Just because my status says “single,” it does not mean that I am available.
In this era of Tweets and Facebook status updates, it’s easy to get caught up in what people represent of themselves on social media—yet often the truth is overlooked, or fabricated all together.
Sometimes the truth is that even if my status says single—I am far from available.
Although I have been single for a few years now, most of that time I wouldn’t have considered myself to have been available—either because I wasn’t in the place where I wanted to be dating, or because I was enjoying a lovely variety of complicated.
And that’s okay.
Honestly, I don’t know if I ever will change my Facebook status again.
What would happen to the world if I was married and yet refused to change my Facebook status?
Would it mean that my relationship and marriage meant less than those who post their anniversary for the world to see?
No, of course not.
People fell in love—and stayed in love long before we felt the need to advertise it to the world.
Because I have a new theory on love…even if I marry again someday, I will still be single.
I will still be me—and my own person apart from who my lover is.
Being in a relationship does not mean that I will give up myself and my own life to join with another in the overzealous attempt to ‘we’ everything around us.
No, even in love I will be singular—and I hope he remains the same as well.
I have no intention of becoming lost in love.
Because maybe the most romantic notion we can have is to want to be in love with someone and still maintain our individual selves at the same time.
I don’t need to tie myself to someone for the world to see to know that it is any more real. It wouldn’t change the connection that I have with a potential lover, nor would it protect us from challenges we might face.
Maybe the saying is right—the healthiest relationships make no mention of it on Facebook.
The heart is a mysterious place, and while I can respect those who have a different view point—for me, what matters most is what happens when I’m spending time with a lover—not what my status says about my relationship status.
I will be unavailable because my heart is taken, not because I have decided to take out a billboard saying that I am in a relationship.
It might not make sense, and to those who don’t understand they may use their own insecurities as a basis on which to question my motives.
Staying single doesn’t mean I’m not taken—it just means that I have decided to still be me, regardless of any relationship I enter into.
No matter how much I can let my romantic heart float away with the belief of fate, love is the best when it’s two people joining in togetherness but not giving up their own identities in the process. Maybe I’ll choose to forever be “plus one,” because I’d rather take a lover who sees the value in maintaining our individuality than conforming to the societal standards of those around us.
I might be the little idealistic rebel, but I’d rather have something that no one else has than to pretend that I have something just so I might show it off to the world.
I have been single for some time—yet that doesn’t mean that my heart is open to be claimed.
I suppose it just seems that Facebook has corrupted our relationships and the way in which we view togetherness—just because someone’s status says ‘married’ or ‘In a relationship’ does not mean they are in fact in love and happy.
Likewise, just because I will choose to keep being single, does not mean that I won’t be in love.
Maybe it’s time we took love off of social media, and put it back in the bedroom where it belongs—because a simple status can’t really accurately describe the togetherness that two unique people can share when they decide to make up their own rules.
So maybe I’ll stay single, or maybe I’ll just be plus one because at the end of the day regardless of what my relationship status says, in my heart I’ll be unavailable—and that’s the most important update of all.
Author: Kate Rose
Editor: Renée Picard
Image: symmetry_mind at Flickr