Single File by Susan Deitz

DEAR SUSAN: Well, for what seems to be the millionth time, I've met a wonderful woman who, after we started dating, suddenly said we're "just friends." Women see me as sincere and reliable but very boring — a complete "puppy dog." I realize I'm too inhibited with women I really care for. (I do fine with the ones who aren't romantic prospects!) How can I tell this woman I deserve a second look? — Clay C., Long Island, N.Y.

DEAR CLAY: By giving her the chill treatment. Stop phoning, and start exploring the rest of the population. Dating isn't the only way to get your jollies, you know (not that it has delivered many for you). This may sound radical coming from a singles columnist, but I'm suggesting you delete dating. (Gasp.) Not for all time, of course, but certainly for the next few months. From what you tell me, you've come to a crossroads, and the smart move is to take the path less taken (i.e., simply enjoy your life by following your interests and values). No fuss, no bother. Gone are the pricey dinners by fake candlelight during which you make small talk that has all the substance of a puffball. Gone are the phone calls and mind games that add up to very (very) little, only sleepless nights and downward estimations of self. No, Clay, my vote is for you to venture into the wider world where dating is an absurdity and common interests are the glue between people. Yes, of course there'll always be primal attraction — Tarzan will always gravitate toward Jane — but the talk between them will be real and honest because it's rooted in a shared experience. That's the kind of talk that brings out the relaxed person, someone at ease with himself and the world around him. Take it from me; you'll enjoy so much more of this ol' world, and you might very well come across someone who brings out the you hidden under layers of dating fluff. Isn't it worth a try?

DEAR SUSAN: I believe many couples fail because they don't acknowledge that they do indeed complete each other and are truly responsible for each other's happiness. If people were happy and complete without partners, the human race would have ended with Adam and Eve! A recent reader sent his lady a CARD(!) for Christmas, wasn't with her on that important holiday, and then was surprised she'd rather be squeezed by her main squeeze! Her problem isn't that she can't be happy on her own. Her problem is that she's trying to find happiness with a self-centered man, who doesn't care about her but rather makes psychobabble excuses.

Better to find a man who feels responsible for some portion of her completeness and happiness. (Then, of course, she has some responsibility for her man, also.)

Susan, I know women who are complete and happy by themselves; they're self-absorbed princesses who are making nobody happy. Plus that completeness doesn't wear well in the long run, and they're out of the running by the time they figure it out. (Guys, too, of course.) I think a couple is more than the sum of its parts. Each person gives up some of the "me" to become "us." Living parallel, separate lives is the death of many couples, I'm sure. — Luther Bub, Santa Rosa, Calif.

DEAR LUTHER: Great letter. Makes your point agreeably while disagreeing with (a misunderstanding of) my premise. Whatever emotion is stirred by your words, it's got to make us all think again about what we believed was firmly settled in our minds. And that can only be healthy and provocative. Count me in as one of your biggest fans. As for your main point, Luther, it's hereby granted that couple-ism can be a state of bliss and wonder — but (this is where "Single File" comes in) only when both partners are whole unto themselves, in a state of undependence. Your (mis)understanding contorts that truth into a closed-end condition that is anything but mutual! Believe me, friend; that's not at all where I'm going with this. Rather, when love partnership is between whole partners, then — and only then — can full loving exist. I'm talking here about completeness of an individual, developed outward to the point that it can be joined to another. If that isn't the case — and it's not a commonplace situation, by any means — one of the partners tends to lean on or, worse, smother or (worst-case scenario) totally eclipse the other.

Yes, this may occur in the name of "love," but the fact is it doesn't come anywhere near benefiting the beloved. And so the entire relationship is lopsided, and in time, it becomes even more so, morphing into a distortion of the original. Which is the reason I advocate expanding oneself in as many ways as possible while keeping doors open (ajar?) for romance. This type of singleness in no way precludes that result; actually, it augments possibilities for full and robust partnership glued by respect, love and all the good stuff. Yes, by all means, put the accent on yourself, and love, neither ruled out nor hunted, will surely find its way.

You do stir up the most interesting thoughts, Luther. Keep sending them our way.

Write to Susan Deitz in care of this newspaper. She will answer all letters that come with a self-addressed, stamped envelope. Or you may e-mail her at info@creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.