The Myth of the Flawless Partner

“If you look for perfection, you’ll never be content.”—Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina

“Wilt Chamberlain had sex with 10,000 women, but how many of them did he truly love? I would say 3,000 at most.”—Sean O’Connor

We all want the perfect romantic partner. But what does having a perfect partner actually mean?

Two Types of Romantic Perfection

“I am far from perfect, so expecting a perfect partner would be unrealistic. Imperfection is perfect for me. Growth comes from imperfection!”—June Bradsell

“I am not perfect. I'm not the most beautiful woman in the world. But I'm one of them.”—Mary J. Blige.

The two major perfection types:

• Being a perfect person in the sense of being the best, or flawless
• Being a perfect partner in the sense of being most suitable for another.

A perfect partner

Source: pexels-2997777-6037685

The idea of seeing the beloved as the best or most flawless person has a strong comparative sense; it focuses on the nonrelational (in the sense of standing on their own, not in relation to the partner), and easily discoverable properties, such as wealth, wisdom, and appearance. This comparative view considers romantic love as static and fixed, occasionally moving from one comparative point to another.

Seeing the beloved as most suitable emphasizes the uniqueness of the relationship, considers the beloved’s most important qualities as relational, and confirms this during shared interactions. This view offers a dynamic kind of romantic love that involves development, bringing out the best in each other (Ben-Ze’ev, 2019).

Which Sense of Perfection Is More Important?

“I married a man who was not the most romantic and athletic of my loves as a young woman, but he was the love of my life.” —A widow

“We come to love not by finding a perfect person, but by learning to see an imperfect person perfectly.” —Sam Keen

Iddo Landau (2017) distinguishes between two meaningful attitudes toward life: aspiring to be the best and aspiring to improve. He criticizes the first attitude, which is often associated with over competitiveness, involving an endless, unproductive search for being “the best,” and praises the second attitude, which is associated with meaningful development.

This distinction is also relevant in the romantic realm. Being romantically meaningful in the first sense depends on comparing factors external to the connection between the two lovers. In the second sense, love depends mainly on the interactions between the two lovers. Improving the connection between the two lovers, rather than finding the person with the best nonrelational properties, is the most meaningful achievement of romantic profundity. If romantic meaning concerns having the best, lovers will always be restless and consumed with concern about missing the perfect person, or perhaps the younger, richer, or more beautiful one. If, however, romantic flourishing mainly involves improvement, achieving it lies much more in the hands of the couple.

Being married to someone who is not perfect but is still a caring and loving partner is not a compromise. That partner might be the optimal choice. We can have a perfect loving relationship with an imperfect lover. Many people even view their partners’ imperfections with compassion and amusement and consider them negligible compared to their own flaws and the partners’ profound virtues. The ability to notice and cope with our partner’s negative and positive aspects expresses emotional complexity crucial for enduring profound love.

“My husband is perfect, but I am not in love with him.”

“I am constantly being told how lucky I am to be with someone like him, and all my single friends ask where I found him. But I still don't love him.” –A woman

“What happens when perfection isn't good enough?”—Scott Westerfeld

The conflict between the two types of “perfection” is obvious in the case of not being in love with a seemingly perfect partner. The absence of love may be due to a lack of excitement and is associated with a lack of humor, feeling lonely, and living with a boring partner.

The lack of certain relational properties, such as “chemistry” and physical attraction, is expressed by one woman in the following statement: “My boyfriend is truly the best guy I’ve ever dated. I’ve never had to worry about his loyalty or his love for me, as he makes it known constantly. He’s the best I’ve ever had in every way, and complete husband material. He even wants to marry me. But I’m not in love with him. I don’t think he’s attractive; I get mad at him so much.” (Reddit).

Relationships Essential Reads

Emotional Rituals During Sickness or Injury

Long-Term Relationships Are No Fun

Concluding Remarks

“Only those who know when enough is enough, will ever have enough.” —Lao Tzu

“We waste time looking for the perfect lover, instead of creating the perfect love.” —Tom Robbins

For many people, the quest for the perfect person, instead of the perfect partner (in the sense of being suitable), is a major obstacle to enduring, profound, loving relationships. Since life is dynamic and people change their views, priorities, and wishes over time, achieving such romantic suitability is not a one-time accomplishment but an ongoing process. Perfect compatibility is not necessarily a precondition for love; it is love and time that create a couple’s compatibility.

You cannot pretend that every frog will turn into the perfect prince, but you can be more generous in evaluating the positive aspects of your partner. In any case, an imperfect person does not necessarily imply an imperfect romantic relationship.