Why there is nothing wrong about a materialistic girl and everything wrong about a non-materialistic guy

Reference to an article published in TRS (you can read the article here), I would honestly say that there is nothing absolutely wrong about being a materialistic girl (pretty similar to a man who only love girls with huge boobs). You can claim that they are superficial, but the problem is never about them - it is really a matter of our choice. You made the choice to date. You made the choice to pursue. You made the choice to jio her.

The bitter truth is that "it is we who choose our partner, not the other way round." After all, throughout the courting process, it is truly freewill.

The writer claims that all his previous girlfriends left him for someone richer. Truth be told that if finding a non-materialistic girlfriend (probably someone more down-to-earth) is his primary prerequisite, then his internal radar would not have picked up the ones with signs that suggested otherwise. Obviously if the writer has a history of such dating patterns, then we need to examine the nature and the development of his choices.

You see, if I walk into a Harvey Norman wanting to buy a television - no amount of persuasion, tactics or employed strategies from the salesman selling vacuum cleaner can make me part my dollar to buy his product.

Of course, that's only possible if I knew exactly what I wanted and need in the first place. Unfortunately in a context of a relationship, this becomes a little tricky. I will explain by tweaking the above scenario a little: imagine you now have $1,000, but on the condition that you must make the purchase by 30 minutes or the money gets taken back. You start scrambling to locate the TV section with no apparent success and by the 15 minutes mark, you encounter the eloquent salesman selling vacuum cleaner. Chances are, you would probably reason with yourself that you could either (1) use the money to buy at least something while you continue to look for your desired TV, (2) or risk having nothing by the end of 30 minutes.    

With the above analogy, those choices in who we accept into our lives then becomes a tool for risk management - not necessarily born out of love. A scary revelation indeed.

Perhaps we have to concede that there is a real difference between loving someone as it is and loving someone with a subconscious clause that he/she must change. For the latter, it is often our own selfish nature to maximize personal needs-fulfillment. We often abuse this actively by wanting to change our partner without first having to reexamine our personal expectation. And one likely culprit responsible for such phenomenon can be attributed to our inability or great aversion to deal with loneliness.

And because many people can't really deal with loneliness very well, the truth (for some) is that accepting an unsuitable partner appears to be a battle easier than having to deal with prolong loneliness with no signs of abating. Sometimes, it is also coupled with our self-defeating belief that if we are single, then there must be something unlovable about us - which is why we are still single.

For a start - you might want to stop feeding yourself with these self destructive thoughts. You are basically worth as much as how you validate yourself; if you figured that you are about a dollar's worth, then essentially you are just that.

Learn to take charge of your love life and be congruent about your needs; the dividends payout from adopting these principles would reward you manifolds in the marathon of love.

Cheers,
Yunhaier

Love is not Charity

Just had a conversation with someone and the gist of the conversation involves questions of going back to her ex. Perhaps it is not so much about what she has decided, but rather, the reason why this even came up.

'I feel sorry for him'. 

I think we need to establish an important principle: that love is NOT charity. Nobody enters into a relationship because they only want to give; there must be a mutual fulfillment of needs. In an absolute sense, relationships that purely give or take pretty much ends up in MH370-type disaster down the road. Everyone enters into a relationship because some aspects of your needs are reasonably being fulfilled, in which you are also then motivated to fulfill your partner's needs simultaneously.

There is no room for charity in love.

There are a number of substitute emotions that can mask the authenticity of love. Sometimes, it is not always external; it could be our inner desire for companionship crying far louder than our natural feeling for the other person. Often, we are assailed by personal insecurity or by self-limiting belief  (e.g. I don't think I can find someone else better or no one loves me like he/she does... so might as well try again).

One cannot expect time to alter the reality of things; there are reasons why certain things ended the way it did. Therefore, one must anticipate that these reality of things will continue to haunt us - regardless of the amount of time you put between 'then' and 'now', especially if these are fundamental challenges.

Time does not resolve fundamental challenges; it merely distort our understanding in the resolution of these problems and creates an illusion of change. Fundamental problems require critical self-negotiation and conscious acceptance in the trade off. If you cannot accept the situation in the past, then going back is just relearning an old lesson. If you have come to a genuine acceptance, then the need to reconcile with what you have traded off is paramount because (going back to the earlier principle) you are in a relationship not for charity. People often downplay or minimizes this traded off equation - thinking that they can manage effectively - but only to ghastly discover how it gradually transform into some demonic resentment later on in life.

One MUST be able to resolve this dissonance at this level; if not, it is probably around-the-world in eighty days in bitterness. Twice the strength.

Cheers,

Yunhaier