8 Answers

  1. You have a strange choice. The dilemma of a maximalist and visionary, I'm sorry. You don't have to spend your entire life living with one person if you feel that this person doesn't quite suit you. Just as they shouldn't be alone, fighting for someone out there and waiting.

    You don't have to fight for anyone at all. This is not how healthy relationships are built. If a person does not make contact, rejects you, prefers someone else to you, says that he does not know what he wants, constantly fools your head-give up on him, this is not your person.

    Try to communicate and build relationships with different people, and somewhere there will be a coincidence of likes and interests

    It's another matter if your expectations from your partner are initially so high that none of the real people can meet them. Please review this point. And, know that building the perfect image in your head is not the best strategy, highlight some of the most important features for you, what you like about a person, without focusing on any general standards. Good luck to you.

  2. Neutral people are passive uninitiative and useless. Their mores are those of the majority, unremarkable faceless dolls. It is preferable to stay completely alone, since the presence of neutral people is extremely meaningless (if you understand from passivity and latency). You don't have to fight for the right people. The smarter you are, the more stupid people around you are, having reached the level when you quote Pushkin (Onegin):
    But there is no friendship between us,
    Exterminate all prejudices,
    We subordinate everyone with zeros,
    And units of themselves.
    Then the right people will not be negligent and indifferent to other people they need. With intelligence comes elitism and the strength of relationships, neutrality is in the majority and is absolutely not valuable.

  3. The only person you'll live with all your life is yourself. What's the point of fighting for someone who doesn't want to be with you and being with someone you don't care about? You just need to understand what you need, understand yourself, surround yourself with people who would support you and with whom you develop, and you will meet the golden mean. It's hard, but it's there.

  4. Strategy card game (twenty-one!) in its pure form, depending on many factors, including their temperament, some stop drawing cards, while others, at the risk of going through everything, draw and draw new ones. Different people play twenty-one games and games in general differently – it's not for nothing that an algorithm was developed to identify a person by how exactly he plays Tetris for a few minutes(while all people were given the same sequence of figures). In short – “crane or tit” is very individual, who is like.

  5. Sometimes, only after losing it can you realize that you did not live with a neutral person… And a bird in the hand is better than a crane in the sky… It always seems that it is good where we are not…. And happiness turns out to be right here, right next to you…

  6. In my opinion, the essence of the question is rather vague, so I will allow myself to put forward a few assumptions.

    Assumption-the author divides people into suitable and neutral from the subjective point of view of the individual. Then a “suitable” person is a person with a set of certain qualities that cause a set of strong emotions, from sexual passion to strong respect. Depending on the subject's preferences-from model legs to a PhD in philosophy or a villa in the Canary Islands. To a neutral person, the attitude is neutral, that is, he does not cause any special feelings for himself.

    Immediately I will make a reservation to myself that there are simply no “neutral” people from my point of view. Everyone has at least some well-defined features, everything depends only on whether these features “hooked” the individual in question (there is no question of individual bright personalities here, there are fewer of them and they really stand out from the general mass). The “appropriate” one is even more difficult to deal with than the neutral one. “Suitable” for whom/what? And if it is suitable, then why did the case still end in failure after a long struggle? Maybe this person only thought that he was suitable, but in fact he was not suitable at all? After all, it didn't work out in the end, it didn't “fit”.

    In this context, the choice of a “neutral” person is often due to fatigue, frustration after unsuccessful attempts, or even a general social norm. In the post-war years – and for a very long time after that, by inertia-many women married not for love or because of any particularly strong sympathy, but on the principle of “at least some man in the family”. For “neutral” people. There was a shortage of men in society at that time.

    I do not deny at all that the” struggle “for the” right ” person often requires considerable volitional and emotional effort. Not everyone needs this, and the result is not always commensurate with the resource spent – this is understandable. But that's where the “conscience” factor comes in. This, like a puzzle, always works in both directions and usually becomes visible if not at the first, then at the second or third stage of communication. The main thing is not to confuse “suitable” with “desired”.

    That's about all the thoughts I have about this issue. Good luck, and all the right people.

  7. I can say that in terms of friendship, I am very selective, so to speak, I have several people who are exactly right for me and I would not want to exchange them for anyone. And I had the feeling that these were exactly “my people”-that is, those who were close to me, almost from the very first minute of communicating with them(in fact, only with them such a feeling has been so far in my entire life). As a result, we have been friends with one person for 14 years, with the second 7, and with the third 4 years. The most interesting thing is that we never quarreled. Minor disagreements that lead to a dispute, of course, happen, but insults, scandals-no. We don't have a fight for each other and a fight for friendship with each other either. We believe that friendship grows stronger over the years, and can last a lifetime. We have outlined our general principles of friendship, which we follow, and everyone is happy. There is no point in fighting, because no one is going to throw anyone, everyone accepts each other as they are.
    So if I didn't have any friends at the moment, and I had a choice in friendship to wait for the right person during my life, or to communicate with neutral people – I would rather choose to be alone than to communicate closely with people who are unremarkable to me.
    I do the same when I'm waiting for the person I'd like to spend the rest of my life with. I understand that I'd rather be alone than with someone who's not close to me in spirit. Because for me, being with neutral people is like being alone.

  8. Having an understanding that there are no” suitable people ” – I would choose a neutral person.
    “The right person” is such a magical mirage that children and extremely stupid adults run after.

    There are no ideals in relationships or anywhere else. That feeling of euphoria and thoughts “ah, here he is / she1111 the very person I've been looking for all my life” – will pass in a week. Well, at most in a couple of years.

    Therefore, all these escapes for mirages, which idiots call love, are extremely unpromising. Because no matter how much you run through the desert, you won't catch up with the water.

    Only the option with a neutral person remains. That is, with someone with whom I will be comfortable going through life.
    A great option.

Leave a Reply