On our way to Phoenix, Allen threw an issue of The Atlantic at me and told me to read an article titled Marry Him! by Lori Gottlieb. It's long, but it's well worth the read.

Here's the brief synopsis of the "feminist" writer (picture Carrie Bradshaw): she decide she was getting too old to have a baby the "traditional way" because she couldn't settle on a husband, so she was artificially inseminated. The realization that followed was that she wishes she just would have settled and got married to one of the men she dated in her 30s. That's hardly a romantic position. That's hardly a feminist position. And it is a position I am not sure if I am comfortable with. But I do think the article is profound in many ways...

Of course, we’d be loath to admit it in this day and age, but ask any soul-baring 40-year-old single heterosexual woman what she most longs for in life, and she probably won’t tell you it’s a better career or a smaller waistline or a bigger apartment. Most likely, she’ll say that what she really wants is a husband (and, by extension, a child).

I am not 40. I know, brilliant. I am not a woman. Even more brilliant. I have no clue if this is true or not. But I believe her. It's kind of like that old adage you never see a tombstone with, "I wish I spent more time at the office" written on it. Humans desire the companionship of marriage (and by extension, a family) more than anything else.

It's like in the Bible where Paul talks about staying single unless you can't control the "passion" inside. Most pastor's will teach the passion is in reference to sexual desire. I think those pastor's fundamentally miss what Paul is talking about. It seems more likely he's talking about companionship. He's talking about knowing someone so intimately that the relationship transcends all other relationships. And when you think about it, that's harder to abstain from than sexual pleasure.

So she continues...

Is it better to be alone, or to settle?

[married woman], like me, would rather feel alone in a marriage than actually be alone, because they, like me, realize that marriage ultimately isn’t about cosmic connection...

I found this interesting because of an all female chapel I sat through at APU in 2003. I was the only man in the room of some 1,200 college females (and I still couldn't get a date, but to my credit, I was in an invisible room directing the event). But one of the speakers was doing a Q&A about being single in her 40s and someone asked simply, "aren't you ever lonely?"

Her response was simple and it stuck with me. "Sure I get lonely, but so do my married friends."

I have often reflected on that statement over the years and found solace in the idea that the loneliness that comes with singleness doesn't go away in marriage, it just mutates. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that being single and lonely isn't any different than being married and lonely. At least being single I can travel the world, right?

But Lori's article got me rethinking this whole position. Because 4.5 years later I think she is right. Every single person I know past the age of 23 (except one) would probably admit they desire a full marriage relationship, even when they acknowledge that marriage is hard.

But there are no married people I know who want to leave a marriage because it is lonely (they may want to leave for other reasons, but loneliness is not it). Therefore, there must be something fundamentally different, and secondary, to the loneliness found in marriage when compared to the loneliness found in singleness.

So far, Lori wins 1 point on should I settle or should I not. Lets see what the rest of the week brings, but I promise she won't win them all...