two heads are better than one.

i've never really been one to believe in the term 'soulmate', it has always seemed just a bit too simplistic. the idea that out of the seven billion people in the world there is only one person out there who is perfect for you is just too insurmountable. the statistical possibility (or rather impossibility) is well, depressing. moreover, there are too many happy couples out there for it to be that black and white.

the other problem i have with the term is the idea that to be with your soulmate is to be complete. as though i'm not a whole person without a romantic partner. now the germiane greer feminist in me is just plain offended by that assertion because it means that once i find a romantic partner i cease to be the person i was before meeting that said person. it's ludicrous! i like being me. being me is fun, i'm not about to change that for regular sex.

still, having said all that i do understand why so many people pay into the idea of there being one perfect partner for them. it's an attractive romantic notion. one that is first spoken of by a very smart man about 2500 years ago. aristocles (or plato) had a very interesting and to be honest mad opinion of the idea. he believed that early man consisted of four arms, four legs and one head with two faces on it. but that a being was far too powerful and the ancient greek god, zeus, the father of all gods, feared such a being and so cut the being in half. the two halves of the one being, now modern man, were forced to spend their entire lives looking for their other half.

now i'm not saying that this isn't mad, it clearly is. but rather, that it is a powerful compunction that we all seem to have. to find that person who 'fits' us and an equal or other half of the whole. one complements our inner and outer strengths whilst tempering our failings or weaknesses. oh i don't know maybe i'm reading far too much into this. or maybe, i'm just another person looking for their 'better half'.