Single mom by choice and author Lori Gottlieb: settle for Mr. Good Enough
I went on the dating junket for a while, and joked with friends about my various Match.com finds that, “He isn’t Mr. Right… but he might be Mr. Right Now.” I went on a series of first dates, some hysterical, some hellish, all with men who had something to recommend themselves… to anyone else but me.
I’ve had my fill of the illusion of blinding, passionate love. Let’s face it. Tristan and Iseult make for good storytelling, but do you really want to raise a family and pay the bills in an atmosphere of pain and longing and possible suicide? Is breathtaking, overwhelming passion going to pay the bills and change the diapers? Not necessarily. That stuff is for windswept beaches and impeccable beauties in flowing white. It’s a Hallmark moment.
Author Lori Gottlieb heeded the call of her own biological clock and became a single mother by choice, but she makes a compelling argument for finding Mr. Good Enough–and MSNBC has printed an excerpt from her new book, “Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough.”
My advice is this: Settle! That’s right. Don’t worry about passion or intense connection. Don’t nix a guy based on his annoying habit of yelling “Bravo!” in movie theaters. Overlook his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics. Because if you want to have the infrastructure in place to have a family, settling is the way to go. Based on my observations, in fact, settling will probably make you happier in the long run, since many of those who marry with great expectations become more disillusioned with each passing year. (It’s hard to maintain that level of zing when the conversation morphs into discussions about who’s changing the diapers or balancing the checkbook.)
I’m alternating between agreeing with her and wondering why my hackles are raising up in protest. I don’t think it’s the hopeless romantic in me protesting the death of all-consuming love… Rather, I object to the idea of having to ’settle’ for a Mr. Good Enough. If he’s Good Enough, why do we have to settle? If you’re in the market for a mate, give the quiet ones a chance. You might be surprised to find that the nice, normal ones who don’t make your heart ache can still make your toes curl, even when you’re both too tired to move.
Tags: dating, Lori Gottlieb, Mr. Good Enough, Mr.-Right, Mr.-Right-Now, single-mom, single-motherRelated Stories
POSTED IN: essential reading
6 opinions for Single mom by choice and author Lori Gottlieb: settle for Mr. Good Enough
Kelly
Feb 8, 2008 at 4:49 pm
I disagree with her. I think what it boils down to is what is going to make you happy, and I don’t know why some people can’t see that you don’t have to be with someone to be happy. I love my (single) life, and the only thing that’s going to make me give it up is a guy who I think will improve it. If that never happens, so be it. But I’m not going to settle for the first guy who comes along just because I don’t want to be alone. Maybe that’s not what she means… I do think there’s a fine line between not settling and being too picky. But like I said, it all comes down to whether or not this guy will make you happier than you already are. It’s that simple.
christina
Feb 8, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Kelly, she’s not advocating bringing a man into your life who isn’t going to add anything to it. She is, however, advising women to stop dreaming about Prince Charming and take a chance on the charming toads in front of them. And from that persepective, I do agree that we spend too much time chasing fairy tales when a solid, loving, wonderful relationship is right in front of our noses, albeit without the heart-racing, death-defying antics of Love as we’ve been taught to know it.
JP
Feb 8, 2008 at 7:47 pm
The problem, I think, is the whole concept behind settling and Mr./Ms. Good Enough. By very definition, each of these says we would be accepting something when we know and believe it is not right for us. If the gestalt of teen-aged romantic love is still what we hold onto, then accepting a long-term relationship with someone who in our eyes fall short of the ideal is a bad idea.
The realization that we are looking for someone who we genuinely like and who likes us, who we can value just as they are and who values us the same way, with whom we can grow together — when we come to a realization that that is what we are looking for, it is no longer a matter of settling for something less than a teen-aged romantic ideal.
Being an idiot, this did not occur to me much later. What I decided was that I was going to be me, warts and all. (Fact is, what some see as my warts I actually kinda like.) Lo and behold, I found someone who valued me for just being me, someone for whom I also had significant respect and whom I liked a lot. Trust was easy (frighteningly so).
By the standards of my teen-aged self, I have settled. As me now, I can’t believe how fortunate I am — and how fortunate my child is.
Sounds trite, I guess, but the gestalt with which one approaches the whole idea of a partner seems, from my anecdotal experience, to matter a great deal.
christina
Feb 9, 2008 at 1:20 pm
JP, it’s not trite at all. It’s just a shame we have to wait so long to get those Hollywood blinders off our eyes and learn what true, lasting love is about. It’s very much about the warts n all part.
Alex
Feb 10, 2008 at 8:59 pm
The ideas about Mr. Right floating around in that article are really… cartoonish. If anyone believes in that kind of Mr. Right, that’s a sad sad thing. I’m glad the women I know don’t settle, but also don’t have weird expectations and demands in the first place.
Liberals and Hollywood get jumbled together a lot in the ‘liberal media’, but this little left winger doesn’t understand why anyone would let Hollywood ideals (which always push motherhood, btw) influence their choice in mates.
christina
Feb 10, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Alex, I haven’t read the whole book but I don’t think the excerpt gives a good enough idea of the voice as a whole. I suspect that the book is an almost tongue-in-cheek look at the whole mess that modern romance has become. If I were to write this book, I’d push for the idea that, while heaving bosoms and being crushed against his manly chest are all well and good for the conception of babies… it’s the man who will fall asleep with a colicky baby on his chest, still kiss you like a movie star when you’ve got pureed peas in your hair, and understand that some times, a woman would rather have her feet rubbed that other, more obviously sexy parts… it’s that man who’s got Sex Symbol written all over him, and the Hollywood hunk can keep his flash.
A mate should be for life, should be for better or worse, for baby fat and dark circled eyes, for laughter and love and a silly soft shoe routine while loading the dishwasher.
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: