The complexities of the Theory of fish

I have been further enlightened as to Ben’s fish theory.

Remember the fish theory – the one where relationships are like the fish’s one eats (always a bigger fish the ‘next’ time…but gWeN kills all fishes anyway). Well, see, apparently, everyone has ideals about what their ‘right’ fish would be like. In terms of appearance, personality, quirks and eccentricities; some aspects less important than others and there will be room for change to the ‘ideal fish’ but the general idea of what one is looking for in a fish will be there. It is the all essential qualification LIST of the IDEAL FISH.

It is all well and good when say on my list I am looking for a angel fish and I ignore all other types of fish until I get to the fish that fits my list ( ie. Angel Fish is angel fish, not shark, not sotong, not watermelon). But, it does not mean that when I do find that angel fish, or a semblance to my angel fish, that my angel fish will reciprocate. That angel fish would have his own essential qualification LIST and I may not have even made it into the preliminary rounds of his list…stupid fish...Fact it there are always two list, so for two fish in a sea to actually match up their lists would be a rather hard task, and more often than not, one list fits while the other does not.

So even if one was to progress through the chart of bigger and better fish, it is a long tedious journey up. This is just one of the complications, I am sure there are more that I have yet to be informed about. I am begining to think that maybe, just maybe, there are just too many fishes in the sea...