Trinary

0  1  2

As I discussed in the last freewrite, a lot of times we only seem to see things in dichotomies. Katy Perry in fact makes the observation that we frequently see ourselves as being one of two poles or two opposites when really we have elements of both these poles. Your head can be hot while your feet can be cold and, in terms of decisions we make, you can say yes to sex when you're drunk when really it's a no. Well, whatever. Sometimes it's useful to see things in 2 anyway, and other times even more useful to see them in terms of 3.

There's the typical "three's a crowd" argument that has as its resolution that it's better to have a couple and a single. If person A wants to get into this group of 2, he does it in order to get with one of the people (generally not both), or in other words to force a 2, whereas in reality it forces a temporary 3, and nobody wants to be just 1. But this is a 1-2-3 case. I want to focus on the 0-1-2 case.

In life many people are in a closed monogamous relationship, and once they're in that, they can't imagine life without the other person. A person in a said relationship becomes like a "2." Others, like me, have to at least for now live life as a "1": the individual strong on his own, not needing to depend on anybody else. But as a "1" it's so easy to slip into feeling like "0", feeling like you need to be "2" or else you're "0." And I feel like the "2" to "0" slip is easy when the relationship suddenly ends. (Even in terms of when my grandfather died; my grandmother never really got over it.) So my question is this: Why is it so hard to be number "1"?

Haha, if you redefine "number 1" as this, isn't that interesting? Land ahoy!