94. Maybe it’s because I’m the middle child?

I worked with a friend who I hadn’t seen in a long, long while & we were playing catch up when she hit me with the news that she has met the love of her life & is happily at home in relationship-land.

Must be nice, Meg.

Obviously I am happy for her, that’s not what this is about. What peaked my interest was the reasoning behind her assertion that this particular relationship was destined to be successful.

She has this theory about relationships — basically, if you are the baby of your family then romantic relationships will only be successful with those who are the inherently responsible, self-entitled, slightly damaged oldest children in families, & vice versa.

Her theory checks out (kind of) & it makes sense. The eldest offspring in any family has a strong, type A personality that, although effective, creates conflict when put in a relationship with someone too similar. First born children are used to being the boss, & giving orders, & getting things done. One bossy, control freak plus another bossy, control freak does not usually equal romantic bliss.

The same thing with youngest siblings: they are a wee bit spoiled, used to being fawned over for the smallest success, & if you have two people in a relationship trying to be the centre of attention… something’s going to have to give eventually. & it probably won’t be pretty when it does.

This made me wonder: where do I fall? As a middle child & Daddy’s Little Girl, I think I possess equal parts older, responsible, slightly damaged, control freak & spoiled-rotten baby. So, what combination is going to lead me to happily-ever-after?

I’m not sure — there’s just way too many factors for me to make a fully-educated hypothesis. I might end up with another middle child, or the baby of the family, or the oldest offspring, or even the elusive only child, & if it is meant to work… we will make it work.

It’s not that I don’t believe Meg’s theory — I actually think it’s a good starting point. It’s important to look at relationships objectively sometimes, & I honestly believe her theory will save me a lot of heartache when I apply it to the online dating circuit (also known as Tinder). But I also won’t let it cloud my judgement for when relationships organically manifest in my life.

In the past, I’ve found it easy to stop being romantically interested in someone for mundane & irrelevant reasons: too skinny, cross-eyed, bad sense of style, terrible hair. & I don’t want to add this theory to the list of “just-because” reasons why I shouldn’t date someone.

I think I’m going to reserve this particular theory for when some loser breaks up with me & I run out of wine & need to be reassured that it was never meant to work out in the first place.




What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s