Justice, and by extension, human rights, is more a matter of wanting than deservedness. People, collectively, do not want to be killed and more so than they want to kill others, so murder is immoral and criminal. People want personal freedom and freedom of choice more so than they want to fuck, so you don't see the government giving out wives/husbands. Human rights are hardly tangible in reality, but they are formed through the illegalization of actions. The collective illegality and immorality of such actions creates a protected sphere that becomes these "human rights" that only exist tangibly by an extension of the law.
As I said, the way I labelled deservedness is in relation not to justice but to acceptance. In the end, if there is a murderer, then someone must have been murdered. No one deserved to be murdered, but no deserves not to. The fact that no one deserves to be murdered allows for the action to be labelled a crime and thusly punished, while the fact that no one deserves not to be murdered allows for the acceptance of this crime, allowing for people to move on after grief. The want to not be killed generates the connotation of murder as a crime, while the want to murder, of the murderer, creates the necessity (should he enact the crime) to realize that the crime is inevitable and that it must happen to someone.
In the context of your grievance (which in nature is not illegal, criminal, unjust, or even immoral), while you do not deserve to be alone you do not deserve to have a partner. It is the same, thusly, for the male who does have one: he does not deserve to have a partner and he does not deserve to be alone, just like you. But one of you shall be left alone, just as someone shall ultimately be murdered. Though, one is a heinous
crime and the other is a natural circumstance of society lol