Singleness As Vocation

[PhuturePriest]

I don't know anything about love or relationships, but in my small experience in this stuff, I have been quite surprised with how attraction works. I always thought my "type" was a blond with long flat hair who was slightly shorter than me. Boy was I surprised when Emily, a curly brown haired girl with long-ish hair, knocked my socks off. I didn't even notice she wasn't a blond or didn't fit my type because I was too busy being infatuated with her. This is how it has always worked since then. Not once have I ever really liked a blond girl. Every single girl of the three girls I have really liked has always had brown hair, and never would have passed as attractive in my old standards of what my "type" consisted of. I've thought all three were amazingly beautiful and have learned there is no such thing as a type. The more I get to know them as friends, the more attractive they are to me. The less contact I have had with one, the less strongly I have felt about her and the less I have found her attractive (Though I still think she is). I can only imagine how much stronger attraction grows when you are actually in a relationship with someone.

[Nihil Obstat]

I don't know anything about love or relationships, but in my small experience in this stuff, I have been quite surprised with how attraction works. I always thought my "type" was a blond with long flat hair who was slightly shorter than me. Boy was I surprised when Emily, a curly brown haired girl with long-ish hair, knocked my socks off. I didn't even notice she wasn't a blond or didn't fit my type because I was too busy being infatuated with her. This is how it has always worked since then. Not once have I ever really liked a blond girl. Every single girl of the three girls I have really liked has always had brown hair, and never would have passed as attractive in my old standards of what my "type" consisted of. I've thought all three were amazingly beautiful and have learned there is no such thing as a type. The more I get to know them as friends, the more attractive they are to me. The less contact I have had with one, the less strongly I have felt about her and the less I have found her attractive (Though I still think she is). I can only imagine how much stronger attraction grows when you are actually in a relationship with someone.

I am relatively sure that almost nobody actually knows who their type is.

[HisChildForever]

I don't know anything about love or relationships, but in my small experience in this stuff, I have been quite surprised with how attraction works. I always thought my "type" was a blond with long flat hair who was slightly shorter than me. Boy was I surprised when Emily, a curly brown haired girl with long-ish hair, knocked my socks off. I didn't even notice she wasn't a blond or didn't fit my type because I was too busy being infatuated with her. This is how it has always worked since then. Not once have I ever really liked a blond girl. Every single girl of the three girls I have really liked has always had brown hair, and never would have passed as attractive in my old standards of what my "type" consisted of. I've thought all three were amazingly beautiful and have learned there is no such thing as a type. The more I get to know them as friends, the more attractive they are to me. The less contact I have had with one, the less strongly I have felt about her and the less I have found her attractive (Though I still think she is). I can only imagine how much stronger attraction grows when you are actually in a relationship with someone.

 

That's because you realized that beauty - well, physical beauty - goes behind a person's hair color. That's why I've always rolled my eyes at the old "men love blondes more than anything" because, well, if she has brittle hair and scaly dry skin her hair color really doesn't matter lol. I like instead to consider what a particular "look" means to a person. For example, maybe you equated blonde hair to daintiness or a rare jewel. But then when you actually met those rare jewels you realized that there's more to it than one physical characteristic. As for myself, the actors I crush on tend to have very dark brown eyes. Maybe it's just coincidence, I don't know. My boyfriend has green eyes though and I think he's the most gorgeous man on the planet. So you're definitely right - there's just something in another person that either pulls us in or strikes us as magnificent. I mean, your future wife might have dark brown hair, but how many women with dark brown hair have you *not* noticed - until you see her and you think wow, she has the most amazing, most beautiful hair I've ever seen.

[PhuturePriest]

That's because you realized that beauty - well, physical beauty - goes behind a person's hair color. That's why I've always rolled my eyes at the old "men love blondes more than anything" because, well, if she has brittle hair and scaly dry skin her hair color really doesn't matter lol. I like instead to consider what a particular "look" means to a person. For example, maybe you equated blonde hair to daintiness or a rare jewel. But then when you actually met those rare jewels you realized that there's more to it than one physical characteristic. As for myself, the actors I crush on tend to have very dark brown eyes. Maybe it's just coincidence, I don't know. My boyfriend has green eyes though and I think he's the most gorgeous man on the planet. So you're definitely right - there's just something in another person that either pulls us in or strikes us as magnificent. I mean, your future wife might have dark brown hair, but how many women with dark brown hair have you *not* noticed - until you see her and you think wow, she has the most amazing, most beautiful hair I've ever seen.

 

Exactly. Honestly, the only reason I was biased towards blonds was because when I was younger I read a book series and one of the main characters was a beautiful girl with blond hair. I guess I equated her attractive personality with her hair or something, so I then liked blondes. Either way, it doesn't matter because a physical type really doesn't exist. If you square the type of girl you like into a little box like I did you will miss out on amazing girls that you would have liked. What matters is what is attractive in someone's personality, rather than in their physical appearance. I've never liked a girl I didn't think was really attractive. But I don't know if that's because I liked them or because they really were objectively attractive or not. My sister didn't ever think Emily was that much of a looker. I thought she was the most beautiful girl I had ever seen. The most beautiful model couldn't compare with her, in my opinion. I guess that's why I think interior attraction is what really attracts you to someone, and not physical attraction. Through interior attraction you will reach physical attraction. Or that's been my experience, anyway. It's probably not a 100% foolproof ideology.
 

[Slappo]

I am relatively sure that almost nobody actually knows who their type is.

 

I know exactly who my type is. It's the person whose name is on my marriage license :|.

 

If it's not, then I'm in awfully big trouble when I get home tonight!

Edited March 8, 2013 by Slappo

[Not The Philosopher]

I'm at something of a similar crossroads in that I don't know what I'm doing with myself. I'm having difficulty seeing how my current single life could become a form of service (especially since I feel comfortable with it more because I am a lone wolf kind of guy than anything else). I don't want to deny the possibility of religious or married life on account of them being too hard, but realistically speaking getting from A to B in either of those cases seems like a bit of a stretch at this point in time.

[Nihil Obstat]

I know exactly who my type is. It's the person whose name is on my marriage license :|.

 

If it's not, then I'm in awfully big trouble when I get home tonight!

Addendum:

I am relatively sure that nobody actually knows who their type is until they marry them. And even then sometimes not.

[PhuturePriest]

Addendum:

I am relatively sure that nobody actually knows who their type is until they marry them. And even then sometimes not.

 

I'm almost certain my type will be my wife when I marry her. I can't imagine still not knowing at that point.

[Nihil Obstat]

I'm almost certain my type will be my wife when I marry her. I can't imagine still not knowing at that point.

The current divorce rate implies that many people are pretty clueless, going into marriage.

[Tony]

The way I've understood it,   the single vocation isn't a "Vocation" with a Capital V  but it could be a "vocation" (lower case v). We are all called to  a vocation but we aren't all nesicairly called to a "Vocation" I've felt called to stay single  for quite a while now, and was  lead to a tailspin of confusion until recently.

[Nihil Obstat]

The way I've understood it,   the single vocation isn't a "Vocation" with a Capital V  but it could be a "vocation" (lower case v). We are all called to  a vocation but we aren't all nesicairly called to a "Vocation" I've felt called to stay single  for quite a while now, and was  lead to a tailspin of confusion until recently.

I agree that we use the word vocation idiomatically, to mean things that are not necessarily the same as the strict definition of vocation. However I do not think it is correct to say that not everyone is called to a particular vocation.

[PhuturePriest]

The current divorce rate implies that many people are pretty clueless, going into marriage.

 

That just means people are getting married for the wrong reasons, or don't know all that marriage entails, or simply aren't mature enough for it yet. That doesn't mean if you get married to the person you are supposed to she/he isn't necessarily your type. Your type is the person God chose for you since the beginning.

[Nihil Obstat]

That just means people are getting married for the wrong reasons, or don't know all that marriage entails, or simply aren't mature enough for it yet. That doesn't mean if you get married to the person you are supposed to she/he isn't necessarily your type. Your type is the person God chose for you since the beginning.

You are taking me much too seriously.  :pinch:

[PhuturePriest]

You are taking me much too seriously.  :pinch:

 

I'm not being uptight about it. I'm just discussing for the sake of discussion.
 

[Tufsoles]

I do agree with the clueless thing. This is why I like the way the Colorado Springs Diocese is doing it. There are some(strong emphasis on this) dioceses that only do 2 meeting with a priest and a 6 month waitng period and maybe one marriage counseling class. The Springs diocese requires couples to be engaged for 1 year, Several meettings with thier priest, Must be going to that parish for 6 months prior to engagement, engaged encounter weekend, Family prep classes(includes stong emphasis on NFP and chasity inside marriage. ) Marriage prep classes that include what the church teaches and why they beleive what they believe.  I think  the couples have to do comptablity test(some of the questions include personality and religous beliefs.)THere is several other stuff that couples have to do but I don't remeber. I know that the springs is trying to prevent divorces like mentioned in this theard.

 I have no clue on what other dioceses do. I am just mentioning this BTW.