Newton’s Laws of Attraction

Times are tough, my fabulous friends. There are women crying in their Cheerios about how they’re never going to meet a man to marry and have babies, “When will I find the One? I wish I was married!” and then on the other hand, there are women who ARE married, who are asking themselves, “Is this all there is? I wish I was single!” Do these women not talk to each other? I’ve been married, I’ve been single and both have their good and bad points. Do we not learn from our own histories?

People seem to be spinning their wheels, addressing “his issues” or “her issues,” when a more productive path is addressing “my issues.” Women want their husbands to be more emotionally available, and husbands just want to have a beer and watch the game in peace. Once people start figuring out that the most influential person in their own relationship is themselves, and therefore, any positive changes must come from within themselves, *then* we may start getting somewhere.

I think many people feel now that it should be perfect all the time, even though by definition, humans aren’t perfect. Then it’s as though they think once they’ve found “it,” relationship bliss, that it’s going to go on with no help at all, no effort, or very little. Like self-perpetuating motion. “I shouldn’t have to tell him what I need, he loves me, therefore he should know.” Bull. “I shouldn’t have to ask her for sex, or get her warmed up with affection, she should just be ready when I am.” Also bull. Just like self-perpetuating motion (conservation of momentum) has a net value of zero, this whole idea that “it will work itself out” also has a value of zero.

If you don’t believe me, look up Newton’s laws on physics.

Speaking of which, the first law, the law of inertia, is a big one in relationships. Go with me on this: “An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.” So pretty much people can change, but they resist it. They’ll go with what’s working in their lives (whether it’s “really” working or not) until something comes along to influence or encourage them to change.

That’s where Isaac’s Second Law comes into play, “The acceleration of an object as produced by a net force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the net force, in the same direction as the net force, and inversely proportional to the mass of the object.” Ok, so a big influence will hav a big influence, and a small influence will have a small influence. Make sense? You want big changes, you have to make big changes, you want small changes, you make small changes, how about that?

And then the kicker, Law number three, “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” Ok, in relationship terms, you have to give as good as you get. Do unto others and all that.

Put it all together and you get this: Your stagnating or unhealthy relationship will resist change (object at rest tends to stay at rest) until you put a positive influence on it (the unbalanced force), and depending on how big or small (the magnitude of the net force applied) your positive influence is (action), that will determine how big the positive change will be in the relationship (reaction).

Am I a genius or what?

Just like anything else in life, you have to work for what you have. True, it shouldn’t be “hard” work, but it’s not always going to be easy sailing. You also have to EARN what you have. So this goes to the idea (which seems lost in the media frenzy of instant gratification, just add water– or alcohol) that if you want to have a good partner, you have to first BE a good partner. Is this idea completely lost out there? Or is it pretty much understood academically, but once it’s time to put it into practice, all good intentions go flying out the window? Kind of like cramming for the final the night before the exam.