denmark
- diabetes
- Dickens
- Dinu Lipatti
- disagreement
- Douglas Adams
- Dragsdal
- econometrics
- economic history
- economics
- education
- Edward Grieg
- egypt
- Eliezer Yudkowsky
- ethics
- EU
- evolution
- Ezra Levant
- Filippo Pacini
- financial regulation
- Flemming Rose
- foreign aid
- Forskelligt
- France
- Franz Kafka
- freedom of speech
- Friedrich von Flotow
- fun
- Fyodor Dostoevsky
- Game theory
- Garry Kasparov
- genetics
- Geology
- George Carlin
- george enescu
- global warming
- government
- Grahame Clark
- Hamelin
- harry potter
- health
- health care
- hemingway
- historie
- history
- Homer
- hypocrisy
- immigration
- indvandring
- integration
- IQ
- isaac asimov
- islam
- Jane Austen
- Japan
- jesusandmo
- John Stuart Mill
- Jon Stewart
- Joseph Heller
- Journalism
- journalistik
- jp
- karl popper
- Khan Academy
- knowledge sharing
- kommunisme
- kriminalitet
- kultur
- landbrug
- language
- løb
- Lectures
- Leland Yeager
- Lenin
- Liszt
- litteratur
- machiavelli
- Marcel Pagnol
- Maria João Pires
- Mark Twain
- marriage
- Martin Amis
- Martin Paldam
- mathematics
- medicine
- medier
- mendelsohn
- meta
- mikhail gorbatjov
- Mikkel Plum
- Montefiore
- Morten Uhrskov Jensen
- movies
- Mozart
- Muhammedtegningerne
- music
- musik
- Muzio Clementi
- Nature
- Nikolai Medtner
- North Korea
- nuclear proliferation
- nuclear weapons
- Obama
- Ole Vagn Christensen
- orwell
- Oscar Wilde
- overcomingbias
- Paleontology
- papers
- Pascal's Wager
- paternalisme
- Paul Graham
- people are strange
- personal
- personligt
- philosophy
- Physics
- pictures
- politics
- politik
- polls
- Psychology
- public choice
- quotes
- Rachmaninoff
- rambling nonsense
- random stuff
- Rationality
- regulation
- regulering
- Relationships
- religion
- Reposts
- Richard Dawkins
- Rochefoucauld
- Rowan Atkinson
- Rusland
- Russia
- samizdata
- Sartre
- Saudi Arabia
- Schumann
- science
- science fiction
- Shakespeare
- skak
- Solzhenitsyn
- Stalin
- statistics
- studies
- stupidity
- Sun Tzu
- Sundhed
- taxation
- technology
- Terry Pratchett
- The Art of War
- Thomas Hobbes
- Thomas More
- Tolstoi
- tradeoffs
- Uncategorized
- USA
- valg
- velfærdsstaten
- voting
- walter gieseking
- wikipedia
- William Easterly
- xkcd
- youtube
- ytringsfrihed
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
The list of possible narratives for people who are in a relationship is actually unrecognisable to myself, because I tell myself none of those things. The same goes for the list of possible narratives for single people as well — I told myself none of those things either, when I was single.
So what is the right narrative for me? I am not sure if it can be summed up neatly in one sentence. It seems like the underlying assumption of all your listed narratives is that happiness is tied to an external locus. For any individual that relies mainly on an external locus for happiness and validation, naturally a lot of self-rationalisation is needed. But for people who do not, things are a lot simpler — they are in a relationship because they have fallen in love; they are single because a compatible partner has not come along. They take things as things happen, and they are happy and secure. Life is what happens when you are busy making plans, thinking about signalling, or finding narratives under which it can be subsumed.
I also apologise if it sounds preachy — I certainly didn’t intend for it to be that way.
“… they are in a relationship because they have fallen in love; they are single because a compatible partner has not come along. They take things as things happen, and they are happy and secure.” — If you ask a happily married man whose utility in life does not largely depend on external validation, “Do you appreciate your wife partly because being married signals that you enjoy higher status than single people?”, he will look at you as if you are crazy, and tell you that that thought has never crossed his mind, and that *of course* he is married to her because he loves her. This is just to expand on what I meant by “taking things as things happen”.
As I pointed out on skype, happiness is always tied to some extent to an external locus/external factors; humans are social animals and we all want other people to tell us that we’re great, that we’re loved etc. People with partners tend to have partners at hand who’ll tell them that and remind them regularly through both words and actions. People without partners tend to run out of non-pathetic people/people whose opinions they care about who’ll tell them these things (especially when they’ve reached the age where their parents are dead), and that lack of validation from credible sources tends to make such people unhappy. In the limit if you receive zero positive social input from others and you get the feeling that nobody else cares about your life besides yourself, then you will stop caring yourself too and you will want to kill yourself – been there, tried to do that, got the t-shirt.
If X knows X could find a partner if X wanted to, X is obviously not going to worry very much about that aspect of X’s life, and so it’ll be easy for X to be happy about X’s state of affairs. Millionaires also sometimes have a hard time understanding that some people have trouble paying their bills, but that doesn’t make money irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. The ‘just be happy whether you’re in a relationship or not’-advice I’ve seen before many times, and to me that’s the millionaire telling the beggar that he shouldn’t worry about money. I have never seen a a person with zero relationship prospects give that advice – that type of advice always comes from people who’re already in a relationship or from people who are single but could presumably without much trouble find a suitable partner if only they could be bothered. It would make a lot of sense if most of the happy and secure single people are the ones who have a lot of options and don’t face a lot of risk; it’s not that hard to be happy and secure while single if you don’t really have anything to worry about when it comes to finding a suitable partner in the future. On the other hand if the most likely future that awaits you is a future without such a suitable romantic partner, when one of the things in life you want the most is such a partner, then you’re probably not going to find it particularly easy to just feel happy and secure about your situation and be perfectly happy with just ‘taking things as things happen’.
“The ‘just be happy whether you’re in a relationship or not’-advice I’ve seen before many times, and to me that’s the millionaire telling the beggar that he shouldn’t worry about money. I have never seen a a person with zero relationship prospects give that advice…”
I can not find a suitable partner, that would be somebody single who lives on Sjælland, approx. my own age and with a regular practice of Vipassana Meditation, without much trouble. The justification for the first two requirements should seem obvious. The justification for the third requirement is that this a major part of my day to day-life, and the overwhelmingly dominant part of my precious vacation-time (neither of which I would want to change). On top of that it is the source of my ethical convictions.
As I am involved in the Trust that organizes the activities in Denmark, I am aware which meditators are active, and there are no single girls approx. my own age with a regular, deep-rooted practice of the meditation technique, that I have put front and center in my life.
Nevertheless my advice remains: Just be happy whether you’re in a relationship or not.
There must be nice, dateable people who share whatever affliction that someone would perceive as the biggest stumbling block to finding a partner?
Why? Because the world is just?
Say for the sake of argument that you happen to be a male chess player and absolutely want your partner to share your passion for chess. In Denmark I’d estimate that less than 1% of all members of the Danish Chess Federation are women. Good luck finding a partner there who also happens to match you along other relevant dimensions. (Perhaps I should point out that I’m not that male – I don’t really care much what a potential partner thinks about chess. Perhaps I should also point out that there are about 4.400 chess players in Denmark, and so 1% of that is 44 women..)
Yeah, of course potential partners always exist; roughly half the world is female anyway, and there’s no single preference or preference combination which would cut you off from every single potential partner in existence. But there are plenty of preferences and preference combinations which would make a potentially successful match-up incredibly unlikely to ever happen.
It’s mostly a question of what, and how much, you want from a relationship – the more you’re willing to disregard the costly preferences/settle/lower standards, the easier it gets to find a partner; and there’s a very big tradeoff here because the expected benefits derived from the relationship goes down when you lower your standards. Add search costs and related costs from repeated rejections, and perhaps also future bad experiences with poor matches which will end up not working out, to the lowered standards (..and lower expected benefits from the relationship..) required to find a partner in the first place, and for some people it sure starts to look as if they’d in expected terms clearly be better off not searching. Many of them search anyway and end up miserable because they keep wanting what they can’t have. Over time some of them learn, and they stop searching.
Men have search costs and women have screening costs, so females who stop searching will often find someone anyway because males approach them (plenty of women end up alone, but in my mind using search efforts to explain that outcome is not very useful). Males who stop looking on the other hand tend to end up alone.
Ha, I’ll see your just-world-hypothesis and raise with some charity.
The chess example is good, because it sounds like what William is doing. And it’s a dumb strategy (IMHO) to have any standards beyond mutual sexual attraction and compatibility in regard to conflict resolution styles. If these two are fulfilled I can’t see how it can in any way be called “settling” or “lowering standards”?
Disregarding all variables besides ‘mutual sexual attraction’ and ‘compatibility in regard to conflict resolution styles’ in the mating strategy implies that you implicitly assume that no other variable besides these two have any bearing on the quality of a potential relationship. Given most people’s search strategies, most people would consider this hypothesis to be blatantly false. If other variables matter as well then disregarding those variables when searching for a partner implies implicit ‘lowering of standards’ (as well as the use of a presumably inefficient search strategy, given that the applied partnership quality estimator is biased due to omitted variables).
Technically true, but the hypothesis behind the stated variables is that people overestimate the benefits of whatever extra must-haves they can come up with over and above these two – and also that it is very easy to overestimate how many of your needs and wants a relationship can realistically fulfill.
I did not mean to imply that other competing search strategies would necessarily always perform better than yours in terms of the (expected) outcomes; biased estimators may sometimes outperform unbiased estimators in finite samples, and if you use a more detailed model you’ll likely at least to some extent trade off the problem with omitted variable bias with other problems – like, say, the need to come up with an optimal weighting function to use to deal with the many different requirements (plus stuff like measurement error; the more variables you need to mentally keep track of, presumably all else equal the less precise are your (implicit) parameter estimates).
I’m sure that for some people a switch from the strategy they’re currently applying to your proposed strategy would improve their outcomes in expected terms. For others it would lead to worse expected outcomes. Again it depends on what you want from the relationship and how much you’re willing to compromise – most people seem to think that an at the very least marginally more detailed model is desirable and likely to achieve better outcomes on average, and I think many of them are probably right. A key point here is that the main tradeoff between the likelihood of finding a partner and the expected matching/relationship quality obtained conditional on finding a partner is always there, and that there’s no unique ‘optimal approach’ to how to deal with that tradeoff – what you consider optimal depends on the structure of your utilty function, attitude towards risk, subjective discount rate, etc.
For the record; I’d like to take this opportunity to completely concede your point regarding the “dumbness” of my strategy as far as landing myself in a relationship is concerned. I am perfectly well aware, that I myself removed the plug from the bottom of the dating pool.
But to completely mix metaphors, empty pools are pretty awesome for skateboarding, and that is just as enjoyable an activity as swimming. I am so happy with so many of my life choices, regarding friends, work, travel etc., that for the time being I enjoy my empty pool, and take full advantage of it’s peculiarities.
There are other strategic goals than getting a girlfriend.
“Dumb” is predicated on the person actually searching for a partner due a percieved need. If that isn’t the case, then adding complicating must-haves would serve as a good rationalization s for not dealing with this aspect of one’s life. And since this is the case, I retract my characterization of your strategy as “dumb”.