June 29, 2009
-
On Significant Others
Which is worse, to be with no one, or to be with someone who doesn’t appreciate you and doesn’t love you? – futureamadeus
At any given moment, to be with no one says nothing about your identity. However, to be with someone who doesn’t love you speaks volumes about you.
Being with someone who doesn’t love you is worse.
Comments (9)
I agree! 100%!!
mhmm
DAMN YOU AND YOUR IMPECCABLE LOGIC!
I definitely agree >_>
It would be very much worse. Loneliness is terrible, but not as much as the alternative.
These “volumes”, what exactly does it say about somebody?
The latter always seems to suck the most, in general and out of you.
I agree. At best, being with someone who doesn’t love you is like being alone. Often times, being with someone who doesn’t love you can lead to abuse or neglect. Being alone rarely leads to abuse or neglect.
Si.
I know a couple who have been together for 5 years, they look and act like a great couple. They have the natural and healthy spats about things… but the trait that annoys me the most is that they enable each other’s bad habits. Both of them are over weight and when the guy starts to lose weight, the girl flips out and makes him feel bad. She has a worse time losing pounds, shes a big emotional eater… I think he could lose the weight if she was more supportive. Alas that part of her misery loves company.
So even if you have a relatively good fit, or compatible relationship that doesnt have too many downers… you could still end up with someone that holds you back in other areas of your life.