The long process of figuring out why we are often drawn to people who turn out not to be good for us leads us to the conclusion that there is something deeper going on here, some rule of living that makes us want what we do not want. One way to understand this is as a learning problem. Since we cannot predict future behavior with any accuracy, even our own, how can we expect the choices we make in our youth to be satisfying in our middle age? We need to think about improving our decision making ability by contemplating those traits of character that are likely to endure and cause us either endless joy or pain.
      We must acknowledge that we regularly confuse pleasure with happiness and are as a consequence drawn to people and pursuits that provide us with more of the former than the latter. This tendency is sometimes described as hedonism but the tension it creates between short-term and long-term gratification constitutes one of the recurrent themes of human behavior.
      In its simplest form the abuse of substances is a study in the hazards of immediate gratification. No one who has tried drugs can deny that they produce temporarily pleasurable sensations that most of us would like to repeat. It is also is apparent to nearly everyone that long-term use results in unwanted, degrading, and soul-destroying outcomes that render us unable to function, the very antithesis of the pleasure that we seek to replicate. We can label this "addiction" and turn it into a disease to diminish stigma and facilitate treatment and yet we must admit that the misuse of substances is a manifestation of a larger paradox: the mindless pursuit of pleasure brings pain.
      And so it is with relationships. Those qualities - physical attractiveness, the promise of excitement, social status - that seem so important at one stage of our lives usually do not persist indefinitely. Attributes that do endure may not be so appealing in the long run, leading to disillusionment and confusion. Since we are bombarded by images of youth and beauty it is easy to become confused about the value of more lasting traits. There are few magazines or television shows devoted to telling the stories of people doing constructive work or living lives of fidelity and determination. Such people are seen as unexceptional and a little dull in a society preoccupied with entertainment. Just as the universal human tendency is to slow down to observe the carnage of an auto accident, so we will always be fascinated by misbehavior and other forms of distraction.
      If we confuse success with fame and accomplishment with notoriety we sacrifice any belief in the power of thought or reflection. One of the reasons that going to school is seen as an onerous burden by young people is that the entertainment value of most instruction is very low, especially when compared to movies, video games, and other activities that occupy their free time. The boredom that characterizes school is good preparation only for work that is also seen as an unpleasant necessity to generate the money needed to enjoy those possessions and activities that do bring us pleasure.
      This perspective on school and work commonly includes the belief that satisfaction of our needs requires a tradeoff in which everything has its price. The implication is that every person has desires that may require some sacrifice from their partner who has requirements of his or her own. No one is expected to get everything they want and achieving even partial satisfaction in the relationship requires a continual process of negotiation of differences.
      While this approach meets some superficial test of fairness, it is laborious and requires a lot of scorekeeping. With the advent of the women's movement in the last half of the twentieth century it became an article of faith in some circles that "no one relinquishes power willingly" and much of the shift from the patriarchal system to greater equality was accompanied by a certain competition in the relationship between the sexes leading to an atmosphere of compromise and negotiation. A divorce rate hovering around 50 percent suggests, among other things, that these negotiations may not be going well.
      Perhaps there is another model for success in intimate relationships that might stand a better chance than the contractual approach currently in favor. What if your choice of partner involved an informed evaluation of their ability to give themselves generously to marriage? What if they expected only that their kindness would be matched by yours? Does this sound hopelessly naïve or difficult? Would such a person be defenseless and subject to exploitation? Your answers to these questions reveal a lot about you, your assumptions about the world, and, most important, your estimate of your own ability to respond with a reciprocal and giving spirit.
      The advantage of such an approach is that it provides a model for relating to another person that requires a lot less negotiation. You are required, however, to become both insightful about yourself and an exceptional judge of character since not everyone is capable of such emotional surrender.
      There is a story about a man's lengthy search for the perfect woman. When he found her they could not connect since she was searching for the perfect man. This is the primary issue in constructing a relationship based on generosity and placing the needs of another at the level of our own. The question is not just where would you find such a person, but are you prepared to give what you wish to receive?