mediocre relationships are easier to start

In a discussion about science and innovations, a person named John Sidles (his homepage) made the following comment:

In particular, [source] describes an example peer-review failure because “The economists of the time felt that it would violate their methodology to consider a problem, such as the role of asymmetric information, that was out of its traditional focus.”
“Out of our traditional focus” is a very common reason for rejection, not only in academic publishing, but also in business, and politics (and if you think about it, even romance).
I think it was Marvin Minsky, in Society of Mind, who pointed out how very necessary it is, that human cognition has strong censorship mechanisms, operating largely on the preconscious level, that reject ideas that don’t match preconceptions.
This is no bad thing. But the paradoxical result is that it is (sometimes) more difficult for a good idea to find an audience than a mediocre one.
For much the same reason, mediocre relationships often are easier to initiate than good ones … with the result that it’s all too easy to find yourself embracing dull ideas *and* dull romantic partners.

I think this is very insightful! True and important at the same time.

It's easy to hook up with people who are like ourselves. But it's much more rewarding to be with people who are different from ourselves! (As long as they share the same basic values, of course.)

That's why the ambitious person will not stop when things get a little difficult in dating. Indeed, if compatibility at a profound level exists, more work in the beginning comes with a promise for a much higher reward. A relationship that widens your horizon! Instead of getting stuck where you are...