My own personal Catch-22
In the past few years I've felt like something has been out of balance in my life. Since arriving in San Diego and joining a lab for my Ph.D. with the 1 person I came all the way to CA to work for, I have balanced much of my life. I spend many hours in the lab, but yet I'm not unhappy or unhealthy. I go to the gym everyday or nearly everyday, I'm very social and I am a leader in the community. I am a model daughter, I think. Always concerned about my family's welfare and health, respectful of my heritage, role model to my siblings.My parents, being quite traditional in some aspects of life, "forbade" me to date in High School. Until I was in College, I really didn't do much of anything in the realm of male/female romantic relationships. The delay in trying to be in such a relationship hindered my interpersonal growth significantly, I think. Although I get along with males very well (most of my best friends being male), I still find my feelings very confusing and conflicting when it comes to affections. This is not just me falling head over heels all the time ("Head over Heels" is usually very unlikely to happen to me). I still have problems in the basic games that men and women apparently have to play. I'm too honest and I can't tell the difference between harmless flirting and serious affections manifest as physical behavior. Apparently the game I have to play is complete aloofness to the affections being directed toward me. "Men like the chase" they say. The men I ask would prefer honesty. What am I to conclude? Do intellectual men like honesty and foolish lover-boy types like the chase? What is the truth here? How do I figure this out?
Going back to the point: My dilemma is that the one thing out of balance in my life is having a relationship with a person that's deeper than "just friends". I hate to say this...but I actually feel like I need someone in my life to whom I mean more than just a friend. This being said I am constantly told that I shouldn't need anyone...I should want someone. The interwoven message being that I must be solid in my own life and abilities such that I am choosing when and who I want to bring into my life to be significant person. Perfectly understood, but continuously wavering. I am solid in my life and abilities...this is why I feel like I'm in balance, but yet I am out of balance in the category of relationships. Thus, I am not solid in my life. Quite the Catch-22 (now that I've read the book, I feel I can use this idiom and know it's truest meaning). To be solid I must have all components of life in balance, but to be in balance I feel solid I must have a significant other, in which case I am not in balance and it follows that I should not be seeking a significant other, thus remaining out of balance. There is a flaw in the logic somewhere, but according to what others say and what I understand I can't figure out where it is.
So, I'm left here imbalanced. Maybe you'll comment on this. For now I'll be stuck in my paradox.

