Skip to main content

Quirkyalone (What Relationship Label Will I Accept?)

A new word for today: quirkyalone*. It's a neologism that wikipedia says refers 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 it."

That is me.

Here's the thing, though. I don't really like the phrase. It's a compound of two words that I don't think accurately describe me - or at least don't flatter me.

First off, quirky. Sure, maybe I'm quirky. Everyone is a little bit strange in their own special (and sometime endearing) way. We all have little idiosyncrasies that mark as our own individual selves. But frankly, I don't think my contentedness and purposeful approach to dating is quirky, and I don't want that label attached to it.

And then, alone. If there is one thing I've internalized in the past three years of my life, it is that I am not alone. I have a plentiful network of friends and family who care for me deeply. I know people who are dating and/or married who experience just as much "aloneness" as I do; maybe more. To say that I am alone draws a distinction of haves and have-nots that I don't believe is true.

This conundrum has been brewing for awhile; I am just not satisfied with the most common options for explaining/defining my romantic status. And yet I recognize that these labels are inevitable and, at times, helpful. So which one do I stick on myself?


Single - carries the stigma of the ages, plus its social implications run parallel to those of alone.

Unmarried - anything that defines me by what I am not is instantly suspect. What other avenues of our lives do we do this in? Unemployed. Another loaded word... (Anything else?)

Not-yet-married - a doozy! Not only is it a negative descriptor, but it implies & assumes that I will someday marry, which we don't know is true! It's counting on a promise that can't be assured, and it builds up false hopes.

Independent - I tend to like this one, except that it inversely suggests that married or dating women are not independent. And while there is a measure of truth to that, it is not as if these women are dependent. They most certainly are still their own unique and contained selves who function and think and feel and experience life separately from their significant others.

Autonomous - same as above. Plus, I am not fully autonomous/independent. No human is. I don't want to pretend to be, because that isn't healthy and leads to a lot of pride and a lot of headaches and a lot of expectations I can't possibly meet.

Solo - I think this is my favourite. It has no implications on the partnered people. It doesn't carry any negative weight (I don't think?) and although I should never refer to myself as "riding solo," it is a term that has some presence/weight in popular culture.


What are your thoughts, friends? What terms do you like/dislike to describe your marital/dating/romantic status? Are there any common labels I've overlooked?



*thanks to Sarah for introducing me to this crazy word, via the wonders of Twitter and UberFacts (whom I often doubt, but were accurate today).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What About Travis!?

I just watched Hope Floats, the second movie in my I-really-need-to-vegetate night. Now that we have more than three channels, there are so many quality programs on TV! Like movies in the middle of the week. I enjoyed many of the lines in this movie, including:

"I went home and told my mama you had a seizure in my mouth."
(referring to her first french-kissing experience)

"Dancing's just a conversation between two people. Talk to me."
(the conversation in our living room then went,
Girl 1: Only Harry Connick Jr. could say that line without it being incredibly cheezy.
Boy: Without it being cheezy? That's all I heard. Cheez, cheez, cheez.
Girl 2: Yeah, but it was sexy, sexy cheez...sigh.)
"Better do what she says, Travis. Grandma stuffs little dogs."

Bernice: At home we had a pet skunk. Mama used to call it Justin Matisse. Do you think that's just a coincidence? All day long she would scream, "You stink Justin Matisse!" Then one day she just…

Fostering FAQ: What's Her (Mom's) Story?

This is probably the second most common question I hear about the baby currently in our care, right after, "Will you keep her?"

It comes in many forms:

"So, what's her story?"
"Is her mom in the picture?"
"How did she end up in your home?
"Is her mom a drug addict?"
"How could a mom not love such a cute baby!"

I get it. It's natural curiousity, and I know I've asked similar questions of my friends who are adoptive parents.


But here's what I'm learning: a child's story is their own. And equally as important, the parent's story is their own.

Imagine how it might feel to hear that for the foreseeable future, you are not allowed to care for your child. On top of whatever difficult circumstances you are already in - perhaps poverty, social isolation, lack of adequate housing, domestic violence, intergenerational trauma, drug or alcohol dependency, low cognitive functioning, or a myriad of other complex strug…

Simone Weil: On "Forms of the Implicit Love of God"

Simone Weil time again! One of the essays in Waiting for God is entitled "Forms of the Implicit Love of God." Her main argument is that before a soul has "direct contact" with God, there are three types of love that are implicitly the love of God, though they seem to have a different explicit object. That is, in loving X, you are really loving Y. (in this case, Y = God). As for the X of the equation, she lists:

Love of neighbor Love of the beauty of the world Love of religious practices and a special sidebar to Friendship
“Each has the virtue of a sacrament,” she writes. Each of these loves is something to be respected, honoured, and understood both symbolically and concretely. On each page of this essay, I found myself underlining profound, challenging, and thought-provoking words. There's so much to consider that I've gone back several times, mulling it over and wondering how my life would look if I truly believed even half of these things...

Here are a few …