Love and the Individual

Being yourself is something of a double edged sword.

From the outset I never sought to place myself in the position I find myself in – a single person who feels on the whole very lonely. Who would? As I reflect more on the recent love lost (whether it was real or imagined is for another blog), and indeed on all of my relationships and hopes for future personal happiness, it seems even more evident to me that it is very hard to live your life in a way which is both truly honest to yourself and still generally acceptable to others. The two just don’t seem to gel at the moment. I’d be the first to point out that I’m throwing stones in a glasshouse. My own life to date hasn’t exactly been exemplary with respect to getting it right first time. We each have our crosses to bear where personal mistakes are concerned and I suppose we each have to find our own way of dealing with them, but as I sit here mulling things over I can’t help but feel that society stacks the odds against us all from the beginning. In the West (and particularly here in the UK) life is hypocritically portrayed as something to behold, with freedom and opportunity for all – no social exclusion. Well as I see it, aside from the fact that we clearly AREN’T all equal or in a position to be capable of having it all (I’m sorry, but someone who is totally paralysed is not going to make it as a true long-distance runner, no matter how many equal opportunity forms the PC brigade print), that “freedom and opportunity, complete with happiness” package comes with an ironic price attached – yes, social exclusion. For my part in this I’m going to metaphorically overlook the long-distance paraplegic sprinter to get to the fundamental issue of “relationships” as my example, as this is foremost on my mind.

In an effort to attract a mate it is typically the looks which get the attention (ie. the most attractive woman/man they would choose to be seen with rather than necessarily the RIGHT person). People may then generally choose to be brave and show themselves as they are, or apply a character ‘veneer’. They may do this either because of peer pressure, or a conscious choice to focus on money/status/looks of the potential mate as motivators rather than any of the true motivators for mutual attraction. This immediately presents a personality apart from their natural self. If the target of their affections chooses to do their self a similar disservice, is it any wonder that relationships keep failing on the scale we see? To meet the bull head-on as it were, if our truly compatible mates are really so physically undesirable, well maybe that would be different if the poor “unfortunate looker’s” personal self-worth wasn’t being crushed or misguided by a society obsessed with career, money and celebrity, and lacking in a proper, personal education for the good of the individual? Surely we would take pride in ourselves rather than feel the need for personal abuse in our united unhappiness. Personally, I suspect this may go some way towards explaining the high incidence of divorce and general malcontent which seems to exist in many relationships. These blindsided issues are usually further exacerbated down the line by couples trying to paper over the cracks and rebuff any nagging doubts with the ultimate commitment status symbol of children, who inevitably pay the price themselves by maturing within a ‘forced’ family unit – forced until divorce or murder ensues. Older generations have typically attributed it to a failing in the younger generations that they don’t persevere. Whilst this may be true to a degree (a world war and physical absence between partners is a very good motivator for appreciating the moment to be sure) I’m not totally convinced that life is so casual at the interpersonal level. Even in times of crisis lovers still experience their share of arguments. No, I think the overall problem we have here ladies and gentlemen is a disguised form of social engineering, itself motivated by either a desire to sustain an unworkable system, make money, and damn the moral consequences, or more likely both.

I can only really speak for the seventy million or so people in the UK as these are the people I experience on a daily basis, but I find it hard to believe that the vast majority really share an overwhelming interest in sport (mainly football), soaps, fame, beer and curry, without external driving forces. Why do we as individuals seem to have a fear of expressing our true selves to one another? The survival instinct encourages homogeneity for sure so grouping is inevitable, but with society in such a relatively comfortable position as it has ever been in, why are we drawn en masse to the banal rather than inspired by the extraordinary possibilities which we each might live? It’s also a truism that humans have a natural tendency to take the line of least resistance, but surely we would be more content existing as people with unique stories? It could be argued that this is the ultimate expression of the desirable side to ‘anarchy’ – and let it be said right here that I believe most people who fear anarchy are likely mistaking it for ‘nihilism’, the unnecessarily barbaric end of chaos rather than personal freedom, not that anarchy couldn’t probably benefit from some small refinement. As I relate this problem through my modest insights into Buddhism I think I can see a Catch 22. The solution would come from our collectively doing the right thing and trusting in the natural order of things by tending first to ourselves - positive selfish motivation, so that we are first and foremost true to ourselves. This then prepares our individual foundations for our contact with people as we travel the coveted ‘path of least resistance’. Maybe this would in itself help alleviate a lot of the underlying irritating feelings we have in our lives, feelings which we have trouble putting our fingers on when we feel discontent, the itch we can’t scratch – ‘What’s wrong with you?’ someone says, ‘I just don’t know’ comes the reply. Maybe we CAN see the problem, but we just choose to ignore it by having elections and letting others take the reins - letting go of personal social responsibility (which comes back to the arguable position of anarchy, which demands personal responsibility at a social level). But who wants to be the first to take individual responsibility? Still, by continuing to resist this responsibility the problem perpetuates and nothing in our lives can ever hope to settle satisfactorily – since when does someone else truly know what’s best for you? Thus people such as myself, who do try to learn from mistakes (despite the irony of going against society’s grain by taking the true path in life), have an especially difficult time of it because we not only have the normal day to day issues to contend with, but (for example) in trying to find happiness with a partner we also have an additional layer of social difficulty because of people playing ‘love games’, possibly denying many people the true, loving connection they deserve. Indeed, we can all aspire to better things – we can all be Johnny Depp, Neil Armstrong, the Dalai Lama - anyone we admire. I haven’t met any of them, but I’ll be willing to bet that when they aren’t doing their “thing” which we know them for, they really ARE normal people behind the scenes – to be the iconic figure 24/7 would drive you insane (and for some this has been the case, yes?). We each have a chance to be an extraordinary individual if we choose, rather than becoming bad copies or clones. Even being ordinary would leave one more contented than being fake wouldn’t it!?

For me, I think this may be why I generally have a hard time living in the society I am stuck in, especially when I am seeking something as simple as true love to help make me feel complete. That’s likely to be the truth at the heart of all this. We’re all stuck - it’s just a matter of whether we really feel and see it, or not. Ignorance may be bliss in this case. Surrounded as I am by people unwilling or unable to be themselves I find the only solution open to me is to seek a lesser-tainted culture for a soulmate, a task which is getting harder every day with rampant globalisation. As has often been said in my ramblings, I believe my true heart lies in Japan, no matter how much I might try to consider otherwise for conveniences’ sake. The main backlash I have read to counter this reasoning for looking beyond my own culture is “If you find you don’t like women in your own culture how can you hope to find love anywhere else? Surely you just have an issue with women generally?”. Not so. I always thought women were the feminine balance to the masculine side of the equation. Today, UK western women seem to feel incomplete unless they can be seen to be wielding personal power like a man, or else they aspire to become one of the many baby-making dole monsters out there, who for my tastes, excepting biological reasons, don’t deserve to be called women. Similarly, whilst I don’t condemn men for seeking a softer side to their personalities to inspire compassion and understanding where a club would have served as well the past, I certainly haven’t felt inspired by any present leaders. Even the arguments relating to pro and anti-homosexual outlooks can’t be honestly swept aside, for if anything they are simply examples of people expressing their true natures, which in this blog would seem to be a laudable thing. To condemn one relationship orientation would mean in this context to condemn all relations. Regardless of how you view it, it is just people expressing themselves freely – exactly what we want to encourage. The villain here is probably the over-exuberance with which alternative lifestyles are forced into the public arena (more social engineering agendas there too I think). I suppose you can pick your pigeonhole for anyone of the fakes out there, and trust me when I say I HATE pigeonholes. As you might imagine from my pictures people usually put me in one every time they meet me, which is about the only reason why I still feel ethically open to the possibility of finding a western soul mate, in spite of the odds.

You know, when we get to the heart of the matter I think a lack of credible role models is a very serious vacuum, which has been sorely overlooked. Is there any wonder that the more extreme, darker side of society would serve heroes up in such a capacity to redress the balance for the socially alienated? Oh, and for those who might seek to pipe up with an old chestnut at this point, let’s put this one to bed right here. it isn’t video games or films which make society violent, it’s more likely the lack of heroes and role models in real life which gives the fantasy characters such a lease of power. Blaming either the creator(s) or the actual film or video game itself is like blaming the hammer when you hit your thumb. The true fault in this case is the consequence of the action or inaction, not the instigator. Sadly, I believe it’s evermore ironic that it’s the truly rebellious side in humanity which is sustaining us as a species at the moment. Then again, maybe that’s always been the case. Surprises usually come our way when someone tries something without knowing it should be impossible.

This plague which has been running through our society which is making it a respectable thing to run from your true nature needs dealing with, now. Where the hell would an idea like that come from in the first place? Maybe from a society run by a lunatic minority who want to sit in their ivory towers, who force ‘square’ people into ‘round’ holes to satisfy their own demands, too afraid to trust in having individuality at the helm? Surely we are each best at what we are? Wouldn’t it be ironic to think that society may be better served by the individual excelling rather than straight-jacketed, badly educated clones?

Hmm.. This all still all leaves me with the problem of finding my one, true love though doesn’t it?