Single life versus a relationship: Which one is more interesting?

Alison is thinking about having children, but not getting into quite as many scrapes

As this is my final column, I thought I might revisit the first one I wrote, back in April 2014, to see how far I've come. The opening line was: "Being single is a lot like being a celebrity. By that I mean you are constantly asked the same (inane) questions, and people are obsessed with your love life." I went on to question the endless inquiries people make about your marital status, and to describe how you end up giving silly answers just to get through the experience. I once told someone I'd been growing my eyebrows out when they asked me why I wasn't married.

I was 36 then. I'm 38 now, and I'm a year into a relationship, so things have moved on quite significantly. I was talking to a friend about single versus not single the other day, and I said, "Not single's not quite as interesting is it?"

Don't get me wrong, I'm so happy, in love, and thinking about having children. And I'm doing things like painting the kitchen at the weekend, which is so nice and normal. But I'm not finding myself in quite as many scrapes, if you will. You do a lot of adventuring when you're single.

The point is – whatever your relationship status, it actually doesn't matter. Forgive the cliché but it's what you make it that counts. I've definitely made the most of both, and I don't necessarily rate one status above the other. Meeting my boyfriend doesn't mean I've reached my fairytale ending.

That's what I fought against when I was single – the idea that you are somehow better or more society-appropriate, especially as a woman, when you're in a relationship. That's rubbish. It's wonderful to love someone and be loved back, of course. And your time will come if you want it to. Look at me – I was practically put out to grass. What else do I think? That the best is yet to come. Always.

@lovefoolforever