It would be hard for them to believe, that while I am a compassionate, sympathetic soul, I am otherwise too heartless for heartbreak. Granted, it is an acquired art, but one which, when mastered, becomes a well entrenched part of the being.
There are those who think that is a sad thing. Believe me, it can save you a lot of money. You coldly calculate the cost of flying to Colorado, for example, against the probable outcome, and then you weigh your sacrifice against that of the potential heartbreaker, and you say, "Screw that!". It is not an angry thing, just the way of one who has learned that one is a fool to gamble on such things.
I used to rush in where angels feared to tread because it was so absurdly unlikely to yield good result, I figured only the smitten, over passionate zealot would undertake such a mission. I signed up because I thought such intense, illogical emotion was cool. Now I see that a bit of calculated prudence is more likely to pay off in the long haul. And now I enjoy being heartless and unassailable.
Besides, even now, there is that part of me which feels too much compassion for others to ever let anyone worthy get too close. I know I'd only bring pain, or experience it. It is a lose-lose until the exact right situation is found, and that may never happen.
So, you're not a sucker for the "'Tis better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all." sentiment, then ;-)
ReplyDeleteSince I've already been down the loved and lost road a time or two, and the not loved at all road, as well, I see no need to go that again. At this point tis better to love and win, or not love at all.
ReplyDelete