Quirkyalone fever

20 04 2007

This morning I got up, got ready, headed off to work and had made it a couple of blocks before I realised the reason I was walking so slowly was because the pesky ground wouldn’t stay flat. That was when I decided to give up and go back to bed. I’m not averse to the occasional sick day, but they seem so wasted when you’re actually sick.

So this post is courtesy of a spacey fever and a cranking headache. Well, the headache’s not too bad, I’ve been sending it paracetamol on and off all day, which has been sorting the fever out as well. Hurrah modern medicine. Part of me thinks fuck up, sook, but my brain has other ideas. Doing stupid things like getting out of the shower and realising I hadn’t rinsed the conditioner out of my hair. Not noticing the flame on the stove making friends with the wooden handle of the kettle. Forgetting to move my head out of the way of the opening door. It’s kind of amusing in a slightly delirious/slimy/charred/bruising way.

Spartacus sent me this article on quirkyalones in response to my last post. Still deciding whether he’s trying to be insulting or helpful. Probably both. I first heard the term a couple of years ago, but I’m yet to come up with a clear view on what I think about it.

Wait, wtf is quirkyalone?

Quirkyalone” is a neologism, referring to someone who enjoys being single (but is not opposed to being in a relationship) and generally prefers to be alone rather than dating for the sake of being in a couple.

I think it’s an interesting way to look at the increasing trend of people staying single rather than settling for less than ideal relationships, but I also see it as playing on the weaknesses of single people. Is that bad? I dunno. Only as far as any idea that might lead to people falsely justifying or papering over something, I guess. It’s a manifesto that takes the sting out of some of the other labels applied to single people; at the same time, it sidesteps any discussion about why we think being single is somehow less than being in a relationship. “Here’s a more positive label for you sad people that can’t attract a mate! But don’t worry, it’s still based on the idea that really, deep down, all anyone wants is to be in a relationship, just this time, it’s with another quirkyalone person!” Are people really staying single because they just haven’t found their miracle? Or is it because the pressure to be in a heterosexual traditional relationship is lessening and people are realising it doesn’t need to be their ultimate goal in life?

Maybe it’s a bit more simple. Maybe I’m just not the target market. I am single. But I’m probably not quirkyalone*, as much as the descriptions of enjoying solitude (I do, thanks for asking) and seeking “momentous meetings” appeal. I’ve spent three-quarters of the past decade in serious monogamy. This current singledom has lasted somewhere between eighteen months and two years (it’s a definitional issue), which, in the grand scheme of things, is pretty small potatoes. And for me being single is more attitudinal than chronological – two years between kisses perhaps, but really not very long since I started thinking I might want to go back out there. The difference between absence and lack, I suppose.

More than that, though, I really don’t have a sense of needing romantic love in order for my life to happen. Of course loving and being loved makes the world go round** etc, but in real terms, I have great friends, a kickarse family, financial security, a full life all by myself. I don’t need saving, or completion, by some external other, be they a matching puzzle piece or not. Emotional security is something that I want before I enter a relationship, not something that will come about because of it. I am also clear-eyed about what will happen in a few years time if I am single and decide to have kids. Which is to say, I will do so. With all the considerations that people are supposed to have, is it right to bring another human into this mad overcrowded world, can I afford it, will I be able to bring them up to be good people.

And maybe I am able to be confident because subconsciously I think I won’t be single forever. What the Baach calls my “particularness” aside***, recent excursions into the world of grown-ups has reminded me that people are fascinating, and humbling, and all manner of good things. They are out there. I love love; being in love is wonderful. Love is the cherry on top, and I recognise that my life will be sweeter if and when I’m ready for it again.

Sweeter. Because it is already sweet.

————————–
* According to the quiz I’m “97 – very quirkyalone”. Of course I did the quiz. I love those things.
** Or conservation of rotational energy does. I forget which. It’s one of those things, anyway.
*** “You get that from me,” she says.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

14 responses

19 04 2007
j

Ha ha what a bunch of bollocks! They just made this up. This was me.How quirkyalone are you?Your score was 79. Somewhat quirkyalone (otherwise known as quirkytogether):You are probably part of a mysterious group of people, the quirkytogethers. You share many of our quirky qualities, but you manage to find yourself, on a regular basis, in a coupled situation. Interesting.

20 04 2007
MikeFitz

Great post, Sherd. Hooray for “Emotional security”. We should all have one.And conservation of rotational energy? Is that what they call it these days? Back when I were a youngster, we used to call it conservation of angular momentum

20 04 2007
Sherd

Ah, tis true Mike. I couldn’t remember exactly (I was never much about the physics) and couldn’t be bothered to google. I shall blame it on the fever!

20 04 2007
Anonymous

people like you are ruining our society

20 04 2007
MadameBoffin

Anon… wtf? She’s someone content with her own life and happy to let love come in it’s own time and it’s own way – we should all take note of her example!! I hate anon commenters.Much respect for you Sherd – you’re an inspiration to those of us still trying to be comfortable with themselves 🙂 PS according to the quiz I’m a 78.. a “quirky together”

20 04 2007
K

I did the quiz just out of interest stake, and oddly enough I got 79 – Quirky together. What the hell does that mean (stupidly I closed the explanation before I’d read it). I’m engaged for those who don’t know. I think it’s crap!Sherd did you get 79 or 97?

20 04 2007
k

Oddly enough I got 79 too, and I’m engaged!I think its crap!Sherd did you get 79 or 97?

20 04 2007
k

Sorry didn’t think it worked the first time so posted it again. Damn technology!

20 04 2007
sherd

Anon: thanks, I do what I can. Boff: Yay! Thanks.K: I got 97. j pasted the quirkytogether description at the top there.

20 04 2007
mangoman

Not so sure about the quiz. I came out at 99. I might have taken some questions a bit literally. Don’t tell the woman I have been with for 35 years.

20 04 2007
Nabla

The quiz is a lot of bollocks.Apparently I’m a 71.You can’t pick more than one answer, and the answers are too restrictive.WhingeRantComplain.Whew.Sorry, just got back from the pub where there were people who didn’t have to go back to work after having a couple of pints.Back to work, the water needs fixing, apparently.

20 04 2007
Mangoman's Manager

And I got 62 – to Mangoman’s 99!! I suppose we should just think ‘complementary’ rather than ‘similar’.

22 04 2007
Alannah

I got 104. That seems like a lot, though I noticed they don’t tell you what it’s out of. What if it’s out of 8 billion? 104 doesn’t seem so high then.

23 04 2007
Sherd

Holy shit, lannie, I think it’s out of 100! You are super quirkyalone! Oh noes! Lucky we’ve decided it’s a load of bollocks then, eh.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: