Accepting imperfection does not equal "settling," any more than accepting that I can't fly unaided is settling. That's about accepting reality.
The reality is that you cannot find a perfect match, but you can find a good one - good enough to permit happiness in that relationship. I take "settling" to mean that you're knowingly accepting less in terms of compatibility than you *realistically* could achieve.
Of course, "settling" can occur in a variety of ways - some more subtle or insidious than others. For example, "friends with benefits" is a way of settling, in my view.
One major hang-up between Western women and believers in Islam could occur IF a Muslim man believes that women should occupy a subordinate position in terms of rights and value to him. Most Western women would fiercely reject that thesis.
Well, T, it seems you are contradicting yourself when you write "I do agree that "signs" have no bearing on the actual reality of who your prospective love is," and "I know for a fact that I just cannot be with a Virgo." ??
You truly believe you can rationally reject every woman who is a "Virgo"? On what basis would you have such a strong belief? Couldn't be empirical, since you could never amass sufficient data personally to make such a judgment. It would have to be theoretical - that is, astrological theory proclaims that all people born in that time range have the same personality attributes which are incompatible with you.
Everyone born in the same month has the same basic personality?? Really? That doesn't seem like an absurd assertion on its face?
Several studies by scientists have been performed addressing this assertion, and every single one of them (to my knowledge) has demonstrated that there is no correlation beyond chance of people born around the same time - or even on the same day - sharing personality characteristics or living a certain kind of life (as predicted, for instance, by "natal charts" - see Shawn Carlson's double-blind test as an example).
Studies such as these, as well as the logical truth that our relationship to the cosmos is infinitely complex and thus practically immeasurable (you'd have to calculate the influences of the entire universe, in essence), offer no reason that I can see for choosing Astrological signs over one's own eyes, ears, and mind in selecting a mate.
You stand the very real possibility, T, of walking away from the love of your life because of this belief. Do you honestly believe you have sufficiently strong evidence/logic for "star signs" to risk that?
I first became aware of my impatience sans "natal charts" when, as a child waiting in line at a store, my dancing to and fro and scowling up at the ceiling caused the manager to inquire if I needed to use the restroom. Maybe he was being sarcastic (he seemed sincere enough), but in a later flash of insight I realized that I seemed to be in a hurry more than most people...
I also realized I was smart before learning the results of an IQ test.
I'm not sure what you mean by a tool being non-rational but useful symbolically, GB. I'm not sure what it demonstrates that some therapists use astrology. I don't doubt that some therapists, particularly of a New Age variety, might employ numerology, tarot cards, or even chicken innards - but I don't see that this bestows any respectability onto these things.
My point is that people seriously looking for a compatible mate would be better of devoting their necessarily limited time and energy toward understanding themselves and their partners. Looking to the heavens or at superstitious portents is not only going to distract from that, but will likely provide misleading or even destructive suggestions. You could easily miss out on a true love because of following "signs" that have no bearing on the actual reality of who you and your prospective love are.
RE: Who is dating who here in CS?
True, but don't you find that a fat bank account helps with the relocation, GB?