But I am so far beyond stupid that I fall into the same trap time and again. History apparently has taught me nothing. I no longer feel I can even learn what a mouse in a science experiment would learn to associate with danger, some bad effect of an activity/situation.
Inherent and insolvable problem in being three is the number of relationships that exist are 6. Lets name the 3 people as A,B and C.
The more the number of relationships, the more the misunderstandings, the jealousies, the rivalries for the affections, the unfair comparisons...you get the drift. Also any person with the working brain cell can identify that there is not one single positive outcome documented in the previous sentence.
Also from my listing of the relationships between A, B and C, it should be obvious that A->B is not equal to B->A. That in itself is not a problem [maybe it is, but not at all significant in direct comparison with the kind of trouble the author is talking about] if the equation only consists of 2 variables.
But consider this,
A->B = K [some value]
and B->A = L [another value]
but B->C = M [you know what is coming...]
of which K>L and M>L.
So the result = A is a pathetic, miserable, codependent loser who is not going to be given any importance from B, who prefers C instead.
Now you are beginning to understand the scope for the trouble. But it gets worse...
consider if all the 3 components of the equation feel that they are in the position of A in the previous illustration...
That they like a person more than the other but that person they like prefers the third more.
Whether it is a fact or not is entirely unimportant. Just that thought can lead to a lot of emotional turmoil.
God! to be emotionless... Would make the world such an efficient place.
People wouldn't be typing laments in form of blog posts, to be unleashed to the unsuspecting couple of people loyal enough to still come here and read it, at midnight when the next day is back-to-office-for- a-new-work-week day. [At this point the author takes a break to remember Rani ma'am who would say - “Short sentences make better impact, Remya! Why are you meandering...what is it, that you want to convey?”]
No one came keeping the another person's support as the basis. Which means that one can live without another person. Only funda is learning how to -
Not NAG [Cos that is right only a wife has and the person doing the nagging is not one...]
Not have expectations [Cos that leads to disappointment which sets off all the nagging...]
Stay less entangled with the other 2 people [that way no expectations, no disappointments, no nagging]
As the wise sage Alanis sang-You live, You learn,